Don’t reward bad behaviour

Re: The corporate death penalty, Terence Corcoran and Corruption makes a comeback, Patricia Adams, Feb. 20 Terence Corcoran’s assertion that it would be illogical to proceed with criminal charges against SNC- Lavalin because it would be a death penalty for the company is a specious argument.

SNC- Lavalin reached its current status as one of Canada’s “national corporate champions” at least partly through what has been shown to be criminal activity. Rather than punish that, Corcoran would reward it.

Further, while investors and employees may be in- nocent of the alleged crimes, they were beneficiaries. They should pay fines to return their portion of the profits of that criminality.

Corcoran’s suggestion seems to be that SNC-Lavalin is too big and too important to Canada to allow it to fail. Is he comfortable with a justice system in which only small- time criminals are prosecuted to the full extent of the law?

Adams, on the other hand, opines that ignoring SNCLavalin’s criminal behaviour would simply induce it and other Canadian corporations to continue, or take up that behaviour. What would be the downside, other than a few million dollars in penalties in the unlikely event they were caught?

It should be obvious that bad behaviour is best prevented by punishment rather than reward. The threat of corporate demise might serve to focus executive minds more sharply on prevention than promotion.

Dave de Jong, Burlington, Ont. I usually agree with you Terence Corcoran, but not on this one.

What do you say to those companies and their employees, who spent countless hours and dollars to compete fairly for the bridge and hospital contracts, only to discover that SNC- Lavalin obtained them by paying bribes?

Companies die because of poor decisions of senior management, mostly nor- mal business decisions, but sometimes because they break the law. Just ask any ex Arthur Andersen partner.

Wieland Wettstein, Calgary