Employment Insurance Commission Defrauded Canadians By At Least $12.9 Billions
ArriveCan and MedicaGo Scandals are Petty Crimes, Mere Distractions, Compared to the EI Commission Abuse of Powers
“Fraud involves intentional deception or misrepresentation to gain an unfair or dishonest advantage. It often involves deceit, manipulation, or false information to obtain financial or personal benefits. … Abuse refers to the misuse or excessive use of something in a way that is harmful or goes beyond its intended purpose.”1
The $12.9 Billion EI Commission Heist
In the post: “Why Your Application For Employment Insurance Regular Benefits Was Denied If You Did Not Comply With A Mandatory Vaccination Policy”, I revealed and briefly discussed the existence of an internal Employment Insurance policy specifically designed to deny regular EI benefits to claims arising from non-compliance with a covid vaccination mandate. This EI policy is referred as the BE Memo 2021-10.
You can download my signed affidavit that proves that the BE Memo 2021-10 is authentic, was released by an ATIP (FOI), and was used in the adjudication of an EI claim of a covid-19 vaccination mandate non-compliant terminated nurse resulting in an EI claim denial. In November and December 2023, I emailed almost every member of the Canadian Parliament about this. They know.
Pierre Poilievre knows, and he won’t do anything about it for the same reason that he won’t touch covid-19 vaccine harmfulness: the magnitude of the liabilities is too big to deal with. When he gets elected, he would have to deal with that problem. Political courage has its limits.
Carla Qualtrough (Delta federal riding) was the minister responsible for EI in October 2021. She crippled the EI system and blinded EI adjudicating agents with the BE Memo 2021-10 preventing them to see if employer vaccination policies were reasonable.
“Mr. Speaker, I can assure this House that the government has zero tolerance for fraud. We are systematically following up on every active case and every issue that we address through CERB. We said from the beginning we would give Canadians, eight million of them, CERB. At the end, we are enforcing our integrity and compliance measures. We have no tolerance for fraud.” – Carla Qualtrough, Dec 9th, 2021, Hansard 14 p. 947
“Mr. Speaker, I can assure this House that my office and my department follow up on every allegation of fraud, and this would be no exception.” – Carla Qualtrough, December 9th, 2021, Hansard 14 p. 947
Now, I’m going to dress this up with numbers for monetary damages quantification and explain some of the crimes and offences involved with that EI policy.
Damage Quantification – Financial Injury to Employed Unvaccinated Canadians
In September 2021, as the covid vaccination were being implemented, Canada had an employed labour force of 19,218,6002 and 70.2% of the population was fully vaccinated.34 This means that 29.8%, or 5,727,1005 employed Canadians were unvaccinated just before employers were implementing mandates.
A single EI claim for regular benefits is worth about $26000. For the sake of easy computations, assume $25,000 per claim and you only need 40,000 EI claims from unvaccinated working Canadians to cause a $1 billion payout in EI regular benefit. It was important for the federal government to find a way to game the EI eligibility of unvaccinated Canadians to exert maximum financial coercion.
Approximately 13% of working Canadians are self-employed. It was 15% before the pandemic. 2% of the 19.2 million workforce was self-employed and has been wiped-out. That’s 384,000 self-employed that disappeared because of covid measures. 87% of the 5.7 million working unvaccinated working Canadians were eligible to EI, that’s 4.96 million people. Figuring out how many of these 4.96 million unvaccinated employed were willing to lose their job amounts to figuring out a vaccination mandate non-compliance termination rate. Luckily, I’ve already done quite a bit of research work on that topic.
In the post “At Least 4762 (9.7%) Missing Nurses Because of the STILL ON-GOING Covid-19 Vaccine Mandates for BC Healthcare Workers”, I calculated a 9.7% termination rate and in “Bonnie Henry’s Vaccination Mandate Caused Harm to the Municipal Pension Plan” I inferred, from drops in employer pension contributions, termination rates ranging from 8.6% to 11.5%.
It is safe to assume that a workforce subjected to a vaccination mandate will have approximately 10% of non-compliance. Applying 10% to 4.96 million equals 496,000 EI claims, multiply by $26,000 and $12.9 billion is the liability that the EI Commission is dodging by defrauding unvaccinated working Canadians of their EI eligibility.
Canada could not lawfully afford its vaccination mandate, the BE Memo caused EI agents to disobey the EI Act.
With evident damages, we can start talking about crimes and torts.
Triangle of Fraud
The Fraud Triangle6 was discussed in the Coercive Vaccine Mandates Were Predicated on Economic False Pretences post. An act of fraud consists of motives, opportunities, and rationalizations. The rationalizations related to covid-19 government frauds are explained in great details throughout the book Fisman’s Fraud – The Rise of Canadian Hate Science.
The Liberal-NDP Alliance Motive to Commit Fraud
Covid vaccine mandates have direct and indirect costs. The avoidance of these costs is the motive of the Liberals to defraud the unvaccinated working Canadians of their eligibility to EI.
Canada’s fiscal year ends in March. The 2022 budget presented by Freeland on April 7th, 2022, covers the period from April 2022 to March 2023. This is the period that would have been most impacted by the EI eligibility of 4.96 million working unvaccinated Canadians. The 2023 budget had a projected budgetary balance (deficit) of -$52.8B.7
Unless the Liberals found a way to make unvaccinated EI claimants ineligible to receive regular EI benefits, the EI operating account would have incurred a shortfall at least the size of the 2023 projected deficit. The government would have been forced to bail out the EI system. The vaccination mandates would have blown a massive hole in Canada’s financial statements.
EI eligibility of unvaccinated working Canadians would have caused a massive, unexpected deficit. Cost-wise Canada was never able to afford a vaccination mandate and assume its full economic consequences.
The Liberals were forced to choose between their vaccination mandate or keeping the rule of law.
By excluding unvaccinated workers from EI with the unlawful BE Memo 2021-10, the Liberal government used the loss of EI eligibility as a financial incentive to force and coerce Canadians into accepting a medical procedure. This is a crime recognized by the Canadian Senate and I covered that in the Canadian Senate Recognized the Wrongs of Medical Coercion in June 2021 post.
The Law
I perused the Criminal Code of Canada to find sections that help clarify issues arising from the BE Memo 2021-10 EI policy.
Section 380 (1) Fraud
One or several individuals inside and/or outside the EI Commission created the BE Memo 2021-10. These individuals, using the BE Memo, made false representions to, and directing EI adjudicating agents to use the BE Memo 2021-10 to adjudicate EI claims arising from non-compliance with a vaccine mandate. This defrauded unvaccinated Canadian workers of their eligibility and/or right to EI, to the services of EI, and financial support from EI.
The BE Memo 2021-10 is the mechanism that defrauded unvaccinated Canadians of their eligibility to EI.
“Section 380(1) Fraud is the wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain. The definition of Fraud is left ambiguous in order to capture the vast nature that these offences occur.”
“EXPLANATION - The offence of Fraud captures an extremely wide range of behaviour. Each charge of fraud is different from the next, as there are a wide variety of circumstances that can amount to a fraud charge. Canadian Criminal Courts have determined that the offence of fraud consists of two distinct elements. First, a prohibited act of deceit, falsehood or other fraudulent means. In the absence of these, the courts will look objectively for a dishonest act. Secondly, the deprivation or loss must be caused by the prohibited act, and must relate to money, property or any valuable security or service.”8
Stated in the Criminal Code of Canada: Fraud: 380(1) “Every one who, by deceit, falsehood or other fraudulent means, whether or not it is a false pretence within the meaning of this Act, defrauds the public or any person, whether ascertained or not, of any property, money or valuable security or any service, (a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to a term of imprisonment not exceeding fourteen years, where the subject-matter of the offence is a testamentary instrument or the value of the subject-matter of the offence exceeds five thousand dollars;…”9
Section 380.1(1.1) Aggravating circumstance value of the fraud
The dollar magnitude of the BE Memo 2021-10 fraud is unprecedented in Canadian history. It’s bigger than Bre-X by a factor of 10.
“Courts must consider as an aggravating circumstance if the value of fraud committed exceeds one million dollars.”10
Section 122 - Breach of Trust by Public Officer
This may apply to Carla Qualtrough, Justin Trudeau because he publicly stated that unvaccinated workers may not be eligible to EI, Chrystia Freeland (Minister of Finance) and several other individuals employed by the government.
“Government officials who commit fraud or breach trust in their duties can be sentenced to up to five years in prison, regardless of whether or not the act would be considered illegal in a private context.”11
“Breach of trust by public officer: 122 Every official who, in connection with the duties of their office, commits fraud or a breach of trust, whether or not the fraud or breach of trust would be an offence if it were committed in relation to a private person,…”12
Section 126(1) Disobeying a Statute
The BE Memo is an unlawful directive or internal policy given to EI adjudicating agents. Its purpose and intent are to make all unvaccinated Canadians ineligible to EI no matter what the circumstances are. The BE Memo 2021-10 shifted the burden of proof against unvaccinated claimants and corrupted the application of the EI Act. The BE Memo caused EI agents to disobey the EI Act.
The BE Memo 2021-10 motives were certainly not about public health, not ideological, not about vaccine uptake, as in Oct 2021 vaccination rates had already peaked, and not even about restarting the economy because the economy, GDP-wise had already recovered to pre-pandemic levels.
The BE Memo 2021-10 admits that it is unlawful in its very first paragraph:
“Any intentional violation of an Act of Parliament without lawful excuse is an indictable offence punishable by imprisonment of up to two years.”13
Tort of Misfeasance in Public Office (Abuse of Power)
Misfeasance in Public Office14 is the civil side of the criminal Breach of Trust by Public Officer.
“When A Public Official Abuses the Power of the Position Held, In a Malicious Manner, With Knowledge That Such Conduct Is Likely to Cause Harm the Abused Person, Such Is Likely to Constitute As the Tort of Misfeasance of Public Office.”15
The malice to cause harm to the unvaccinated Canadian workers is explained in great details in the book Fisman’s Fraud – The Rise of Canadian Hate Science and is demonstrated by numerous public statements made by Justin Trudeau and other public officials.
“Lord Steyn, set out the elements of the tort as follows (pp. 8-11):
a) the defendant must be a public officer.
b) the defendant’s conduct must involve the exercise of power as a public officer, or
the exercise of public functions.
c) the defendant must be shown to have one of two states of mind:
i) targeted malice - conduct specifically intended to injure someone. This
includes “bad faith” in the sense of exercising public powers for an improper or ulterior motive; or
ii) acting with subjective knowledge that he has no power to do the act complained of and subjective knowledge that the act will probably injure the plaintiff; or acting with subjective reckless indifference with respect to the illegality of the act and subjective reckless indifference to the outcome.
d) the public officer must owe a duty to the plaintiff, which may be established by showing that the plaintiff has the right not to be damaged or injured by a deliberate abuse of power.
e) causation - the plaintiff must show that the defendant’s abuse of power caused him harm as a matter of fact.
f) the plaintiff must show that he has suffered damages that are not “too remote” from the defendant’s tortious act. The plaintiff must show not only that the defendant knew his act was beyond his powers, but also acted in the knowledge that his act”16
“Test for the tort of misfeasance in public office:
1. Deliberate unlawful conduct in the exercise of public functions.
2. Knowledge or being reckless to the fact that the conduct is unlawful; and
3. Knowledge or being reckless to the fact that the conduct is likely to injure the plaintiff.”17
Conclusion
The BE Memo 2021-10 is the instrument and mechanism that enabled the Liberals to commit the largest fraud in Canadian history. This is what Pierre Poilievre should be focusing on, but he won’t because when he gets elected, he would have to acknowledge a massive liability.
The creation and application of this BE Memo 2021-10 is an abuse of power and a the weaponization of the Canadian Employment Insurance system into a mean to achieve medical coercion by unlawfully withholding financial support for those exercising their constitutionally protected right to safety and security of the person.
Thank you for sharing your knowledge, skills and research, Lex. Holding records of these govt. crimes in public trust is essential, especially since they are poised to repeat and likely supersede the false narratives and mandates Canadians were violated under in the past 4 years. This is what put me to the curb at the end of 2021.
I question if the Sunset Clause of the Canada Bank Act falls into your sphere of knowledge. Many eye it with suspicion, namely:
21 (1) Subject to subsections (2) and (4), banks shall not carry on business, and authorized foreign banks shall not carry on business in Canada, after June 30, 2025.
(4) If Parliament dissolves on the day set out in subsection (1) or on any day within the six-month period before that day or on any day within an extension ordered under subsection (2), banks may continue to carry on business, and authorized foreign banks may continue to carry on business in Canada, until the end of the 180th day after the first day of the first session of the next Parliament.
In light of the globalization of the Canadian banking sector since 2001, what could possibly go wrong (sarc) ? Please consider this a suggestion for your Stack list, I believe it is a quandary for most of those who are even aware it exists.