The name of Claude Surprenant percolated to the surface of the news at the beginning of 2017 when the MP was excluded from the caucus of CAQ MPs: he was suspected of having taken from the budget of his constituency office.
The CAQ was then in opposition, we were 18 months away from the election that would propel François Legault’s party into government.
Where did the allegations of mismanagement of public funds from his constituency office against the member for Groulx come from?
By Julie Nadeau, a political attaché whom Claude Surprenant had fired a few weeks earlier, at the end of 20161.
It’s Mme Nadeau who managed the finances of the constituency office. Mr. Surprenant had discovered an inexplicable “hole” of $9,000 in this budget. He had asked for explanations from M.me Nadeau.
On December 7, 2016, deeming her explanations not credible, he fired her.
A few weeks later, Julie Nadeau began to loudly spread the word that Claude Surprenant had been reimbursed for expenses to which he was not entitled. The journalists are happy: a source who exposes the embezzlement of an elected official, openly, makes for hard-hitting headlines.
Claude Surprenant is initially supported by his leader, Mr. Legault. The MP admits he made honest mistakes in the constituency office’s accounting.
But Julie Nadeau persists. She multiplies the shattering declarations. She is convincing. So much so that the ethics commissioner of the National Assembly at the time announced that he was going to investigate.
It’s too much for the CAQ: Claude Surprenant was dropped from the CAQ caucus in January 2017, temporarily.
At the end of that year, Ethics Commissioner Jacques Saint-Laurent submitted his report. It is based largely on the statements of Julie Nadeau. The words are harsh: Mr. Saint-Laurent speaks of a “subterfuge” by MP Surprenant and recommends sanctions.
It is a parliamentary death sentence: Claude Surprenant will never be taken back by the CAQ.
PHOTO JACQUES BOISSINOT ARCHIVES THE CANADIAN PRESS
Claude Surprenant at the Salon bleu in December 2017, when he was an independent MP
Independent candidate in the 2018 elections, he was defeated. Independents rarely win. Imagine those who carry the stigma of an allegation of having dipped into the candy dish.
In short, everyone believed Julie Nadeau: the CAQ, the ethics commissioner, journalists.
From there, Claude Surprenant is a broken man. The stress of these allegations shatters his marriage and his relationship with his children.
It would take five years for the light of a certain justice to illuminate Mr. Surprenant’s life.
In 2022, two major events demonstrated that Julie Nadeau was first and foremost an Olympic-caliber liar.
First, in February 2022, the Administrative Labor Court ruled on the dismissal of Ms.me Nadeau, which she contested. Administrative judge Karine Boivin heard the witnesses, studied documents, and assessed the credibility of each person’s testimony.
And what emerges from reading Judge Blouin’s decision is that Julie Nadeau lies like she breathes2.
She claims to be a lawyer? We check: Mme Nadeau never was.
She claims to have completed her law degree? We check, she only studied law for one year, at Laval University.
And this diploma from Laval University, hung on the wall by Julie Nadeau?
I quote Judge Boivin: “She claims that it was her ex-partner who provided it to her and who hung it on the wall of her office, which made her believe that she had really obtained it. She then maintains that she does not remember having affirmed before the Court that she also obtained a master’s degree in law, which she nevertheless did…”
Judge Boivin considers Julie Nadeau’s explanations about checks that she wrote to herself, without justification, and that she lied about it as “implausible”.
And it’s like that for pages and pages, of versions modified into laughable contradictions from the accuser.
I quote Judge Boivin: “Her explanations are largely implausible and the Court does not believe them. »
As for Mr. Surprenant, Judge Boivin believes that he told the truth during the hearings, “even if it was not to his advantage”.
The dismissal of Mme Nadeau was therefore retained.
Then, let’s move the cursor forward to December 2022. A press release from UPAC announces an arrest in the funds file of the constituency office of the former member of Groulx…
It is Julie Nadeau who is accused of having defrauded the State3 for $8,000, perjury and forgery.
Julie Nadeau will plead guilty in November 2023: the judge sentences her to 15 months in prison.
A month later, the National Assembly mandates Ethics Commissioner Ariane Mignolet to determine whether “new elements” in Claude Surprenant’s file justify the reopening of the investigation of former Commissioner Saint-Laurent , who had blamed the deputy for Groulx, destroying his political career.
Commissioner Mignolet entrusts the case to an ad hoc judge, who must rule. His verdict fell on May 94 : the 2017 investigation must not be reopened, but it is necessary to delete dozens of passages from Jacques Saint-Laurent’s report which were based on the testimony of Mme Nadeau…
And the reprimand given to Claude Surprenant by Commissioner Saint-Laurent must be annulled.
On Thursday, the National Assembly rescinded the ethics commissioner’s reprimand against Mr. Surprenant in 2017.
Mr. Surprenant told me he was happy with this “new stage” after years of trying to “reestablish [s]has reputation.”
It took seven years, but Claude Surprenant was cleared.
In this saga, Julie Nadeau managed to fool a lot of people with her lies.
François Legault and his entourage, who believed her in 2017.
Ethics Commissioner Jacques Saint-Laurent, who relied on the lies of Mme Nadeau to reprimand Claude Surprenant. And journalists, who relayed Julie Nadeau’s assertions.
In this saga, a man was the victim of an injustice, his name is Claude Surprenant. He now hopes for compensation from the National Assembly5 : “The next step,” he told me, “is discussions on reparations. »
In this saga, there is a lesson for everyone: yes, people lie and lie repeatedly and some are even very convincing.
Why do they lie?
For lots of reasons. To take revenge, to hide their faults, to promote themselves, whatever: lies exist.
And for some people, like Julie Nadeau, lying is second nature.
1. Read the article published in News
2. Consult the decision of the Administrative Labor Tribunal
3. Read “Fraud and perjury: former political attaché Julie Nadeau sentenced”
4. Consult the report of the ad hoc commissioner
5. Read the article published in The Quebec Journal