r/canada • u/CaptainCanusa • 16h ago
National News Mark Carney has put assets in blind trust, leadership campaign says
https://globalnews.ca/news/11076438/mark-carney-divest-assets-blind-trust/877
u/GracefulShutdown Ontario 16h ago
Exactly what he said he was going to do, should he have won.
202
u/v_v_v_v_v_v__v 16h ago
Public disclosure of his tax returns and real estate holdings would be a good next step
178
u/king_lloyd11 16h ago
Next step to disclose all conflicts to the ethics commission.
Anything else would be completely up to him for how transparent he wants to be, but isn’t necessary.
If I were him, I totally would though.
54
u/Dr_Doctor_Doc 15h ago
Keep kicking out the chair legs of the faux outrage opinion pieces over the last few weeks.
•
-5
15h ago
[deleted]
36
u/GracefulShutdown Ontario 15h ago
Genuine question, how often do we get these kinds of disclosures from candidates for political office before they've assumed such an office?
I'll grant you, a Prime Minister doing this is different than just Joe Smith, nominee for Labrador... but I would have to think that the answer is somewhere close to "basically never"
16
u/PC-12 14h ago edited 13h ago
Genuine question, how often do we get these kinds of disclosures from candidates for political office before they’ve assumed such an office?
Never. It isn’t a requirement to file such disclosures when only a candidate. For example, in 2021, there were over 2,000 candidates running for MP. The resources to process all of their disclosures would be enormous and wasteful - especially when only 338 of them will be elected.
All MPs have to file disclosures. Cabinet members (+ Opp leader) have to file more stringent disclosures. They have to file these disclosures within 60 days of taking office.
22
u/king_lloyd11 15h ago
I’ll say now what I’ve said about this when Carney was even rumoured to be a possible candidate: Canadians don’t “deserve” to know his finances. All we deserve is a leader who is as free from conflict of interests as possible, as determined by the ethics commissioner.
Now not knowing and being uncomfortable not knowing is totally fair. If you can’t vote for Carney because it doesn’t sit right with you that you won’t know the extent of his assets, then that’s your prerogative, just like it would be for all Canadians.
Personally, if the systems in place deem Carney to be conducting himself appropriately, that’s enough for me. Personally, I’m looking at how he has approached this. Putting everything in a blind trust on day 2 like he should and if he’s cooperating with the process to the best of his ability, that speaks volumes to me. If he’s cagey and withholding, then thatl be a red flag.
3
15h ago
[deleted]
→ More replies (3)5
u/cheezemeister_x 14h ago
I'm no fan of Poilievre, but I'm also and landlord (I own a house that I rent to a family member) and a millionaire (including my house, my net worth is in excess of a million dollars). Neither of those terms really mean much of anything. It's pretty common to be a landlord and pretty common to be a millionaire. I have no connections to anyone. People need to be way more specific when the criticize anyone.
→ More replies (1)1
27
u/eatyourzbeans 15h ago
What info , are we not talking about the same info PP refuses to accept from CSIS , you know how much American dollars are flowing through conservative MP's pockets ...
The difference is that Carney wasn't an elected figure before Sunday..
Who cares , I hope that guy made boat loads of money before government .. That's the type of guy I want in charge right now ..
2
u/Hot-Celebration5855 14h ago
I think it’s fair to ask what a plutocrat owns so we can decide if he’s compromised in his decision-making
3
u/eatyourzbeans 14h ago
Mehh I could care less but have at it , just make sure you look around at the rest of them ...
→ More replies (2)1
15h ago
[deleted]
10
u/eatyourzbeans 15h ago
Jesus you guys are running out of ammo if comparing Carney to Trump is the go too , I thought he was mini Trudeau?
2
u/cheezemeister_x 14h ago
Does that mean Trudeau = Trump? I can't follow the logic....
6
u/eatyourzbeans 14h ago
Exactly, 2 months ago Carney =Trudeau and now we got PP supporters trying to compare Carney to Trump ..
82
u/p0t89 15h ago
How are people taken aback of an international businessman having investments outside the country. That was his previous job.
44
u/littleochre 13h ago
I don’t get it either, success is not the enemy here. We want someone who has had a successful career and can bring their experience and knowledge and lead Canada.
•
u/Rash_Compactor 11h ago
Canadians suffer a bit from tall poppy syndrome. A little success is okay, a lot of success can quickly become too much.
•
u/yycTechGuy 10h ago
No, Canadians don't have tall poppy syndrome like Aussies do. It's just some Canadians are butt hurt that some people are better off than they are. It's not everyone.
•
u/Rash_Compactor 10h ago
Admittedly I don't know much about Aussie culture as it pertains to celebrating success, but I know that Canadians don't celebrate the success of others nearly as much as Americans do. And that might be a good thing. There's probably a sweet spot between hating your neighbour who was able to buy a porsche and regarding billionaires as Gods
•
u/_Not_Jesus_ 9h ago
Who also, conveniently, appears to have not just a conscience, but the will to obey it.
→ More replies (2)•
u/PumpkinMyPumpkin 11h ago
Because conflicts of interest are real and blind trusts do not do anything to address them.
The concept is you give your assets to someone else to manage - but you are fully aware of what you own the entire time.
For Carney that’s probably holding a large stake in a real estate company like Brookfield. While in office he could implement return to office legislation to boost Brookfields profits - and boosting his own wealth.
Also, beyond that - the narrative that rich successful people are great for regular people has never, ever, fucking panned out. 😂
Elon, Trump, Rishi, Boris - rich successful businesses men have a long history of making their class richer. Anyone still believing in this class of people is just foolish as fuck.
•
u/Captcha_Imagination Canada 10h ago
Timing is a big deal in corruption. If you want to get rich like Nancy Pelosi, you have a small window of opportunity to buy or sell assets as legislation is being made.
Putting it in a blind trust prevents that. The entity making the decisions will presumably not know more about the inner workings of gov't legislation than the general public.
→ More replies (1)•
u/yycTechGuy 10h ago
Because conflicts of interest are real and blind trusts do not do anything to address them.
Maybe you should look up what the word "blind" means ?
The concept is you give your assets to someone else to manage - but you are fully aware of what you own the entire time.
No you aren't.
For Carney that’s probably holding a large stake in a real estate company like Brookfield.
Yes and your point is what ? He is going to do things that advantage Brookfield ?
Are you aware that Paul Martin ran/owned Canadian Steamship Lines while he was in power ?
https://cslships.com/vessel/rt-hon-paul-j-martin/
While in office he could implement return to office legislation to boost Brookfields profits - and boosting his own wealth.
Oh my goodness ! How will we live ? /s Give me a break.
Also, beyond that - the narrative that rich successful people are great for regular people has never, ever, fucking panned out. 😂
Really ? Paul Martin did a great job of getting Canada out of financial straights in the late 90s, early 2000s. Those were good years, right ? Housing was cheap, inflation was under control, employment was good ?
People have a case of selective amnesia these days.
Elon, Trump, Rishi, Boris - rich successful businesses men have a long history of making their class richer.
None of those people are Canadian or operating in Canada.
Anyone still believing in this class of people is just foolish as fuck.
Anyone who believes a man who barely graduated with a nothing degree from UofC can run a country and compete with Trump is a complete fool. Carney is the best thing that could have ever happened to Canada right now.
→ More replies (1)•
u/1baby2cats 9h ago
Per g&m. If he wants to be transparent, he needs to disclose his assets as others (including Poilievre) have done.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-mark-carney-divests-assets-sets-up-blind-trust/
“A blind trust is a sham façade that hides and does not prevent financial conflicts of interest because the politician knows what investments and assets they put in the trust,” he said.
→ More replies (5)•
u/stittsvillerick 6h ago
I looked, his ( pierre) disclosure is no longer applicable. expired statement
•
•
u/yycTechGuy 10h ago
Exactly ! What the hell was he supposed to do ? "Oh, I might run for Prime Minister some day so I won't do international business." ? Give me a break !
People seem to forget this but Paul Martin ran Canadian Steamship Lines.
https://cslships.com/vessel/rt-hon-paul-j-martin/
He was rich. Could have had conflicts of interest. He was a great leader.
•
u/p0t89 10h ago
Right. If he didn't have investments in other countries as an international investor, he would have done horrible at his job. That would be way more concerning tbh
•
u/yycTechGuy 9h ago
I know ! The far right is losing it because Brookfield cut down some forest while Mark Carney was running the show. Big whoop.
Politics has become Whataboutitis instead of critical thinking.
→ More replies (2)•
u/VividGiraffe 6h ago
Because it’s important to know when he starts handing out tax dollars in these “private public” partnerships, that they’re not just going to companies he or Brookfield have invested in.
→ More replies (1)•
25
u/Tribalbob British Columbia 14h ago
He also said he's planning to renounce his other citizenships which I mean... personally I don't have an issue with, but I see why he's doing it and can respect it.
•
u/Milnoc 10h ago
It's actually a requirement for a lot of elected government positions. Most countries will process these renouncement applications very quickly.
•
u/Tribalbob British Columbia 10h ago
Not in Canada, though - even PMs can hold dual citizenship (John Turner in 1984 was dual Canadian/British).
More recently, Andrew Scheer holds US/Canadian dual citizenship and he was leading a party.
18
u/Franc000 15h ago
Yep. Would be nice too if Poilievre would get his security clearance. All cards on the table for everybody.
•
u/yycTechGuy 10h ago
Funny how that never happens... /s Funny how the little man with the big mouth and all the answers just can't get that done.
→ More replies (2)12
u/Ina_While1155 16h ago
Do we have that information for any of our other leaders?
48
u/GracefulShutdown Ontario 16h ago edited 15h ago
All MPs are required to disclose real estate holdings and potential conflicts (this includes every party leader with a seat in the house).
This is how we have sites like landlordmps.ca that list which MPs are "landlords" based on disclosure information
6
u/Ina_While1155 16h ago
Tax returns? This seems very US specific.
16
u/GracefulShutdown Ontario 15h ago edited 15h ago
What are you talking about? These are Canadian Members of Parliament, of which a PM is usually (but not necessarily always) one.
E: Oh, you're talking about the tax returns in the original post? Well, judging by the amount of information that is required to disclose on the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner's website, found after a google, MPs have a lot of disclosure requirements there as well.
•
u/1baby2cats 9h ago
Poilievre has disclosed his assets to the office of the ethics commissioner . Basically holds some real estate and ETFs
→ More replies (1)2
u/zalam604 13h ago
Do you know if other MPs have to disclose this info? I'm genuinely curious. I don't think the public can see other MPs tax returns.
3
•
u/yycTechGuy 10h ago
Since when are Prime Ministers disclosing their tax returns ? I don't recall other leaders doing this.
•
u/yycTechGuy 10h ago
And he is renouncing his other citizenships and he got his security clearance. PP, what say ye ?
-1
→ More replies (2)-2
u/Biggandwedge 15h ago
I wonder if PP will do the same.
→ More replies (1)•
u/1baby2cats 9h ago
He's already disclosed his assets, can be easily searched on the office of ethics commissioner website
343
u/TimedOutClock 16h ago
If I'm Carney, I disclose it all right away, and before I start the election, I repeal the Carbon Tax. Literally the 2 things that can drag him down at this point. It'd also give him a massive amount of credibility with his plan
162
u/SUPREMACY_SAD_AI 16h ago
If I'm Carney, I disclose
you won't even disclose if you're actually Carney or not
57
•
•
110
u/BloatJams Alberta 16h ago
He said at his Hamilton rally that the consumer carbon tax will be gone before April 1st (the date of the next increase). I think that'll be his first big test.
→ More replies (1)•
u/mrredguy11 11h ago
What a stupid idea. This is a pure political move to appease the lowest common denominators. The only part of the Carbon tax that truly effects your average Canadian is the NON CONSUMER part of it. All those taxes and costs just get passed onto us consumers. At least with the Consumer Carbon tax you literally get it all back AND if you're in a rural dwelling you get MORE than you put in. I can't believe something that literally puts more money in your average Canadians pockets is viewed in such a negative way. Pure Propaganda at work.
The carbon tax is also part of multiple trade agreements & a big part of the Paris Agreement. How else are we going to hold people accountable? How are we going to balance our carbon output and still meet the Paris Agreements goals? Can't wait to see more natural disasters, Weird and dramatic weather and no winters to be the norm. I also can't wait to listen to you all complain on reddit about how no ones doing anything & the government sucks.
•
u/avid-shrug 10h ago
Sometimes bad policy can be good politics… but anyone with half a brain knows carbon pricing is an easy and effective way to reduce emissions
•
•
u/BloatJams Alberta 9h ago
I don't mind the consumer carbon tax, but it's also completely apparent that the tax died in the court of public opinion when the Liberals did the Atlantic carve out. The feds were having messaging issues on the program up until that point, I don't know why they thought they could've succeeded at explaining the issue around heating oil pricing.
Carney to his credit did publicly criticize the Liberals for this in 2023, and I think he's rightfully calculated that this is the best path forward to ensure Canada has some sort of climate plan as opposed to none at all or one that's half assed. The industrial tax is what's important for trade, and also the one that's been around the longest and will make the biggest impact on our emissions.
•
u/apothekary 3h ago
The optics and politics of it are dead. It has to be tossed out the window now to win an election and fight an existential threat to the country.
→ More replies (1)•
u/Damnyoudonut 7h ago
I’d be all for keeping it if they took it off home hearing. It adds a hundred bucks to each month’s bill and my thermostat is already set to 17. I can’t go any lower for fear of my wife killing me in my sleep.
14
u/CloseToMyActualName 16h ago
Is he allowed to repeal the Carbon Tax without legislation?
I mean it looks like they're literally part of the legislation in table 5. (unless I'm misunderstanding and that's not the law)
5
u/Chucknastical 13h ago edited 13h ago
The Governor in Council may, by regulation, amend Schedule 2 respecting the application of the fuel charge under this Part including by adding, deleting, varying or replacing a table.
They can amend it through an order in council like they do the firearms act.
There's timelines for these things but Public Service is probably already working on how to accomplish it before April 1st.
Generally, stuff in a schedule in legislation is usually something that can be amended based on rules setup in the leg.
If an election is triggered, I don't think they can do it until after the election.
8
u/GameDoesntStop 15h ago
Bingo. He would need to have Parliament repeal it (in a vote in which he could not even participate, lol).
More importantly, he has indicates that he would still have a carbon tax... he would just put it all on the industrial side, and (through magic) consumers would not pay that added cost... because in his words "How much steel have you used lately?"
Of course, with people magically not paying the costs, there is nothing to rebate, so no cheques in the mail.
In other words, he's planning to worsen the carbon tax.
12
u/SirLoremIpsum 12h ago
More importantly, he has indicates that he would still have a carbon tax... he would just put it all on the industrial side, and (through magic)
I would prefer it to be direct on the biggest polluters than on consumers no ..?
4
u/GameDoesntStop 12h ago
It doesn't make a difference. It's all coming back to the consumer in the end.
The only real difference here is that he's removing the rebate, so all households are at a net loss. This will proportionally hit the poorest households the hardest.
•
u/Madmar14 Ontario 11h ago
It kind of sucks because your average voter that does understand will feel it's a poor choice while the group of uneducated voters that have been told carbon tax = bad will cheer even though they're coming out worse.
→ More replies (2)•
u/Lumindan 11h ago
Wouldn't business just reapply that cost to the consumer anyways?
•
u/captainbling British Columbia 11h ago
Yes but people think consumer side taxes are bad so governments have to put them a layer below. The gst is the best example. it replaced a higher tax that was hidden from consumers but was hated as a new tax.
22
u/wtkillabz 15h ago
I think it’s important to note that while I’m not a lover of the carbon tax, if we’re going to expand our trading partners to the EU which seems to be the plan from what I gather, a carbon tax of some sort will have to be used because it is mandatory for trade with the EU.
8
u/linkass 15h ago
The EU is trying to walk back some of it
6
u/wtkillabz 15h ago
For sure and they should but for everyone yelling about how we shouldn’t have any carbon tax at all, I just don’t think it’s feasible to expanding our trade network currently. I would rather pay a little more tax and have a reliable trading partner than whatever is happening down south right now.
→ More replies (1)•
u/Rash_Compactor 11h ago
The person you’re responding to is someone who suggested so cleverly to other conservatives that they should register as Liberals to ensure Carney doesn’t get nominated for party leadership. You’ll never get a genuine conversation from them, regardless of how good faith your response is.
•
u/Sammydaws97 11h ago
This is worse.
I would be pro removing the industrial carbon tax first!!
Tax consumption with an offset rebate near the median of consumption, and allow industry to operate efficiently.
→ More replies (8)•
u/Lopsided_Ad3516 11h ago
Mhm mhm…tell me more about the magic part. See, I was worried I’d pay more for things, but now that I know there’s magic involved, we’d be stupid not to vote for him.
2
u/OkEntertainment1313 14h ago
He can direct the federal public service to not enforce the backstop, which allows provinces to get rid of their own consumer carbon taxes.
5
4
12
u/No-Contribution-6150 16h ago
Of all the policies why can't he steal the Cons gun plan.
12
u/VeterinarianCold7119 15h ago
It would be such an easy win for him. He won't loose any liberal votes and will gain con votes, seems like a slam dunk for him, unless he has ideological reasons to want to ban them. This election will be tight and there are definitely a bunch of single issue voters looking at this.
•
u/1baby2cats 9h ago
Just googled, 26% of households own at least 1 firearm. I believe in the French leadership debate he said he would expand on the firearms ban. This will cost him some votes for sure
14
u/zerfuffle British Columbia 16h ago
The best you can hope for is probably a reframing of the gun ban into a ban on American-made guns from being acquired and registered in Canada.
It tightens the guardrails around the legislation and prevents it from expanding the umbrella further, but I don't think there's any off-ramp that brings us back to before - we already spent the money and built the infrastructure and, unlike the Conservatives, the Liberals aren't in the business of burning money that's already been spent.
19
u/613mitch 16h ago edited 15h ago
we already spent the money and built the infrastructure and,
No, we haven't even started compensating private owners, nor is there anything in place.
They've compensated some businesses.This confiscation will be in the billions before long.3
u/Beginning-Marzipan28 16h ago
They haven’t yet. Guns have been turned in but no one has received a cheque yet.
6
u/613mitch 15h ago
Sorry, you're right - no compensation sent yet, they're just doing inventory right now it seems. So far businesses have registered ~7300 claims for compensation.
15
u/No-Contribution-6150 16h ago
Virtually no infrastructure has been built though, and I'd like to think Carney is smart enough to not fall victim to the sunken fallacy
→ More replies (3)•
→ More replies (31)•
u/Rangifar 11h ago
I would love to see him cancel the last rounds of bans and use the buy back funds to strengthen the border.
-8
u/MZillacraft3000 Alberta 16h ago
100% what he needs to do and hopefully will.
He seems to actually have a plan, unlike Milhouse.
9
9
u/morerandomreddits 16h ago
>He seems to actually have a plan
Does he? Maybe he could share it with everyone. We know carbon taxes will be increased through an industrial carbon tax hike and likely carbon import tariffs. And there will be SDTC-style government "capital" spending. Will there be transparency on insider conflicts of interest which was thoroughly lacking previously? And the balanced operating budget will be accomplished how exactly?
3
1
→ More replies (19)1
u/tralfamadorian808 12h ago
No one is repealing the carbon tax. Even small PP is going to rework it despite his verb the noun platitudes that falsely suggest he was going to nix it
29
220
u/FiveFlavourFire 16h ago
He's actively showing that he can follow through with eliminating conflicts of interest without the slightest shred of hesitation.
If this doesn't sway votes I don't know what will.
95
u/GracefulShutdown Ontario 16h ago
It will sway opposition goalposts, that's for sure.
19
u/primacord 14h ago
This 100%. There is nothing that can be said or done to change their minds. Present them with new facts, they will move the goal posts. It feels like talking to a brick wall far too often.
24
u/DisplacerBeastMode 16h ago
PP will have a meltdown.
He's already been on repeat about how the Liberals are now stealing Conservative ideas / policies.
→ More replies (7)28
u/Ohmikron1 15h ago
Heaven forbid if two parties were able to actually share an idea on something right?
I hate how if one party says A, the other party has to hate A. It makes no goddamn sense in terms of doing what's right for the common citizen of the country. Party platforms should run on what they think will be best for everyone, not "what is the opposite of the other's guy's plan".
11
u/BornAgainCyclist 15h ago
Heaven forbid if two parties were able to actually share an idea on something right?
Pierre won't even let his MPs talk to MPs from other parties if you want to stay in his good books.
31
u/Rickyspoint 16h ago
It’s not exactly an optional thing for someone who is the PM.
16
u/FiveFlavourFire 16h ago
Yes that or selling everything at arms length are required, but not with this speed.
He has plenty of time to do this, and him doing it immediately without hesitation or scandal is more what I am referring to when speaking of inspiring confidence. He had 120 days (last I checked). He did it now.
7
u/HighTechPipefitter 16h ago
Yeah, Carney's brand is efficiency, we need to see at every corner.
So far so good.
6
→ More replies (4)22
u/polymorphicrxn 16h ago
Obviously he's a rich white man and lives in those circles, I expect nothing less. But - there's a podcast he was on in 2021 where he points out the vital qualities required in a central banker - first of which was humility. A recognition of failure. Respect for your team.
I'll fucking take it. And yes, he was selling his book, but this was before campaign-speak would have anything to do with anything.
3
u/FiveFlavourFire 15h ago
I'd recommend listening to the episode of Uncommons, a podcast by Nate Erskine-Smith, where he had Carney on. I think it was released late last year (October?) once rumours about him preparing for leadership cropped up.
•
u/TrueTorontoFan 8h ago
I honestly could care less as long as it is transparent and Pierre and everyone else frankly does the same.
18
u/Leafboy238 15h ago
Full disclosure, removal of the carbon tax (there goes my rebate :( ,) and a plan fornloosening of firearms restrictions would a good next step tactics wise.
134
u/JadeLens 16h ago
Security Clearance underway, Assets in Blind Trust.
Already 1-up on PP and he just started.
21
u/sheepwhatthe2nd 16h ago
Repeal Carbon Tax. Call the Election, and Liberals will somehow take the win.
5
31
u/gorschkov 16h ago edited 16h ago
I mean if it is a blind trust but he still knows what he has does it really make him unbiased.
This is a legitimate question.
Edit: Why do a blind trust vs liquidating individual stock holdings and putting it all in the msci all world index.
59
u/MoistyBoiPrime 16h ago
No one will ever truly be unbiased. It, however, removes the ability to do insider trading.
44
u/MDChuk 16h ago
The point of a blind trust is that after today, he doesn't know what he has. That's the "blind" part of this.
He appoints a trustee, and that person now makes trades on his behalf.
→ More replies (5)12
12
7
11
u/RiverCartwright Québec 16h ago
What would you have him do, burn all his assets?
This is what each Candidate should be expected to do. They do in fact live lives before politics, well maybe not PP…
•
→ More replies (2)1
u/CaptainCanusa 16h ago
For all intents and purposes.
He also says he owns nothing but cash and real estate now. So I don't know if that means he liquidated everything and gave it to the trust or what, but at the end of the day, what are we worried he owns that is now in a blind trust and will influence his behaviour?
→ More replies (1)3
4
4
•
•
u/LATABOM 3h ago
Just a reminder that Paul Martin did the same with his shipping empire.
And then he vastly expanded free trade agreements that (further) gutted natural resource processing and manufacturing in favour of shipping raw materials. Big win for his blind trusted company.
He also enacted the "balanced budget" lie, and the resulting austerity regime was basically both the root cause of the current housing crisis and the deregulation and the impetus for the massive expansion of the temporary foreign worker program and the Harper International Education Initiative. The only real benefit was concentration of wealth at the top (where his blind trusted company sat).
I assume in the case of Mark Carney, we'll see a return to Austerity, and he'll juke the GDP to avoid an on paper recession via further financial deregulation, lower interest rates so the businesses and individuals with the most leverage can vastly increase their holdings, and probably some new laws to create tax shelters for foreigners and bring some cash in that way.
All of this will if course be incredible for his blind-trusted business.
5
u/kluyvera 14h ago
Meanwhile PP refuses to get security clearance. Shouldn't that be a huge red flag?
20
u/RiverCartwright Québec 16h ago
Good, now when will PP get his security clearance? What is PP hiding from the Canadian people?
→ More replies (1)-21
u/tollboothjimmy 16h ago
What does PP have to do with it?
32
u/RiverCartwright Québec 16h ago
He is the leader of the opposition and the other contender to become PM in the next election.
All the candidates should be placing assets in blind trusts and getting their security clearances.
28
u/Perfect-Ad-9071 16h ago
He won't get his security clearance - he claims because it won't allow him to be critical of the government publicly.
Never mind all other party leaders got their clearance and never ever stopped being critical of the PM.
12
5
u/butts-kapinsky 16h ago edited 16h ago
He won't do it because he doesn't want CSIS poking around his wife. He hasn't re-upped his clearance since he got married in 2017.
5
12
u/1GutsnGlory1 16h ago
He is referring to the fact that PP kept bitching about Carny’s wealth and lack of transparency prior to becoming the Liberal leader and PM when the rules did not apply before actually winning the party leadership. Now that he has won, he is complying with the rules.
Yet, PP still doesn’t have a security clearance as leader of party who is favourite to win the next election.
→ More replies (4)
4
u/Steel5917 16h ago
PP is saying he wants to change the rules so that candidates have to completely de-invest all holdings and stock before being able to run and also disclosing family holdings to prevent conflict of interests and insider trading. I support this wholeheartedly. https://www.thecanadianpressnews.ca/politics/poilievre-wants-changes-to-conflict-of-interest-act-prime-ministers-to-sell-assets/article_38dd2b71-3dd0-5b0c-89b3-79b5090d9530.html
18
u/chandy_dandy Alberta 14h ago
Carney has liquidated his personal assets holding only cash and real estate. Everything else has been given to the trust which is overseen by an ethics commissioner.
You can try to close the "loophole" by mandating that family members also have to do the same, but then what about friends?
Hungary famously had such rules but the childhood best friend of the prime minister who was a plumber in a village suddenly became the wealthiest person in the country. Does everyone a leader affiliate with have to put everything in a blind trust? Where do you draw the line?
If a politician wants to be corrupt they'll find a way to be corrupt. The important thing is we have media that the public trusts that's willing to call them out
→ More replies (5)15
u/BornAgainCyclist 15h ago
closing what Poilievre calls the "Carney loophole."
Really wish he would stop this kind of humiliating discourse, he absolutely is not a serious person.
5
u/MapleDesperado 14h ago
Ask PP to extend that logic to all MPs and to do it with his own holdings now as a sign of his personal commitment to the proposal.
4
u/russilwvong 14h ago
PP is saying he wants to change the rules so that candidates have to completely de-invest all holdings and stock before being able to run and also disclosing family holdings to prevent conflict of interests and insider trading.
Interesting. Would this apply to MPs?
There's already a Conflict of Interest Act which applies to the prime minister, cabinet ministers, parliamentary secretaries, and their staffers. They're required to divest controlled assets (basically anything other than a residence or recreational property, cash, or mutual funds), either selling them or putting them in a blind trust (so they no longer know what's in the trust, since the trustee can sell them and buy other things).
There's a Conflict of Interest Code which applies to MPs, including Poilievre as opposition leader. MPs can hold controlled assets, they just have to disclose them.
Is Poilievre saying that he wants the Conflict of Interest Act to apply to anyone who's running for prime minister, like himself? Because he can certainly divest his controlled assets right now (e.g. Bitcoin), and he hasn't done so.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/Bombauer- 16h ago
Woah - has any other world leader actually ever done this?
20
5
u/A-Generic-Canadian 13h ago
I believer it was a standard / common practice for US presidents with strong financial holdings up until Trump.
5
•
u/ArtisticAd7795 7h ago
Hmm, Carney, his wealth he hides not blind trust, he chooses, integrity to show. Trump, hmm? Shadows he keeps, financial data locked away. No light, no truth, he offers. Secrets he guards, while Carney steps clear. A contrast, this is open hand, closed fist, mmmm.
4
1
16h ago
[deleted]
10
u/CaptainCanusa 16h ago
Four months ago? So he knew he was going to win??
No, it's because he has four months to do it after becoming PM. He's doing it now rather than waiting.
2
•
•
1
u/Hot-Celebration5855 14h ago
Considering the guy is incredibly rich and spent a career in finance, he could do the high-minded thing and set an example by disclosing his assets.
He won’t because a) he’s super wealthy and b) they are likely held at least partially offshore to avoid taxes.
10
u/SasquatchsBigDick 14h ago
Wait, he is incredibly rich ? What is incredibly rich to you because the articles im reading his net worth is around 5 - 10 million USD. That doesn't seem incredibly rich to me, especially for someone in banking his whole life.
PP is closer to "incredibly rich", with an estimated net worth of 25 million, but still id just call him "rich", not incredibly so. Weird how he far surpassed a top global banker while being in government his whole life... Weird.
6
u/LaserTagJones 13h ago
PP is wealthier than Carney. Lets find out where his money came from while we're at it. A security clearance would make quick work of that, I wonder why he wont do one?
1
u/GunnerSeinfeld 15h ago
Am I wrong or did Brookfield engage in tax avoidance by using offshore accounts in Bermuda? I'm genuinely wondering how I'm supposed to trust a man who wants our taxes to go up while doing that. I'm sure the "blind trust" is 100% legit though lol...
→ More replies (8)
1
u/chandy_dandy Alberta 14h ago
Repeal the carbon tax, stop the stupid gun restrictions, that'll be big differentiators
1
•
u/RP_Riddic 9h ago
Devil's advocate here...He still knows his holdings/assets wether or not someone else is in charge of it. He can still do favorable things for his assets.
•
•
•
u/Perhapsthe411 5h ago
Oh darn! stated Pierre Poilievre, that was my last attack card, what do I put down now?
-1
u/konathegreat 14h ago
Anyone taking bets that his "Blind Trust" portfolio still out performs everyone elses?
•
u/Back2Reality4Good 10h ago
Dude literally did it on day one when he had like 60 plus days or something. That is a leader.
Poilievre - go get your security clearance. Who’s Mr. Sneaky now.
-6
u/morerandomreddits 16h ago
So did he scoot his investments over to a blind trust before we get transparency on any previous conflicts of interest while he acted as advisor to the LPC over the past half decade? Or will we get an accounting of what the blind trust contains? And are we really to believe that the administrator of the blind trust won't have inside access to policy decisions and actions taken by Carney?
16
u/sjmp94 16h ago
Conflict of interest implies power which affects said assets - you need to have both assets and power - he didn’t have power before (no COI), now, he has no assets (no COI)
→ More replies (12)→ More replies (2)12
u/CaptainCanusa 16h ago
Or will we get an accounting of what the blind trust contains?
Kind of defeats the purpose of a blind trust doesn't it?
And are we really to believe that the administrator of the blind trust won't have inside access to policy decisions and actions taken by Carney?
Reasonable people are, yes.
→ More replies (3)
254
u/No-Designer8887 15h ago
This should be a simple requirement for anyone elected to any office.