Liberal Minority Government 2025 - ???

[Jarnhamar]

Are you familiar with the concept of a blind trust? You no longer know what assets are in there; the administrator is a fiduciary, and acts as such, but you have no control over those assets.

I'd be happy to get educated on it.

Is the administrator someone comepletely unfamiliar to Carney who is just as likely to dump everything for pennies on the dollar? Or someone trusted who he's confident will take care of his assets and investments?

He has no control over them now, but he gets them back when he's no longer prime minister, right?

 

[Jarnhamar]

Best for who, and for accomplishing what objective?

Best for transparency. Carney is heavily associated with Brookfield. While he's in such a powerful position they're barred from government contracts. Price of doing business. Surely Canada has other companies he's that can bid.

Would that extend to barring Inter Pipeline from taking part in O&G expansion in the West?
Genesee & Wyoming from bringing their expertise in First and Last Mile to open up the ring of fire?

Are they a part of Brookfield? If yes then sure. Let other companies bid.

What about a compromise. Canadians are made aware of any and all assets of Carneys that had anything to do with Brookfield gping into the blind trust. Then put it to a vote whether Brookfield can bid on contracts.

 

[dapaterson]

I'd be happy to get educated on it.

Is the administrator someone comepletely unfamiliar to Carney who is just as likely to dump everything for pennies on the dollar? Or someone trusted who he's confident will take care of his assets and investments?

He has no control over them now, but he gets them back when he's no longer prime minister, right?

Things can go wrong, definitely (like in the UK example cited in Wikipedia). But by and large they are an important tool.

Blind trust - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[IKnowNothing]

Best for transparency. Carney is heavily associated with Brookfield. While he's in such a powerful position they're barred from government contracts. Price of doing business. Surely Canada has other companies he's that can bid.


Are they a part of Brookfield? If yes then sure. Let other companies bid.

What about a compromise. Canadians are made aware of any and all assets of Carneys that had anything to do with Brookfield gping into the blind trust. Then put it to a vote whether Brookfield can bid on contracts.

They are not "part of Brookfield." They are firms that Brookfield has invested in. Brookfield is an asset management company. They take investor money and return back more by picking winners in their chosen sectors of focus. Those chosen areas of focus cover a lot of strategic areas of investment for Canada. The firms that Brookfield can, and likely will, change while Carney is PM.

Compromise- Canada picks the best firms for given endeavours, and doesn't let itself be held hostage by a failed campaign manager's info op.

 

[The Bread Guy]

I'd be happy to get educated on it.

Is the administrator someone comepletely unfamiliar to Carney who is just as likely to dump everything for pennies on the dollar? Or someone trusted who he's confident will take care of his assets and investments?

He has no control over them now, but he gets them back when he's no longer prime minister, right?

More on this from MSM (also archived here) ....

Confused about Mark Carney's blind trust? Here's how they work

OTTAWA — Prime Minister Mark Carney’s critics have been asking pointed questions lately about the assets in the former central banker’s blind trust — a tool meant to allow politicians to avoid conflicts of interest. How do blind trusts work? What is a blind trust? A trust is a legal arrangement...

halifax.citynews.ca

From this piece, sounds like any back & forth goes through the Commissioner (highlights mine):
"... Are blind trusts truly blind?

(Ian Stedman, associate professor in the School of Public Policy and Administration at York University) and (Jason Heath, managing director at Objective Financial Partners) both said that once assets are placed in a blind trust, it’s impossible to know exactly which assets remain in a particular portfolio.

The ethics commissioner’s website says that a public office holder can submit “general investment instructions” in writing to the trustee through the commissioner, who must approve the instructions in advance. Beneficiaries cannot direct specific changes to their portfolios.

Stedman said all communication between a blind trust’s beneficiary and trustee must flow through the commissioner’s office — no back-channels allowed.

Heath said a blind trust is likely to be managed like any other portfolio, with a few adjustments made here and there, but it’s rare for trustees to make sweeping changes.

Stedman said “it’s very unlikely” that a trustee for a blind trust portfolio that’s already set up according to the beneficiary’s risk tolerance would “rock the boat.”

In theory, a trustee could sell off every single asset in a blind trust and replace them with completely new investments.

“But really, that’s probably not how the world works if you’re a trustee and you have to act in the best interest of the person whose money you’re managing,” Stedman said.

Are blind trusts good enough for government work?

Carney floated in a press conference on Tuesday that he likely would get “screens” set up through the ethics commissioner that would automatically recuse him from any decisions that could present a conflict.

Stedman said putting up screens like this would be a good “prophylactic” that would build trust among Canadians, since he may still have a general idea of his assets based on the composition of his portfolio before taking office.

“He would say, ‘I can’t be 100 per cent sure, it’s in a blind trust, but I’m going to make sure that in case that is what’s still my portfolio, I’m not making decisions that could impact its value,’” Stedman said."

To be fair, there's at least one critic ...

Duff Conacher

Invited professor | Political Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ottawa

uniweb.uottawa.ca

... who asks if you know what's in it before it's imposed, is it REALLY blind?

Bill C-2 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) Committee on May 30th, 2006 | openparliament.ca

openparliament.ca

Blind Trust

An interview with Duff Conacher, co-founder of Democracy Watch, on Prime Minister Mark Carney’s blind trust, and why it's basically a ‘sham façade’

lindapannozzo.substack.com

 

[Czech_pivo]

They are not "part of Brookfield." They are firms that Brookfield has invested in. Brookfield is an asset management company. They take investor money and return back more by picking winners in their chosen sectors of focus. Those chosen areas of focus cover a lot of strategic areas of investment for Canada.

Compromise- Canada picks the best firms for given endeavours, and doesn't let itself be held hostage by a failed campaign manager's info op.

The easiest way to understand or compare Brookfield is to think of Berkshire-Hathaway, in essence they are run in the same manner. Their 'job' is to invest the money coming into each of them (through individuals or investment companies on behalf of individuals/entities/companies) by purchasing high quality business and then managing those businesses to maximize their profits.

 

[IKnowNothing]

The easiest way to understand or compare Brookfield is to think of Berkshire-Hathaway, in essence they are run in the same manner. Their 'job' is to invest the money coming into each of them (through individuals or investment companies on behalf of individuals/entities/companies) by purchasing high quality business and then managing those businesses to maximize their profits.

Apt comparison, though even money that anyone that isn't familiar with Brookfield and what they do isn't familiar with BH either.

My overall point was that they invest in, as you say "high quality business", and are very good at it. Self selecting to remove these firms from the field when they might represent best in breed solutions is the definition of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

 

[Czech_pivo]

To be fair, there's at least one critic ...

Duff Conacher

Invited professor | Political Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ottawa

uniweb.uottawa.ca

... who asks if you know what's in it before it's imposed, is it REALLY blind?

Bill C-2 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) Committee on May 30th, 2006 | openparliament.ca

openparliament.ca

Blind Trust

An interview with Duff Conacher, co-founder of Democracy Watch, on Prime Minister Mark Carney’s blind trust, and why it's basically a ‘sham façade’

lindapannozzo.substack.com

It depends on what the assets are invested in.

If the investments in the blind trust invest in the S&P 500 ETF, as 1 example, then obviously in Trustee is 'not blind' to what's in that 1 particular investment within the blind trust - as everyone with half a brain can google the holdings within the S&P 500 ETF to know what's in it.

Another example would be say 'ZEB' the BMO CDN Banking ETF - it ONLY invests in the big 5 CDN banks, plus the National Bank - that's it, nothing more, ever, unless the ETF shareholders vote to allow the ETF Administrators to change the investment strategy of the ETF.

Now, if the Blind Trust administrators are not investing in ETF's or certain Mutual Funds (say, 'sector' funds, such as the CDN Oil & Gas Sector), then it becomes much much more difficult for the Trustee to be aware of what's within the Blind Trust. A fair amount of detail should go into the 'KYC' (Know Your Client) set of questions to understand the individual, their investment timelines, goals, current financial situation, their citizenship(s), are they mortgage free, does their spouse work, what type of life insurance do they have, do they have dependent kids requiring money for a university education, possibly what do they have laid out in the wills/estate wishes, etc, etc, etc.

It also depends on what the Trustee is 'allowed' to stipulate as to what type of investments ('I want NO alcohol or tabaco investments' for an example), they are able to dictate. If the Trustee says, "I want my portfolio to only be invested in blue chip companies domiciled only in Canada, the US and within the EU that pay a dividend with a min. of 2% and have a historical track record of returning a greater than 5% return on their investment over a rolling 10yr time period" - then they may NOT know each and every single stock in their blind trust, but with some effort and research they'd have a decent shot of 'knowing' greater then 40-50% of the blind trust's holdings.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Apt comparison, though even money that anyone that isn't familiar with Brookfield and what they do isn't familiar with BH either.

My overall point was that they invest in, as you say "high quality business", and are very good at it. Self selecting to remove these firms from the field when they might represent best in breed solutions is the definition of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

True - bet the name 'Warren Buffet' is basically a household name to the vast majority of people in North America.

 

[IKnowNothing]

True - bet the name 'Warren Buffet' is basically a household name to the vast majority of people in North America.

Sure, the Margaritaville guy's lame brother right?

 

[The Bread Guy]

Lotsa down-the-middle results in this post-ballot poll .,,

Post-Election: Half of Canadians are Satisfied with Election Outcome

Download the report to discover Canadians' points of view on the results of this week's federal election.

leger360.com

 

[brihard]

Lotsa down-the-middle results in this post-ballot poll .,,

Post-Election: Half of Canadians are Satisfied with Election Outcome

Download the report to discover Canadians' points of view on the results of this week's federal election.

leger360.com

“Two-thirds of Canadians (65%) trust that the election results are accurate. However, 16% say they trust them only somewhat, and 13% do not trust them at all.”

That’s concerning.

 

[PuckChaser]

Well when 1 party seems to be turning a blind eye into how much the CCP is trying to buy favour with them, it's not surprising. The do not trust at all part will always be there, likely around 2% (PPC fringe voters) so something is sparking up distrust in the mainstream voter.

 

[Blackadder1916]

“Two-thirds of Canadians (65%) trust that the election results are accurate. However, 16% say they trust them only somewhat, and 13% do not trust them at all.”

That’s concerning.

Yes, it is concerning. However, I'm equally perplexed by what they mean by "election results are accurate". Do those in the "not trusting" column suggest that ballot boxes were stuffed or that election officers were crooked (or incompetent)? Having spent last Monday maintaining the security and impartiality of one small piece of that vote, I am unable to understand how that could happen.

 

[The Bread Guy]

“Two-thirds of Canadians (65%) trust that the election results are accurate. However, 16% say they trust them only somewhat, and 13% do not trust them at all.”

That’s concerning.

Interesting party breakdown in the “trusting the results” section …

 

[Remius]

A couple of things about the upcoming bi election that PP will run in.

Despite Carney wanting it to be as soon as practicable there is a bit of a wait first. Guessing it would be a month, followed by a couple of weeks of admin via the speaker’s office and a month long campaign. So late June, July?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/damien-kurek-poilievre-byelection-1.7526895

Also, these clowns are at it again…

Longest ballot group takes aim at Alberta byelection where Pierre Poilievre plans to run

Group says it’s trying to get attention to push for electoral reform

www.theglobeandmail.com

 

[Halifax Tar]

Ignore the Canada Proud things just where I found the video.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1919506695409000521

 

[GK .Dundas]

Also, these clowns are at it again…

Longest ballot group takes aim at Alberta byelection where Pierre Poilievre plans to run

Group says it’s trying to get attention to push for electoral reform

www.theglobeandmail.com

I'd really like to know who are these guys and where do they get their money from ?
Cuz this ain't cheap nor easy to organize.
It doesn't matter to me whether they're doing it to Pierre Poilieve or Marc Carney I find this kind of tactic disturbing.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Ignore the Canada Proud things just where I found the video.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1919506695409000521

Yeah, good luck with that Alberta

 

[IKnowNothing]

Ignore the Canada Proud things just where I found the video.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1919506695409000521

Not you, her.

I think you were right on the money about her deliberately tanking PP, because thats the deliberately inflamatory demand list you throw on the table in order to A. Inevitably point to not everything getting met. B. Provoke responses from well, everyone, that you can use to manipulate your populace.