Skip to content
0
  • Home
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
  • Home
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Sketchy)
  • No Skin
Collapse

Wandering Adventure Party

  1. Home
  2. Canada
  3. Poilievre wants Carney to cash out blind trust, says ethics screens insufficient

Poilievre wants Carney to cash out blind trust, says ethics screens insufficient

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Canada
canada
57 Posts 22 Posters 75 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • N nsabot@lemmy.ca

    What exactly do you want done with unvested shares?

    P This user is from outside of this forum
    P This user is from outside of this forum
    patatas@sh.itjust.works
    wrote on last edited by patatas@sh.itjust.works
    #29

    Carney could, for instance, sign away any future claim to them.

    At the very least, Canadians deserve to know what the vesting schedule is. But he’s a rich man already. If he was really in politics for the greater good (doubtful!), and if he cared about not having conflicts of interest or even appearing not to (also doubtful!), then he’d have zero qualms about giving up these Brookfield options.

    Instead, he gets mad at anyone who questions the arrangement, and continues to push projects in sectors that Brookfield is heavily invested in.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • N nsabot@lemmy.ca

      It’s a blind trust. Maybe they’ve already been sold. He doesn’t know. And because it’s in a blind trust, if he did want them sold he:

      1. Doesn’t get to tell the person managing what to do (buy or sell)
      2. Couldn’t be told by the manager whether they had been sold

      This is as stupid as the excuses to not get a security clearance

      P This user is from outside of this forum
      P This user is from outside of this forum
      patatas@sh.itjust.works
      wrote on last edited by
      #30

      The problem is, his stock options may not have vested, and Carney would be aware of the vesting schedule. It could be years before he (or whoever is managing the trust) could exercise those options and/or sell those shares.

      In other words, the trust may not be ‘blind’ in practice.

      This was the original criticism from reporters such as Rosie Barton, and many of Carney’s supporters never bothered to try to understand the issue.

      N 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • T teppa

        “We’re calling on the Prime Minister to sell his investments, turn them into cash, hand them to a trustee who can invest them in a way that is completely blind to him so that he does not have any knowledge of what he owns”

        I assumed this was what a blind trust is, can you educate me what a blind trust actually is?

        U This user is from outside of this forum
        U This user is from outside of this forum
        ulrich_the_old@lemmy.ca
        wrote on last edited by
        #31

        google is free.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • P patatas@sh.itjust.works

          I don’t like that I agree with Poilievre here.

          But it’s unclear what the vesting schedule for Carney’s Brookfield stock options is. Meaning that whoever is administering the ‘blind’ trust may not even have the ability to decide whether to exercise those options while Carney is in office.

          I can’t see how that’s not a problem tbh

          Edit: if you’re gonna downvote this, then go ahead and tell everyone what a vesting schedule is, and what the vesting schedule for Carney’s stock options is. I’ll wait.

          U This user is from outside of this forum
          U This user is from outside of this forum
          ulrich_the_old@lemmy.ca
          wrote on last edited by
          #32

          google is free

          P 1 Reply Last reply
          1
          • U ulrich_the_old@lemmy.ca

            google is free

            P This user is from outside of this forum
            P This user is from outside of this forum
            patatas@sh.itjust.works
            wrote on last edited by
            #33

            And that’s exactly my point. So go on, answer the question please?

            U 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • P patatas@sh.itjust.works

              And that’s exactly my point. So go on, answer the question please?

              U This user is from outside of this forum
              U This user is from outside of this forum
              ulrich_the_old@lemmy.ca
              wrote on last edited by
              #34

              go use google is the answer…

              P 1 Reply Last reply
              1
              • U ulrich_the_old@lemmy.ca

                go use google is the answer…

                P This user is from outside of this forum
                P This user is from outside of this forum
                patatas@sh.itjust.works
                wrote on last edited by
                #35

                Not sure what you think I meant.

                I know what a vesting schedule is. Do you?

                And Carney has not disclosed what the vesting schedule for his Brookfield stock options is.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • P patatas@sh.itjust.works

                  The problem is, his stock options may not have vested, and Carney would be aware of the vesting schedule. It could be years before he (or whoever is managing the trust) could exercise those options and/or sell those shares.

                  In other words, the trust may not be ‘blind’ in practice.

                  This was the original criticism from reporters such as Rosie Barton, and many of Carney’s supporters never bothered to try to understand the issue.

                  N This user is from outside of this forum
                  N This user is from outside of this forum
                  nsabot@lemmy.ca
                  wrote on last edited by nsabot@lemmy.ca
                  #36

                  As soon as they vest, they are entered into the blind trust and Carney will have no knowledge or input into what happens with them

                  Unvested stocks can’t really be part of a blind trust because the holder can’t do anything with them until they have vested, and the vesting schedule being known means that the “blind” isn’t there in the blind trust

                  P 1 Reply Last reply
                  1
                  • N nsabot@lemmy.ca

                    As soon as they vest, they are entered into the blind trust and Carney will have no knowledge or input into what happens with them

                    Unvested stocks can’t really be part of a blind trust because the holder can’t do anything with them until they have vested, and the vesting schedule being known means that the “blind” isn’t there in the blind trust

                    P This user is from outside of this forum
                    P This user is from outside of this forum
                    patatas@sh.itjust.works
                    wrote on last edited by patatas@sh.itjust.works
                    #37

                    And when will that be? Will that happen while he is PM? Carney knows, and we don’t. And that’s the problem!

                    N 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • P patatas@sh.itjust.works

                      And when will that be? Will that happen while he is PM? Carney knows, and we don’t. And that’s the problem!

                      N This user is from outside of this forum
                      N This user is from outside of this forum
                      nsabot@lemmy.ca
                      wrote on last edited by nsabot@lemmy.ca
                      #38

                      When they vest? Generally stocks vest to a schedule like x% per month over 4 years from when they were issued.

                      P 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • G greyeyedghost@lemmy.ca

                        So we should stop having politicians from having investments in housing, right?

                        T This user is from outside of this forum
                        T This user is from outside of this forum
                        teppa
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #39

                        I would love to have that terrible pick for housing minister be liquidated, that is a prime example of blatant corruption.

                        G 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • T teppa

                          I would love to have that terrible pick for housing minister be liquidated, that is a prime example of blatant corruption.

                          G This user is from outside of this forum
                          G This user is from outside of this forum
                          greyeyedghost@lemmy.ca
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #40

                          Well, there’s nothing stopping Poilievre and his wife from selling the rental properties they own, which should help remove some conflict of interest they may have in this issue which is so important to many Canadians, and he doesn’t even have to get the approval of anyone but his wife to make it happen (and that only for one of them).

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • N nsabot@lemmy.ca

                            When they vest? Generally stocks vest to a schedule like x% per month over 4 years from when they were issued.

                            P This user is from outside of this forum
                            P This user is from outside of this forum
                            patatas@sh.itjust.works
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #41

                            So why doesn’t Carney disclose this? Do you agree he should?

                            N 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • Sunshine (she/her)S Sunshine (she/her)

                              Avoid Paywall

                              D This user is from outside of this forum
                              D This user is from outside of this forum
                              dancesongraves@lemmy.ca
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #42

                              If he cashes out of his investments, then what does PP expect him to do, hold a massive cash position, and eat inflation?

                              B 1 Reply Last reply
                              1
                              • P patatas@sh.itjust.works

                                So why doesn’t Carney disclose this? Do you agree he should?

                                N This user is from outside of this forum
                                N This user is from outside of this forum
                                nsabot@lemmy.ca
                                wrote on last edited by nsabot@lemmy.ca
                                #43

                                He could I guess, but it’s pretty standard stuff so the outrage over it seems manufactured to me.

                                P 1 Reply Last reply
                                1
                                • N nsabot@lemmy.ca

                                  He could I guess, but it’s pretty standard stuff so the outrage over it seems manufactured to me.

                                  P This user is from outside of this forum
                                  P This user is from outside of this forum
                                  patatas@sh.itjust.works
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #44

                                  Personally I’ve not heard of a PM having millions in unvested stock options before this one, so, not sure how standard it is.

                                  If Poilievre was doing the same, would you have the same response?

                                  N 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • P patatas@sh.itjust.works

                                    Personally I’ve not heard of a PM having millions in unvested stock options before this one, so, not sure how standard it is.

                                    If Poilievre was doing the same, would you have the same response?

                                    N This user is from outside of this forum
                                    N This user is from outside of this forum
                                    nsabot@lemmy.ca
                                    wrote on last edited by nsabot@lemmy.ca
                                    #45

                                    If Pierre wants to go get a job and succeed to the point where he gets stocks, good luck and more power to him.

                                    IMO this hasn’t really been an issue in Canada before because generally we elect lawyers or career politicians. If we want a higher bar for divestment then let’s get that into law so that it applies either later in Carney’s term or for the next PM. In the meantime I am happy that Carney has fulfilled the requirements of the ethics commissioner and don’t believe that we have any clear mechanisms today to deal with unvested stocks owned by our politicians.

                                    It is IMO very unlikely that a large percentage of Carney’s net worth will be from (currently) unvested stocks. He’s entered everything that can be into a blind trust and once vested these currently unvested stocks will go to the blind trust. Until that happens this grey area seems like much ado about nothing.

                                    And to be 100% clear I did not vote Liberal in this latest election.

                                    P 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • N nsabot@lemmy.ca

                                      If Pierre wants to go get a job and succeed to the point where he gets stocks, good luck and more power to him.

                                      IMO this hasn’t really been an issue in Canada before because generally we elect lawyers or career politicians. If we want a higher bar for divestment then let’s get that into law so that it applies either later in Carney’s term or for the next PM. In the meantime I am happy that Carney has fulfilled the requirements of the ethics commissioner and don’t believe that we have any clear mechanisms today to deal with unvested stocks owned by our politicians.

                                      It is IMO very unlikely that a large percentage of Carney’s net worth will be from (currently) unvested stocks. He’s entered everything that can be into a blind trust and once vested these currently unvested stocks will go to the blind trust. Until that happens this grey area seems like much ado about nothing.

                                      And to be 100% clear I did not vote Liberal in this latest election.

                                      P This user is from outside of this forum
                                      P This user is from outside of this forum
                                      patatas@sh.itjust.works
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #46

                                      We don’t have a clear legal mechanism, but we to have the power of public outrage.

                                      The whole point of conflict of interest legislation is that politicians should not have, nor be seen to have, opportunity for personal gain.

                                      Carney could easily clear this up to satisfy critics like myself. Choosing not to only makes it look worse, frankly.

                                      People mad about Poilievre not having a security clearance should also be mad about this.

                                      N 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • P patatas@sh.itjust.works

                                        We don’t have a clear legal mechanism, but we to have the power of public outrage.

                                        The whole point of conflict of interest legislation is that politicians should not have, nor be seen to have, opportunity for personal gain.

                                        Carney could easily clear this up to satisfy critics like myself. Choosing not to only makes it look worse, frankly.

                                        People mad about Poilievre not having a security clearance should also be mad about this.

                                        N This user is from outside of this forum
                                        N This user is from outside of this forum
                                        nsabot@lemmy.ca
                                        wrote on last edited by nsabot@lemmy.ca
                                        #47

                                        I disagree. I think drumming up outrage over this is a ploy to manufacture outrage over him being rich. We all already know he’s richer than any of us could ever dream of. I just want the government to focus on keeping Canadians safe and stable while our former ally wages economic war against us. This is a distraction at best.

                                        Pierre not having a security clearance on its own is odd and disappointing, but fine on its own. The problem is that he used not getting a security clearance as a way for him to spread conspiracies about the things he could not know without clearance, but would know about with clearance. It was a bad faith argument.

                                        P 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • N nsabot@lemmy.ca

                                          I disagree. I think drumming up outrage over this is a ploy to manufacture outrage over him being rich. We all already know he’s richer than any of us could ever dream of. I just want the government to focus on keeping Canadians safe and stable while our former ally wages economic war against us. This is a distraction at best.

                                          Pierre not having a security clearance on its own is odd and disappointing, but fine on its own. The problem is that he used not getting a security clearance as a way for him to spread conspiracies about the things he could not know without clearance, but would know about with clearance. It was a bad faith argument.

                                          P This user is from outside of this forum
                                          P This user is from outside of this forum
                                          patatas@sh.itjust.works
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #48

                                          If this were simply a ploy to manufacture outrage, then Carney’s best move would be to neutralize that ploy, or ‘distraction’, by calling people’s bluff and actually being transparent.

                                          Instead, he got angry at reporters for asking him about it, and denied that there could be any possible conflict.

                                          Meanwhile he continues to pitch projects in sectors that Brookfield has tens of billions invested in.

                                          N 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0

                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                          • First post
                                            Last post