As per
@grok.
Mark carneys conflict of interest would not be tolerated in any other office in this country. But it stands for the government????
Would this arrangement survive five minutes in the private sector? No.
In any major corporation, bank, pension fund, or public company, Mark Carney’s setup would end his career the day it became known. He would be fired, the board would demand full divestment, and regulators or auditors would open an investigation. What is treated as routine process under this federal government would be treated as an unacceptable conflict anywhere else.
Private-sector rules are blunt for a reason. Executives and directors with residual financial interests in a former firm — stock options, deferred units, carried interest, or anything whose value moves with that firm’s performance — do not stay in roles where they can influence decisions that touch that firm. Blind trusts exist, but they are not treated as a free pass when the portfolio is this large and the decisions are this broad. Companies require either outright sale or hard, independently administered recusal with no involvement by the executive’s own staff. “General application” carve-outs that let you shape industry-wide subsidies, infrastructure policy, nuclear strategy, or carbon-credit frameworks while residual interests sit in the background do not fly. The optics alone get you walked out.
Carney’s reality: roughly $6.8 million in Brookfield instruments whose value rises with the firm, hundreds of other holdings in a blind trust, and an ethics screen covering more than 100 Brookfield-related entities (including Westinghouse). That screen is administered by his own Chief of Staff and the Clerk of the Privy Council. It has been applied in a handful of specific cases. Broad policies that expand markets for infrastructure, heat pumps, nuclear technology, carbon capture, and transition assets are allowed to proceed under the “general application” exception. Brookfield’s portfolio sits squarely in those sectors. In a private company this would be called what it is: an executive with residual upside shaping the environment in which his former firm operates, with the compliance process run by people who report to him.
Private boards do not accept “the screen caught a few files” as the answer when the firm’s assets under management are measured in the hundreds of billions and the policy decisions are national. They do not accept an unpaid family appointment sitting next to billion-dollar packages in the same space. They do not accept pension capital being structured into vehicles with the former employer while residual instruments remain. They fire the person and force the sale so there is nothing left to manage.
This current federal government treats the same facts as compliant process. The Conflict of Interest Act permits blind trusts and screens with general-application exceptions. The Ethics Commissioner has not found a violation. The ethics committee’s recommendation for full divestment by the prime minister was not adopted. That is the gap. What would end a private-sector career is presented as ordinary governance here.
Canadians are told the rules are being followed. In any other serious organization the rules would have ended the arrangement long ago. Results. Not process. Not spin.
🚨 🇨🇦 Canada’s Prime Minister holds $6.8 million in Brookfield stock options.
Brookfield manages $850 billion in global assets.📌🌎
Every policy Carney signs that benefits clean energy, infrastructure or housing ..Brookfield wins.💵
📌 Confirmed under oath by Brookfield’s own COO: “When Brookfield’s value increases, the value of the instruments Mark Carney holds increases as well.”
📌 Carney holds stakes in 500+ companies. All in a blind trust. Administered by his own Chief of Staff.
📌 1,900 Brookfield assets were NOT submitted to his ethics screen.
📌 Brookfield pitched Ottawa for a $50 billion “Maple Fund” — including $10 billion directly from the federal government.
📌 His ethics screen administrator?
Marc-André Blanchard — Carney’s own Chief of Staff.
The fox isn’t guarding the henhouse.
The fox built the henhouse.
Named it after himself.
And is now writing the rules for who gets in.
In any other G7 country this would be front page every day.
In Canada, CBC calls it “a complicated situation.”
🇨🇦 Repost if the PM’s personal portfolio shouldn’t grow while he runs the country.