Prime Minister Mark Carney and other Canadian prime ministers should be required to divest their investment portfolios when they assume office, not just put them in a blind trust, the House of Commons ethics committee recommends in a new report.

In its report made public Thursday morning, the committee said putting assets in a blind trust isn’t good enough, recommending instead "that the Government of Canada amend the Conflict of Interest Act that, for the application of subsection 27(1) the prime minister, as a reporting public office holder, is fully divested from their controlled assets through sale, since placement in a blind trust does not constitute true divestment."

The committee also wants the law amended to require public disclosure of "high-level holdings categories placed in a blind trust by reporting public office holders (sector/asset class, and whether the holdings are Canadian-market concentrated)," a recommendation that could shed new light on the financial interests of a number of top officials and cabinet ministers.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] patatas@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I don't see any reason why he couldn't have signed away any claim on those stock options, or asked Brookfield to renegotiate things so he could cash out.

Some people might think it's somehow unfair, but I mean, he wanted to be PM, no one made him do it.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Does the blind trust need his permission to renegotiate them though? Couldn't they just do it?

Edit. ~~Or what if they costless collared them and effectively locked in the price on the date it went into the trust. Then it becomes this $x.xx is locked in at today's price until you can exercise them, but you wont really make or lose any money on them between now and then.~~

Edit: you need to own the underlying stock for the collar idea, not options.