you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago*

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (-1 replies)