Marc Carney $10 Billion “Conflict Of Interest” Exposed By Conservative MP

“There should be no way in hell that Mr. Carney — who, as Chair of Brookfield— should be acting as the prime minister's key economic adviser.”

Despite a falling out in political fortunes, the surreal nature of Canada's Liberal government continues to roll. Rather than displaying flexibility, PM Justin Trudeau and team continue to double down on party policy.

The latest example is a real doozy. According to Conservative MP Michelle Rempel-Garner, as reported this week by Western Standard news, we witness a breaking development:

MICHELLE REMPEL-GARNER: “Exposing The Carney Appointment's Massive Conflict Of Interest”

September 17th, 2024: "Last week, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced that he would be appointing uber-elitist and longtime carbon tax supporter Mark Carney as his key economic policy czar. Mr. Trudeau structured Mr. Carney's appointment...so that it would not be subject to any conflict of interest rules for public office holders."

This week, we uncover the following:

“Brookfield in talks with Canadian pensions to create new $50B fund for domestic assets.”

Mark Carney is the Chair of Brookfield Asset Management. He is also Chair of the Group of Thirty and Bloomberg LP’s Board of Directors, as well as an external member of the Board of Stripe, a member of the Global Advisory Board of PIMCO, Harvard University, Rideau Hall Foundation, Bilderberg, the Peterson Institute for International Economics, the Blavatnik School at Oxford, and the Hoffman Institute for Global Business.

Hold your woke horses for just a minute. Doesn't Justin Trudeau's directive to appoint Carney as Liberal government economic advisor substantiate every assessment of our PM as a globalist climate-tax pushing political despot?

Of course it does-- so why do it? Why such a brazen move, one which flies-in-the-face of any sign of ideological adaptability on the part of our prime minister? It's a complex question, and therefore one certain to be down-played by media.

One thing is definite, however. The Conservative MP for Calgary-Nose Hill doesn't think much of the Carney appointment:

"There should be no way in hell that Mr. Carney — who, as Chair of Brookfield, would have a direct personal interest in a new Brookfield run multi-billion dollar fund — should be acting as the prime minister's key economic adviser while his company is reportedly trying to get its grubby hands on the pension savings of Canadian families and seniors or $10 billion out of their wallets."

We interject with a few thoughts. The first that comes to mind is a playing of the "long-game." Political pundits understand the cyclical nature of federal politics in Canada. Liberal rule transitions to Conservative rule, and round and round governance goes, ad infinitum.

The concept of playing the long-game happens to be a Chinese government specialty. It's a political maneuver hard-wired into socialist and communist ideology. Have Trudeau's Liberals appropriated the behaviour? Can it be said that the mind-set of Liberal party strategists is one in which they accept their imminent demise, and therefore plan for their return, let's say, a decade down the road.

On this basis, the immediate task becomes one of entrenchment. As in, an injection of Liberal political weaponry to the degree that they can pick-up-the-woke-ball when political fortunes fade on a future Conservative government.

Apart from this, it's difficult to comprehend the 'strategy" that is the Carney appointment. More from Rempel-Garner:

"As a publicly traded for-profit company, its executives are focused on making money for Brookfield's shareholders. And as one of Brookfield’s top executives, that would be Mr. Carney’s primary interest, too."

"There is no way he should be anywhere close to formally influencing the Prime Minister on economic policy." 

On the other hand, perhaps it's simply a case of money grubbing. As political historians have noted, once the "greater good"-- the serving of the people-- fades into the sunset, fall-out is found in self-serving personal indulgence and profit-taking. Not to say that Trudeau and the Liberals had the greater good of society in mind in the first place.

"That the Liberals didn't think, at the very least, about the optics of this situation proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that they care more about securing the interests of globally well-connected corporate executives than fixing the budget to bring down inflation."  

Has federal governance in Canada been reduced to little more than a globalist grab-bag for Trudeau and his elite Laurentian Mountain money-men?

"His acceptance of Mr. Trudeau's offer demonstrates that he's unable to see the inherent wrongness of someone who helms a publicly traded investment firm and formally advises the Prime Minister on economic policy without being either registered as a lobbyist or subjecting himself to the ethics rules public office holders must adhere to."

If so, then Marc Carney is clearly "the man for Trudeau."

What would be fascinating, and possibly beneficial, is for the round-and-round cyclical nature of Liberal-Conservative federal governance to be cut off at the pass. Canada is likely a long way off from this, but it's an idea that certainly deserves public scrutiny.

Upon which we note the number of times mainstream media has made reference to the binary Liberal-Conservative nature of federal governance in Canada:

Begin at never, and don't stop 'till you get enough.