Poilievre slams alleged Carney conflicts, pledges new ethics law

A Conservative government would make anyone running for office disclose where they paid taxes for the previous seven years, party leader Pierre Poilievre said Sunday while outlining a proposed new ethics law — and blasting Liberal Leader Mark Carney’s own alleged conflicts of interest. Cabinet ministers would also have to divest from tax havens and prime ministers would be required to sell off all their assets under the new rules Poilievre promised. But the Conservative leader deflected a question about whether he would put new limits on candidate nomination votes as a way to combat another ethical minefield: foreign interference in Canadian politics. Carney himself did not make a public appearance Sunday, while NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh promised he would boost the number of doctors serving northern Ontario as part of a strategy for the region, a traditional New Democrat stronghold. Poilievre touted his proposed new ethics law as a way to plug “loopholes” he said the Liberal government had found in rules implemented by the previous Conservative administration. But as his party continues to trail in the polls and his approval rating remains below Carney’s, he used the announcement to roundly criticize his Liberal rival for lacking transparency about his personal finances. “Mark Carney is already the most conflicted prime minister in Canadian history,” the Tory leader alleged. “His conflicts touch everything — from his business interests in nuclear energy to real estate to income tax laws.” “We’re going to put Canadians first for a change. We’re going to have accountable government for a change.” Controversy has surrounded Carney’s refusal to disclose details of his financial holdings after serving as chair of Brookfield Asset Management, which has a trillion-dollar book around the world. According to company filings, he has $6.8 million in Brookfield stock options, and helped the company obtain a $250-million loan from the state-owned Bank of China last November. Carney says his assets are in a blind trust, meaning a trustee manages his investments and he has no control over them. Poilievre also charged that the prime minister will not reveal where he pays taxes after a globe-trotting career that included several years as governor of the Bank of England. But the Liberal campaign said that is simply not true, while referencing the Conservative chief’s lack of private-sector experience. “Mark Carney pays income taxes in Canada and has always followed all the rules as a tax-paying resident of Canada,” said campaign spokesman Mohammad Hussain. “Pierre Poilievre continually attacks Mark Carney’s expertise in business and finance because he has no experience of his own. “While Pierre Poilievre continues his desperate attacks, Mark Carney is taking action to stand up to Donald Trump’s tariffs and build a stronger economy for all Canadians.” A group that advocates for tougher ethical rules in government was lukewarm on Poilievre’s proposals, saying that while well-intentioned, they’re muddled and don’t go nearly far enough. The Conservatives propose to ban blind trusts because of their lack of transparency, for instance, yet suggest cabinet ministers need only disclose their investments to the ethics commissioner, not the public, noted Duff Conacher, co-founder of Democracy Watch. And while they say the prime minister should sell all his or her assets, other public officials would face no such requirement, he said. As well as requiring political candidates to say where they’re paying taxes, Poilievre proposes:

• Requiring business leaders and other private citizens who act as government advisers to register as lobbyists if they stand to profit from their advice;
• Banning politicians from making decisions that benefit them or their families disproportionately;
• Increasing fines for ethics violations to $10,000;
• Forcing cabinet ministers to sell off investments in tax havens and disclose assets to the conflict of interest commissioner;
• Making party leaders disclose their assets within 30 days of getting the job, and selling off assets within 30 days of becoming prime minister.

But Conacher suggested the proposed measures largely skirt around the real issues. He said one of the most important reforms to the current law would be to require all cabinet members and other top government officials to simply sell off their investments, lessening the chance of financially benefiting from decisions. He said the current law also exempts “99 per cent” of decisions governments make from conflict rules, because the legislation does not cover policies that apply generally, as opposed to a specific company or other entity. As for a $10,000 fine, that would provide little incentive for compliance when a politician could potentially earn millions of dollars from a government decision, said Conacher. A reporter asked Poilievre after his announcement whether he would favour putting the nomination elections for party candidates under the authority of Elections Canada to prevent meddling in them by foreign powers. Such contests could be a “gateway” for foreign interference, Justice Marie-Josée Hogue had said in a report on the federal foreign-interference inquiry. Loose rules around who can vote in those elections, for instance, have led to allegations of instant party members — some who are neither citizens nor even permanent residents — helping to elect candidates. Poilievre did not directly answer the question, but said a government he led would take foreign interference seriously and criticized Carney’s response to one of his candidate’s controversial remarks. Paul Chiang, the incumbent in Markham—Unionville riding, encouraged people to turn Conservative politician Joe Tay into the Chinese consulate and collect a bounty placed on his head by Hong Kong police. Tay’s alleged “crime” was to run a YouTube channel here that was critical of the city’s China-dominated government. Carney defended Chiang, though the former MP later stepped down as a candidate. Conacher said Elections Canada must take over responsibility of running both nomination and party leadership elections. “As long as the parties run nomination contests and party leadership contests, foreign interference will be covered up whenever it happens in those contests,” he said. ”The Parties just will not expose foreign interference in their own contests because of how embarrassing it would be.”