Go Ad Free

Brookfield's extensive and questionable investments, particularly those linked to China and its state-backed entities, have raised significant concerns regarding potential conflicts of interest for figures like Mark Carney. 

The House of Commons voted yesterday to summon Brookfield's CEO and Carney's chief of staff to testify about these alleged conflicts, his ethics, and offshore wealth.

Recent revelations have highlighted Brookfield's deep involvement across Canada, often leveraging government relationships for its benefit. This includes over $3 billion in China-linked real estate and energy investments, some made after 2015. 

Notably, a key Hong Kong investor involved in Brookfield's projects was part of China's political consultative conference, an entity the CIA identifies as being involved in Beijing's global United Front networks—a mechanism for the Chinese Communist Party to engage influential individuals.

Carney's travels to China to meet with senior Communist Party officials while the Bank of China aided Brookfield's real estate investments, amid China's severe real estate downturn, raises concerns that Brookfield's investments may have bailed out the Chinese government.

Moreover, Carney is alleged to have met with United Front-affiliated individuals on Canadian soil, specifically in areas where disinformation campaigns linked to the CCP targeted Conservative MP Kenny Chu during the 2019 and 2021 elections. These meetings, initially denied by Carney, further question his judgment and alignment with Canadian interests.

The central question remains whether Carney's actions prioritize the well-being of Canadians or the economic interests of Brookfield and its shareholders. This is particularly relevant when considering Canada's natural resources, such as Saskatchewan's uranium deposits, where Brookfield could profit at Canada's expense.

Increased scrutiny and a potential moratorium on business with Brookfield are warranted due to its questionable dealings. Carney's alleged actions—stifling Canadian energy while boosting American energy via Brookfield—suggest he prioritized corporate profit over national interest.