Carney announced last week that he has put his financial assets into a blind trust to shield himself from any conflicts of interest.
But that hasn’t stopped Conservatives from calling on the new prime minister to publicly disclose his financial holdings, suggesting that Canada could be in an election campaign before Carney’s assets are publicly disclosed.
A blind trust means Carney’s financial assets are handled by a trustee who has the legal authority to manage them but who is barred from seeking his input. Carney wouldn’t know what is in his blind trust portfolio, but would know what those assets were before they were divested.
The blind trust vs. full disclosure debate perfectly illustrates how our politics has devolved into partisan theatre rather than substantive governance. A properly administered blind trust is an established ethical mechanism, yet we’re treating it as suspicious while ignoring the Conservative leader’s security clearance issues.
What’s more troubling is how these superficial conflicts distract from real democratic deficits. While we argue over financial disclosure formats (or security clearances), our electoral system continues to systematically discard millions of votes. If we’re genuinely concerned about government accountability, perhaps we should focus on ensuring our voting system accurately represents citizens instead of manufacturing outrage over procedural matters that both parties engage in when convenient.