British Columbia has no limits on political donations, leading critics to say the provincial government has become a lucrative business dominated by special interests. As the premier of British Columbia, Christy Clark is on the public payroll, pulling down a salary of 195,000 Canadian dollars in taxpayer money. But if that were not enough, she also gets an annual stipend of up to 50,000 Canadian dollars — nearly $40,000 — from her party, financed by political contributions. Personal enrichment from the handouts of wealthy donors, some of whom have paid tens of thousands of dollars to meet with her at private party fund-raisers? No conflict of interest here, according to a pair of rulings last year by the province’s conflict-of-interest commissioner — whose son works for Ms. Clark.
How many shell companies exist in Canada? How many legal trusts? Who are the beneficial owners protected by such unnecessary veils of secrecy? No one knows because in most cases there is no legal requirement to disclose actual ownership even to regulators. In fact, more information is required to get a library card than to set up a company in most jurisdictions in Canada. What we do know is that Canada ranks near the bottom among our OECD partners in terms of corporate disclosure requirements to fight money laundering and tax evasion. A recent report from Transparency International detailed the dismal situation and why our country has become a haven for dubious offshore property speculation.
UPDATE: This February 3, 2016 post on Uber deserves an update. This week Uber announced that it lost $800 Million in its 3rd quarter. That’s correct, $800 Million in only three months. The Uber announcement tries to spin the loss as good news for Uber as ” increased by only 25% over the third quarter last year. An $800 Million quarterly loss is right up there in the same league with Trump lost money. I guess we need to remember Trump’s admonition that debt is good, and it’s ok to lose other people’s money. Uber’s announcement goes on to project continuing losses projected to be greater than $3 Billion next year, as Uber continues its plans for an apparent IPO for brain dead investors.
Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. Presidential election has evolved into a genuine and unprecedented national crisis. The Electoral College meets December 19th. Over the years, the Electoral College has deteriorated into a quant rubber-stamp of each state’s elector outcome. Some states have even passed laws that prohibit electors from changing their votes. However, this is patently un-Constitutional and not the intent of The Founders. Alexander Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Papers that the intent was for the Electoral College to be a check on exactly the situation we are facing. Meanwhile, a group of electors has demanded that the CIA share its evidence with the Electoral College.
Anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks said on Monday that its founder Julian Assange’s internet was shut down by the government of Ecuador, deflecting blame from the U.S. or British governments which have sparred with Assange for releasing sensitive material. My earlier predictions that Assange has worn out his welcome at the Ecuadorian Embassy in Knightsbridge, appears to be playing out. Assange and Wikileaks, originally portrayed themselves as an “international, non-profit, journalistic organization” with no political bias, that releases confidential information form anonymous sources for the benefit of the public. This image has been severely tarnished by Assange’s own statements, and numerous allegations of bias favoring Russia going back to 2011, and Assange’s own statements of a bias against the United States for seeking his prosecution.
The following article from Alternet, discusses the legal complexities of a potential espionage or conspiracy charge against Julian Assange by the United States. My reading as that such a charge is likely and possibly imminent, which would lead to diplomatic moves by Ecuador to force Assange to leave their embassy in London and extradition to the United States by Great Britain. The increased likelihood of moving against Assange has been heightened in my opinion, by two factors: Obama’s announcement on October 7th that the United States officially holds Russia responsible for the cyber theft of the Democratic National Committee documents released by Wikileaks, and Assange’s own statements of his intent to harm the United States, most recently in a video interview with Bill Maher, which are now coming back to haunt him.
Former Nortel workers who are still owed money say they’re frustrated that executives with the now […]