The demand
Divest. That's the test.
We are not asking the Prime Minister to prove his innocence. We are asking him to remove the conflict. If his financial interests are truly compatible with the public interest, divestment costs nothing. If they are not, the refusal to divest is the only answer Canadians need.
What we're asking for
Full divestment
Voluntarily divest all residual financial interests — including carried interest, stock options, long-term incentive eligibility, and any indirect exposure through trust structures — that create real or perceived conflicts in sectors affected by federal policy, trade, investment, procurement, or strategic partnerships.
Not a blind trust. Not a screen. Divestment.
Plain-language public disclosure
Publish a clear, readable explanation of what was divested, what remains in trust, what compensation or incentive structures are still active, and what the limits of the current ethics screen are — in language any Canadian can understand.
Independent recusal oversight
Replace the PMO-administered ethics screen with a genuinely independent recusal process — overseen by the Ethics Commissioner directly, with a published recusal log showing when screens were triggered, the general subject area, and the outcome.
MPO transparency
Publish the decision criteria and selection log for the Major Projects Office. If a fast lane exists for large projects, the public deserves to know which projects are in it, why they were selected, and whether entities covered by the conflict screen benefit.
Equal rules
If regulatory burden is the justification for the MPO, reform the regulatory framework for everyone — not just for projects that happen to align with the PM's former investment portfolio. Fast-tracking for some while choking regulation persists for everyone else is not a neutral policy choice.
These demands apply to any current or future prime minister or senior official. Our standard is non-partisan: where public duty and private financial exposure overlap at this scale, the remedy is divestment and transparency. Not a screen. Not a trust. Not a promise.
Take action
Contact your MP
Use this template to write to your Member of Parliament. Edit it to make it your own — your voice matters more than a form letter.
Find your MP: ourcommons.ca
Questions to ask publicly
Whether you're talking to your MP, posting on social media, or speaking at a town hall — these are the questions that matter:
On divestment
"Will the Prime Minister fully divest all financial interests that create conflicts — including carried interest and long-term incentive structures — rather than relying on a blind trust administered by his own staff?"
On the ethics screen
"Why is the conflict-of-interest screen administered by PMO appointees rather than the Ethics Commissioner directly? Will the government publish a recusal log?"
On the MPO
"What are the selection criteria for the Major Projects Office? Will the government publish which projects receive fast-track treatment and confirm whether any involve entities covered by the conflict screen?"
On equal rules
"If regulatory burden is serious enough to justify a fast-track office for major projects, why hasn't the government reformed the regulatory framework for all Canadians and businesses?"
When you share this
The strength of this campaign depends on credibility. When you share this site or discuss these issues:
Share source links, not just screenshots. Let people verify for themselves.
Say what is confirmed and what is your interpretation. The facts are strong enough — they don't need exaggeration.
Don't claim corruption without proof. The conflicts are the story. The refusal to divest is the story. You don't need to prove criminal intent to demand accountability.
Focus on the demand. Divest. Disclose. Independent oversight. Equal rules. That's it.
Submit a source or correction
Have a primary document that strengthens the evidence? Found an error? We welcome both.
Send to tips@thecarneyrule.ca with:
1. The specific claim (one sentence).
2. Your source link or document.
3. Why it matters for public confidence.
Anonymous submissions accepted. We publish only what we can verify with documentary evidence.