Quote:
Originally Posted by Monahammer
Well, his family members are employed by the foundation. I think there are numerous potential ways that foundation money could find itself back in family hands, here are some examples:
- speaking event fees. Foundation throws an event and invites a famed family member to speak. Family member is paid a speaking fee. I seem to recall the PMs mother charging upwards of several hundred thousand for this. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mar...rity-1.5643586
There's the article. It was actually from another charity fiasco (I had already completely forgotten about WE, wow...)
- The retirement scheme you mention is valid, but with executives instead of board members. Charities can pay executives, and can pay them quite well.
- Money flow through; i.e. flow through bribes. Say Trudeau needed to bribe someone or buy influence. Well, he could have the foundation employ someone who he needs to buy influence from. The foundation having money to bribe people on his behalf would thus be similar to him just having that money himself.
- Potentially the foundation could be buying them trips or small gifts. It would be interesting to know if the foundation has a yearly retreat or board meeting somewhere nice. |
I don't think any of those are all that plausible in terms of motivations. The Foundation's financials are publicly available and they really don't spend a whole lot on things that would or could benefit Trudeau or his family directly. And frankly, a $200K donation is pocket change for a foundation that has $140M in Net Assets.
I think it comes down more to soft power rather than being a bribe or a quid pro quo. China (via an intermediary) donates money and offers to build a statue of Pierre Trudeau in the hopes that it'll curry favor with the new Prime Minister, make them look like credible partners, and ultimately advance their goals. China is doing whatever it can to create a multi-polar world where they're seen as a credible alternative to US hegemony, and this (in a very tiny way) sort of ties into that.
It's the same reason rich people donate money to improve their image; it doesn't mean they expect or will get anything directly in return. But when you burnish your image through donations, it can help down the road and cause people to overlook the negative things you do. I mean, look at Bill Gates. Outside the crazies, he generally has a good reputation because of his philanthropy. But he's still a cutthroat businessman who has done and is doing a lot of pretty negative things like hoarding farmland, spending billions to undermine public education, etc.