Why so uninquisitive about the CPP Investment Board, ROBers?

1 response

  1. erik says:

    You are absolutely correct posing these questions of disclosure.

    Several years ago Mark [Wiseman] defended the CPPIB practice of private equity valuations because they conducted a “mark-to-market” calculation when framing annual reports. That maybe be fine for the CPPIB and Minister Flaherty but there is way too much conflict of interest in a system that relies upon undisclosed self -audit.
    Frustrated by this practice I asked the Minister to hire outside of Canada consultants to conduct periodic “value at risk” examinations that would be published like the Actuary’s report. Not surprisingly he declined to reply. Interestingly the CPPIB found “religion” and recently hired a team to do just that inside the Board. The Minister’s parliamentary secretary wrote a useless reply (available by e-mail should you wish it) when I presented the notion that a self-examination process was blatantly a conflict of interest condition.
    For reasons I can readily guess the CPPIB serves the interests of Bay Street which means not necessarily serving the Fund beneficiaries interests.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *