Mark Carney’s Ties to Global Financial Elite Exposed in Brazil’s Pipeline Sell-Off Scandal

In 2016, a consortium led by Brookfield Infrastructure acquired a 90 percent stake in Nova Transportadora do Sudeste, a natural gas pipeline system owned by Petrobras, Brazil’s state-controlled oil company, for 5.2 billion dollars. This transaction, finalized on September 23, 2016, involved China Investment Corporation Capital Corporation, a subsidiary of China’s sovereign wealth fund, alongside British Columbia Investment Management Corporation and GIC Private Limited. Petrobras retained a 10 percent stake, with the deal structured to include an initial payment of 4.3 billion dollars upon closing and the remaining balance due five years later. The pipeline network, spanning 2048 kilometers, connects Brazil’s industrialized regions of Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, and Minas Gerais, transporting natural gas from Bolivia and Brazil’s offshore fields. This sale was part of Petrobras’ broader strategy to divest 15.1 billion dollars in assets to reduce its debt, a plan that saw 9.8 billion dollars in sales by the end of 2016, including this transaction. The involvement of foreign entities, particularly China’s sovereign wealth fund, raised concerns about strategic infrastructure falling into external control, especially given Brazil’s economic vulnerabilities at the time, which some analysts viewed as a risk to national interests.

Further examination reveals additional layers of financial interconnectedness. Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, a prominent law firm, advised on the Petrobras deal, with Chun Wei, a Hong Kong-based lawyer specializing in corporate finance, listed as having contributed to this transaction. Her professional experience includes advising China Investment Corporation Capital Corporation on other high-profile acquisitions, suggesting a pattern of involvement in deals that transfer critical infrastructure to foreign entities. Separately, Sean Carney, brother of Mark Carney, a former Bank of England governor and Bank of Canada governor, worked as an associate at Sullivan & Cromwell’s London office in the early 1990s. While no direct evidence ties Sean Carney to the Petrobras deal, his association with the firm underscores a network of relationships that could influence financial decisions, raising questions about transparency and potential conflicts of interest within elite financial circles.

The same consortium, including Brookfield Infrastructure and China Investment Corporation Capital Corporation, participated in another significant transaction in 2016: the acquisition of Asciano, an Australian logistics company specializing in ports and railways, for 9.05 billion dollars. This deal involved additional partners, notably the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board and British Columbia Investment Management Corporation, both Canadian pension funds managing public sector retirement savings. The acquisition, executed through a special purpose vehicle named BidCo, saw the consortium take control of Asciano’s operations, which were critical to Australia’s trade infrastructure. Legal oversight included Jones Day representing China Investment Corporation Capital Corporation and Allens advising the broader consortium, confirming the deal’s complexity and international scope. The repeated collaboration between Brookfield, Canadian pension funds, and China’s sovereign wealth fund in acquiring strategic assets across continents suggests a coordinated effort to consolidate control over global infrastructure, potentially prioritizing profit over public welfare.

Adding to the web of financial ties, Allianz, a German insurance giant, and Goldman Sachs invested 3.78 billion dollars in 2006 to acquire a 10 percent stake in the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, with Goldman Sachs securing a 7 percent share for 2.58 billion dollars. Sullivan & Cromwell likely advised on this transaction, given their history with similar deals, and Chun Wei’s involvement is plausible, though not explicitly documented. This investment, made during a transformative period for China’s banking sector, allowed foreign firms to gain significant influence over one of China’s largest financial institutions, raising concerns about external sway over domestic economic policy. The recurrence of Sullivan & Cromwell in these transactions points to a concentration of legal and financial power that could facilitate deals favoring corporate interests over national sovereignty.

Mark Carney’s role in this network further complicates the narrative. Until January 17, 2025, he served on the global advisory board of PIMCO, a subsidiary of Allianz, which connects him indirectly to the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China investment. His resignation coincided with his announcement to run for leadership of Canada’s Liberal Party, a move that followed his tenure as a senior advisor at Brookfield Asset Management, a parent entity of Brookfield Infrastructure, from 2020 to 2022. Carney’s involvement with Brookfield during a period when it pursued fossil fuel infrastructure deals, such as the Petrobras pipeline acquisition, contrasts with his public advocacy for climate-conscious policies, including his role as UN Special Envoy for Climate Action and Finance. This discrepancy suggests a potential misalignment between his professional actions and public statements, which critics argue undermines trust in his commitment to environmental priorities, particularly when Canadian pension funds, entrusted with public savings, were invested in these transactions.

The Petrobras and Asciano deals, coupled with the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China investment, illustrate a pattern of global financial entities acquiring strategic assets in ways that could compromise national interests. The involvement of China Investment Corporation Capital Corporation, a state-backed fund, in both the Brazilian and Australian acquisitions raises questions about geopolitical motives, especially given China’s strategic push to secure global energy and trade routes. Similarly, the participation of Canadian pension funds in these deals suggests a prioritization of high returns over ethical considerations, as public savings were funneled into fossil fuel and logistics infrastructure abroad, potentially at odds with Canada’s domestic climate goals. Sullivan & Cromwell’s recurring advisory role across these transactions highlights a centralized legal framework that may enable such deals, with limited public oversight.

Transparency issues persist throughout this network. The complexity of these transactions, often routed through special purpose vehicles or consortiums, obscures accountability, making it difficult to trace ultimate beneficiaries or assess conflicts of interest. For instance, while Brookfield Infrastructure publicly led the Petrobras deal, the involvement of multiple foreign investors, including a Chinese state entity, was less emphasized in initial reports, potentially downplaying the extent of external control. Likewise, the Asciano acquisition’s structure, involving numerous global players, diluted public scrutiny in Australia, where the loss of domestic control over critical infrastructure sparked debate. The lack of clear disclosure about individual roles, such as Chun Wei’s specific contributions or Sean Carney’s historical ties to Sullivan & Cromwell, further clouds understanding, fostering perceptions of an opaque financial elite operating beyond public reach.