Analysts expect the move to free up at least $20 billion for TD
Author of the article:
Published Feb 10, 2025 • Last updated 4 hours ago • 3 minute read
Toronto-Dominion Bank is selling its entire ownership stake in Charles Schwab Corp. as it takes a major step towards reallocating its capital after being sanctioned by United States regulators last year for failing to prevent money laundering at its branches.
Article content
Article content
The bank on Monday said it intends to sell about 184.7 million shares of the Texas-based financial company’s common stock, or about 10.1 per cent of economic ownership. Analysts expect the move to free up at least $20 billion for TD, of which $8 billion will be used to repurchase up to 100 million shares, TD said.
Advertisement 2
Story continues below
Article content
“As part of our strategic review, we have been evaluating capital allocation and have made the decision to exit our Schwab investment,” TD chief executive Raymond Chun said in a statement. “We are very pleased with the strong return we are generating on the Schwab shares we acquired in 2020.”
The bank also will use the money to “further support” its “customers and clients, drive performance and accelerate organic growth,” he said.
In December, TD suspended its medium-term financial targets and said it would conduct a review of its strategies after it was fined $3.1 billion and ordered to cap the expansion of its U.S. retail banking business by U.S. regulators. It hopes to provide new financial targets in the second half of 2025 after its strategic review is completed.
TD had already lowered its ownership in Schwab to 10.1 per cent in August 2024 from 13.5 per cent in August 2022 as it anticipated getting hit with fines due to the anti-money laundering charges. As such, its decision to sell the remainder didn’t surprise analysts following the bank.
“Overall, we view this transaction favourably,” Canaccord Genuity Corp. analyst Matthew Lee said in a note on Monday. “It represents the first step in TD’s strategic review to reallocate capital.”
Posthaste
Article content
Advertisement 3
Story continues below
Article content
While TD won’t own any shares in Schwab once the sale is completed, it will continue to have a business relationship with the U.S. financial player through its Insured Deposit Account agreement, which he said will benefit TD.
The agreement allows clients’ cash balances held in Schwab brokerage accounts “to be swept into deposit accounts at TD Bank,” providing them with Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.’s insurance, which, “enhances both safety and liquidity,” Lee said.
“For TD, these deposits serve as a stable funding source and generate net interest income. The agreement will remain in place after TD’s sale of its Schwab stake and is set to expire in 2034. It includes a deposit range with a floor of US$60 billion. As of now, we estimate total deposits to be over US$80 billion.”
Jefferies Inc. analyst John Aiken said TD’s decisions could have a net neutral impact on earnings.
“We believe that this will simplify TD’s U.S. operations,” he said in a note. “Whether this sets TD up for a different strategy in U.S. wealth management will be seen when its strategic review is complete and revealed to the street.”
Advertisement 4
Story continues below
Article content
Prior to TD’s announcements, National Bank of Canada analyst Gabriel Dechaine said it seemed like a “no brainer” to sell its Schwab shares, but there may be some other “important considerations.”
For one thing, he said TD will be selling an investment that has created tremendous value over the years and generates returns materially above TD’s consolidated figure.
Recommended from Editorial
“Second, the Schwab stake is expected to grow as an earnings contributor, an important consideration for a bank in TD’s position,” he said in a note on Sunday. “TD’s share price improvement in anticipation of this scenario has diluted the ‘financial engineering’ aspect of the trade.”
TD said it plans to purchase and cancel up to 100 million of its common shares, representing about 5.7 per cent of its issued and outstanding common shares and its public float as of Oct. 31, 2024, subject to the completion of the sale of its Schwab investment and the approval of the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions and Toronto Stock Exchange.
• Email: nkarim@postmedia.com
Bookmark our website and support our journalism: Don’t miss the business news you need to know — add financialpost.com to your bookmarks and sign up for our newsletters here.
Article content
Analysts expect the move to free up at least $20 billion for TD
Author of the article:
Published Feb 10, 2025 • Last updated 34 minutes ago • 3 minute read
Toronto-Dominion Bank is selling its entire ownership stake in Charles Schwab Corp. as it takes a major step towards reallocating its capital after being sanctioned by United States regulators last year for failing to prevent money laundering at its branches.
Article content
Article content
The bank on Monday said it intends to sell about 184.7 million shares of the Texas-based financial company’s common stock, or about 10.1 per cent of economic ownership. Analysts expect the move to free up at least $20 billion for TD, of which $8 billion will be used to repurchase up to 100 million shares, TD said.
Advertisement 2
Story continues below
Article content
“As part of our strategic review, we have been evaluating capital allocation and have made the decision to exit our Schwab investment,” TD chief executive Raymond Chun said in a statement. “We are very pleased with the strong return we are generating on the Schwab shares we acquired in 2020.”
The bank also will use the money to “further support” its “customers and clients, drive performance and accelerate organic growth,” he said.
In December, TD suspended its medium-term financial targets and said it would conduct a review of its strategies after it was fined $3.1 billion and ordered to cap the expansion of its U.S. retail banking business by U.S. regulators. It hopes to provide new financial targets in the second half of 2025 after its strategic review is completed.
TD had already lowered its ownership in Schwab to 10.1 per cent in August 2024 from 13.5 per cent in August 2022 as it anticipated getting hit with fines due to the anti-money laundering charges. As such, its decision to sell the remainder didn’t surprise analysts following the bank.
“Overall, we view this transaction favourably,” Canaccord Genuity Corp. analyst Matthew Lee said in a note on Monday. “It represents the first step in TD’s strategic review to reallocate capital.”
Posthaste
Article content
Advertisement 3
Story continues below
Article content
While TD won’t own any shares in Schwab once the sale is completed, it will continue to have a business relationship with the U.S. financial player through its Insured Deposit Account agreement, which he said will benefit TD.
The agreement allows clients’ cash balances held in Schwab brokerage accounts “to be swept into deposit accounts at TD Bank,” providing them with Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.’s insurance, which, “enhances both safety and liquidity,” Lee said.
“For TD, these deposits serve as a stable funding source and generate net interest income. The agreement will remain in place after TD’s sale of its Schwab stake and is set to expire in 2034. It includes a deposit range with a floor of US$60 billion. As of now, we estimate total deposits to be over US$80 billion.”
Jefferies Inc. analyst John Aiken said TD’s decisions could have a net neutral impact on earnings.
“We believe that this will simplify TD’s U.S. operations,” he said in a note. “Whether this sets TD up for a different strategy in U.S. wealth management will be seen when its strategic review is complete and revealed to the street.”
Advertisement 4
Story continues below
Article content
Prior to TD’s announcements, National Bank of Canada analyst Gabriel Dechaine said it seemed like a “no brainer” to sell its Schwab shares, but there may be some other “important considerations.”
For one thing, he said TD will be selling an investment that has created tremendous value over the years and generates returns materially above TD’s consolidated figure.
Recommended from Editorial
“Second, the Schwab stake is expected to grow as an earnings contributor, an important consideration for a bank in TD’s position,” he said in a note on Sunday. “TD’s share price improvement in anticipation of this scenario has diluted the ‘financial engineering’ aspect of the trade.”
TD said it plans to purchase and cancel up to 100 million of its common shares, representing about 5.7 per cent of its issued and outstanding common shares and its public float as of Oct. 31, 2024, subject to the completion of the sale of its Schwab investment and the approval of the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions and Toronto Stock Exchange.
• Email: nkarim@postmedia.com
Bookmark our website and support our journalism: Don’t miss the business news you need to know — add financialpost.com to your bookmarks and sign up for our newsletters here.
Article content
Trusted News Since 1995
A service for global professionals
·
Monday, February 10, 2025
·
784,682,316
Articles
·
3+ Million Readers
I’ve accumulated more than $2,000 of cash in my model Yield Hog Dividend Portfolio, and today I’m putting some of that money to work.
With the U.S. tariff threat still looming and a Canadian federal election expected as early as the spring, this might seem like a risky time to be investing. But there is a method in my madness: If I wait until things settle down – and let’s hope they do very soon – stock prices could well be higher by then.
As Warren Buffett famously said, it pays “to be fearful when others are greedy and to be greedy only when others are fearful.”
With that in mind, I’m adding 30 units of Brookfield Infrastructure Partners LP (BIP.UN), bringing my total to 250 units.
I’ve long been a fan of Brookfield Infrastructure for several reasons.
As a global infrastructure giant, it owns a diversified portfolio of assets that are essential to the economy, including utilities, pipelines, data centres, toll roads, ports and telecom towers. These long-lived assets have high barriers to entry, which creates a wide economic “moat.” They also throw off growing cash flows that, in a majority of cases, are indexed to inflation.
I like it when companies give me money. I like it even more when the amount increases every year – an area in which Brookfield Infrastructure excels.
Thanks to the predictable nature of its businesses, the Bermuda-based limited partnership has raised its distribution to unitholders for 16 consecutive years. The latest increase was announced along with fourth-quarter results on Jan. 30, when the partnership and its sister corporation, Brookfield Infrastructure Corp. (BIPC), hiked their quarterly payouts by 6 per cent to 43 US cents per unit or share, respectively.
Including the recent increase, the partnership units currently yield about 5.1 per cent, while the corporation’s shares, which trade at a higher price, yield about 4.1 per cent.
(The partnership and corporation pay out the same quarterly amount. However, the partnership’s distributions typically include foreign dividend and interest income, Canadian dividend and interest income, return of capital and capital gains, whereas the corporation pays dividends that are eligible for the Canadian dividend tax credit. That makes the latter a good choice for non-registered accounts.)
There are more distribution increases to come, analysts say.
“We believe BIP is set up as an attractive investment opportunity with a strong organic project backlog, accelerating capital recycling activity and an attractive distribution growth profile,” Robert Catellier, an analyst with CIBC Capital Markets, said in a research note.
Mr. Catellier rates the units “outperformer” and is one of nine analysts with a “buy” or equivalent rating. There are three hold recommendations and no sells, and the average price target for the U.S.-listed units is US$40, according to Refinitiv data. On Friday, the units closed at on the New York Stock Exchange and on the Toronto Stock Exchange.
Distribution increases need to be supported by growing cash flow to be sustainable, and Brookfield Infrastructure is delivering in that regard. For the year ended Dec. 31, funds from operations (FFO) – a cash flow measure – rose by about 8 per cent to US$2.47-billion or US$3.12 per unit, driven by inflation-linked price increases, growing business volumes and the commissioning of more than US$1-billion of new capital projects.
Cash flow is expected to continue growing in the years ahead, with FFO per unit rising by a projected 8.7 per cent in 2025 and a further 9.4 per cent in 2026, according to analysts’ estimates.
“Following a relatively light 2024 for capital deployment, the new investment pipeline has been rebuilding and is the deepest in several years,” Devin Dodge, an analyst with BMO Capital Markets, said in a note to clients.
Investments in digitalization, such as data infrastructure and midstream energy assets, will be key areas of focus, with capital recycling – selling assets to fund higher-return investments – playing a growing role in Brookfield Infrastructure’s growth, Mr. Dodge said.
There is almost certainly more geopolitical and economic turmoil ahead, but thanks to Brookfield Infrastructure’s growing portfolio of wide-moat assets and deep connections around the world, I expect that the units will be delivering capital growth and rising distributions for many years to come.
(Disclosure: the author owns BIP.UN and BIPC personally and holds BIP.UN in his model Yield Hog Dividend Growth Portfolio. The purchase of 30 BIP.UN units was completed at Wednesday’s closing price and consumed $1,418.10 of cash. View the complete model portfolio online at tgam.ca/dividend-portfolio.)
E-mail your questions to jheinzl@globeandmail.com. I’m not able to respond personally to e-mails but I choose certain questions to answer in my column.
For diversified investors, 2024 was a big, beautiful bull run that blew past analysts’ expectations. The Nasdaq stock exchange climbed 29% and the S&P 500 went up 23%, hoisted aloft by the seven biggest American tech companies, which together drove more than half of the overall gains.
With rapid advances sparking broad enthusiasm for artificial intelligence, and with Big Tech spending billions to build infrastructure to meet the expected demand, even going so far as to reactivate Three Mile Island, investors rode a tsunami of rising valuations and increasing returns. Everyone with index funds in their portfolio – especially those tracking indexes that include U.S. equities – benefited one way or another from the AI trend. And even though markets were recently thrown into chaos over news about potentially disruptive AI tech out of China, most observers think the gold rush in AI isn’t over.
Last year was a good one for buyers of sustainability-focused index funds, too. Exchange-traded funds were popular in general: global net inflows nearly doubled in 2024 to more than US$1 trillion. While not often outperforming the broader market, sustainable ETFs all experienced strong growth, with the “Magnificent Seven” tech companies doing the heavy lifting.
“‘Doing less evil’ sustainable funds did a great job of tracking overall returns, despite horrible things like weapons manufacturers and for-profit prisons getting a bump from Trump’s win late in the year,” says Tim Nash, the founder of Good Investing, in an email. “Fortunately, Nvidia – one of the best-performing stocks in the entire market – has a strong sustainability rating and filled the gap nicely in sustainable funds that exclude less savoury tech companies like Amazon and Meta.”
Along with Nvidia, other common tech holdings for sustainable equity funds include Apple, Tesla, Alphabet and Microsoft.
The energy sector didn’t do any favours for sustainable investors in 2024, however. “Energy stocks lagged in 2024, which benefited investors who have divested from fossil fuels. However, green energy stocks had another abysmal year, so green investors can’t be too smug,” Nash says. “Niche clean-energy ETFs were some of the worst-performing ETFs in the market.”
To implement their strategies, ETF and mutual fund managers rely on widely varying data providers with their own divergent methodologies for rating companies. The lack of a standard taxonomy for sustainable finance makes these funds uniquely hard to compare, because there are so many different approaches for deciding what stocks they should contain. For example, Corporate Knights researchers give Nvidia a low sustainability score, while others, such as the ESG rating tool by the firm MSCI, put it higher. You can read a detailed explanation of the Corporate Knights methodology here.
RELATED
Why are financial advisers shunning green funds?
The anti-ESG movement scores a victory as net-zero financial alliance unravels
Seven sustainable finance predictions for 2025
“Our taxonomy is different from others,” says Michael Yow, director of ratings at Corporate Knights. Yow’s research team takes a mostly quantitative approach, whereas other research providers use more qualitative definitions, so subjectivity can get into the investment, he says.
“We do this ranking to help investors cut through the noise and identify which funds stand above the rest when it comes to responsible investing,” says Toby Heaps, CEO of Corporate Knights, in a statement. “Our methodology meets the acid test of credibility, with 100% transparent and clear criteria for grading funds against peers according to the weighted sustainability score of their holdings.”
Here are each of the top sustainable ETFs in the four key categories used in the 2025 Responsible Funds ranking. Whether you’re looking for Canadian, U.S., international or global equity funds, these four achieved the highest sustainability level, according to the methodology used by Corporate Knights researchers.
This information is not financial advice. Speak with a professional advisor for financial planning.
| Top Four Sustainable Funds of 2025 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Category | Fund | Manager | 1yr Return* | 3yr Return* |
| Top U.S. Equity | Invesco ESG NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (QQCE) | Invesco Canada Ltd. | 32.89% | 18.74% |
| Top Canadian Equity | RBC Vision QUBE FFF LV Canadian Equ Fd A | RBC Global Asset Management Inc. | 21% | 9.80% |
| Top International Equity | Franklin ClearBridge Sust Intl Gth Fd Ser A | Franklin Templeton Investments Corp. | 15.12% | 2.05% |
| Top Global Equity | CI MSCI World ESG Impact Index ETF (CESG) | CI Investments Inc | 0.30% | 8.20% |
* as at January 31, 2025
This fund by Invesco Canada is an RRSP-eligible ETF (ticker: QQCE) that tracks the Nasdaq-100 ESG Index and reported an impressive 32.89% one-year return on January 31, 2025. For these higher returns, investors must be comfortable with higher risk of volatility. If you were to invest $100 in this ETF, you would pay a modest 22 cents toward management expenses.
QQCE was launched on November 15, 2021, and despite its relative youth, it has caught on with investors and already has $309 million (all amounts in Canadian dollars unless otherwise noted) in assets under management. Its top holdings are Microsoft, Apple and Nvidia. Apple ranks 69th on the Corporate Knights Global 100 ranking of the world’s must sustainable corporations. Two other G100 companies are among QQCE’s chief holdings: Tesla (#45) and Cisco (#54).
QUBE is an actively managed mutual fund for fossil-free investing. It uses an exclusion list based on the Carbon Underground 200 and another created with Sustainalytics. RBC Global Asset Management advertises this Canadian equity fund as a long-term investment with low-to-medium risk.
Created in 2021, this fund is weighted toward lower-risk stocks and sectors in the S&P/TSX Capped Composite Index. For example, as of December 31, 2024, the fund held 30% in financials, a lower risk sector, and 0% in energy, a higher risk sector.
This is an actively managed mutual fund, and for retail investors buying the Series A version, the cost to own is $1.89 per $100 invested, with a minimum investment of CAD$500. QUBE has $188 million in assets under management, signifying ample liquidity. Its reported 1-year return on Jan 31, 2025 was 21%, compared to 19.89% for the S&P/TSX Capped Composite Index.
This is a sustainability-focused mutual fund that invests in equities issued outside the United States or Canada, and is also available as an ETF. This fund excludes fossil fuel companies and relies on ClearBridge’s proprietary ESG ratings. The managers take a “fundamental, bottom-up approach,” actively picking stocks according to their own best analysis and keeping most of their holdings in large companies. It has a medium risk rating and $314 million in assets under management.
The expenses for this actively managed mutual fund are slightly above average at 2.1%, or $2.10 for every $100 invested. Its one-year return as of December 31, 2024, was 15.12%, tracking closely with its benchmark, the MSCI EAFE Index.
“Many international stocks can be mispriced by markets, especially in the short term,” the firm wrote in a recent fund snapshot. “Active managers like ClearBridge can exploit these opportunities.”
This fund’s number one holding is SAP Software Solutions (G100 #58), a German cloud services provider with strengths in AI, whose one-year return at the time of writing was 58%, climbing from US$175.73 to $279.79. Following that is Novo Nordisk (G100 #62), a Dutch pharmaceutical giant, whose value has dropped precipitously since last summer. Schneider Electric, the first-place company on this year’s G100 ranking, is also among the fund’s top holdings.
This medium-volatility ETF excludes fossil fuel companies and is available in two series, one in which exposure to foreign currency is hedged (CESG) and one that is unhedged (CESG.B), as well as a mutual fund version. It is advertised to investors who want to put their money into companies with strong environmental, social and governance (ESG) performance and “that have a positive impact on the environment and society.”
“Unlike many other ESG funds which often hold very similar stocks to the broad market index and then apply a slight ESG tilt, CESG.B/CESG strictly screens for stocks that must meet several key impact metrics in order to be included in the fund,” a representative of CI Investments said in an email.
The total cost to invest in this low-carbon ETF is listed as 0.47% of its value, or $0.47 for every $100 invested. Created on September 12, 2019, and managed by CI Global Asset Management, this fund tracks the MSCI World ESG Select Impact ex Fossil Fuels Index. Its listed one-year return on January 31, 2025 was 0.3%, whereas its three- and five-year returns were both around 8%.
It has 72 listed holdings and its total assets under management are $61.2 million. Its current top holding is French IT company Dassault Systèmes, ranked 31 on the 2025 Global 100 list. Other G100 holdings include Ozempic-maker Novo Nordisk (#62) and the U.S. data processor and hosting provider Equinix (#72).
Nations Royalty pools resource royalty payments made to First Nations to grow wealth
Leaders of a new mining royalty company were in Timmins this week looking for Indigenous organizations to partner with and invest in their company.
Advertisement 2
Story continues below
Article content
Article content
Article content
Nations Royalty is the largest majority-Indigenous owned public company in Canada and the only mining royalty company in the world that is majority owned by Indigenous peoples, founded by the self-governing Nisga’a Nation.
They have gained media attention as a milestone on the road to Indigenous economic reconciliation.
The company, backed by Canadian mining financier Frank Giustra, started trading in June but has yet to pay dividends. They boast a portfolio of four mining assets owned by the Nisga’a Nation with royalties valued at US$214 million,
There are reportedly 400 individual benefit agreements between mining companies and First Nations across Canada, which drew them to Ontario’s largest gold camp in search of Indigenous partners.
Advertisement 3
Story continues below
Article content
The Daily Press spoke with Kody Penner on Thursday, vice president of corporate development.
Penner worked underground at the Brucejack Gold Mine in British Columbia before studying commerce and finance at UBC.
After working in investment banking and financial strategy at mining company Teck Resources, he was invited to work at Nations Royalty. Along the way, Penner gained an understanding of First Nations business and governance as the vice chair at Tahltan Nation Development Corporation.
This interview has been edited for clarity.
Q: What is unique about Nations Royalty?
A: Nations Royalty is Canada’s first and largest majority Indigenous publicly-traded company, trading on the Toronto Stock Exchange Venture. We are a mining royalty company. The mining royalty model means you get a portion of revenue from that mine. Mining royalty companies collect many different royalties from different mines and receive revenue from those royalty agreements.
Article content
Advertisement 4
Story continues below
Article content
By obtaining more royalties from different mines, we aim to create a diversified portfolio of mining assets in different jurisdictions, which also lowers your risk. This should push your stock price up, as time goes on.
Investors who invest in Nations Royalty get access to precious metal benefit agreement payments with our Indigenous partners.
We’re the first majority Indigenous-owned mining royalty company and we’re the first mover in the Indigenous royalty space. The Indigenous people of Canada have a tremendous amount of value baked into their impact benefit agreements and the financial payments in those agreements.
In 2023 alone, there was $353 million paid out in cash payments from industry in the metals and mining sector to Indigenous groups through IBA payments, if you include oil and gas that’s over $700 million.
Advertisement 5
Story continues below
Article content
There’s never been a majority Indigenous managed company that looks to pool all of those different payments together in to a single publicly-traded company so we could receive the high valuations that these other royalty companies such as Wheaton Precious Metals or Franco-Nevada have been receiving for years.
We’re the first mover in this last untapped royalty space. It’s a very, very exciting time.
Q: What opportunities does Nations Royalty present for Indigenous communities in the Timmins and Cochrane District?
A: Our company’s first goal is shareholder return. The Niska’a Nation owns 77 per cent of our company. If we increase the share price in our company by bringing more Indigenous partners and their benefit agreements into the company, then they get a return. Our second goal is to build Indigenous capacity within the public markets.
Advertisement 6
Story continues below
Article content
We’re looking for Indigenous partners to join Nations Royalty by exchanging their Impact Benefit Agreement financial payments for equity in the company. Indigenous partner organizations would learn how we raise capital and if there was a substantial partnership (such as 40 per cent of our company), there’d be a potential for board seats.
Q: What are some of your guiding principles?
A: We’re very flexible with what kind of partnerships Indigenous groups can have. We offer cash in exchange for the impact benefit agreement, but we prefer to offer is equity in our company. That amount, whether it’s cash or equity, all of the benefit agreement payment or half or a quarter—those are the conversations that we’re having with different groups to see what makes sense for them and their Nation.
Advertisement 7
Story continues below
Article content
If it’s a Nation that only has one mine in the area and they’re using that money to fund all of their government functions, then our model might not work for them, and we don’t want to push them or trick them or do anything to harm their government functions because that’s education and wildlife protection and the things that truly matter.
If there’s a group that has an IBA and a couple other income streams and a settlement payment and they don’t actually need the cash flow coming in from the IBA payments and are able to invest that in Nations Royalty to partner with us, then we can go from there.
I’m Tahltan First Nations, we’re majority Indigenous managed, we’re all Indigenous here. We’re here to help increase Indigenous wealth, and do it in a sustainable manner. We’re here to accelerate economic diversification, reconciliation and to move groups forward.
Advertisement 8
Story continues below
Article content
Q: Do you only invest in mining?
A: The royalty companies that get the highest valuation in the market are gold royalty companies. They trade at very high valuations relative to their assets. We would love to be primarily a gold-focused Indigenous royalty company, so that’s our primary goal. We’re also looking at some base metals and energy assets.
Q: Who have you been meeting with in Timmins?
A: Timmins is a prolific gold mining area and as mentioned our main goal is to add Indigenous benefit agreements within the gold space, so Timmins has been mining gold for over 100 years. All the Indigenous groups related to those gold mines have been interacting with these companies for years and making decisions on impact benefit agreements, assessing risks, opportunities, so it’s a great area to be in.
Advertisement 9
Story continues below
Article content
We’re chatting with many groups across Canada, though I can’t divulge confidential business information. We’re spending time in community and seeing where their pain points are, and how we could help.
Timmins is a prolific gold mining area with advanced Indigenous groups with mature governments and it’s a fantastic place to be.
Q: Your have a current portfolio of four mining assets owned by the Nisga’a Nation with royalties valued at US$214 million, including the largest, fully permitted gold and copper project in the world. Is that in B.C.?
A: The Nisga’a Nation from northwest British Columbia is in the Golden Triangle. If you go to the tip of northwest B.C. that’s Tahltan territory. Just south of that is Nisga’a territory. It encompasses about 30 per cent of the Golden Triangle. They have an impact benefit agreement with the KSM Project owned by Seabridge Gold. It’s the world’s largest permitted but undeveloped copper-gold asset. It has a 72-year mine life, and it has 47.5 million ounces of gold in reserves and 7.5 billion pounds of copper. This is a generational mining asset that can provide financial benefits for seven generations to come.
Advertisement 10
Story continues below
Article content
That’s what we like to chat with different groups about—when you’re making decisions as chief, council or community, you’re thinking seven generations ahead. And we have an asset within our portfolio that could provide long-term, stable financial returns that can take care of people’s kids, their kids and their kids.
Q: Do you see Indigenous groups owning and operating a mine in the future?
A: I’m a miner, my dad’s a miner, my brother is a mining engineer, and I would love to help Indigenous group at some point, build and operate their own mine. You’re starting to see it across Canada– the Selkirk First Nation in the Yukon actually bought the Minto Mine out of receivership so they own that mine. They own the mineral rights, they own the infrastructure, it’s a past-producing mine. They’re looking to progress that one forward.
Advertisement 11
Story continues below
Article content
So you’re already seeing Indigenous groups buying and developing their own assets and if I can play a small part in that in unison with Nations Royalty, then that’s a future I would love to see.
Q: What is your message to people within and without the Indigenous community who have concerns about the environmental impact of mining on freshwater, country food, wildlife and migratory bird habitat?
A: I have many thoughts about that. I come from a mining territory up in Tahltan Territory. In the Nations Royalty model, we’re essentially working with groups that have already signed their impact benefit agreements, and we’re working on the financial aspects of those. So they’ve already gone through the technical analysis with their consultants. They’ve already weighed the risks, outcomes and opportunities and they’ve signed an impact benefit agreement. Nations Royalty comes in after that is all done. We look to bolster the value in their financial payments in the IBAs.
Advertisement 12
Story continues below
Article content
I’m a big believer in Canadian mining and our regulatory process. We have good consultation with Indigenous groups. I see a bright future for it. We don’t do anything that doesn’t align with the Indigenous groups.
Q: How is mining in line with an Indigenous worldview?
A: As an Indigenous person, it really depends how you’re looking at it. It was a past president up in our Nation said “the quickest way to lose your culture is poverty.” So we’ve been brought up in this system that has repressed Indigenous people’s ability to access business, the capital markets. When Indigenous people have mines on their territory, it’s a huge potential for economic development.
That money can go into education, extra wildlife protection in other areas of their territories, supporting elders and community centres. Mining is part of the value chain. I’m a miner and I believe in it. Mining can add a ton of value if it’s done responsibly and sustainably.
Advertisement 13
Story continues below
Article content
This is more just coming from me and my experience. At Nations Royalty we work with the IBAs after this has all been discussed. We help diversify their financial risk, and bring value forward for Indigenous groups so they can use future payments today, and receive the premium valuations that royalty companies get in the market.
Its about aligning those world views, proper consultations, and progressing sustainable, responsible assets.
Q: What did you do as a miner?
A: I worked underground at the Brucejack Gold Mine in northwest British Columbia. We actually have a royalty on it within our company now. I ran a jack leg— so I would drill holes in the wall, take off danger rocks and put up screen. I ran heavy equipment like haul trucks and scissor decks.
Advertisement 14
Story continues below
Article content
Q: Anything else you’d like to add?
A: We also help groups negotiate better royalty agreements, or benefit agreement financial payments. We help them structure those so they actually get a better piece of the pie and can actually reap the rewards of increased production of the mine, so if the gold price rises they can actually see those increases rather than some old agreements.
We do it for a few reasons. We’re Indigenous and we want to see all Indigenous people grow and prosper. Second, if you see better impact agreements being structured throughout Canada that means other groups will see those and the whole mining royalty sector will start to rise. That’s good for our business and for Indigenous livelihoods.
It also helps us to build trust with Indigenous groups so they might consider a partnership with Nations Royalty.
A rising tide lifts all boats.
Article content
In the summer of 2024, a cluster of tents sprang up on the University of Windsor’s central campus, transforming a patch of grass near the main quad into what organizers called ‘The Liberation Zone’.
Colourful banners and hand-painted signs bearing slogans like ‘Free Palestine’ and ‘Boycott Israel’ lined the perimeter, while makeshift tables offered pamphlets detailing the goals of the protest.
Similar to many pro-Palestinian encampments erected at universities throughout North America that summer, the gathering primarily aimed to pressure the school’s administration to adopt sweeping reforms in alignment with the global Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel. Over several weeks, demonstrators called for financial transparency, divestment from companies linked to the Jewish state, and an academic boycott of Israeli institutions.
On July 10, 2024, the encampment organizers announced an agreement with UWindsor’s administration via Instagram. The post celebrated the student-led initiative, which secured the university’s commitment to expand its responsible investment policies and provide annual public disclosure of its financial portfolio. “This is the most comprehensive and far-reaching agreement to come out of Canadian encampment negotiations,” posted the Palestinian Solidarity Group Windsor.
According to the agreement, the university committed to “not pursue any institutional academic agreements with Israeli universities until the right of Palestinian self-determination has been realized, as determined by the United Nations.” It also pledged to establish relationships with Palestinian universities to support post-secondary education in Gaza and proposed the creation of a “Palestine Studies minor under the Interdisciplinary and Critical Studies Department.” Additionally, the university agreed to revise its Responsible Investing Policy to include a “human rights framework,” though specific details remained vague.
While supporters hailed the agreement as a major victory, it quickly sparked criticism. Members of UWindsor’s Jewish community voiced concerns that the campaign disproportionately targeted Israel and vilified Jewish students.
The agreement also sparked a lawsuit. In January, the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) filed an application for judicial review, challenging UWindsor’s agreements with the encampment organizers, arguing that these agreements violate Ontario’s anti-discrimination laws.
🚨🚨The University of Windsor caved to extremist, anti-Israel encampment leaders.
Our community won’t stand for that. Discrimination has no place in Canada.
We’re going to Court.
Learn more ⤵️https://t.co/wQUNVqWwpf pic.twitter.com/HelrhU6MLw
— Richard Marceau (@richardmarceau) January 28, 2025
Seven months after the agreement was signed, larger questions loom over its tangible impact. Despite the encampment’s sweeping demands, UWindsor’s administration acknowledge that the university had no existing academic partnerships or financial investments linked to Israel to begin with—raising questions about what, if anything, has truly changed.
While supporters view the agreement as a precedent-setting win for student activism, critics argue that BDS is largely a symbolic movement rooted in hate, offering political optics rather than substantive policy shifts.
Aside from demonizing supporters of Israel and preventing future academic partnerships, the deal at UWindsor has underscored deepening ideological divides on Canadian campuses, with ongoing legal challenges and backlash threatening to prolong tensions rather than resolve them.
UWindsor’s journey with the BDS movement began a decade earlier. In March 2014, the University of Windsor Students’ Alliance (UWSA) held a referendum asking students to support divestment from companies allegedly “complicit in human rights abuses in the Palestinian territories.”
The campaign was fraught with tension. Days before the vote, anti-Israel graffiti was scrawled on the door of a Jewish student executive’s office, an incident later classified as a hate crime by Windsor Police.
Alan Wildeman, UWindsor’s president at the time, addressed the unrest, emphasizing a commitment to campus safety on the school’s Facebook page. “The University will not tolerate any practices, by any member or group of its community, that target specific individuals or entities on the basis of ethnicity, nationality, religion, or any other personal characteristic,” Wildeman wrote in 2014.
Read President Alan Wildeman’s response to the outcome of the BDS student referendum: http://t.co/yNVxcnkXbu
— University of Windsor (@UWindsor) March 2, 2014
The UWSA motion ultimately passed with 798 votes in favour and 585 opposed. Critics, however, pointed to procedural concerns, alleging that the referendum process lacked transparency and fairness. Some students reported feeling marginalized, particularly within the Jewish community, which viewed the motion as an attack on their identity rather than a legitimate critique of Israeli policy.
Following numerous complaints about the referendum’s procedures, Wildeman requested that the UWSA defer ratification of BDS policy until a thorough investigation was carried out. The referendum was never officially adopted, until ten years later.
In March 2024, the UWSA revisited the BDS movement, passing a motion at its annual general meeting to form a committee to investigate its investments. The motion called for the student union to ensure it does not support or profit from companies benefiting from Israel’s actions in Gaza.
“As a result of that student motion, UWSA has advocated in support of BDS,” wrote Ghallia Hashem, the current president of the UWSA, in an email statement sent to The Canadian Jewish News. “Through this motion, we have established a BDS Advisory Committee that consists of both approving and dissenting voices so that we are aware of the differing perspectives of our student body,” Hashem said, adding that, “This committee has no binding power, and merely acts as an advisory board to the UWSA.”
Universities typically manage substantial endowment funds, often invested in a mix of stocks, bonds, and other assets. While most institutions do not disclose detailed information about their portfolios, activists have identified several corporations as potential targets for divestment, arguing that financial ties to certain companies raise ethical concerns.
According to public data, there are at least 22 Israeli firms currently listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX) and TSX Venture Exchange (TSXV). These companies operate primarily in the technology, life sciences and clean energy sectors.
Despite their presence, Israeli firms account for a very small fraction of the overall Canadian market. With a combined estimated market capitalization of $375 million, these companies represent approximately 0.008 per cent of the total Canadian stock market value, which stands at $4.91 trillion as of December 2024. This negligible percentage indicates that while Israeli firms have a foothold in the Canadian financial market, their influence on institutional investments remains minimal.
According to Iso Setel, communications coordinator with Independent Jewish Voices (IJV), a vocal supporter of BDS, financial transparency is “the first call for on-campus BDS organizing.”
Setel pointed to Scotiabank’s past investments in Elbit Systems, an Israeli defense company that supplies surveillance drones and military technologies. IJV argues that Elbit’s products have been used in security operations and border enforcement, though the company maintains that it adheres to international regulations.
ICYMI, @scotiabank has come under fire recently for being the largest foreign shareholder in notorious Israeli weapons company Elbit. Activists are demanding the bank divest from a company with so much blood on its hands. https://t.co/UXGTxshCxR #BDS
— Independent Jewish Voices (@IndJewishVoices) April 23, 2023
Other corporations frequently cited in divestment campaigns include the Canadian aerospace company Bombardier, which has supplied railway components to Jerusalem’s light rail system. Some activists contend that the project facilitates settlement expansion, though proponents describe it as public infrastructure. The company also highlights its dedication to sustainability, focusing on reducing carbon emissions and developing greener aviation technology.
Lockheed Martin, a major defense contractor, has drawn scrutiny for supplying F-35 fighter jets used by the Israeli military, with divestment advocates arguing that such technologies contribute to military operations in Gaza.
Canadian firm CAE Inc. has also been raised in discussions due to its military training simulators, including programs for Israeli Air Force pilots. Similarly, aerospace manufacturer Pratt and Whitney produces jet engines for fighter aircraft used in Israeli operations, while Airbus has been linked to the supply of helicopters and surveillance technologies. Critics of these investments argue that they reinforce military capabilities in the region, while supporters counter that these companies provide defense technologies used by multiple countries.
As reported by The Guardian, companies like Caterpillar Inc., HP Inc., and G4S have been at the forefront of BDS divesting demands at schools throughout North America.
Together with @natansachs we use exports data to analyze how much of a threat is #BDS to #Israel economy. The answer: not much. Read more here: https://t.co/SLv6elqqsM
— Dany Bahar 🌎🎗️ (@dany_bahar) January 27, 2018
Dany Bahar, an economist and contributing columnist for The Forward, argues that student-led divestment campaigns have little financial impact given Israel’s minimal market territory. He identifies three main areas of exposure—direct holdings in Israeli public companies, private equity or venture capital funds, and indirect ties through multinational corporations—but suggests that divestment would be largely symbolic rather than financially significant.
UWindsor’s investments are managed through pooled funds by external investment managers, meaning that the university itself does not directly control or select individual holdings, according to an email statement from the administration.
Decisions to invest in or divest from specific companies ultimately rest with those external managers. “The University does not direct or influence any investment or divestment decisions related to equities,” UWindsor said.
UWindsor’s investment portfolio includes a broad mix of Canadian and global equities across industries such as technology, finance, energy and manufacturing.
Among the many companies included in its holdings, which are publicly available, are Bombardier Inc. and CAE Inc., both Canadian firms in the aerospace and transportation sectors that have been targeted by BDS protesters.
The encampment agreement does not prevent future university investments in these companies.
As UWindsor explained, “Investment policies prioritize diversifying holdings, with decisions made by investment managers guided by reviews of social, environmental, and governance factors, not by a focus on any specific country or region.”
While BDS’s financial impact on Israel is limited, CIJA’s primary concern regarding the 2024 UWindsor encampment agreement is the administration’s pledge to refrain from academic partnerships with Israeli institutions until Palestinian self-determination is achieved.
According to Richard Marceau, CIJA’s vice-president of external affairs and general counsel, this commitment effectively enforces a boycott of Israel and places the burden of Palestinian statehood solely on Israel—ignoring the Palestinians’ role– a factor that Israeli universities have no control over.
“Preemptively closing the door of any such academic partnership is a form of BDS… which is a form of antisemitism,” Marceau told The Canadian Jewish News. “So, basically, by signing this agreement, the University of Windsor has engaged in antisemitism.”
“We filed a complaint with the Ontario government under the Ontario Discriminatory Business Practices Act,” Marceau said. “This bill was written many years ago in the context of fighting any forms of boycott.” However, the Ontario Ministry of Public and Business Service Delivery ruled that the law did not apply in this case, arguing that the agreement did not involve a commercial business transaction. CIJA is now challenging that interpretation, asserting that the exclusion of Israeli institutions from partnerships is discriminatory and should be considered a violation of the act.
CIJA contends that by singling out Israeli universities—and only Israeli universities—the encampment agreement constitutes overt discrimination based on nationality, place of origin and geographical location.
Beyond legal concerns, CIJA warns that UWindsor’s decision sets a dangerous precedent for Canadian universities. While encampments at other institutions—such as the University of Toronto—were dismantled following a court injunction, UWindsor remains one of the few universities to have formally agreed to student demands.
“I think that (UWindsor) was wrong to cave in and, and I would go further to say capitulate,” Marceau said. “It set a bad precedent that, in order for the law to be applied, you have to capitulate to those groups who are divisive, are toxic, and are not good not only for the Jewish students, the Jewish faculty, but I think for the entire Windsor community and more broadly across Canada.”
CIJA also argues that the agreement has contributed to a more hostile climate for Jewish students and faculty. “Our contacts at Windsor, not only Jewish students, but also Jewish faculty, felt that they were targeted,” Marceau said. “They felt that it fostered an atmosphere of antisemitism. It made them feel not welcome.”
Taking the University of Windsor.
“We believe that those agreements foster an atmosphere of antisemitism.
They are discriminatory on the basis of national origin, among other things, and they should not be left to stand.”https://t.co/0M9ohrW6PM
— Richard Marceau (@richardmarceau) January 30, 2025
Marceau argues that the decision to boycott academic partnerships is impractical as well as discriminatory. While the agreement states that individual collaborations between UWindsor faculty and Israeli academics remain permitted, CIJA argues that institutional partnerships require administrative support, which the university has effectively withdrawn. “Let’s say a professor wants to (pursue) an academic project with a professor in Israel… some people say, ‘Oh, you know, (the agreement) doesn’t stop this from happening,’ but it does not happen if there’s no institutional support.”
Now that CIJA judicial review is before the Divisional Court of Ontario, the Ontario government will be required to respond and defend its decision. The court will determine whether the UWindsor agreement meets the legal definition of discrimination under the DBPA—and, if so, whether elements of the agreement could be deemed unlawful under Ontario law.
The university meanwhile, says it continues “to work to engage with Jewish student organizations, Jewish faculty and staff, and Jewish community organizations to better understand their concerns about our policies and decisions.”
Stephen Cheifetz, a lawyer and the president of the Windsor Jewish Federation, says, “No, they never, never did that.”
Cheifetz, who also taught at UWindsor, told The Canadian Jewish News that communication between the administration and the school’s Jewish community has been limited to a few meetings with very little room for raising concern.
“Basically, the answer in each of the meetings was, ‘we’re not changing anything,’” Cheifetz said, referring to a meeting he had with UWindsor’s current president, Robert Gordon.
Cheifetz argues that while the encampment agreement may not have immediate material consequences, it has future implications for potential partnerships and investments. “It affects Jewish professors due to the faculty association’s stance, and it affects Jewish law students—the largest Jewish student group at Windsor. Windsor already has a reputation for antisemitism, which discourages Jewish students from attending. Several large donors have canceled their gifts and requested their names be removed from acknowledgments.”
“Making such agreements further emboldens lawlessness on campus and will only serve to further marginalize Jewish students and discourage them from attending the University of Windsor.” -Stephen Cheifetz, Windsor Jewish Federation https://t.co/7t8r6GbD32 pic.twitter.com/a5RwVnwwas
— The Jewish Federations of North America (@jfederations) July 14, 2024
Cheifetz and his wife donated a scholarship to UWindsor, in memory of both their late fathers. The Saul Pazner and Nathan Cheifetz Scholarship was established in 2009. But, in an interview with The Canadian Jewish News in July 2024, Cheifetz announced he’d be removing his name from the gift.
“Both my father and my father-in-law would be rolling in their graves if they knew that the money that I donated on their behalf is being used by a law school where there’s so much Jew hatred that emanates from there,” Cheifetz said in July.
Cheifetz says protesters got “everything but the kitchen sink in those agreements.”
“This is the thin edge of the wedge. People go, ‘Oh, it’s only at Windsor, who cares, they only have a few Jewish students. But (BDS-proponents) are attempting to use it as a method to try and get BDS agreements at other schools.”
Cheifetz says that despite the university’s stated intention to consult the Jewish community, no such outreach took place beyond hiring a Jewish liaison—a sessional professor with the business school named Ira Cohen—who was vetted by a pro-Palestinian student representative.
The Canadian Jewish News emailed Cohen for comment on what wider efforts the university has made to communicate with the UWindsor’s Jewish community, but did not receive a reply.
The Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel claims Israeli universities are complicit in “occupation, settler-colonialism and apartheid,” as stated on their website.
But enrolment data tells a different story. Arab citizens, who make up about 20 per cent of Israel’s population, are attending Israeli universities in growing numbers. A 2021 report by the Israel Democracy Institute found Arab enrolment in bachelor’s programs nearly doubled from 22,268 in 2010 to 43,454 in 2020, rising from 10.2 per cent to 18 per cent of all undergraduates.
The trend extends to graduate programs. Arab enrollment in master’s degrees climbed from 6.5 per cent in 2011-12 to 16 per cent in 2020-21. At the University of Haifa, Arab-Israeli students made up about 41 per cent of the student body in 2019, while Ariel University, a frequent BDS target, enrolls Arab, Druze and Circassian students.
Critics argue academic boycotts undermine global research collaboration and harm the very communities BDS claims to support.
“BDS not only harms Jewish Israelis but also Palestinians and Arab Israelis, who make up nearly 17 per cent of the student body in Israeli universities,” wrote Judy Zelikovitz, CIJA’s vice-president of University and Local Partner Services, in an email statement sent to The Canadian Jewish News.
“Canadians have benefitted immensely from collaborations with Israel, yielding advances in brain science, agricultural technologies, public health and more. These partnerships not only enhance the global community but also strengthen Canada’s contributions to solving shared challenges,” Zelikovitz said.
IJV says the BDS movement does not target specific programs at Israeli institutions. “The academic boycott targets institutions as a whole, not individuals or individual projects within them,” IJV wrote. “These institutions continue to partner with the Israeli military and settler groups on behalf of the university as a whole.”
BDS has become a major talking point at other Canadian universities, particularly Montreal’s Concordia University, where the movement has gained traction through student-led initiatives and union-backed motions.
In January 2025, the Concordia Student Union (CSU) announced that over 250 students had signed a petition calling for a Special General Meeting (SGM) to discuss the university’s involvement in the BDS movement. The petition demanded that Concordia University disclose its financial investments, divest from companies linked to militarized violence and colonialism, and suspend partnerships with Israeli institutions. Specific targets for divestment included companies such as Bombardier, Lockheed Martin, CAE, Pratt & Whitney, and Airbus.
On Jan. 29, the CSU held the SGM, which began an hour late and was marked by procedural disputes, accusations of silencing dissent, and heightened tensions between opposing factions. A motion to endorse the BDS movement passed by a vote of 858 in favour to 58 against.
According to an observer of the meeting, students opposing the motion were “denied a fair chance to debate” due to a procedural maneuver that abruptly ended discussion. “The meeting was justified as being in-person for the sake of democracy, yet the moment debate became inconvenient, they shut it down,” this source said, referring to a motion to call the question, which moved the proceedings straight to a vote before many had a chance to speak.
🇨🇦Montreal, Canada
🚨Last week @Concordia students faced relentless intimidation as a mob took over the CSU Special General Meeting. Debate on the antisemitic, anti-peace BDS motion was shut down, and dissenting voices were silenced through aggression.Why does Concordia… https://t.co/2wLacbn4sa pic.twitter.com/EXV0qLE7tx
— FactsMatter (@AllFactsNoHate) February 3, 2025
A Jewish student at Concordia, who did not want to be named, expressed frustration: “The CSU is funded by all students. Our student body is made up of diverse ethnic and religious people, and we have a wonderful diversity of nationality too. Boycotting Israeli institutions does not help the Palestinians but just seeks to ostracize and marginalize the Israeli and Jewish members of Concordia.”
Following the passage of the BDS motion, Concordia’s president and vice-chancellor Graham Carr released a statement, saying such campaigns are “contrary to the value of academic freedom upon which all universities are founded.”
“Beyond the vote itself, reports from yesterday’s meeting are deeply troubling,” Carr wrote. “They include the presence of heavily masked individuals, complaints of discriminatory behaviour and the use of intimidation tactics. This behavior is unacceptable on campus and contravenes our policies.”
Concordia’s president added that, “The university has no input on the motions presented by the CSU or on its deliberative and decision-making processes. But we will examine the behaviour around and at the special meeting, and urge those who have complaints to report them.”
Despite student pressure, Canadian university presidents have taken varying but generally critical stances on BDS, often emphasizing academic freedom and fostering constructive dialogue. At the University of British Columbia (UBC), former president Santa J. Ono publicly stated in 2022 that the university does not support BDS, citing a commitment to “constructive and respectful debate” while opposing polarizing actions based on identity or politics. This stance was reaffirmed by UBC’s current president, Benoit-Antoine Bacon, in 2023.
Similarly, the University of Ottawa has voiced firm opposition to BDS. President Jacques Frémont declared in 2021 that the university “will have no part of the BDS movement nor any movement that boycotts academic institutions,” framing such efforts as incompatible with the free exchange of ideas and mutual respect that universities aim to uphold.
University of Toronto president Meric Gertler has consistently expressed opposition to the BDS movement. In his remarks at the Conference on Historical and Contemporary Antisemitism on Sept. 23, 2024, he stated: “We remain unequivocally opposed to academic boycotts—targeting scholars or institutions simply because of the country in which they are located.”
.@UofT President Gertler delivers speech needed for months: acknowledges harm of campus antisemitism, says exclusion of anyone (whether Jewish, Israeli or Zionist) is discriminatory, protests must abide by campus codes, and fully oppose academic boycotts.https://t.co/RSnVhJNLUK pic.twitter.com/jiC7m5QOQG
— Michael Geist (@mgeist) September 24, 2024
This statement was made in the context of addressing rising antisemitism on campus, particularly following events such as the encampment at King’s College Circle and tensions related to the conflict in Gaza.
Schools such as the University of British Columbia maintain several academic partnerships with Israeli universities.
According to UBC’s Office of Global Engagement, these include a student mobility agreement with the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, “facilitating academic exchanges and collaborative research.”
Despite motions considered by UBC’s Senate to suspend such collaborations, including one in May 2024 that was defeated 49 to 16, these partnerships remain intact. The university has emphasized the importance of academic freedom and the value of global engagement, noting that such collaborations contribute significantly to UBC’s mission of advancing knowledge and promoting international understanding.
Even though university administrations have almost uniformly denounced BDS, the campaigns continue to create a climate of animosity on campuses.
“We’ve tried to create spaces for open dialogue at UBC, but the toxicity on campus makes it nearly impossible,” said Zara Nybo, an Emerson Fellow with StandWithUs Canada and a student at UBC. “Students are afraid of being ostracized or even attacked for expressing their views. Even identifying as a Zionist on campus has become a social risk.”
Justin Hebert, a Jewish law student at UWindsor and an Emerson Fellow with StandWithUs Canada, says BDS is “a very conceptual, easy to digest mantle upon which an entire hate movement is hung upon.”
Hebert, who describes himself as the unofficial liaison for UWindsor’s Jewish community, says the movement’s actual goal is not divestment. “The actual goal is not to help make any material improvements to the conditions of life for the Palestinian people. This is specifically and squarely about turning the tide of public consciousness against the state of Israel and anyone who supports it,” he said.
In Windsor, Sydney Greenspoon, a recent law school graduate, who headed the Windsor Law Jewish Students Association (the only Jewish club on campus), spoke to The Canadian Jewish News in July, describing her convocation ceremony as deeply alienating.
‘We are going to fight back’: Windsor Jews rally against UWindsor’s concession to pro-Palestinian students https://t.co/SMw2LPppxn THE CJN DAILY podcast with @ebessner @sydgreenspoon
— The Canadian Jewish News (@TheCJN) July 16, 2024
Many graduates wore keffiyehs or Palestinian flags, and the valedictorian’s speech accused Israel of genocide, she said. Greenspoon carried a small Israeli flag on stage. Reflecting on the broader campus climate, she said, “It’s not a place for Jews anymore.”
Her experience highlights growing concerns among Jewish students at UWindsor, who have reported harassment and a lack of institutional support following the university’s agreement with pro-Palestinian protesters. Greenspoon and Hebert warn that the administration’s response has damaged the university’s reputation within the Jewish community.
“Jewish students are afraid,” said Hebert. “It’s not that they don’t want to speak out—it’s that doing so makes them a target. The negative impacts of anti-Zionist sentiment on campus are often unseen or unheard. It’s how students feel and how they are perceived.
“When the rhetoric becomes all-encompassing, targeting not just Israeli policies but Jewish identity and Zionism itself, it creates a deeply unsafe environment.”
Empower’s push into personal wealth advisement has been gaining traction, with the division reporting 29% growth in average assets under administration to $86 billion in 2024 in part from “capturing rollover volume from defined contribution plans.”
Empower, the country’s second-largest retirement plan recordkeeper by assets, has built up a staff of 1,000 advisors in recent years to provide wealth management services to individuals, including the 19 million people on its recordkeeping platform, representing about $1.8 trillion in assets.
“At the center of Empower’s growth strategy is the delivery of financial advice to more people in new ways,” Empower CEO Edmund Murphy said in a statement. “We achieved four strong quarters of growth in 2024 because our customers, their advisors and the partners with whom we work are bringing much-needed advice to the millions of people we serve.”
Empower, owned by Winnipeg-based Great-West Lifeco, embarked on its wealth strategy with a 2020 $1 billion acquisition of Personal Capital.
In 2023, it announced the Empower Personal Wealth brand, headed by Carol Waddell. Waddell had previously been a managing director at J.P. Morgan, overseeing retirement plan services. Her division’s launch included a national marketing effort aimed at consumers.
Roger Hobby, a former Fidelity Investments executive, was named vice president and head of advisory and distribution for the division last year.
Great-West Lifeco President and CEO Paul Mahon said on an earnings call that Empower Personal Wealth brought in over $3 billion in net new assets in the fourth quarter, with rollover sales playing a significant role.
“A thriving workplace business fuels the growth of our personal wealth offering,” he said. “For the full year, net flows alone accounted for 12% asset growth in the personal wealth business, demonstrating the growing strength of the platform.”
Empower’s workplace platform reported adding 600,000 net new plan participants in 2024, increasing 3.4% year-over-year and AUA growth of 22% year-over-year.
It also, however, saw net outflows of $13.8 billion from its defined contribution assets over the course of the year as people withdrew from their retirement accounts. CEO Mahon called the withdrawals a “trend that remains consistent across the industry at this time.”
Empower as a division achieved record earnings of $973 million in 2024, up 30% from the prior year.
Great-West Lifeco, listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange, reported adjusted earnings per share of $1.14 during the quarter, up 12% year-over-year, beating analysts’ expectations by 6 cents, according to Yahoo!Finance.
They were up another 17% on the Toronto Stock Exchange on Thursday, at $8.88 in morning trade.
That’s because Aurora’s financial results exceeded analyst expectations, with net revenue reaching $88.1 million for the quarter ending December 31 — a 37% year-over-year increase. Adjusted earnings jumped 316%, driven by strong medical cannabis sales in Europe, Australia, Poland and the UK.
“This quarter was record-breaking for Aurora, driven by all-time highs in global medical net revenue, net income, adjusted EBITDA, and free cash flow,” said CEO Miguel Martin.
Aurora’s strong earnings sparked a rally across the struggling Canadian cannabis sector, with Canopy Growth (CGC) gaining 11%, Cronos Group (CRON) rising 2%, and SNDL Inc (SNDL) up 4%. Investors are betting that Aurora’s success could be replicated by other Canadian cannabis firms looking beyond their home market for growth.
Analysts pointed to outright legalization in the US and wider medical adoption overseas in the EU and Asia Pacific.
Aurora’s strategy of focusing on higher-margin medical cannabis rather than the saturated Canadian recreational market appears to be paying off, they added.
Canaccord Genuity’s Matt Bottomley called the results “well above consensus expectations,” highlighting Aurora’s ability to improve operating margins while expanding internationally.
European countries like Germany, which recently passed legislation easing restrictions on medical cannabis, present significant growth opportunities for Canadian producers. Australia, another key market, has also seen rising demand for prescription cannabis products.
Canopy, which is set to report earnings on Friday, saw a spike in options activity — a sign of traders betting on further upside. Meanwhile, Tilray (TLRY), which has diversified into the alcohol industry, announced that its Montauk beer brand will soon be available on JetBlue domestic and international flights — a sign that cannabis companies are exploring new revenue streams.
Listen to this article
Bausch + Lomb Corp. has ended talks with a potential buyer interested in taking the company private, but the business said it will continue with plans to fully separate from its parent company.
Bausch + Lomb issued an update Thursday on a potential sale, which was disclosed in December following a regulatory request from the Canadian Investment Regulatory Organization. In a statement, the company said:
“Taking Bausch + Lomb private with a third-party buyer was one of several options being explored to complete a full separation from Bausch Health Companies Inc. After engagement with potential buyers, that process is complete, and will not result in a transaction at this time.”
It continued, “Full separation remains the goal. Bausch + Lomb continues to operate as its own entity and execute on its strategies and business plan.”
The company, which raised 2024 revenue guidance on Oct. 30, will report fourth-quarter and full-year 2024 earnings on Feb. 19, in addition to providing guidance for the 2025 fiscal year.
Bausch + Lomb (NYSE/TSX: BLCO) is traded on both the New York Stock Exchange and Toronto Stock Exchange.
The company has roughly 13,000 employees and a presence in nearly 100 countries. It is headquartered in Vaughan, Ontario, with corporate offices in Bridgewater, New Jersey.
Bausch + Lomb ranked sixth on the most recent RBJ list of manufacturers with 1,168 local workers at the end of 2024, down 8 percent year-over-year.
[email protected] / (585) 653-4021
“
Comments