Angela Lindow
Independent Candidate | University–Rosedale

Why I'm Running

Let me share with you my thoughts on this campaign.We've been here before.Not this exact moment — but moments like it. Moments when the path forward wasn't clear. When the institutions felt broken. When a generation wondered if anyone was listening.And every single time?
We built our way out.
Not with slogans.
Not with political brochures.
Not with politics as performance.With work. With will. With each other.This campaign is going to show you some hard truths.
The youth mental health crisis — real.
The housing collapse — real.
The broken promises — documented.We're going to look at the wounds. Plainly. Directly. Without flinching.
Because you can't fix what you won't face.But here's what I'd like you to hold onto:Every single one of these problems is fixable.Every. Single. One.We have the human talent. We have the capital. We have the models — Quebec's Caisse de dépôt has been doing this for sixty years.What we've been missing is honesty. Specificity. The courage to stop pretending and start building.Not "building" as a buzzword.Building as in: here is the problem, here is the money, here is the model that works, here is how we implement it.No more vague promises. No more "commitments to explore." No more kicking it to a committee.A specific problem. A specific solution. A specific way to pay for it. A specific precedent that proves it works.That's what building actually looks like.Everything else is theatre.This is not a campaign of doom.
This is a campaign of diagnosis — followed by action.Yes, we stumbled. Governments came and went. Promises were made and broken. A generation was told to wait their turn while the ladder got pulled up.But here's the thing about Canadians:We don't stay down.We're builders. We're fixers. We're the people who figure it out when the textbook doesn't have the answer.We're the neighbours who shovel each other's driveways without being asked.The ones who check in on the elderly couple down the street when the power goes out.The community that shows up with casseroles before you know you need them.We're quietly brilliant — world-class researchers, engineers, doctors, innovators — who don't need to shout about it.We built the Canadarm. We pioneered insulin. We lead in AI, in mining tech, in clean energy.We're the peacekeepers. The multicultural experiment that actually worked.We're not flashy. We're not loud.But when something breaks? We fix it.When someone falls? We help them up.When the world gets complicated? We find the practical path through.That's who we are.And that's who we still are — even if the last decade tried to make us forget it.I believe in this country.
I believe in this city.
I believe in this generation — the one they call lost, who are anything but.I believe that when Canadians see a problem clearly — really see it — we don't look away.We get to work.That's why I'm running.Not red. Not blue. Not brochure politics.Something new.A clear-eyed look at where we are.A practical framework for where we're going.And an unshakeable belief that we can get there.Because if anyone can do this it's us.It's University-Rosedale.
It's Toronto.
It's Ontario.
It's Canada.I'm ready to work for you, for us all.— Angela
I

What Comes Next

This platform follows the path young people actually walk.First: Education, Technology, and the Future of Work.
Because opportunity now depends on skills, access, and whether our systems are even designed for the world that already exists.Then: Housing and Community Stability.
Because no amount of ambition matters if you can't afford to live where you learn, work, or build.Then: Governance and Institutional Trust.
Because this can't be another program. It must be structural — changing how power and capital actually move through this country.And finally: CGCD-50 — Rethinking Canada's Capital for a New Generation.
A framework to put capital directly in the hands of young Canadians. Not charity. Investment in continuity.This is not a wish list.
It's an argument — built in sequence, open to challenge, designed to be understood before it's judged.But before any of that, we begin with something unexpected."The Architects"
Not a policy paper. A song.
Because before we talk frameworks and funding, we need to remember who this is for.Nearly a million young Canadians — not in jobs, not in school, not in training. The generation we praised at Davos and abandoned at home.They are not a statistic to be managed.They are the people who will build what comes next — if we let them.
Policy without humanity is just abstraction.So we start with the humans.

The Canadian Graduate Capital Dividend (CGCD-50): Rethinking Canadian Capital for a New Generation

• Want the short version? I wrote the plain-language case for why this matters — no jargon, no spin. Read it on LinkedIn →

A Promise That Must Be Kept

Part I: The Problem

The Numbers That Don't Add UpThe Canada Pension Plan Investment Board now manages $777.5 billion in assets. It generates roughly 8.8% annual returns. It's one of the most sophisticated investment vehicles on Earth, lauded globally for its performance.Meanwhile, youth unemployment hit 14.7% in September 2025, the highest rate in 15 years outside of a pandemic. Teenagers aged 15-19 in Ontario face 22.2% unemployment. Rising rental costs, inflation, and unemployment are fueling a youth homelessness crisis. Housing prices have structurally decoupled from median wages. University graduates face an economy that increasingly doesn't value their credentials.Here's the part that's harder to quantify but impossible to ignore: An entire generation is being told to "pay into CPP for 40 years" when we can't predict what the world will look like in 4 years. AI is rewriting job markets faster than universities can update curricula. Climate change is redrawing geopolitical boundaries. The very concept of a 40-year career trajectory is becoming as obsolete as the fax machine.And yet, CPP investment strategy operates as if we're still in 1997.
The Moral DimensionEvery Canadian who died before collecting their full CPP contributions left money in the system. Their early deaths, often from shorter life expectancies decades ago, from workplace accidents, from diseases we've since cured, helped build this $777 billion fund.That money was supposed to create intergenerational security. Instead, it's buying toll roads in Australia, rental developments in Korea, and infrastructure in Texas while their grandchildren can't afford to live in the country their grandparents built.This isn't a failure of individuals. It's a failure of frameworks that no longer match reality.

Part II: Why the 1997 Framework Is Obsolete

The Historical ContextIn 1997, when the CPP Investment Board was created, the goal was clear and necessary: prevent governments from raiding pension funds for short-term political gain. The arm's-length structure, the fiduciary duty to maximize returns, the global diversification strategy: all of this made perfect sense.Canada's economy was different then. A university degree reliably led to stable employment. Housing prices roughly tracked incomes. The global trade order seemed stable. Demographics favored workers. Career trajectories were predictable.The mandate was simple: invest prudently, maximize returns, ensure Canadians can retire. Keep politics out of it.What ChangedEverything.Economic Structure: The relationship between education, employment, and prosperity has broken down. Having a degree no longer guarantees economic security. Credential inflation means entry-level jobs require experience that entry-level workers can't get.Housing: Housing has transformed from a consumable good into a financialized asset class. CPP invests in real estate globally, often in the very markets pricing out Canadian youth domestically. The fund benefits from the same housing crisis it could help solve.Demographics: The ratio of workers to retirees is shifting dramatically. The system depends on young workers paying in, but those workers increasingly can't afford to participate in the economy at the level previous generations did.Global Instability: Trump's tariff threats, deglobalization, climate change, and rapid technological disruption mean the stable 40-year investment horizon the 1997 framework assumed is now fantasy.Technological Acceleration: AI and automation are rewriting job markets in real-time. The premise that young Canadians will have linear careers long enough to benefit from CPP retirement payouts is increasingly questionable.The 1997 framework assumed stability. We live in permanent disruption.

Part III: What Other Jurisdictions Do Differently

The Quebec ModelQuebec's Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec (La Caisse) manages over $500 billion with a dual mandate that the CPP Investment Board doesn't have.From their founding legislation: La Caisse must "receive moneys on deposit as provided by law and manage them with a view of ensuring optimal return on capital within the framework of depositors' investment policies while contributing to Québec's economic development."That second clause changes everything.La Caisse invests globally, yes. About 60% of its assets are outside Quebec. But it also built the Réseau express métropolitain (REM), a $6.3 billion automated light rail system for Montreal. It created CDPQ Infra specifically to develop major public infrastructure.
It launched a program in February 2025 to steer capital toward Quebec companies amid tariff threats. It systematically supports Quebec-based companies with growth potential. And it generated returns competitive with or exceeding CPP's performance while doing all of this.This isn't charity. This is strategic investment with a domestic overlay. La Caisse proves you can serve fiduciary duty AND regional development simultaneously.
The Norwegian ModelNorway's Government Pension Fund Global (the "Oil Fund") is the world's largest sovereign wealth fund at $1.4 trillion. It invests globally with strict ethical guidelines, but Norway also has a separate Government Pension Fund Norway that invests domestically in Norwegian companies and infrastructure.The split is deliberate: one fund maximizes global returns, the other serves domestic strategic priorities. Both are managed prudently. Both deliver returns. Neither compromises the other.What Canada DoesCanada has CPP investing 85% of its assets outside the country with zero obligation to domestic priorities beyond eventual pension payouts. We have all the risk of global diversification with none of the benefits of strategic domestic investment.We're the only G7 country with a pension system this large that has no mechanism for domestic strategic deployment.That's not prudent. That's ideological.

Part IV: The Solution: The CPP Canada Builder Fund

Here's what I'm proposing:The Core MechanismCreate a parallel fund, the CPP Canada Builder Fund, that operates alongside CPPIB with a modified mandate.Funding Source: 10-15% of CPP's annual RETURNS above actuarial requirements, not the principal.The math: CPP's Chief Actuary determines the rate of return needed to keep pensions sustainable. If that requirement is 6.5% and CPP is generating 8.8%, that's a 2.3% differential. On $777 billion, that's approximately $18 billion annually that's above what's strictly needed for pension sustainability.That $18 billion annually is surplus. It's not threatening anyone's pension. It's excess returns that could serve a broader purpose.The MandateThe CPP Canada Builder Fund would have a dual mandate: (1) Generate competitive returns (maintain fiduciary duty), and (2) Serve Canadian domestic strategic priorities.This requires parliamentary legislation amending the CPPIB Act. It's politically viable because it requires provincial agreement, and every province faces these same crises.Three Core Programs1. The Canadian Graduate Capital Dividend (CGCD-50)Every Canadian who graduated in the last 10 years receives a $25,000-$50,000 refundable tax credit spread over 5 years, tied to productive use: housing down payments, business startup capital, skills retraining, or student debt elimination.This isn't a handout. It's intergenerational equity. Their grandparents' uncollected contributions helping their grandchildren access the economy.Annual cost: roughly $5-7 billion2. Rent-to-Own Housing ProgramThe Builder Fund constructs 50,000 units annually of rent-to-own housing specifically for Canadians under 35. Market-rate rent for 10 years, then automatic conversion to ownership. CPP gets rental income plus appreciation. Youth get housing and eventual equity.This solves housing supply while generating returns. It's not social housing; it's strategic investment that happens to also address a crisis.Annual cost: roughly $10 billion3. Jobs Bridge ProgramThe Builder Fund invests in Canadian companies with requirements for creating apprenticeships and entry-level positions. $1 billion invested equals a minimum 5,000 jobs for under-30s. Companies get growth capital, youth get experience, CPP still gets equity returns.This closes the experience gap that keeps youth unemployed while generating investment returns.
Annual deployment: $3-4 billion
Total Annual Deployment: $18-21 BillionThis is roughly equivalent to the excess returns above actuarial requirements. The fund maintains actuarial soundness while serving domestic priorities.

Part V: Why This Works

Legal ViabilityThe CPP Investment Board Act was created by legislation. It can be amended by legislation. The 1997 framework was a policy choice, not a constitutional requirement.Parliament has full authority to modify CPPIB's mandate with provincial agreement. Precedent exists: Quebec did it in 1965. Norway did it. Singapore's GIC and Temasek have similar dual structures.Economic ViabilityThis doesn't threaten pension sustainability because it only uses excess returns above actuarial requirements, it maintains fiduciary duty through the dual mandate structure, the investments are still expected to generate returns, and it actually reduces long-term pension risk by ensuring the next generation of workers can participate in the economy at levels necessary to sustain CPP contributions.Political ViabilityCritics will say this is "raiding pensions." The answer is simple: "We're using excess returns, surplus above what's needed, to help the generation paying into those pensions actually afford to live in Canada."That's a winning message for youth voters, for parents watching their adult children struggle, for seniors who want their grandchildren to have what they had, for regional premiers who want investment tools, and for anyone frustrated with housing costs.Moral ClarityOur grandparents' generation built Canada with the promise that each generation would do better than the last. That promise is broken.CPP was supposed to ensure intergenerational security. Instead, it's become a mechanism for exporting Canadian capital while importing Canadian insecurity.This proposal fixes that without undermining the pension system itself.

Part VI: Why This Moment Matters

The Right Prime MinisterMost politicians couldn't execute this because they lack either (1) the technical understanding of global finance, or (2) the credibility with markets, or (3) the political mandate to make structural changes.Mark Carney has all three. He navigated the 2008 crisis as Governor of the Bank of Canada. He understands global capital markets. He has relationships with every major institutional investor on Earth. Markets trust him.His Goldman Sachs background, which some see as a liability, is actually an asset here. He can structure this so it's genuinely sound, not just politically popular.He can speak to institutional investors in their language and explain why this makes Canada a better investment destination, not a worse one.The Missing IngredientWhat's been missing is someone willing to put this proposal on the table and force the conversation.To say it plainly, publicly, and persistently until it becomes impossible to ignore.That's what I'm doing. Not because I expect to form government from University-Rosedale, but because ideas enter the political bloodstream when someone is willing to champion them. Because the major parties won't touch this unless they're forced to respond.Because young Canadians deserve to hear that someone is fighting for them with a real plan, not just rhetoric.This is what political courage looks like: proposing something substantial, defending it rigorously, and trusting voters to recognize the difference between a serious policy and a talking point.

Part VII: Answering the Critics

"This Threatens Pension Sustainability"No, it doesn't. It only uses excess returns above actuarial requirements. The principal and required returns remain untouched.If anything, this strengthens long-term sustainability by ensuring the next generation of workers can afford to participate in the economy at levels necessary to sustain CPP contributions."The 1997 Arm's Length Structure Was Designed To Prevent Political Interference"Correct. And that was good.But "arm's length" and "zero obligation to domestic priorities" are not the same thing. You can maintain independent professional management while adding a dual mandate.Quebec does it. Norway does it. Singapore does it. The argument that it's impossible is simply false."This Reduces Returns By Limiting Investment Options"The Quebec Caisse and Norway's domestic fund both generate competitive returns while maintaining domestic investment obligations.More importantly: if 15% of capital deployed domestically generates 2% lower returns, but enables the domestic economy to grow 1% faster, the net effect on pension sustainability is positive because more workers are employed at higher wages paying into the system.You have to model the general equilibrium effects, not just direct returns."This Is Just Vote Buying"Vote buying is promising something you can't deliver or that harms long-term interests for short-term gain.This is structural reform that addresses a genuine crisis while maintaining fiscal responsibility.The programs are designed to generate returns. The beneficiaries are people who already paid into the system through taxes and CPP contributions.If helping citizens during a crisis with their own capital is "vote buying," then all social programs are vote buying and the term becomes meaningless.

Part VIII: Implementation Roadmap

Phase 1: Legislative Framework (Months 1-6)Task Finance Department with drafting amendments to CPPIB Act. Consult with provinces on framework. Establish governance structure for new fund. Create actuarial oversight mechanism. Pass legislation with provincial agreement.Phase 2: Fund Establishment (Months 6-12)Appoint professional management board (maintain arm's length operation). Establish investment criteria and guidelines. Set up operational infrastructure. Begin capital allocation from excess returns. Create transparent reporting mechanisms.Phase 3: Program Launch (Month 12+)Launch Graduate Capital Dividend application process. Begin Rent-to-Own Housing construction.Announce Jobs Bridge investment criteria. Establish performance metrics and accountability.Success MetricsPension actuarial soundness maintained or improved. Youth unemployment reduction target: below 10% within 3 years. Housing construction target: 50,000 units annually. Graduate Capital Dividend enrollment target: 70% of eligible graduates. Investment returns on domestic programs: competitive with CPP benchmark minus 2%.

Part IX: The Bigger Picture

This Isn't Just About CPPThis is about whether Canada can adapt 20th-century institutions to 21st-century realities.We're not the only country with a pension system. We're not the only country with housing crises or youth unemployment. But we might be the only G7 country with both a massive pension fund AND the political conditions to actually reform it.If Canada does this successfully, it becomes a model. Other countries will study it. It positions Canada as innovative in institutional design, not just resource extraction.This Is About the Social ContractThe premise of liberal democracy is that each generation leaves things better than they found them. That premise is currently false for young Canadians.They're more educated than any generation in history and poorer than their parents were at the same age. They're told to save for retirement while unable to afford housing. They're expected to fund current retirees' pensions while having no confidence those pensions will exist for them.That's not sustainable politically or economically.This Is About What We're Willing to Fight ForI'm running in University-Rosedale because this riding is full of exactly the people this policy is designed to help: students, recent graduates, young professionals watching their futures narrow despite doing everything right.I'm not promising this will pass if I win a single seat. I'm promising that I'll make it impossible to ignore. That I'll force every candidate, every party, every leader to answer: Why not?Why can't we use surplus returns to help the people paying into the system? Why can Quebec do this but Canada can't? Why are we building toll roads in Australia while our graduates are homeless?These questions deserve answers.And if the major parties won't ask them, I will.

Conclusion: The Choice Before Us

Canada has two paths:Path One: Continue the status quo. Let CPPIB invest globally with zero domestic obligations. Watch youth unemployment stay high, housing stay unaffordable, and the social contract continue breaking. Defend this by saying "the system works" even as an entire generation disagrees. Keep designing policy in closed rooms, for people who will never sit in those rooms, and wonder why trust in institutions keeps collapsing.Path Two: Adapt. Amend the CPPIB Act to create the Builder Fund. Deploy excess returns to domestic priorities while maintaining fiduciary duty. And, crucially, build the governance structures that place graduates themselves at the decision-making table: not as consultants, not as focus groups, not as tokenised voices in a government report, but as leaders with real authority over the programs designed in their name.Path One is inertia.
Path Two is leadership.The 1997 CPP framework was right for its time. That time is over.
It is time to build something new.And it is time to let the people who will inherit that future be the ones who build it.At Davos, the Prime Minister told the world we have the most educated population on Earth. That is either true or it is rhetoric. If it is true, then we must act accordingly: trust that generation to govern their own capital, design their own programs, and hold their own institutions accountable.Government's role is to create the architecture and then step back. To provide the legislative framework, the actuarial oversight, the fiduciary guardrails, and then to trust the graduates of this country to do what they have always done when given the chance: exceed expectations.This is not a radical proposition. It is the bare minimum of democratic accountability: that policies affecting a specific population should be shaped by that population. That those who pay into a system should have voice in how it serves them. That the "most educated population in the world" should not be treated as children waiting for their elders to decide their fate._____________The math works. The precedent exists. The political conditions are right. The question is whether anyone is willing to fight for it.I am.And I am asking for something more than your vote. I am asking for your leadership.If you are a graduate of the last ten years, this policy is yours. Not a gift. Not a handout. Yours, because your grandparents paid into it, yours because you are paying into it now, and yours because you are the ones who will live with the consequences of what we build or fail to build.Step forward. Demand a seat at the table. And if they won't give you one, take it.This is your economy. This is your future. This is your fight.I am ready to stand with the youth of today._____________This proposal is offered in the spirit of constructive policy development. The numbers are approximate and would require detailed actuarial review. But the framework is sound, the precedent exists, and the need is undeniable.