PREAMBLE
That Bliss & Wisdom Inc. has been engaged in a strategy of “land grabbing” from the time their very first executives arrived in PEI and immediately began incorporating and registering new organizations in PEI…
That’s the only logical conclusion that can be drawn when two things are considered carefully:
(1) the definition of “land grabbing,” and
(2) the evidence showing how Bliss & Wisdom Inc. – primarily through its two main subsidiaries in PEI, GEBIS and GWBI, but also through many other organizations and laity – meet the definition of “land grabbing”.
Let’s start with the definition:
“A land grab refers to the large-scale acquisition or control of land, often through buying or leasing, by companies, governments, or individuals. This practice frequently involves human rights violations, a lack of free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) from affected communities, and inadequate compensation. The term itself is controversial, but it implies an acquisition that is unjust or exploitative, rather than a fair market transaction.[See, “What Is a Land Grab and Is It Illegal?” August 2025]
O.K., now let’s get busy with the evidence…..BUT WAIT JUST A MINUTE….why even bother?
Why should I or any other Islander spend a whack of time examining all the “ins-and-outs” of land fraud by Bliss & Wisdom via their many affiliates and followers?
For what end?
Why bother disassembling and then reassembling the “nuts-and-bolts” of all those illicit activities in an attempt to somehow “prove the obvious” – i.e., that ONE corporate entity – Bliss & Wisdom Inc. – has been engaged in a multi-layered, systematic and persistent process of land grabbing in PEI?
Would such information even matter for the current IRAC investigation?
Well, that will depend on three key things that we all should be aware of at the present juncture as we await to see how this historically-critical investigation setting a decisive direction for the future of PEI unfolds.
Given the extreme degree of public fuzziness concerning what’s actually going on with IRAC and HR Atlantic, and what’s likely to happen with the IRAC investigation on a go-forward basis, I decided it would be helpful to first write an article to establish the parameters and known facts about this IRAC investigation before getting into the actual “land grabbing” issue and evidence.
We need a proper framework for understanding both what “is” and what “is not” possible within the confines of the investigation to gauge what is likely to happen with this particular IRAC investigation.
I initially planned a 2-part look into Bliss & Wisdom’s strategies, methods and means of land acquisition to expose the illicit nature of those purchases, a continuation of a series of “land fraud” case studies I put out on Facebook and haven’t transferred to my website yet; but it’s now a 3-parter, with this first part taking a look at IRAC’s investigation in an attempt to clarify some of the known facts and to establish what the current status of things is, as much as that can be determined with all the continued secrecy.
THE THREE ‘KEY’ THINGS
Determining what the outcome of the investigation commissioned by IRAC “might” look like is principally dependent upon three things:
- What the Lands Protection Act authorizes IRAC to do, but especially how the wording and definitions of terms within the Act sets parameters for determining links and connections between different corporate entities;
- The terms and conditions that establish the “scope” and establish parameters for what is to be looked into; and
- The willingness and ability of the investigator to disclose and expose the full extent of what falls within the broadest possible scope available from #1 and #2.
The Lands Protection Act is what gives the “broadest” parameters for the scope; however, specific investigations generally offer a much narrower scope, with targeted terms and conditions focusing on only certain things to ‘look for’.
What’s “possible” within the scope established jointly by the Act and IRAC’s “terms and conditions” for the investigation may not, however, materialize, and that will depend entirely on the willingness and ability of the Investigator/IRAC to ascertain and present a full picture of what the evidence says, i.e. to go the outer-limit of boundaries established to capture the maximum amount of relevant information possible.
But again, whatever eventually becomes public in a final report will be framed and curtailed by the “fence,” i.e., the boundaries and scope established by the terms and conditions guiding the investigator no matter how much more insight and information the investigator may have access to and may legitimately want to include in the report.
On the other hand, within the boundaries of that “scope,” not everything provided to the investigator as evidence is likely to be deemded “relevant” to the investigation, no matter how relevant it may actually be.
What we will get will not be greater than what is specified in the Terms and Conditions provided to the person(s) undertaking the investigation commissioned by IRAC., but what we get could ALSO be any degree of “less” than what’s possible within that scope.
VIGILANCE DEMANDS UNDERSTANDING THE INTENT/LIMITS OF ANY INVESTIGATION INTO BLISS & WISDOM LAND HOLDING IN PEI
There are very good reasons to be vigilant from the outset and to come to an understanding of what IRAC is likely to do, or not do, with its investigation.
Although that may be indeterminate in a precise way now, what IS possible to identify with a good degree of precision are the three key things that will ultimately determine what the outcome of this investigation can, hypothetically, be or not be.
But I want to turn for a minute to the mega “terms confusion” so far with this critically-important issue already evident.
MYERS: “IT’S ONE ENTITY…but
I’m asking to investigate 2 SUBSIDIARIES” of that entity!”
If you look at the number of Asian land owners in Eastern PEI before the arrival of Buddhist monks and nuns and calculate that acreage, then subtract that from the amount of acreage owned by any Asian individual or corporation affiliated with Bliss & Wisdom Inc., then you’ll get an accurate calculation of the total acreage for which Bliss & Wisdom has a beneficiary interest.
They’re all one entity. That’s well-established now.
There may indeed be the odd “exception” with my comprehensive and simple method of acreage calculation; however, if the interest was in the truth and coming to a just resolution and remedy for the mess PEI is in as a result of secretive and completely undemocratic decisions and plans that opened the door to creating, aiding, and abetting all this land purchase, then this METHOD would be used to answer the question “What’s the total acreage?” exactly as I stated, but with an ‘appeal’ mechanism for those few possible exceptions. I’ll explain.
The assumption for acreage calculations should be that Bliss & Wisdom has a ‘beneficiary’ interest in all that acreage, or will have such in the future, including the purchases and holdings of individual Asian buyers.
Starting with that, deducting the acreage ‘prior’ to B & W’s arrival, and making a “challenge” mechanism in the process available allowing any individual – monk, nun or Buddhist lay person, either here in PEI or in Taiwan/China, to make a case to the Investigator that they are not affiliated with Bliss & Wisdom.
But this is not the approach that will be followed, nor the method of acreage ‘calculation’ employed.
It’s a technical affair with these folk!
Remember Brendel Farms?
When Irving bought more land by bypassing the entire IRAC application process by simply acquiring a corporation with land assets, it was perfectly legal and had to be allowed, although we were all – including government – outraged at the audacity and injustice.
Law is not always moral. In fact, in lawless times such as ours) with corrupt governments (such as ours) it’s almost never moral!
The Lands Protection Act was changed so that what Rebeca Irving did “will never happen again.” We’ll see.
Notwithstanding that particular amendment, I expect that much worse will transpire along the same lines with this investigation if the Act doesn’t have the technical precision to catch the complex circumstances that constitute not only illicit land purchase, i.e., fraudulent land grabbing, but concealed land ownership and/or beneficiary interest in said land.
With Brendel, the problem was that the Act didn’t say “shares in a corporation owning land” anywhere, so now it does, with the addition of secti0n 9.1 and some other amendments.
But here’s the thing – not all illicit land acquisitions, sales, transfers, donations, etc. that may be evident in the land-grabbing strategies of Bliss & Wisdom involve “shares” or “blood relatives”.
There are all kinds of different scenarios at play, many of which I’ve already documented showing in actual, concrete cases the anatomy of that land acquisition fraud for the purpose of acquiring land for Bliss & Wisdom.
For example, a common strategy is that a nun or monk will purchase a choice property adjacent to a B & W corporate land holding (i.e., land owned by Hopetown Inc. GEBIS, GWBI, etc.) and then just keep it in his or her name for years, then perhaps “gift” it to organization many years later. No shares. No “blood-family” connection. No problem with the Act!?
Would the land owned by that nun or monk or lay person be counted in the current total in this investigation?
In other words, what exactly is being investigated?
On what basis are ‘connections’ and links that would result in combining/adding acreage being determined that would in fact see a truthful calculation of all the acreage?
The answer is that we don’t know. If IRAC is trying to win back some trust with Islanders with this investigation they are off to a very bad start by failing (I won’t say “refusing” yet) to provide Islanders with some clarity about what exactly they intend to investigate, and it better be BLISS AND WISDOM and all it’s affiliates, subsidiaries and followers, nuns, monks, and laity and not what we’re hearing *GEBIS and GWBI” or the entire enterprise is a bust from the beginning.
Imagine a small Island on the East Coast of Canada (shouldn’t be hard), one that never had a fire ant in its entire history. Then some tourist kid spills his exotic fire ant farm on the south side of the Island.
Fast-forward a couple of months.
CBC Reporter: “A local resident on the north-side of our beautiful Island was disturbed to find a fire ant in his house; officials have not be able to say whether it originated from the fire ant colony on the south-side of the Island”.
Welcome to the GEBIS & GWBI “one entity” investigation!
WHEN (IF EVER) ARE WE GOING TO BE TOLD THE SCOPE, TERMS AND CONDITIONS?
We’re a week shy of a year since Hon. Steven Myers called upon IRAC to undertake an investigation into – and the wording is key here ‘GEBIS’ [Great Enlightenment Buddhist Institute Society – Monks] and ‘GWBI’ [Great Wisdom Buddhist Institute – Nuns].
You can see the ambiguity in language and resulting confusion with words being used in the news release and interviews that paint different pictures: on the one hand, you hear language about “beneficial ownership,” and “indirect connections,’ but then it is repeatedly stated that the investigation is going to be into just TWO organizations!
Looking at the “indirect connections” of these two SUBSIDIARIES may not reveal all the connections tying all the land under Bliss & Wisdom!
Yet, we hear Myers himself speak of “one entity” in his news conference interview.
If Myers was aware that they are all ‘one entity’ – which he was – then why didn’t he call for an investigation into that one entity, Bliss & Wisdom Inc., rather than just 2 of dozens of its subsidiaries?”
That – and no “terms and conditions” establishing a “scope” in the investigation that is just now apparently underway in earnest troubles me greatly.
How IRAC “Links” Owners
In 1994, the provincial government ordered the Irving family to divest roughly 2,000 acres to bring their total holdings below the 3,000-acre corporate limit, effectively treating multiple family-held entities as a single aggregate unit.
It was determined that what was claimed to be “separate” was indeed serving one and the same interest – growing potatoes for Irving French fry production.
But that ruling was possible as a result of provisions under Under Section 1 of the Lands Protection Act, “aggregate land holding” where land calculations are stipulated to include:
-
Land owned by the person’s minor children.
-
A pro-rata share of land held by any corporation where the person holds more than 5% of the shares.
-
Holdings of other corporations controlled by those same entities.
-
Interdependent Entities: Linking companies that share common management, funding, or operational control.
-
Corporate Stacking: IRAC looks at who ultimately benefits from the land, treating multiple “independent” corporations as a single unit if they are functionally controlled by the same family group.
The Act defines “hold” in relation to shares (Section 1(1)(e.1)) to include:
“…shares held by any trustee, legal representative, agent or other intermediary, as well as a person or corporation that has beneficial ownership of such shares.”
This prevents individuals from using “shell” corporations or independent incorporation to hide land ownership, as IRAC traces the beneficial ownership back to the individual family members.
The “mother house” monastery in Taiwan has the same “abbess” or head as GWBI.
Surely some lee-way, a full understanding of the “spirit of the Lands Protection Act,” some discretion afforded the investigator by the seriously-conflicted management at IRAC, Pam Williams (Chair) and Kerri Carpenter (Vice-Chair), both senior Cox & Palmer lawyers, the firm that helped Bliss & Wisdom exploit weaknesses and loopholes to get all that land.
We’ll see.
SUMMARY
In early December, 2025 we learned that the monks and nuns had only just been notified that the investigation had begun.
Why did it take so long to start this process?
Since that time, we have also learned that IRAC has appointed a lawyer and partner of HR Atlantic, Chris Montigny, to conduct this investigation.
A recent appeal was made to the public to provide assistance if Islanders have first-hand information or documents that may be relevant. The deadline for submission of material is fast approaching (February 13).
I’ll reproduce news release here since it has some recent and relevant information:
“The Island Regulatory and Appeals Commission is inviting members of the public to share information as part of its investigation into the landholdings of two Buddhist groups.
In a news release, IRAC, through its special counsel Christopher Montigny, invited people to share any “relevant and verifiable” information that could assist the commission in conducting the investigation.
The investigation into the Buddhist landholdings began after former housing, land and communities minister Steven Myers ordered it in February.
Myers ordered IRAC to investigate the direct and indirect landholdings of the Great Wisdom Buddhist Institute and the Great Enlightenment Buddhist Institute Society.
Both organizations confirmed to The Guardian they had recently received notice the investigation has begun.
In its news release, IRAC asked that submissions be limited to first-hand knowledge or supported by documentation.
That could include records, agreements, correspondence or other materials related to the ownership, control, use or beneficial interest in land, IRAC said.
Information can be provided by email to iracinvestigation@hratlantic.law.
The deadline for submission of information is Feb. 13, 2026.
I want to see this investigation do a proper job with it’s sights set on LAND.
But we need a PEI public inquiry.
We can be sure that whatever this IRAC investigation does uncover and share in a final report will be limited to land purchases, and whether limits have been exceeded.
They will not be exposing B & W fraud/possible crimes or pointing any fingers at any politicians regarding all the secrecy and corruption behind these land acquisitions made by Bliss & Wisdom Inc.