The federal Liberal government tabled a budget Tuesday that calls for billions of dollars in new spending — something they’ve done in every other fiscal document for the last seven years.
A review of federal finances shows just how big the government has become in recent years as a result. Ottawa is projected to spend about $151 billion more next year than it did in 2014-15, the year before Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his party won government in November.
It’s not just expenses — federal public service employment has increased by 31 per cent in seven years. The government has added nearly 80,000 employees to the roster during its tenure.
Total expenses for the federal government were $280.4 billion in the 2014-15 fiscal year.
Adjusted for inflation, that’s roughly $345.5 billion in today’s dollars.
Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland’s budget projects total expenses will be $496.9 billion in 2023-24 — a year when there’s no extraordinary pandemic-related spending.
And under Freeland’s current plan, the spending will move higher in the years to come. Her budget projects spending will ring in at $555.7 billion in 2027-28.
Total program expenses as a share of the economy — a figure that includes all government spending other than public debt charges — is at its highest point in three decades.
In 2014-15, program spending was 12.8 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP). It’s over 16 per cent now.
“This Liberal government has put their stamp on the state and the economy — they’ve taken us in a new direction. Even before the pandemic, they had pretty big budgets,” Sahir Khan, a former deputy parliamentary budget officer and the executive vice-president of the uOttawa Institute of Fiscal Studies and Democracy, told CBC News.
“The state has gotten bigger, there’s no question. They abandoned the Chrétien-Martin-Harper political consensus as soon as they got into power,” said Khan, pointing to previous governments that kept spending in the 12-13 per cent range of GDP.
The eye-popping spending increases may seem like a problem but Khan said it’s sustainable as long as the economy continues to grow.
“It will work, it’s functional and it’s fiscally sustainable. We’re a $3-trillion dollar economy,” he said.
A lot of this spending is possible because of cuts made in the 1990s when Canada was in worse financial shape.
“Chrétien-Martin did the heavy lifting. That’s what’s given us the room now,” Khan said.
Trudeau himself mounted a similar defence this week when asked if he can really describe his budget as “fiscally responsible” given the plan to spend more now and into the future.
“We have the lowest deficit in the G7, the best debt-to-GDP ratio and we’ve preserved our AAA credit rating. We’re one of the three largest economies in the world with a AAA credit rating, which means that our plan is responsible,” he said.
Federal debt climbs to $1.2 trillion
The current Liberal government has never posted a budget surplus.
Under both former finance minister Bill Morneau and Freeland, Ottawa has always been in the red.
That’s added to the federal debt, which, at last check, is roughly $1.2 trillion — double the $612.3 billion it was when Trudeau and his team took the reins of power.
The government is no longer projecting when it will return to a balanced budget.
While the fall economic statement tabled last November suggested Ottawa’s budget might be back in the black in 2027-28, Freeland dumped that projection in Tuesday’s budget after announcing some new spending on health and dental care and a series of tax credits to spur green tech and energy development.
Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland and B.C Premier David Eby tour a clean electricity research and development facility in Surrey, B.C., on Thursday. (Ben Nelms/CBC)
Franco Terrazzano is the federal director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, a group that advocates for lower spending and a smaller government.
He said he doesn’t think the Liberal government will ever balance the budget.
“Fiscal management, it’s like a muscle, if you don’t flex it and if you don’t use it, you lose it. They just don’t have the skill set anymore. The government wants to spend more on everything forever and that’s not a good way to manage the public purse,” Terrazzano said.
“The government is spending so much that they could win the lottery every single day of the year and they’d still never pay down the deficit. They’d just spend more.”
The COVID-19 pandemic was a massive shock to the country and its finances.
In an effort to keep the economy afloat, Ottawa rolled out a stimulus program to backstop business and send cheques to the unemployed, among other initiatives.
But it wasn’t just the $327-billion deficit in 2020-21 that added to the national debt. It’s grown every year this government has been in power — in good economic times and bad.
The party that promised “real change” in the 2015 election has delivered on its commitment to fundamentally shift the role of government in Canadian life.
“I don’t think this big spending has been hidden. This is what was advertised. They promised a centre-left shift after the Harper years,” Khan said.
Under Trudeau, for example, the government has rolled out a more generous Canada Child Benefit, created a national child care program, increased Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) payments for impoverished seniors, hiked Old Age Security payouts for some of the elderly and spent tens of billions of dollars on Indigenous programming.
It has invested more in infrastructure, housing, health care and, with Tuesday’s budget, it’s poised to stand up a dental care program that will see the federal treasury cover the cost of dentistry for millions of Canadians.
The government also has resettled tens of thousands of refugees and introduced a new Canada Workers’ Benefit for low-wage people, among many other measures.
While some of this spending has been offset by tax increases (the government increased income tax rates for higher income earners, for example) and higher revenues from a growing economy, a lot of it has been paid for by taking on more debt.
The cost to service all that debt has increased. Interest charges on the debt will cost taxpayers almost $44 billion in 2023. Interest charges are expected to reach $50 billion in 2027.
While relatively high in numerical terms, public debt charges as a percentage of GDP are still lower than they were in the 1990s.
The government projects debt charges will be about 2 per cent of GDP compared to nearly six per cent in 1991.
That’s cold comfort to Terrazzano.
“Every year, there’s more money wasted on interest charges. That’s money that can’t be used to improve health care or lower taxes. It’s just a bunch of money going to bond fund managers,” he said.
Public service employment has grown by 31 per cent
Now that the government does a lot more than it did before Trudeau took over, the size of the bureaucracy has increased in lockstep.
Federal statistics on the size of the public service show that the number of people on the government’s payroll has climbed considerably in seven years.
In 2015, there were 257,034 federal workers — a figure that includes people working in what the government calls “core public administration” and “separate agencies.”
Separate agencies include the Canada Revenue Service, Parks Canada, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and more than a dozen others.
These numbers, however, do not include the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF), the RCMP, political staff and some people working overseas.
Also excluded are workers at federal Crown corporations like Canada Post, CBC/Radio-Canada and Via Rail, which generate revenue to cover some of their costs.
In 2022, there were 335,957 federal public servants — an increase of 30.7 per cent compared to seven years before.
Canada’s population, meanwhile, grew by about 8.5 per cent in the same time period.
That means the federal public service’s employment growth rate is three times greater than the population growth rate.
NEW YORK (AP) — In a new video posted early Election Day, Beyoncé channels Pamela Anderson in the television program “Baywatch” – red one-piece swimsuit and all – and asks viewers to vote.
In the two-and-a-half-minute clip, set to most of “Bodyguard,” a four-minute cut from her 2024 country album “Cowboy Carter,” Beyoncé cosplays as Anderson’s character before concluding with a simple message, written in white text: “Happy Beylloween,” followed by “Vote.”
At a rally for Donald Trump in Pittsburgh on Monday night, the former president spoke dismissively about Beyoncé’s appearance at a Kamala Harris rally in Houston in October, drawing boos for the megastar from his supporters.
“Beyoncé would come in. Everyone’s expecting a couple of songs. There were no songs. There was no happiness,” Trump said.
She did not perform — unlike in 2016, when she performed at a presidential campaign rally for Hillary Clinton in Cleveland – but she endorsed Harris and gave a moving speech, initially joined onstage by her Destiny’s Child bandmate Kelly Rowland.
“I’m not here as a celebrity, I’m not here as a politician. I’m here as a mother,” Beyoncé said.
“A mother who cares deeply about the world my children and all of our children live in, a world where we have the freedom to control our bodies, a world where we’re not divided,” she said at the rally in Houston, her hometown.
“Imagine our daughters growing up seeing what’s possible with no ceilings, no limitations,” she continued. “We must vote, and we need you.”
Harris used the song in July during her first official public appearance as a presidential candidate at her campaign headquarters in Delaware. That same month, Beyoncé’s mother, Tina Knowles, publicly endorsed Harris for president.
Beyoncé gave permission to Harris to use the song, a campaign official who was granted anonymity to discuss private campaign operations confirmed to The Associated Press.
Outside of sports and a “Cold front coming down from Canada,” American news media only report on Canadian events that they believe are, or will be, influential to the US. Therefore, when Justin Trudeau’s announcement, having finally read the room, that Canada will be reducing the number of permanent residents admitted by more than 20 percent and temporary residents like skilled workers and college students will be cut by more than half made news south of the border, I knew the American media felt Trudeau’s about-face on immigration was newsworthy because many Americans would relate to Trudeau realizing Canada was accepting more immigrants than it could manage and are hoping their next POTUS will follow Trudeau’s playbook.
Canada, with lots of space and lacking convenient geographical ways for illegal immigrants to enter the country, though still many do, has a global reputation for being incredibly accepting of immigrants. On the surface, Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver appear to be multicultural havens. However, as the saying goes, “Too much of a good thing is never good,” resulting in a sharp rise in anti-immigrant sentiment, which you can almost taste in the air. A growing number of Canadians, regardless of their political affiliation, are blaming recent immigrants for causing the housing affordability crises, inflation, rise in crime and unemployment/stagnant wages.
Throughout history, populations have engulfed themselves in a tribal frenzy, a psychological state where people identify strongly with their own group, often leading to a ‘us versus them’ mentality. This has led to quick shifts from complacency to panic and finger-pointing at groups outside their tribe, a phenomenon that is not unique to any particular culture or time period.
My take on why the American news media found Trudeau’s blatantly obvious attempt to save his political career, balancing appeasement between the pitchfork crowd, who want a halt to immigration until Canada gets its house in order, and immigrant voters, who traditionally vote Liberal, newsworthy; the American news media, as do I, believe immigration fatigue is why Kamala Harris is going to lose on November 5th.
Because they frequently get the outcome wrong, I don’t take polls seriously. According to polls in 2014, Tim Hudak’s Progressive Conservatives and Kathleen Wynne’s Liberals were in a dead heat in Ontario, yet Wynne won with more than twice as many seats. In the 2018 Quebec election, most polls had the Coalition Avenir Québec with a 1-to-5-point lead over the governing Liberals. The result: The Coalition Avenir Québec enjoyed a landslide victory, winning 74 of 125 seats. Then there’s how the 2016 US election polls showing Donald Trump didn’t have a chance of winning against Hillary Clinton were ridiculously way off, highlighting the importance of the election day poll and, applicable in this election as it was in 2016, not to discount ‘shy Trump supporters;’ voters who support Trump but are hesitant to express their views publicly due to social or political pressure.
My distrust in polls aside, polls indicate Harris is leading by a few points. One would think that Trump’s many over-the-top shenanigans, which would be entertaining were he not the POTUS or again seeking the Oval Office, would have him far down in the polls. Trump is toe-to-toe with Harris in the polls because his approach to the economy—middle-class Americans are nostalgic for the relatively strong economic performance during Trump’s first three years in office—and immigration, which Americans are hyper-focused on right now, appeals to many Americans. In his quest to win votes, Trump is doing what anyone seeking political office needs to do: telling the people what they want to hear, strategically using populism—populism that serves your best interests is good populism—to evoke emotional responses. Harris isn’t doing herself any favours, nor moving voters, by going the “But, but… the orange man is bad!” route, while Trump cultivates support from “weird” marginal voting groups.
To Harris’s credit, things could have fallen apart when Biden abruptly stepped aside. Instead, Harris quickly clinched the nomination and had a strong first few weeks, erasing the deficit Biden had given her. The Democratic convention was a success, as was her acceptance speech. Her performance at the September 10th debate with Donald Trump was first-rate.
Harris’ Achilles heel is she’s now making promises she could have made and implemented while VP, making immigration and the economy Harris’ liabilities, especially since she’s been sitting next to Biden, watching the US turn into the circus it has become. These liabilities, basically her only liabilities, negate her stance on abortion, democracy, healthcare, a long-winning issue for Democrats, and Trump’s character. All Harris has offered voters is “feel-good vibes” over substance. In contrast, Trump offers the tangible political tornado (read: steamroll the problems Americans are facing) many Americans seek. With Trump, there’s no doubt that change, admittedly in a messy fashion, will happen. If enough Americans believe the changes he’ll implement will benefit them and their country…
The case against Harris on immigration, at a time when there’s a huge global backlash to immigration, even as the American news media are pointing out, in famously immigrant-friendly Canada, is relatively straightforward: During the first three years of the Biden-Harris administration, illegal Southern border crossings increased significantly.
The words illegal immigration, to put it mildly, irks most Americans. On the legal immigration front, according to Forbes, most billion-dollar startups were founded by immigrants. Google, Microsoft, and Oracle, to name three, have immigrants as CEOs. Immigrants, with tech skills and an entrepreneurial thirst, have kept America leading the world. I like to think that Americans and Canadians understand the best immigration policy is to strategically let enough of these immigrants in who’ll increase GDP and tax base and not rely on social programs. In other words, Americans and Canadians, and arguably citizens of European countries, expect their governments to be more strategic about immigration.
The days of the words on a bronze plaque mounted inside the Statue of Liberty pedestal’s lower level, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free…” are no longer tolerated. Americans only want immigrants who’ll benefit America.
Does Trump demagogue the immigration issue with xenophobic and racist tropes, many of which are outright lies, such as claiming Haitian immigrants in Ohio are abducting and eating pets? Absolutely. However, such unhinged talk signals to Americans who are worried about the steady influx of illegal immigrants into their country that Trump can handle immigration so that it’s beneficial to the country as opposed to being an issue of economic stress.
In many ways, if polls are to be believed, Harris is paying the price for Biden and her lax policies early in their term. Yes, stimulus spending quickly rebuilt the job market, but at the cost of higher inflation. Loosen border policies at a time when anti-immigrant sentiment was increasing was a gross miscalculation, much like Trudeau’s immigration quota increase, and Biden indulging himself in running for re-election should never have happened.
If Trump wins, Democrats will proclaim that everyone is sexist, racist and misogynous, not to mention a likely White Supremacist, and for good measure, they’ll beat the “voter suppression” button. If Harris wins, Trump supporters will repeat voter fraud—since July, Elon Musk has tweeted on Twitter at least 22 times about voters being “imported” from abroad—being widespread.
Regardless of who wins tomorrow, Americans need to cool down; and give the divisive rhetoric a long overdue break. The right to an opinion belongs to everyone. Someone whose opinion differs from yours is not by default sexist, racist, a fascist or anything else; they simply disagree with you. Americans adopting the respectful mindset to agree to disagree would be the best thing they could do for the United States of America.
PHOENIX (AP) — Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a prominent proponent of debunked public health claims whom Donald Trump has promised to put in charge of health initiatives, said Saturday that Trump would push to remove fluoride from drinking water on his first day in office if elected president.
Fluoride strengthens teeth and reduces cavities by replacing minerals lost during normal wear and tear, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The addition of low levels of fluoride to drinking water has long been considered one of the greatest public health achievements of the last century.
Kennedy made the declaration Saturday on the social media platform X alongside a variety of claims about the heath effects of fluoride.
“On January 20, the Trump White House will advise all U.S. water systems to remove fluoride from public water,” Kennedy wrote. Trump and his wife, Melania Trump, “want to Make America Healthy Again,” he added, repeating a phrase Trump often uses and links to Kennedy.
Trump told NBC News on Sunday that he had not spoken to Kennedy about fluoride yet, “but it sounds OK to me. You know it’s possible.”
The former president declined to say whether he would seek a Cabinet role for Kennedy, a job that would require Senate confirmation, but added, “He’s going to have a big role in the administration.”
Asked whether banning certain vaccines would be on the table, Trump said he would talk to Kennedy and others about that. Trump described Kennedy as “a very talented guy and has strong views.”
The sudden and unexpected weekend social media post evoked the chaotic policymaking that defined Trump’s White House tenure, when he would issue policy declarations on Twitter at virtually all hours. It also underscored the concerns many experts have about Kennedy, who has long promoted debunked theories about vaccine safety, having influence over U.S. public health.
In 1950, federal officials endorsed water fluoridation to prevent tooth decay, and continued to promote it even after fluoride toothpaste brands hit the market several years later. Though fluoride can come from a number of sources, drinking water is the main source for Americans, researchers say.
Officials lowered their recommendation for drinking water fluoride levels in 2015 to address a tooth condition called fluorosis, that can cause splotches on teeth and was becoming more common in U.S. kids.
In August, a federal agency determined “with moderate confidence” that there is a link between higher levels of fluoride exposure and lower IQ in kids. The National Toxicology Program based its conclusion on studies involving fluoride levels at about twice the recommended limit for drinking water.
A federal judge later cited that study in ordering the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to further regulate fluoride in drinking water. U.S. District Judge Edward Chen cautioned that it’s not certain that the amount of fluoride typically added to water is causing lower IQ in kids, but he concluded that mounting research points to an unreasonable risk that it could be. He ordered the EPA to take steps to lower that risk, but didn’t say what those measures should be.
In his X post Saturday, Kennedy tagged Michael Connett, the lead attorney representing the plaintiff in that lawsuit, the environmental advocacy group Food & Water Watch.
Kennedy’s anti-vaccine organization has a lawsuit pending against news organizations including The Associated Press, accusing them of violating antitrust laws by taking action to identify misinformation, including about COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines. Kennedy is on leave from the group but is listed as one of its attorneys in the lawsuit.
What role Kennedy might hold if Trump wins on Tuesday remains unclear. Kennedy recently told NewsNation that Trump asked him to “reorganize” agencies including the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration and some agencies under the Department of Agriculture.
But for now, the former independent presidential candidate has become one of Trump’s top surrogates. Trump frequently mentions having the support of Kennedy, a scion of a Democratic dynasty and the son of former Attorney General Robert Kennedy and nephew of President John F. Kennedy.
Kennedy traveled with Trump Friday and spoke at his rallies in Michigan and Wisconsin.
Trump said Saturday that he told Kennedy: “You can work on food, you can work on anything you want” except oil policy.
“He wants health, he wants women’s health, he wants men’s health, he wants kids, he wants everything,” Trump added.
