Connect with us

Business

Taxpayers Federation: Is Catherine Tait “trying” to bring down the CBC?

Published

5 minute read

News release from Franco Terrrazzano of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

CBC’s fresh batch of bonuses cost you $18 million

Catherine Tait has racked up an impressive list of accomplishments during her tenure as CBC President and CEO.

Trust in the CBC is in freefall, viewership and ad revenue are down, hundreds of jobs were just slashed, and more Canadians than ever want it defunded.

So it’s good to know that in between all that hard work, Tait still found the time to take more of your money to slosh around more bonuses at the state broadcaster.

The CBC rubber stamped another $18.4 million in bonuses in 2024.

You read that right: the CBC just took $18.4 million of your tax dollars and turned it into bonus cheques for 1,194 executives, managers and non-union staff.

Forty-five executives took home $3.3 million in bonuses, for an average of $73,000 each.

To put things in perspective: the average salary for Canadian workers last year was less than $70,000. That means CBC executives took home more of your money as a bonus than the average Canadian makes in a year.

At this point, we’re starting to wonder if Tait is a double agent working to bring down the CBC from the inside. Because these taxpayer-funded bonuses are making a great case for why the CBC should be defunded.

This latest round of bonuses comes less than six months after the CTF reported the CBC dished out $15 million in bonuses last year.

CBC bonuses now total $132 million since 2015.

Members of Parliament on the Heritage Committee are calling for an emergency meeting to drag Tait back to Ottawa to answer for the latest bonus bonanza.

If that happens, Tait will probably claim, yet again, that the CBC doesn’t hand out bonuses, which she prefers to call “performance” or “at-risk” pay.

And then she’ll defend the bonus payments by claiming her hands are tied, as payouts are triggered when CBC staff hit pre-set “key performance indicators.”

But here’s the thing about these KPIs.

The CTF went through every CBC annual report from 2019-20 to 2023-23.

Last year, the CBC only hit 40 per cent of its KPIs. That’s the kind of report card that should get your grounded, not a big bonus.

And it’s not like the CBC just had a bad year. Add up all of those years and the CBC only hit 58 per cent of its KPIs.

Keep in mind, these are performance targets they set for themselves. And they still only hit 58 per cent of them.

So, naturally, in honour of that stellar performance, the CBC showered itself with more than $61 million in taxpayer-funded bonuses during those years.

That’s like creating the test you have to take, still only managing to get a D+ and then rewarding yourself with other people’s money.

At this point, it’s clear Tait isn’t willing to do the right thing and end the taxpayer gravy train at the CBC.

So now it’s time for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland or Heritage Minister Pascal St-Onge to step in and put a stop to this nonsense.

Or better yet, just defund the CBC.

Franco’s note: Sorry to be the bearer of more bad news. But it’s not just the bonuses. The number of CBC staffers taking a six-figure base salary has increased by 231 per cent under the Trudeau government. There are now 1,450 CBC staffers with a six-figure annual salary.

We need to keep building the taxpayer army that will push to defund the CBC. You can help build that army by signing and sharing the PETITION to defund the CBC and end media subsidies. 

Here’s the link to the taxpayer petition: https://www.taxpayer.com/petitions/defund-the-cbc-and-end-media-bailout 

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Automotive

Ford Files Patent to Surveil Drivers

Published on

News release from Armstrong Economics

By Martin Armstrong

Governments are pushing the public to switch to smart vehicles to reduce fossil fuel consumption, but there is also a second motive – surveillance.

This September, Ford filed a new patent to eavesdrop on riders. They plan to share this information with third-parties to personalize the advertisements riders hear. Ford will also take the driver’s destination into consideration to determine location-specific advertisements and suggestions. The technology will factor in the weather, traffic, and all external sensors to fine tune when and what to market to passengers.

Advertisements are perhaps the least ominous use of voice data based on the plans that these car manufacturers have. Car insurance rates in the United States spiked 26% in the past year, which is partly due to car manufacturers sharing ride data with insurance companies. Even older cars with basic features like OnStar have tracking devices that report your driving behavior to the manufacturers who share your data with insurance companies and, ultimately, the government. LexisNexis, which tracks drivers’ behaviors and compiles risk profiles, has been sharing individual data with General Motors, who passes that information along to the insurance companies. General Motors.

One driver demanded that LexisNexis send him his personal report, which was a 258-page document containing every trip he or his wife took in his vehicle over a six-month period. LexisNexis said that this data will be used “for insurers to use as one factor of many to create more personalized insurance coverage.” They even reported small issues such as hard breaking and rapid acceleration, according to the report. “I don’t know the definition of hard brake. My passenger’s head isn’t hitting the dash,” an unnamed Cadillac driver enrolled in the OnStar Smart Driver subscription service told reporters.

“Cars have microphones and people have all kinds of sensitive conversations in them. Cars have cameras that face inward and outward,” a researcher with Mozilla Foundation told the Los Angeles Times. In fact, 19 automakers in 2023 admitted that they have the ability to sell your personal data without notice. Law enforcement may subpoena these records as well.

Ford claims that the patent was submitted, but they do not necessarily plan to use the technology. “Submitting patent applications is a normal part of any strong business as the process protects new ideas and helps us build a robust portfolio of intellectual property. The ideas described within a patent application should not be viewed as an indication of our business or product plans. No matter what the patent application outlines, we will always put the customer first in the decision-making behind the development and marketing of new products and services,” Ford said in a statement released to MotorTrend.

Now, the US Department of Transportation is permitted to mandate that certain manufacturers provide them with vehicle data. Sens. Ron Wyden of Oregon and Edward Markey of Massachusetts testified that all vehicles in the United States with a GPS or emergency call system are collecting travel data that car manufacturers have remote access to via the computer chips. The computer chips are compiling data on vehicle speed, movement, travel, and even using exterior sensors and cameras to record the vehicle’s location.

All of this violates the Fourth Amendment which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures without probable cause. These car manufacturers are surpassing what anyone would consider a reasonable expectation of privacy. Governments, third-party advertisement companies, and insurance companies all have warrantless access to personal data, and drivers are largely unaware they are being spied on. Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act permits the government to have backdoor access to this data.

The aforementioned senators’ concerns fell on deaf ears at the Federal Trade Commission. The Department of Transportation clearly is not listed within the US Constitution. People are already experiencing stiff consequences from autos sharing data with the sharp uptick in insurance rates.

Continue Reading

Business

Companies Are Getting Back To Business And Backing Away From DEI

Published on

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Devon Westhill

 

Classic American companies like John DeereHarley Davidson and Tractor Supply Co. are finally reevaluating Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives. They are realizing that their consumers, many from rural, midwestern and working-class communities, don’t care for the DEI practices of corporate elites. They just want good service, reliable tractors and badass motorcycles.

The about-face is especially timely as the Supreme Court’s 2023 affirmative action decision prohibiting race-based college admissions has increased scrutiny of private sector DEI practices. This new legal climate, combined with the discovery of problematic DEI programs at major American companies, means that corporations are at long last feeling significant pressure to prioritize excellence and efficiency over faddish diversity metrics.

Companies operating in the free market have one purpose: to provide quality goods and services to consumers in order to make a profit. For too long, much of corporate America has focused on virtue signaling to appease the left’s cultural mandates. Now, business incentives are forcing a return to the bottom line.

The change began in June when conservative commentator Robby Starbuck took to social media to expose companies masquerading as all-American brands with traditional values. He first exposed Tractor Supply’s DEI practices and announced that he would be investigating a list of other companies considered exemplars of Americana.

In response, Tractor Supply customers began boycotting the company, resulting in an 8% decrease in its stock price (a $2.8 billion market value loss) over five days. This led Tractor Supply to announce later that month the termination of its DEI programming. The company promised to stop submitting data for the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate Equality Index and withdrew sponsorship of LGBTQ+ pride events and voting campaigns, calling them “nonbusiness activities.”

Starbuck’s later exposure of John Deere’s DEI policies also caused the company to issue a statement announcing major cutbacks to their DEI programs. Harley DavidsonJack Daniels and Lowe’s followed suit, preemptively terminating their DEI programs and standards.

All of these companies should be commended for abandoning excessive DEI and getting back to business.

Now, instead of requiring costly, time-intensive programs to prove their liberal bona fides, they can focus on delivering results for their customers. Free from worry about optics and bureaucratic compliance, they can hire the most qualified employees and let them rise to the top.

But these decisions are not without their naysayers. DEI proponents have labeled these moves as bullying from far-right extremists and claim that terminating these policies will encourage gender and race discrimination in the workplace.

This hysteria is unwarranted and relies on the absurd claim that without DEI standards, there can be no equality, inclusion or respect in the workplace. Of course, it is crucial that businesses cultivate a culture of respect and dignity. Employees should be educated on their protections and duties regarding civil rights and basic civility in the workplace. All of the companies reversing on DEI have remained committed to fostering respectful, safe cultures for their employees.

In fact, too much corporate DEI can wreak havoc on a company’s morale. In many cases, it can result in scapegoating certain groups of people for grievous wrongs none of them had a hand in committing. It can also lead to damaging intellectual conformity and groupthink. DEI hiring quotas, in particular, can lead to serious legal risk. All of this results in the complete opposite of DEI’s purported goals. Instead, it increases workplace disunity and harms true diversity.

Ultimately, the DEI policies at these classic American companies have proven to only burden corporations, frustrate employees and confuse customers. Companies should prioritize producing better quality products, lowering prices, and offering attractive wages and benefits for all employees, instead of pouring time and money into ineffective policies that do not represent the American values of their customer base. So long, discrimination disguised as diversity.

Devon Westhill is the president and general counsel for the Center for Equal Opportunity.

 

Continue Reading

Trending

X