Business
Carney’s plan to balance the budget missing one thing, a plan to balance the budget
The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is criticizing Liberal leadership front-runner Mark Carney’s fiscal plan for having no credible plan to balance the budget or cut spending.
“Carney wants to run on his economic credibility, but he has no credible plan to cut spending or balance the budget,” said Franco Terrazzano, CTF Federal Director. “The next time Carney releases a plan to balance the budget, he should remember to include the plan to balance the budget.”
Today Carney released his “approach to federal budgeting.” Carney’s backgrounder acknowledges “the federal government has been spending too much,” but Carney’s plan does not include a plan to balance the budget or cut spending.
Carney plans to separate the government’s operating and capital budgets.
“A Mark Carney-led government will balance the operating budget in three years,” Carney’s backgrounder states. “At the same time, we will run a small deficit on capital spending.”
“Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told Canadians he would balance the budget after a few small deficits, but instead of balancing the books he ran massive deficits and doubled the debt,” Terrazzano said. “Carney needs to go back to the drawing board and come up with a credible plan to balance the budget and cut spending.”
The federal government ran a $62-billion deficit last year. That’s $20 billion higher than its promised fiscal guardrail.
The Trudeau government doubled the debt in less than a decade. Interest charges on the debt are costing taxpayers $54 billion this year. For context, the government is wasting more money on debt interest charges than it sends to the provinces in health-care transfers.
“A balanced budget means the government stops adding to the debt, but Carney’s plan would continue to rack up debt and waste more money on interest charges,” Terrazzano said. “Carney acknowledges the government has a spending problem and now he needs to find concrete ways to save money, balance the budget and cut the debt.”
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
At Tesla’s Austin headquarters, investors backed Musk’s 12-step plan that ties his potential trillion-dollar payout to a series of aggressive financial and operational milestones, including raising the company’s valuation from roughly $1.4 trillion to $8.5 trillion and selling one million humanoid robots within a decade. Musk hailed the outcome as a turning point for Tesla’s future.
“What we’re about to embark upon is not merely a new chapter of the future of Tesla but a whole new book,” Musk said, as The New York Times reported.
Dear Readers:
As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.
Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.
Thank you!
The decision cements investor confidence in Musk’s “moonshot” management style and reinforces the belief that Tesla’s success depends heavily on its founder and his leadership.
Tesla Annual meeting starting now
https://t.co/j1KHf3k6ch— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 6, 2025
“Those who claim the plan is ‘too large’ ignore the scale of ambition that has historically defined Tesla’s trajectory,” the Florida State Board of Administration said in a securities filing describing why it voted for Mr. Musk’s pay plan. “A company that went from near bankruptcy to global leadership in E.V.s and clean energy under similar frameworks has earned the right to use incentive models that reward moonshot performance.”
Investors like Ark Invest CEO Cathie Wood defended Tesla’s decision, saying the plan aligns shareholder rewards with company performance.
“I do not understand why investors are voting against Elon’s pay package when they and their clients would benefit enormously if he and his incredible team meet such high goals,” Wood wrote on X.
Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, Norges Bank Investment Management — one of Tesla’s largest shareholders — broke ranks, however, and voted against the pay plan, saying that the package was excessive.
“While we appreciate the significant value created under Mr. Musk’s visionary role, we are concerned about the total size of the award, dilution, and lack of mitigation of key person risk,” the firm said.
The vote comes months after Musk wrapped up his short-lived government role under President Donald Trump. In February, Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) team sparked a firestorm when they announced plans to eliminate the U.S. Agency for International Development, drawing backlash from Democrats and prompting protests targeting Musk and his companies, including Tesla.
Back in May, Musk announced that his “scheduled time” leading DOGE had ended.
From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
By Conrad Eder
Frontier Centre for Public Policy study reveals a decade of inflated Liberal forecasts—a track record that casts a long shadow over Carney’s first budget
The Frontier Centre for Public Policy has released a major new study revealing that the Trudeau government’s federal budget forecasts from 2016 to 2025 were consistently inaccurate and biased — a record that casts serious doubt on the projections in Prime Minister Mark Carney’s first budget.
Carney’s 2025–26 federal budget forecasts a $78.3-billion deficit — twice the size projected last year and four times what was forecast in Budget 2022. But if recent history is any guide, Canadians have good reason to question whether even this ballooning deficit reflects fiscal reality.
The 4,000-word study, Measuring Federal Budgetary Balance Forecasting Accuracy and Bias, by Frontier Centre policy analyst Conrad Eder, finds that forecast accuracy collapsed after the Trudeau government took office:
- Current-year forecasts were off by an average of $22.9 billion, or one per cent of GDP.
- Four-year forecasts missed the mark by an average of $94.4 billion, or four per cent of GDP.
- Long-term projections consistently overstated Canada’s fiscal health, showing a clear optimism bias.
Eder’s analysis shows that every three- and four-year forecast under Trudeau predicted a stronger financial position than what actually occurred, masking the true scale of deficits and debt accumulation. The study concludes that this reflects a systemic optimism bias, likely rooted in political incentives: short-term optics with no regard to long-term consequences.
“With Prime Minister Carney now setting Canada’s fiscal direction, it’s critical to assess his projections in light of this track record,” said Eder. “The pattern of bias and inaccuracy under previous Liberal governments gives reason to doubt the credibility of claims that deficits will shrink over time. Canadians deserve fiscal forecasts that are credible and transparent — not political messaging disguised as economic planning.”
The study warns that persistent optimism bias erodes fiscal accountability, weakens public trust and limits citizens’ ability to hold government to account — a threat to both economic sustainability and democratic transparency.
Click here to download the full study.
Trans Mountain executive says it’s time to fix the system, expand access, and think like a nation builder
Biden’s Autopen Orders declared “null and void”
Study promotes liver transplants from Canadian euthanasia victims
Musk launches Grokipedia to break Wikipedia’s information monopoly
-
Energy2 days agoEby should put up, shut up, or pay up
-
Business2 days agoPulling back the curtain on the Carney government’s first budget
-
Daily Caller2 days agoUS Eating Canada’s Lunch While Liberals Stall – Trump Admin Announces Record-Shattering Energy Report
-
Business2 days agoThe Liberal budget is a massive FAILURE: Former Liberal Cabinet Member Dan McTeague
-
Business1 day agoCarney’s budget spares tax status of Canadian churches, pro-life groups after backlash
-
COVID-191 day agoFreedom Convoy leader Tamara Lich to appeal her recent conviction
-
espionage18 hours agoU.S. Charges Three More Chinese Scholars in Wuhan Bio-Smuggling Case, Citing Pattern of Foreign Exploitation in American Research Labs
-
Justice1 day agoCarney government lets Supreme Court decision stand despite outrage over child porn ruling