Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Business

Canadians largely ignore them and their funding bleeds their competition dry: How the CBC Spends its Public Funding

Published

9 minute read

 

If we want to intelligently assess the value CBC delivers to Canadians in exchange for their tax-funded investment, we’ll need to understand two things:

  1. How CBC spends the money we give them
  2. What impact their product has on Canadians

The answer to question #2 depends on which Canadians we’re discussing. Your average young family from suburban Toronto is probably only vaguely aware there is a CBC. But Canadian broadcasters? They know all about the corporation, but just wish it would lift its crushing hobnailed boots from their faces.

Stick around and I’ll explain.

For the purposes of this discussion I’m not interested in the possibility that there’s been reckless or negligent corruption or waste, so I won’t address the recent controversy over paying out millions of dollars in executive benefits. Instead, I want to know how the CBC is designed to operate. This will allow us to judge the corporation on its own terms.

The Audit is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

CBC’s Financial Structure

We’ll begin with the basics. According to the CBC’s 2023-24 projections in their most recent corporate plan strategy, the company will receive $1.17 billion from Parliament; $292 million from advertising; and $209 million from subscriber fees, financing, and other income. Company filings note that revenue from both advertising and legacy subscription pools are dropping. Advertising is trending downwards because of ongoing changes in industry ad models, and the decline in subscriptions can be blamed on competition from “cord-cutting” internet services. The Financing and other income category includes revenue from rent and lease-generating use of CBC’s many real estate assets.

The projected combined television, radio, and digital services spending is $1.68 billion. For important context, 2022-23 data from the 2022-2023 annual report break that down to $996 million for English services, and $816 million for French services. 2022-23 also saw $60 million in costs for transmission, distribution, and collection. Corporate management and finance costs came to around $33 million. Overall, the company reported a net loss of $125 million in 2022-23.

The corporation estimates that their English-language digital platforms attract 17.4 million unique visitors each month and that the average visitor engages with content for 28 minutes a month. In terms of market relevance, those are pretty good numbers. But, among Canadian internet users, cbc.ca still ranked only 43rd for total web destinations (which include sites like google.com and amazon.ca). French-language Radio-Canada’s numbers were 5.2 million unique visitors who each hung around for 50 minutes a month.

Monthly engagement with digital English-language news and regional services was 20 minutes. Although we’re given no visitor numbers, the report does admit that “interest in news was lower than expected.”

CBC content production

All that’s not very helpful for understanding what’s actually going on inside CBC. We need to get a feel for how the corporation divides its spending between programming categories and what’s driving the revenue.

The CRTC provides annual financial filings for all Canadian broadcasters, including the CBC. I could describe what’s happening by throwing columns and rows of dollar figures at you. In fact, should you be so disposed, you can view the spreadsheet here. But it turns out that my colorful graph will do a much better job:

As you can see for yourself, CBC spends a large chunk of its money producing news for all three video platforms (CBC and Radio-Canada conventional TV and the cable/VOD platforms they refer to as “discretionary TV”). The two conventional networks also invest significant funds in drama and comedy production.

The chart doesn’t cover CBC radio, so I’ll fill you in. English-language production costs $143 million (roughly the equivalent of the costs of English TV drama/comedy) while the bill for French-language radio production came in at $94 million (more or less equal to discretionary TV news production).

CBC Content Consumption

Who’s watching? The CBC itself reported that viewers of CBC English television represented only 5.1 percent of the total Canadian audience, and only 2.0 percent tuned in to CBC news. By “total Canadian audience”, I mean all Canadians viewing all available TV programming at a given time. So when the CBC tells us that their News Network got a 2.0 percent “share”, they don’t mean that they attracted 2.0 percent of all Canadians. Rather, they got 2.0 percent of whoever happened to be watching any TV network – which could easily come to just a half of one percent of all Canadians. After all, how many people still watch TV?

According to CRTC data, between the 2014–15 and 2022–23 seasons, English language CBC TV weekly viewing hours dropped from 35 million to 16 million. That total would amount to less than six minutes a day per anglophone Canadian. Specifically, news viewing fell by 52 percent, sports by 66 percent, and drama and comedy by 51 percent.

CBC Radio One and CBC Music only managed to attract 14.3 percent of the Canadian market. What does that actually mean? I’ve seen estimates suggesting that between 15 and 25 percent of all Canadians listen to radio during the popular daily commute slots. So at its peak, CBC radio’s share of that audience is possibly no higher than 3.5 percent of all Canadians.

recent survey found that only 41 percent of Canadians agreed the CBC “is important and should continue doing what it’s doing.” The remaining 59 percent were split between thinking the CBC requires “a lot of changes” and was “no longer useful.” Those numbers remained largely consistent across all age groups.

It seems that while some Canadian’s might support the CBC in principle, for the most part, they’re not actually consuming a lot of content.

CBC Revenue sources

CBC’s primary income is from government funding through parliamentary allocations. Here’s what those look like:

Advertising (or, “time sales” as they refer to it) is another major revenue source. That channel brought in more than $200 million in 2023:

But here’s the thing: the broadcast industry in Canada is currently engaged in a bitter struggle for existence. Every single dollar from that shrinking pool of advertising revenue is desperately needed. And most broadcasters are – perhaps misguidedly – fighting for more government funding. So why should the CBC, with its billion dollar subsidies, be allowed to also compete for limited ad revenue?

Or, to put it differently, what vital and unique services does the CBC provide that might justify their special treatment?

It’s possible that CBC does target rural and underserved audiences missed by the commercial networks. But those are clearly not what’s consuming the vast majority of the corporation’s budget. Perhaps people are watching CBC’s “big tent” drama and comedy productions, but are those measurably better or more important than what’s coming from the private sector? And we’ve already seen how, for all intents and purposes, no one’s watching their TV news or listening to their radio broadcasts.

Perhaps there’s an argument to be made for maintaining or even increasing funding for CBC. But I haven’t yet seen anyone convincingly articulate it.

Share

Subscribe to The Audit.

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

Business

EXCLUSIVE: Former Biden Climate Czar Apparently Pushed Homeland Security To Ease Up On Chinese Company Linked To Slave Labor

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Nick Pope

Then-national climate adviser Gina McCarthy appears to have met directly with Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas in 2021 to urge him to ease up on a Chinese solar company linked to slave labor, according to documents obtained by Protect the Public’s Trust, a government watchdog group.

pre-meeting primer prepared for Mayorkas by staff to get him ready to meet with McCarthy in June 2021 states that McCarthy would “likely discuss the concerns the solar industry has regarding the Department’s enforcement posture on solar products, particularly with regard to Hoshine Silicon Products Company.” The meeting, which McCarthy requested, was scheduled to take place several days after DHS issued a “Withhold Release Order” (WRO) to customs officials to begin seizing shipments of Hoshine solar products because of its connections to slave labor in China’s Xinjiang region, an area known as ground zero for the Chinese government’s genocidal repression of Uyghur Muslims.

DHS still lists Hoshine Silicon Industry and its subsidiaries as entities manufacturing products that use slave labor in violation of the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act.

“The impacts of the Hoshine Withold (sic) Release Order (WRO) include the detention of goods and their effect on consumer and investor confidence in solar products, projects, and the industry; concern is growing that this will affect the industry’s ability to meet the nation’s clean energy goals,” the primer for Mayorkas reads.

PPT Documents – Hoshine + DHS by Nick Pope

“Industry indicates that the Hoshine WRO limits their ability to meet demand for solar panels without liability,” the memo continues. “Industry expressed that the WRO’s impact on consumer and investor confidence has resulted in cancelled orders and investments and has put jobs at risk.”

Chinese companies dominate the global supply chains for green energy products including solar panels, and a large share of the world’s polysilicon — a key ingredient for the production of solar panels — comes from the Xinjiang region specifically, The New York Times reported in June 2021 following the announcement of the Hoshine WRO. The Hoshine WRO illustrates a wider problem for the Biden administration whereby it works to cut China and Chinese slave labor-tied companies out of the U.S. solar supply chain without going too far and suffocating American solar companies that rely on Chinese component parts at the expense of the government’s lofty long-term green energy goals.

For example, about one year after the scheduled Mayorkas-McCarthy meeting, the Biden administration opted to waive tariffs on Chinese solar products in June 2022 amid concerns that the levies could crush the American solar industry before reinstating the duties in June 2024. Some American solar firms and executives said that Chinese companies managed to undercut U.S. solar production during the period of time when the tariffs were not being enforced.

Mayorkas stated publicly that “the United States will not tolerate modern-day slavery in our supply chains” on the day DHS announced the WRO against Hoshine.

The memo briefed Mayorkas on several options that McCarthy was likely to bring up at the meeting, including possible proposals to phase in enforcement to reassure the spooked market, increase transparency for the public with respect to DHS’ Hoshine restrictions or to create a “de minimis” threshold for the amount of slave labor-linked polysilicon in a given imported product. Mayorkas’ staff also laid out detailed “pros” and “cons” for each of the suggestions they expected McCarthy to make in the meeting.

“DHS made a rational and moral judgement about products from a company and a nation that uses the forced labor of Uyghurs and other ethnic and political prisoners,” Michael Chamberlain, executive director of Protect the Public’s Trust, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “But it seems human rights are a secondary consideration for the people charged with implementing the Biden administration’s green agenda and their counterparts in the clean energy industry. It’s hard to see what’s ‘clean’ about solar panels made with slave labor.”

McCarthy, who was the head of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for the Obama administration, served as the Biden administration’s national climate adviser before leaving the government in 2022. In between her stints in the Obama and Biden administrations, McCarthy worked as the president of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), a major environmental activist group that has a presence in China and is registered with or supervised by Chinese government institutions like the Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau and the State Forestry and Grassland Administration, according to NRDC’s Chinese language website.

Notably, the documents obtained by Protect the Public’s Trust also include a similar briefing memo meant to prepare him for an October 2021 meeting with the American Clean Power Association about DHS’ enforcement actions against slave labor-linked solar products. That particular document spells out how representatives for the green energy trade group were likely to push for answers about the administration’s conflicting goals of rooting out slave labor from solar supply chains and quickly standing up a robust domestic solar industry.

DHS and McCarthy’s spokesperson did not respond to multiple requests for comment from the DCNF.

Continue Reading

Business

Public Accounts of Canada Report Buried on Last Day of Sitting Session

Published on

The Opposition with Dan Knight

Trudeau Government Hides Exploding Deficit and Fiscal Mismanagement Amid Chaos and Distraction

Well, folks, here we go again. The Trudeau government—masterclass in obfuscation, fiscal recklessness, and zero accountability—just pulled off another slick political maneuver. This time, it’s the Public Accounts of Canada 2024, a document that should be front-page news, but this news bite is buried so deep in the news cycle you’d think it was radioactive.

Here’s what’s happening: the government dropped its final, audited financial statements for the fiscal year on the last day of the parliamentary sitting session, when no one’s watching. Why? Because it’s bad. Really bad. Let’s connect the dots.

First, we had the Fall Economic Statement released just yesterday, a forward-looking document that’s basically a glossy brochure for Trudeau’s latest spending spree. That’s what the media focused on. But the Public Accounts—that’s where you see the hard, cold truth: the deficit is exploding, hitting $61.9 billion, and Canada’s finances are way past the so-called “guardrails” Trudeau and Freeland promised us.

Let’s not forget, those guardrails were supposed to limit deficits to $40 billion, but Trudeau blew right past that, overspending by more than $20 billion. And now they’re scrambling to hide the numbers because they know Canadians will not tolerate this reckless fiscal mismanagement any longer.

Ah, yes, Chrystia Freeland—the “fiscally responsible” finance minister—who just resigned in the middle of this chaos. What are the odds? She’s out, claiming “irreconcilable differences” with Trudeau’s economic policies. Translation: she knew the books are in tatters, and she didn’t want her name on them when the inevitable reckoning comes.

Now ask yourself: if everything was fine, if Canada’s economy was strong and the government was keeping its promises, wouldn’t Trudeau and his pals want to shout this from the rooftops? Wouldn’t they want the opposition to read every page of those Public Accounts? Instead, they slid the report across the table on the last possible day—while the media was distracted, MPs were packing up, and Freeland was running for the hills.

This is the oldest trick in the book. When governments screw up, they don’t admit it. They bury the evidence, release it late, or throw out a flashy distraction. Trudeau just did all three in one week: the Fall Economic Statement, full of nice words but exposing Trudeau’s reckless spending; Chrystia Freeland’s resignation, a clear sign even she wanted no part of it; and Anita Anand quietly releasing the Public Accounts on the last day of the sitting session, hoping no one would notice as Trudeau’s crumbling leadership sucks up all the oxygen in the news cycle.

What’s in those Public Accounts that Trudeau doesn’t want you to see? Deficits far larger than what he promised? Ballooning spending on programs that are failing Canadians? Spiraling interest costs on our record-breaking debt? Likely all of the above.

Here’s the bottom line: Trudeau’s government has lost control of the country’s finances. They’re driving Canada into economic oblivion, and when the consequences hit, it won’t be politicians who pay the price. It’ll be hardworking Canadians—your taxes, your savings, your livelihoods.

And what does Trudeau do? He hides the truth, covers it up, and hopes you’re too distracted to care. This is what contempt for democracy looks like, and it’s a disgrace. Canadians deserve better.

That’s the real story here—Trudeau’s government has a deficit of trust, a deficit of competence, and now, a fiscal deficit so big it makes Freeland want to quit. You couldn’t make it up if you tried.

Stay tuned, folks, because this isn’t over. When the numbers come out, they’ll tell a story Trudeau can’t hide forever—and that story won’t be pretty.

What is the Public Accounts of Canada?

The Public Accounts of Canada is the official, audited financial report of the Government of Canada, providing a final and comprehensive overview of the federal government’s finances for the fiscal year, which runs from April 1 to March 31.

  • This document is produced annually by the Receiver General for Canada and is audited by the Auditor General of Canada to ensure its accuracy, reliability, and adherence to public sector accounting standards.
  • It includes detailed information about revenues, expenditures, deficits or surpluses, debt, and all financial activities of government departments, agencies, and Crown corporations.

The Public Accounts is a backward-looking document: it reports the final, audited numbers of what has already happened financially over the previous fiscal year.


How is it Different from the Fall Economic Statement?

The Fall Economic Statement is a forward-looking financial update presented by the government midway through the fiscal year, typically in November or December. It outlines the government’s current economic outlook, updates revenue and spending projections, and provides an estimate of deficits or surpluses for the upcoming years.

Key Differences Between the Public Accounts and the Fall Economic Statement

The Public Accounts of Canada and the Fall Economic Statement serve distinct purposes in the government’s financial reporting, primarily differing in their focus, timing, and level of scrutiny.

  • Timeframe:
    The Public Accounts are backward-looking, presenting the final, audited financial results for the previous fiscal year (April 1 to March 31). In contrast, the Fall Economic Statement is forward-looking, providing forecasts and plans for the current and upcoming fiscal years.
  • Purpose:
    The Public Accounts offer a definitive and detailed overview of the government’s financial performance, focusing on accountability and transparency. It includes actual revenues, expenditures, deficits, and debt levels. Meanwhile, the Fall Economic Statement serves as a mid-year economic and fiscal update, often outlining new spending initiatives, policies, and projections for future budgets.
  • Audit Status:
    A key distinction is that the Public Accounts are audited by the Auditor General of Canada. This means the numbers are verified and considered reliable. In contrast, the Fall Economic Statement consists of projections prepared by the Department of Finance and is not independently audited.
  • Content:
    The Public Accounts present actual, finalized financial data, including where taxpayer money was spent, how much debt was accumulated, and whether the deficit or surplus matched previous promises. The Fall Economic Statement, however, focuses on estimates—projecting government spending, deficits, and economic growth into the future.
  • Timing:
    Traditionally, the Public Accounts are tabled in the fall, typically between late September and October. This timing ensures that Parliament and the public have an opportunity to analyze the government’s financial performance before the year ends. The Fall Economic Statement, on the other hand, is released later in the fall, usually in November or December, as a political and economic update.

The Bottom Line

The Public Accounts of Canada is about facts and accountability, providing hard, audited numbers on what the government actually did with its finances. The Fall Economic Statement is about forecasts and priorities, giving Canadians a sense of where the government intends to go financially and politically. While both are important, only the Public Accounts holds the government accountable for its actual financial record.


Why it Matters

  • The Public Accounts hold the government accountable for its actual spending and deficits. Because they are audited, these numbers are considered the final word on the government’s fiscal performance.
  • The Fall Economic Statement, however, is a political document. It forecasts future spending, reflects policy priorities, and often contains new announcements or programs. While it gives an idea of where the government thinks finances are headed, it’s not final or independently audited.

Final Thoughts

The Public Accounts of Canada is a finalized, audited report that shows where the government’s money actually went—the truth, the real numbers, no spin, no glossy brochures. It’s the hard, cold record of how this government spent your hard-earned tax dollars. The Fall Economic Statement, by contrast, is just a wish list—a forward-looking document full of lofty promises, political spin, and projections that rarely match reality. One is about accountability. The other is about politics and promises.

Both matter, but only one tells Canadians the hard truth about the state of our country’s finances. And let’s be clear: this Public Accounts report isn’t going away. Come the next session, the Public Accounts Committee will be digging through every page of this government’s fiscal mismanagement. They’ll expose what Trudeau, Freeland, and now LeBlanc have done to this country’s finances—runaway deficits, bloated spending, mountains of debt our kids will have to pay off.

And where is the NDP in all this? They’ll criticize just enough to keep up appearances, but let’s not pretend they’re not part of the problem. They’ve traded your children’s future for a seat at Trudeau’s crumbling table. For what? A dental plan? A plan that sounds great on paper, but let’s face it: what good is getting your teeth cleaned when you can’t afford to put food on the table? What good is a government that pretends to care about affordability while driving this country further into debt?

Canadians deserve better than this. Our families, our children, and our seniors deserve better. This country was built on the promise of hard work, sacrifice, and the dream of a better life for the next generation. But that dream is being stolen—piece by piece—by a government with no respect for fiscal responsibility, no sense of accountability, and no real plan for the future. Instead, they’re mortgaging your kids’ future, spending money we don’t have on programs we can’t afford, all to cling to power a little longer.

This is about more than budgets and deficits. This is about Canada—about the values that built this country. We are a nation of workers, builders, and innovators. We are a people who believe in living within our means, taking responsibility for ourselves and our families, and handing something better to the next generation. That’s what makes Canada strong. And that’s what this government is destroying—recklessly, selfishly, and without shame.

Canadians are tired of the misplaced priorities. Tired of being told there’s no money for veterans, farmers, or small businesses while this government burns through billions on their pet projects and political handouts. Tired of watching their taxes go up, their cost of living skyrocket, and their dreams slip further and further out of reach.

It’s time to stop this madness. Canadians deserve a government that respects their sacrifices, lives within its means, and understands that every dollar it spends belongs to you—not them. This country is not Justin Trudeau’s personal playground. It’s your country. It’s our country. And it’s time to take it back.

We need an election. Canadians need to send a message to this government that enough is enough. We will not stand by while they gamble away our future. We will not let them bury the truth in backroom releases and holiday distractions. This is our Canada, and it’s time to fight for it. For our families, for our future, and for the country we love.

Support independent journalism by subscribing to The Opposition with Dan Knight .

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Continue Reading

Trending

X