Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Business

Federal government gets failing grade for fiscal transparency and accountability

Published

4 minute read

From the Fraser Institute

By Jake Fuss and Grady Munro

Last week, Yves Giroux, the Parliamentary Budgetary Officer, raised a rarely-talked-about issue with the federal government—that is, the release of important fiscal documents is being delayed further and further each year. While at first glance this may not seem like a big deal, it’s a sign of declining transparency—an issue all Canadians should care about.

According to Giroux, the Trudeau government’s failure to yet release this year’s federal public accounts—which will report the final numbers for the 2023-24 fiscal year—“goes against fiscal transparency and accountability” that Canadians should expect.

While budgets outline the government’s plan for spending and revenue each year, the public accounts tell us whether or not the government actually stuck to this plan. Typically, the federal government releases the public accounts in October. Yet we’re entering December and last year’s federal finances remain in question.

Provinces also release public accounts, and though they have in the past displayed a similar tardiness, this year every provincial government has released their public accounts well before the federal government.

Why is this important?

Parliamentarians are expected to make important decisions that affect revenues and spending, yet many of them currently do not have the necessary information to make decisions on behalf of their constituents. Moreover, the federal government makes important commitments—referred to as “fiscal anchors”—to help ensure the sustainability of Canada’s finances. The public accounts are a critical tool for both elected officials and the public to hold government accountable to those commitments. Simply put, these fiscal documents are how we determine whether or not the government is actually staying true to its promises.

Some observers claim the Trudeau government may be intentionally delaying the release of this year’s public accounts to avoid this scrutiny. In its 2023 fall update, and again in the 2024 budget, the government promised to hold the 2023-24 deficit to $40.0 billion. Yet a recent report from the PBO suggests the deficit will instead be $46.8 billion. Since the government might be forced to deliver bad news, Giroux suggested it could be delaying the release “to find a more appropriate time where it gathers less attention.” Those are not the actions of a transparent and accountable government.

The issue of delayed fiscal releases is not limited to the public accounts. The Trudeau government has also released federal budgets later than usual. For example, this year it released the 2024 federal budget on April 16. The budget presents the fiscal plan for the upcoming fiscal year that begins April 1, meaning the federal government didn’t release its plan until more than two weeks after the fiscal year had started. In fact, three of the last four budgets from the Trudeau government have been released after the fiscal year started.

Similarly, the Trudeau government has also heretofore failed to release this year’s fall economic statement, which provides a mid-year update on the government’s budget plan. Again, the government has pushed this release later into the year compared to the past. From 2000 to 2014, no fiscal update was released later than November 22. Yet the Trudeau government has delayed the release of this update into December twice so far (in 2019 and 2021).

Canadians should expect their federal government to release important fiscal information in a timely and transparent manner. Unfortunately, transparency and accountability don’t appear high on this government’s list of priorities.

  • Jake Fuss

    Director, Fiscal Studies, Fraser Institute
  • Grady Munro

    Policy Analyst, Fraser Institute

 

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

Canada has given $109 million to Communist China for ‘sustainable development’ since 2015

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

A briefing note showed Canadian aid has gone to ‘key foreign policy priorities in China, including human rights, gender equality, sustainable development, and climate change.’

A federal briefing note disclosed that well over $100 million has been provided to the Communist Chinese government in so-called “foreign aid” to promote “sustainable development” that includes woke ideology such as gender equality.

As reported by Blacklock’s Reporter, a recent briefing note titled Assistance to China from May for the Minister of International Development showed $109 million has gone to “key foreign policy priorities in China, including human rights, gender equality, sustainable development, and climate change” since 2015 and $645 million since 2003.

The briefing note asked directly if funding was “going to the Government of China.”

In reply, the briefing note stated, “Canada has not provided direct bilateral assistance to Chinese state authorities since 2013, though it continues to provide small amounts of funding to international partners and non-state partners on the ground.”

Former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau came to power in 2015 and increased relations with the Communist Chinese regime. This trend under the Liberal Party government has continued with Prime Minister Mark Carney.

During a 2025 federal election campaign debate, Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre called out Carney for his ties to Communist China.

Conservative MP Andrew Scheer has consistently called out any money at all going to China, saying, “I don’t believe Canadian taxpayers should be sending any money to China.”

“We’re talking about a Communist dictatorial government that abuses human rights, quashes freedoms, violates rights of its citizens, and has a very aggressive foreign policy throughout the region,” he noted.

Scheer added that he has been calling on the Carney Liberals to “stand up for themselves, stand up for Canadians, stop being bullied and pushed around on the world stage, especially by China.”

Other countries have received millions of dollars in foreign aid, with $2.1 billion going to Ukraine, $195 million to Ethiopia, $172 million to Haiti, and $151 million to the West Bank and Gaza last year.

Foreign aid to all nations totaled $12.3 billion.

LifeSiteNews recently reported that the Canadian Liberal government gave millions in aid to Chinese universities.

China has been accused of direct election meddling in Canada, as reported by LifeSiteNews.

LifeSiteNews also reported that a new exposé by investigative journalist Sam Cooper has claimed there is compelling evidence that Carney and Trudeau are/were strongly influenced by an “elite network” of foreign actors, including those with ties to China and the World Economic Forum.

Continue Reading

Business

Canada’s combative trade tactics are backfiring

Published on

This article supplied by Troy Media.

Troy MediaBy Sylvain Charlebois

 

Defiant messaging may play well at home, but abroad it fuels mistrust, higher tariffs and a steady erosion of Canada’s agri-food exports

The real threat to Canadian exporters isn’t U.S. President Donald Trump’s tariffs, it’s Ottawa and Queen’s Park’s reckless diplomacy.

The latest tariff hike, whether triggered by Ontario’s anti-tariff ad campaign or not, is only a symptom. The deeper problem is Canada’s escalating loss of credibility at the trade table. Washington’s move to raise duties from 35 per cent to 45 per cent on nonCUSMA imports (goods not covered under the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement, the successor to NAFTA) reflects a diplomatic climate that is quickly souring, with very real consequences for Canadian exporters.

Some analysts argue that a 10-point tariff increase is inconsequential. It is not. The issue isn’t just what is being tariffed; it is the tone of the relationship. Canada is increasingly seen as erratic and reactive, negotiating from emotion rather than strategy. That kind of reputation is dangerous when dealing with the U.S., which remains Canada’s most important trade partner by a wide margin.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford’s stand up to America messaging, complete with a nostalgic Ronald Reagan cameo, may have been rooted in genuine conviction. Many Canadians share his instinct to defend the country’s interests with bold language. But in diplomacy, tone often outweighs intent. What plays well domestically can sound defiant abroad, and the consequences are already being felt in boardrooms and warehouses across the country.

Ford’s public criticisms of companies such as Crown Royal, accused of abandoning Ontario, and Stellantis, which recently announced it will shift production of its Jeep Compass from Brampton to Illinois as part of a US$13 billion U.S. investment, may appeal to voters who like to see politicians get tough. But those theatrics reinforce the impression that Canada is hostile to
international investors. At a time when global capital can move freely, that perception is damaging. Collaboration, not confrontation, is what’s needed most to secure investment in Canada’s economy.

Such rhetoric fuels uncertainty on both sides of the border. The results are clear: higher tariffs, weaker investor confidence and American partners quietly pivoting away from Canadian suppliers.

Many Canadian food exporters are already losing U.S. accounts, not because of trade rules but because of eroding trust. Executives in the agri-food sector are beginning to wonder whether Canada can still be counted on as a reliable partner, and some have already shifted contracts southward.

Ford’s political campaigns may win applause locally, but Washington’s retaliatory measures do not distinguish between provinces. They hit all exporters, including Canada’s food manufacturers that rely heavily on the U.S. market, which purchases more than half of Canada’s agri-food exports. That means farmers, processors and transportation companies across the country are caught in the crossfire.

Those who believe the new 45 per cent rate will have little effect are mistaken. Some Canadian importers now face steeper duties than competitors in Vietnam, Laos or even Myanmar. And while tariffs matter, perception matters more. Right now, the optics for Canada’s agri-food sector are poor, and once confidence is lost, it is difficult to regain.

While many Canadians dismiss Trump as unpredictable, the deeper question is what happened to Canada’s once-cohesive Team Canada approach to trade. The agri-food industry depends on stability and predictability. Alienating our largest customer, representing 34 per cent of the global consumer market and millions of Canadian jobs tied to trade, is not just short-sighted, it’s economically reckless.

There is no trade war. What we are witnessing is an American recalibration of domestic fiscal policy with global consequences. Canada must adapt with prudence, not posturing.

The lesson is simple: reckless rhetoric is costing Canada far more than tariffs. It’s time to change course, especially at Queen’s Park.

Dr. Sylvain Charlebois is a Canadian professor and researcher in food distribution and policy. He is senior director of the Agri-Food Analytics Lab at Dalhousie University and co-host of The Food Professor Podcast. He is frequently cited in the media for his insights on food prices, agricultural trends, and the global food supply chain

Troy Media empowers Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in helping Canadians stay informed and engaged by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections and deepens understanding across the country

Continue Reading

Trending

X