Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

National

Generous Justin: Trudeau hands out one million raises in four years

Published

4 minute read

From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

Author: Ryan Thorpe

The Trudeau government rubberstamped more than one million pay raises to federal bureaucrats since 2020, according to access-to-information records obtained by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation.

The federal government gave 319,067 bureaucrats a raise in 2023. The government has consistently declined to disclose how much annual pay raises cost taxpayers.

“Taxpayers deserve to know how much all these raises are costing us,” said Franco Terrazzano, CTF Federal Director. “It’s wrong for the government to hand out a million raises while taxpayers lost their jobs or struggled to afford ground beef and rent.”

The cost of the federal payroll hit $67 billion last year, a record high, representing a 68 per cent increase since 2016.

Meanwhile, the size of the bureaucracy spiked by about 40 per cent since Prime Minister Justin Trudeau took office, with more than 98,000 new employees being added to the federal payroll.

In 2020, the federal government issued 373,134 pay raises to bureaucrats, followed by 266,646 in 2021 and 162,263 in 2022.

All told, the feds rubberstamped 1,121,110 pay raises since the beginning of 2020.

“What extra value have taxpayers received from the million raises Trudeau has given bureaucrats?” Terrazzano said. “You shouldn’t get a raise just because you show up to work twice a week with your shoes tied.”

The raises come on top of lavish bonuses for federal bureaucrats. The government rubberstamped $406 million in bonuses in 2023 alone.

Bureaucrats working in federal departments and agencies took home $210 million in bonuses last year, while bureaucrats working in federal Crown corporations took $195 million in bonuses.

The government dished out more than $1.5 billion in bonuses to employees in federal departments since 2015, despite the fact that “less than 50 per cent of [performance] targets are consistently met within the same year,” according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer.

The average compensation for each full-time federal employee is $125,300 when pay, pension, paid time off, shift premiums and other benefits are considered, according to the PBO.

Meanwhile, the average annual salary among all full-time workers was less than $70,000 in 2023, according to data from Statistics Canada.

Government employees also receive an “8.5 per cent wage premium, on average, over their private-sector counterparts,” according to a report from the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan think tank.

The Public Service Alliance of Canada, the largest union representing federal bureaucrats, is currently fighting against a government order asking employees return to the office three days per week.

Alex Silas, PSAC’s regional executive vice-president for the National Capital Region, said bureaucrats were “infuriated” by the government asking them to show up to their jobs in person three days per week.

“Taxpayers have zero sympathy for overpaid bureaucrats throwing a hissy fit about having to swap out their sweatpants for suits,” Terrazzano said. “Taxpayers are the ones who should be complaining after the feds hired tens of thousands of extra bureaucrats, paid out hundreds of thousands of raises and hundreds of millions in bonuses and still can’t deliver good services.

“Trudeau needs to take some air out of his ballooning bloated bureaucracy.”

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

Energy

There is no better time for the Atlantic to follow the Pacific as the next stage of Canadian energy development

Published on

Premier Tim Houston says it’s time for Nova Scotia to develop its energy industry

In late January, Nova Scotia Premier Tim Houston announced that natural resources would become a major focus of his government, stating that it was time to, “We can’t expect Nova Scotia to prosper when we ban industry after industry after industry.”

It was announced that his government would look into fracking for natural gas, uranium mining, and lifting fossil fuel extraction moratoriums along the coast.

Atlantic Canada is poised to become the next major player in Canada’s energy expansion. With growing global demand for clean energy, a shift toward resource independence, and the looming threat of U.S. tariffs, provinces like Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia are taking bold steps to develop their energy sectors. Recent developments in liquefied natural gas (LNG), offshore oil, green hydrogen, and critical minerals are positioning the region as a crucial pillar of Canada’s energy future.

Donald Trump’s threats to impose tariffs on Canadian energy exports have forced Canada to reassess its reliance on the United States as its primary customer. This shift has already played out in Quebec, where the government is reconsidering its stance on LNG projects. Similarly, Atlantic Canada recognizes the need to diversify its energy exports to Europe and Asia. With vast offshore oil reserves and new LNG projects in the works, the region is set to capitalize on international markets.

Premier Houston has emphasized the importance of local resource development to secure the province’s economy. Though he has walked back on previous comments about revisiting the Georges Bank offshore drilling moratorium, his government is clearly focused on increasing natural resource production. The seafood industry, a vital component of the region’s economy, has expressed concerns about potential energy developments affecting fisheries, but a balance must be struck to ensure both industries thrive.

Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Andrew Furey has made it clear that offshore oil will continue to play a key role in the province’s economy for decades. Addressing industry leaders, Furey positioned Newfoundland as the future “energy capital of North America,” highlighting new offshore projects and hydrogen development. ExxonMobil’s $1.5 billion investment in offshore infrastructure underscores industry confidence in the region’s potential.

Despite dubious global forecasts suggesting oil demand will peak in the coming years, Newfoundland and Labrador believes its high-quality, low-emission crude will remain in demand, particularly in Europe and Asia. Additionally, the province is exploring hydrogen production, backed by federal incentives and private investment. Companies like World Energy GH2 are pushing forward with large-scale green hydrogen projects, despite local opposition from residents concerned about the environmental impact of wind farms.

As British Columbia emerges as an LNG powerhouse, Atlantic Canada is following suit. The region’s proximity to European markets gives it a significant advantage, particularly in light of geopolitical instability affecting global energy supplies. With European nations scrambling to secure reliable energy sources, Atlantic Canada’s LNG potential is more valuable than ever.

Much like British Columbia, where First Nations have played a central role in LNG expansion, Atlantic Canada has an opportunity to develop Indigenous-led energy projects. Federal tax incentives and emissions regulations will shape how LNG projects move forward, ensuring they align with Canada’s climate commitments while driving economic growth.

The combination of Trump’s tariffs, shifting global energy markets, and renewed provincial interest in resource development has created a perfect storm for Atlantic Canada’s energy sector. With strong government backing, significant private investment, and growing international demand, the region is well-positioned to become a major energy player.

As Canada navigates this new era of energy expansion, Atlantic Canada’s strategic location, resource wealth, and commitment to innovation make it a natural frontier for growth. Whether through LNG, offshore oil, hydrogen, or critical minerals, the region’s energy sector is set to thrive in the coming decades.

Continue Reading

Addictions

Does America’s ‘drug czar’ hold lessons for Canada?

Published on

Harry Anslinger (center) discussing cannabis control with Canadian narcotics chief Charles Henry Ludovic Sharman and Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Stephen B. Gibbons in 1938. (Photo credit: United States Library of Congress’ Prints and Photographs division)

By Alexandra Keeler

The US has had a drug czar for decades. Experts share how this position has shaped US drug policy—and what it could mean for Canada

Last week, Canada announced it would appoint a “fentanyl czar” to crack down on organized crime and border security.

The move is part of a suite of security measures designed to address US President Donald Trump’s concerns about fentanyl trafficking and forestall the imposition of 25 per cent tariffs on Canadian goods.

David Hammond, a health sciences professor and research chair at the University of Waterloo, says, “There is no question that Canada would benefit from greater leadership and co-ordination in substance use policy.”

But whether Canada’s fentanyl czar “meets these needs will depend entirely on the scope of their mandate,” he told Canadian Affairs in an email.

Canadian authorities have so far provided few details about the fentanyl czar’s powers and mandate.

A Feb. 4 government news release says the czar will focus on intelligence sharing and collaborating with US counterparts. Canada’s Public Safety Minister, David McGuinty, said in a Feb. 4 CNN interview that the position “will transcend any one part of the government … [It] will pull together a full Canadian national response — between our provinces, our police of local jurisdiction, and work with our American authorities.”

Canada’s approach to the position may take cues from the US, which has long had its own drug czar. Canadian Affairs spoke to several US historians of drug policy to better understand the nature and focus of this role in the US.

Subscribe for free to get BTN’s latest news and analysis – or donate to our investigative journalism fund.

The first drug czar

The term “czar” refers to high-level officials who oversee specific policy areas and have broad authority across agencies.

Today, the US drug czar’s official title is director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy. The director is appointed by the president and responsible for advising the president and coordinating a national drug strategy.

Taleed El-Sabawi, a legal scholar and public health policy expert at Wayne State University in Detroit, Mich., said the Office of National Drug Control Policy has two branches: a law enforcement branch focused on drug supply, and a public health branch focused on demand for drugs.

“Traditionally, the supply side has been the focus and the demand side has taken a side seat,” El-Sabawi said.

David Herzberg, a historian at University at Buffalo in Buffalo, N.Y., made a similar observation.

“US drug policy has historically been dominated by moral crusading — eliminating immoral use of drugs, and policing [or] punishing the immoral people (poor, minority, and foreign/traffickers) responsible for it,” Herzberg told Canadian Affairs in an email.

Harry Anslinger, who was appointed in 1930 as the first commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, is considered the earliest iteration of the US drug czar. The bureau later merged into the Drug Enforcement Administration, the lead federal agency responsible for enforcing US drug laws.

Anslinger prioritized enforcement, and his impact was complex.

“He was part of a movement to characterize addicts as depraved and inferior individuals and he supported punitive responses not just to drug dealing but also to drug use,” said Caroline Acker, professor emerita of history at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Pa.

But Anslinger also cracked down on the pharmaceutical industry. He restricted opioid production, effectively making it a low-profit, tightly controlled industry, and countered pharmaceutical public relations campaigns with his own.

“The Federal Bureau of Narcotics [at the time could] in fact be seen as the most robust national consumer protection agency, with powers to regulate and constrain major corporations that the [Food and Drug Administration] could only dream of,” said Herzberg.

The punitive approach to drugs put in place by Anslinger was the dominant model until the Nixon administration. In 1971, President Richard Nixon created an office dedicated to drug abuse prevention and appointed Jerome Jaffe as drug czar.

Jaffe established a network of methadone treatment facilities across the US. Nixon initially combined public health and law enforcement to combat rising heroin use among Vietnam War soldiers, calling addiction the nation’s top health issue.

However, Nixon later reverted back to an enforcement approach when he used drug policy to target Black communities and anti-war activists.

“We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or Black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and Blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities,” Nixon’s top domestic policy aide, John Ehrlichman, said in a 1994 interview.

Michael Botticelli, Acting Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy March 7, 2014 – Jan. 20, 2017 under President Barack Obama. [Photo Credit: Executive Office of the President of the United States]

Back and forth

More recently, in 2009, President Barack Obama appointed Michael Botticelli as drug czar. Botticelli was the first person in active recovery to hold the role.

The Obama administration recognized addiction as a chronic brain disease, a view already accepted in scientific circles but newly integrated into national drug policy. It reduced drug possession sentences and emphasized prevention and treatment.

Trump, who succeeded Obama in 2016, prioritized law enforcement while rolling back harm reduction. In 2018, his administration called for the death penalty for drug traffickers, and in 2019, sued to block a supervised consumption site in Philadelphia, Pa.

Trump appointed James Carroll as drug czar in 2017. But in 2018 Trump proposed slashing the office’s budget by more than 90 per cent and transferring authority for key drug programs to other agencies. Lawmakers blocked the plan, however, and the Office of National Drug Control Policy remained intact.

In 2022, President Joe Biden appointed Dr. Rahul Gupta, the first medical doctor to serve as drug czar. Herzberg says Gupta also prioritized treatment, by, for example, expanding access to naloxone and addiction medications. But he also cracked down on drug trafficking.

In December 2024, Gupta outlined America’s international efforts to combat fentanyl trafficking, naming China, Mexico, Colombia and India as key players — but not Canada.

Gupta’s last day was Jan. 19. Trump has yet to appoint someone to the role.

Canada’s fentanyl czar

El-Sabawi says she views Canada’s appointment of a drug czar as a signal that the government will be focused on supply side, law enforcement initiatives.

Hammond, the University of Waterloo professor, says he hopes efforts to address Canada’s drug problems focus on both the supply and demand sides of the equation.

“Supply-side measures are an important component of substance use policy, but limited in their effectiveness when they are not accompanied by demand-side policies,” he said.

The Canada Border Services Agency and Health Canada redirected Canadian Affairs’ inquiries about the new fentanyl czar role to Public Safety Canada. Public Safety Canada did not respond to multiple requests for comment before publication.

El-Sabawi suggests the entire drug czar role needs rethinking.

“I think the role needs to be re-envisioned as one that is more of a coordinator [across] the administrative branch on addiction and overdose issues … as opposed to what it is now, which is really a mouthpiece — symbolic,” she said.

“Most drug czars don’t get much done.”


This article was produced through the Breaking Needles Fellowship Program, which provided a grant to Canadian Affairs, a digital media outlet, to fund journalism exploring addiction and crime in Canada. Articles produced through the Fellowship are co-published by Break The Needle and Canadian Affairs.

Subscribe to Break The Needle.

Our content is always free – but if you want to help us commission more high-quality journalism, consider getting a voluntary paid subscription.

Continue Reading

Trending

X