Connect with us

Business

Canada’s debt ranking falls from best in G7 to 7th worst of 32 advanced countries when total debt is measured

Published

5 minute read

From the Fraser Institute

By Jake Fuss, and Milagros Palacios and Callum MacLeod

Canada’s relative debt position is much worse than the federal government suggests when a larger group of advanced countries are included and total debt—not just net debt—is measured, finds a new study released today by the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan, Canadian public policy think-tank.

“The federal government is very quick to point out that the country’s net debt relative to the size of the economy (GDP) is lowest in the G7, but Canada’s true debt position is much worse than Ottawa lets on,” said Jake Fuss, director of fiscal studies at the Fraser Institute and co-author of Caution Required When Comparing Canada’s Debt to that of Other Countries, 2024.

The study finds that Canada’s relative debt position, instead of being the best of the G7, falls significantly when total debt is measured instead of measuring debt after adjusting for financial assets. Net debt, which is the measure used by the federal government, offsets a part of the country’s total debt by including financial assets.

Specifically, Canada ranks 26th of 32 developed countries for its total (gross) debt as a share of the economy. In other words, Canada’s total debt relative to GDP is the 5th highest in the G7 and 7th highest amongst the industrialized world (32 advanced countries).

The reason Canada’s debt position declines so dramatically when total debt—and not net debt—is measured is because net debt includes the assets of the Canada Pension Plan and the Quebec Pension Plan, which unlike the public pension programs of other developed countries invests in non-government assets such as stocks and bonds.

As of December 2023, the combined assets of the CPP and QPP, some $716.7 billion, represented more than one-quarter of the difference between Canada’s total debt and net debt.

“The government cannot use the assets of the CPP and the QPP to repay its debt, so it is disingenuous to include those assets in Canada’s debt calculations,” Fuss said. “Canada is not the low-debt jurisdiction that Ottawa suggests, and Canadians should be aware of the true state of the country’s indebtedness.”

  • The federal government continues to rationalize its debt-financed spending based on international comparisons showing Canada with the lowest level of debt in the G7.
  • Of the two broad measures of debt, gross debt includes most forms of debt while net debt is a narrower measure that accounts for financial assets held by governments.
  • By using net debt as a share of the economy (GDP), Canada ranks 5th lowest of 32 countries and lowest amongst the G7. By using gross debt as a share of the economy, Canada falls to 26th of 32 countries and 3rd lowest in the G7.
  • Canada experiences the largest change in its indebtedness ranking—falling 21 places—when the measure shifts from net debt to gross debt.
  • One reason for this pronounced change in ranking is that net debt includes the assets of the Canada and Quebec Pension Plans, which have unique approaches to funding public retirement plans: unlike most other industrialized countries, the CPP and QPP invest in non-government assets including equities and corporate bonds.
  • As of December 31, 2023, according to Statistics Canada data, there were net assets in the combined CPP and QPP of $716.7 billion.
  • According to IMF data, the difference between Canada’s gross and net debt was approximately $2.7 trillion at the end of 2023, which means the assets of CPP and QPP explain more than one-quarter of the difference.
Director, Fiscal Studies, Fraser Institute
Director, Addington Centre for Measurement, Fraser Institute
Callum MacLeod

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

CBC’s business model is trapped in a very dark place

Published on

The Audit

 

 David Clinton

I Testified Before a Senate Committee About the CBC

I recently testified before the Senate Committee for Transport and Communications. You can view that session here. Even though the official topic was CBC’s local programming in Ontario, everyone quickly shifted the discussion to CBC’s big-picture problems and how their existential struggles were urgent and immediate. The idea that deep and fundamental changes within the corporation were unavoidable seemed to enjoy complete agreement.

I’ll use this post as background to some of the points I raised during the hearing.

You might recall how my recent post on CBC funding described a corporation shedding audience share like dandruff while spending hundreds of millions of dollars producing drama and comedy programming few Canadians consume. There are so few viewers left that I suspect they’re now identified by first name rather than as a percentage of the population.

Since then I’ve learned a lot more about CBC performance and about the broadcast industry in general.

For instance, it’ll surprise exactly no one to learn that fewer Canadians get their audio from traditional radio broadcasters. But how steep is the decline? According to the CRTC’s Annual Highlights of the Broadcasting Sector 2022-2023, since 2015, “hours spent listening to traditional broadcasting has decreased at a CAGR of 4.8 percent”. CAGR, by the way, stands for compound annual growth rate.

Dropping 4.8 percent each year means audience numbers aren’t just “falling”; they’re not even “falling off the edge of a cliff”; they’re already close enough to the bottom of the cliff to smell the trees. Looking for context? Between English and French-language radio, the CBC spends around $240 million each year.

Those listeners aren’t just disappearing without a trace. the CRTC also tells us that Canadians are increasingly migrating to Digital Media Broadcasting Units (DMBUs) – with numbers growing by more than nine percent annually since 2015.

The CBC’s problem here is that they’re not a serious player in the DMBU world, so they’re simply losing digital listeners. For example, of the top 200 Spotify podcasts ranked by popularity in Canada, only four are from the CBC.

Another interesting data point I ran into related to that billion dollar plus annual parliamentary allocation CBC enjoys. It turns out that that’s not the whole story. You may recall how the government added another $42 million in their most recent budget.

But wait! That’s not all! Between CBC and SRC, the Canada Media Fund (CMF) ponied up another $97 million for fiscal 2023-2024 to cover specific programming production budgets.

Technically, Canada Media Fund grants target individual projects planned by independent production companies. But those projects are usually associated with the “envelope” of one of the big broadcasters – of which CBC is by far the largest. 2023-2024 CMF funding totaled $786 million, and CBC’s take was nearly double that of their nearest competitor (Bell).

But there’s more! Back in 2016, the federal budget included an extra $150 million each year as a “new investment in Canadian arts and culture”. It’s entirely possible that no one turned off the tap and that extra government cheque is still showing up each year in the CBC’s mailbox. There was also a $93 million item for infrastructure and technological upgrades back in the 2017-2018 fiscal year. Who knows whether that one wasn’t also carried over.

So CBC’s share of government funding keeps growing while its share of Canadian media consumers shrinks. How do you suppose that’ll end?

We make content free for you but we require support to create journalism. Please consider a free subscription to our newsletter, or donate an amount of your choice.

Subscribe to The Audit

Continue Reading

Business

PBO report shows cost of bureaucracy up 73 per cent under Trudeau

Published on

From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

By Franco Terrazzano

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is calling on the federal government to rein in the bureaucracy following today’s Parliamentary Budget Officer report showing the bureaucracy costs taxpayers $69.5 billion.

“The cost of the federal bureaucracy increased by 73 per cent since 2016, but it’s a good bet most Canadians aren’t seeing anywhere close to 73 per cent better services from the government,” said Franco Terrazzano, CTF Federal Director. “Taxpayers are getting soaked because the size and cost of the federal bureaucracy is out of control.”

Today’s PBO report estimates the federal bureaucracy cost taxpayers $69.5 billion in 2023-24. In 2016-17, the cost of the bureaucracy was $40.2 billion. That’s an increase of 72.9 per cent.

The most recent data shows the cost continues to rise quickly.

“Spending on personnel in the first five months of 2024-25 is up 8.0 per cent over the same period last year,” according to the PBO.

“I have noticed a marked increase in the number of public servants since 2016 and a proportional increase in spending,” said Parliamentary Budget Officer Yves Giroux. “But we haven’t seen similar improvements when it comes to service.”

The Trudeau government added 108,793 bureaucrats since 2016 – a 42 per cent increase. Canada’s population grew by 14 per cent during the same period. Had the bureaucracy only increased with population growth, there would be 72,491 fewer federal employees today.

The government awarded more than one million pay raises to bureaucrats in the last four years, according to access-to-information records obtained by the CTF. The government also rubberstamped $406 million in bonuses last year.

“The government added tens of thousands of extra bureaucrats, rubberstamped hundreds of millions in bonuses and awarded more than one million pay raises and all taxpayers seem to get out of it is higher taxes and more debt,” Terrazzano said. “For the government to balance the budget and provide tax relief, it will need to cut the size and cost of Ottawa’s bloated bureaucracy.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X