Business
Comparing four federal finance ministers in moments of crisis
From the Fraser Institute
By Grady Munro, Milagros Palacios and Jason Clemens
The sudden resignation of federal finance minister (and deputy prime minister) Chrystia Freeland, hours before the government was scheduled to release its fall economic update has thrown an already badly underperforming government into crisis. In her letter of resignation, Freeland criticized the government, and indirectly the prime minister, for “costly political gimmicks” and irresponsible handling of the country’s finances and economy during a period of great uncertainty.
But while Freeland’s criticism of recent poorly-designed federal policies is valid, her resignation, in some ways, tries to reshape her history into that of a more responsible finance minister. That is, however, ultimately an empirical question. If we contrast the performance of the last four long-serving (more than three years) federal finance ministers—Paul Martin (Liberal), Jim Flaherty (Conservative), Bill Morneau (Liberal) and Freeland (Liberal)—it’s clear that neither Freeland nor her predecessor (Morneau) were successful finance ministers in terms of imposing fiscal discipline or overseeing a strong Canadian economy.
Let’s first consider the most basic measure of economic performance, growth in per-person gross domestic product (GDP), adjusted for inflation. This is a broad measure of living standards that gauges the value of all goods and services produced in the economy adjusted for the population and inflation. The chart below shows the average annual growth in inflation-adjusted per-person GDP over the course of each finance minister’s term. (Adjustments are made to reflect the effects of temporary recessions or unique aspects of each minister’s tenure to make it easier to compare the performances of each finance minister.)
Sources: Statistics Canada Table 17-10-0005-01, Table 36-10-0222-01; 2024 Fall Economic Statement
By far Paul Martin oversaw the strongest growth in per-person GDP, with an average annual increase of 2.4 per cent. Over his entire tenure spanning a decade, living standards rose more than 25 per cent.
The average annual increase in per-person GDP under Flaherty was 0.6 per cent, although that includes the financial recession of 2008-09. If we adjust the data for the recession, average annual growth in per-person GDP was 1.4 per cent, still below Martin but more than double the rate if the effects of the recession are included.
During Bill Morneau’s term, average annual growth in per-person GDP was -0.5 per cent, although this includes the effects of the COVID recession. If we adjust to exclude 2020, Morneau averaged a 0.7 per cent annual increase—half the adjusted average annual growth rate under Flaherty.
Finally, Chrystia Freeland averaged annual growth in per-person GDP of -0.3 per cent during her tenure. And while the first 18 or so months of her time as finance minister, from the summer of 2020 through 2021, were affected by the COVID recession and the subsequent rebound, the average annual rate of per-person GDP growth was -0.2 per cent during her final three years. Consequently, at the time of her resignation from cabinet in 2024, Canadian living standards are projected to be 1.8 per cent lower than they were in 2019.
Let’s now consider some basic fiscal measures.
Martin is by far the strongest performing finance minister across almost every metric. Faced with a looming fiscal crisis brought about by decades of deficits and debt accumulation, he reduced spending both in nominal terms and as a share of the economy. For example, after adjusting for inflation, per-person spending on federal programs dropped by 5.9 per cent during his tenure as finance minister (see chart below). As a result, the federal government balanced the budget and lowered the national debt, ultimately freeing up resources via lower interest costs for personal and business tax relief that made the country more competitive and improved incentives for entrepreneurs, businessowners, investors and workers.
*Note: Freeland’s term began in 2020, but given the influence of COVID, 2019 is utilized as the baseline for the overall change in spending. Sources: Statistics Canada Table 17-10-0005-01, Table 36-10-0130-01; Fiscal Reference Tables 2024; 2024 Fall Economic Statement
Flaherty’s record as finance minister is mixed, in part due to the recession of 2008-09. Per-person program spending (inflation adjusted) increased by 11.6 per cent, and there was a slight (0.6 percentage point) increase in spending as a share of the economy. Debt also increased as a share of the economy, although again, much of the borrowing during Flaherty’s tenure was linked with the 2008-09 recession. Flaherty did implement tax relief, including extending the business income tax cuts started under Martin, which made Canada more competitive in attracting investment and fostering entrepreneurship.
Both Morneau and Freeland recorded much worse financial performances than Flaherty and Martin. Morneau increased per-person spending on programs (inflation adjusted) by 37.1 per cent after removing 2020 COVID-related expenditures. Even if a more generous assessment is used, specifically comparing spending in 2019 (prior to the effects of the pandemic and recession) per-person spending still increased by 18.1 per cent compared to the beginning of his tenure.
In his five years, Morneau oversaw an increase in total federal debt of more than $575 billion, some of which was linked with COVID spending in 2020. However, as multiple analyses have concluded, the Trudeau government spent more and accumulated more debt during COVID than most comparable industrialized countries, with little or nothing to show for it in terms of economic growth or better health performance. Simply put, had Morneau exercised more restraint, Canada would have accumulated less debt and likely performed better economically.
Freeland’s tenure as finance minister is the shortest of the four ministers examined. It’s nonetheless equally as unimpressive as that of her Trudeau government predecessor (Morneau). If we use baseline spending from 2019 to adjust for the spike in spending in 2020 when she was appointed finance minister, per-person spending on programs by the federal government (inflation adjusted) during Freeland’s term increased by 4.1 per cent. Total federal debt is expected to increase from $1.68 trillion when Freeland took over to an estimated $2.2 trillion this year, despite the absence of a recession or any other event that would impair federal finances since the end of COVID in 2021. For some perspective, the $470.8 billion in debt accumulated under Freeland is more than double the $220.3 billion accumulated under Morneau prior to COVID. And there’s an immediate cost to that debt in the form of $53.7 billion in expected federal debt interest costs this year. These are taxpayer resources unavailable for actual services such as health care.
Freeland’s resignation from cabinet sent shock waves throughout the country, perhaps relieving her of responsibility for the Trudeau government’s latest poorly-designed fiscal policies. However, cabinet ministers bear responsibility for the performance of their ministries—meaning Freeland must be held accountable for her previous budgets and the fiscal and economic performance of the government during her tenure. Compared to previous long-serving finances ministers, it’s clear that Chrystia Freeland, and her Trudeau predecessor Bill Morneau, failed to shepherd a strong economy or maintain responsible and prudent finances.
Business
Liberals backtrack on bill banning large cash gifts, allowing police to search Canadians’ mail
From LifeSiteNews
The JCCF warned that Canada will be a “police state by Christmas” if lawmakers pass three new bills introduced by the federal Liberal government of Prime Minister Mark Carney, Bill C-2, C8, and C-9.
The Canadian federal Liberal government now says after a public outcry it will rewrite portions of a bill that not only would permit police and government officials to open and examine Canadians’ personal mail but would also ban cash donations over $10,000.
Earlier this week, Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree acknowledged significant shortfalls in Bill C-2, known as An Act Respecting Certain Measures Relating to the Security of the Border.
Anandasangaree said before Canada’s Senate national security committee, “We realize the consensus on what lawful access is, is not captured right now in C-2.”
He then said he had “talked to some civil rights experts” and that the bill would be amended.
As reported by LifeSiteNews, the bill has been blasted by Canada’s top constitutional experts as a “step towards tyranny” as it would impact Canadians’ charter rights as written.
As written, Bill C-2 lets police, without a warrant, conduct searches of telecom databases solely on “reasonable grounds to believe the computer data will afford evidence with respect to the commission of an offence.”
Bill C-2 was introduced on June 3 by Anandasangaree.
The legislation reads, “Part 11 amends the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act to prohibit certain entities from accepting cash deposits from third parties and certain persons or entities from accepting cash payments, donations or deposits of $10,000 or more.”.
The bill will also permit police and government officials to open and examine Canadians’ personal mail.
Senator Katherine Hay told the national security committee she had been told by her constituents that they were alarmed by the bill, noting how it had “police state” qualities to it.
“The words used to me, very respectfully, were concerns around Canada becoming a ‘police state,’ and I’ll just quote that, and real concerns around privacy and rights,” she said.
She asked Anandasangaree directly, “What would you say to my constituent?”
He replied, “The area where someone may say this is about a police state is a notion I would really ask people to reflect on.”
“Maybe C-2 as written may not capture, I think, the true intent of what’s called lawful access.”
He then said, “My response to you would be, it is not an option not to have a lawful access regime in Canada,” adding, “It is a primary need for law enforcement.”
Despite promising changes to the bill, Anandasangaree said it could be fixed “in a manner that doesn’t appear to trample on individuals’ civil liberties.”
The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) has warned that buried deep within Bill C-2 are “provisions that would make it a criminal offence for businesses, professionals, and charities to accept cash payments of $10,000 or more in a single transaction or in a series of related transactions.”
“Restricting the use of cash is a dangerous step towards tyranny,” JCCF president John Carpay said.
Anandasangaree made no mention whether the cash donations’ part of the bill would be amended or removed.
The JCCF, as reported by LifeSiteNews, warned that Canada will be a “police state by Christmas” if lawmakers pass three new bills introduced by the federal Liberal government of Prime Minister Mark Carney, Bill C-2, C-8, and C-9.
The Liberal government under former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has gone after Canadians’ bank accounts before. In 2022, it froze the bank accounts of those who donated to the Freedom Convoy against COVID mandates.
As for Carney, he has globalist ties and was called the World Economic Forum’s “golden boy” by CPC leader Pierre Poilievre. Carney has also admitted he is an “elitist” and a “globalist.”
Business
$15B and No Guarantees? Stellantis Deal explained by former Conservative Shadow Minister of Innovation, Science and Technology
Rick Perkins reveals what billions in subsidies didn’t buy: job protections, clawbacks, or Canadian hiring guarantees.
For weeks, Canadians were told, confidently, smugly, that the $15 billion handed to Stellantis and Volkswagen was protected by “job clauses” and “performance-based contracts.” That’s the line Industry Minister Mélanie Joly repeated in interviews, press releases, and on social media. It’s a lie.
Yesterday, we sat down with former Member of Parliament Rick Perkins one of the few people who actually read the unredacted contracts in question and he laid it out plainly: those job guarantees don’t exist. Not in the way you were told. Not even close.
“There is no cancellation clause,” Perkins said.
“The ‘job commitments’ are maximums, not minimums. And the contracts don’t require those jobs to be Canadian or even union.”
Let that sink in.
We were sold a vision of a green industrial renaissance, Canadian workers building Canadian batteries in Canadian factories, funded with Canadian taxpayer money. Instead, we’ve bankrolled foreign-owned companies to build batteries with no guarantee they’ll hire local workers, or that the batteries will even be sold in Canadian vehicles.
And here’s the kicker: the federal government is already writing monthly subsidy cheques, covering 100% of the cost per battery, based on production volume, not sales. That’s right. You and I are footing the bill whether those batteries go into a Dodge Ram, a Chinese-market minivan, or sit on a warehouse shelf until 2032.
No wonder the production subsidy contract is only 26 pages long. There wasn’t much in it.
Minister Joly claimed there are “performance conditions” and “job guarantees.” But as Perkins told us, those words are political wallpaper not legal obligations. There’s no enforcement mechanism. There’s no clawback clause. There’s no language saying, “You must hire X Canadians or repay the money.” It’s not there.
And that’s what this government doesn’t want you to understand. It’s not just that they wasted your money, it’s that they did it knowingly.
They gambled billions on the assumption that Joe Biden would remain in power, that EV mandates would keep growing, and that Trump wouldn’t come back. Now that he has, with tariffs, deregulation, and a clear “America First” energy agenda, these companies are doing what any rational business would do: they’re leaving.
And there’s nothing in the contract stopping them.
If you’re wondering why the mainstream media isn’t shouting this from the rooftops ask yourself who cashes the cheques. Ask yourself why no journalist has demanded to see the full, unredacted documents. Ask why Minister Champagne hasn’t been hauled before a committee and asked under oath whether he even read the damn contract before signing.
We did what they wouldn’t. We got the receipts. We sat down with someone who saw the deal with his own eyes. And here’s what he told us: it’s worse than you think.
The Stellantis deal isn’t a strategic investment, it’s a bailout with no brakes. And every month, billions continue to bleed out of the treasury while ministers issue press releases pretending we’re building an economy.
We’re not. We’re building someone else’s. And we’re paying full price.
This isn’t over.
Invite your friends and earn rewards
If you enjoy The Opposition with Dan Knight , share it with your friends and earn rewards when they subscribe.
Click here to help choose Alberta’s new licence plate design
Is the CFIA a Rogue Agency or Just Taking Orders from a Rogue Federal Government?
Democracy Watch Renews Push for Independent Prosecutor in SNC-Lavalin Case
Disabled Canadians increasingly under pressure to opt for euthanasia during routine doctor visits
-
Agriculture14 hours agoFrom Underdog to Top Broodmare
-
Carbon Tax1 day agoBack Door Carbon Tax: Goal Of Climate Lawfare Movement To Drive Up Price Of Energy
-
Alberta2 days agoCalgary’s High Property Taxes Run Counter to the ‘Alberta Advantage’
-
International2 days agoTrump, Putin meeting in Hungary called off
-
Alberta1 day ago
Alberta’s licence plate vote is down to four
-
Bruce Dowbiggin24 hours agoIs The Latest Tiger Woods’ Injury Also A Death Knell For PGA Champions Golf?
-
Digital ID2 days agoThousands protest UK government’s plans to introduce mandatory digital IDs
-
City of Red Deer24 hours agoCindy Jefferies is Mayor. Tristin Brisbois, Cassandra Curtis, Jaelene Tweedle, and Adam Goodwin new Councillors – 2025 Red Deer General Election Results