Business
Federal bureaucrats spend $76,000 a month renting art taxpayers have already bought
From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation
By Ryan Thorpe
“Can someone in government explain why taxpayers are being sent a bill so bureaucrats can decorate their offices with artwork that taxpayers have already bought and paid for?”
When bureaucrats hang art in their offices, taxpayers are on the hook – twice.
First, the government uses tax dollars to purchase artwork for its Art Bank. Then bureaucrats rent out that artwork and send the bill to taxpayers.
And that art bill comes to millions of dollars.
“Can someone in government explain why taxpayers are being sent a bill so bureaucrats can decorate their offices with artwork that taxpayers have already bought and paid for?” asked Franco Terrazzano, CTF Federal Director. “This is an outrageous waste of money and, to add insult to injury, the government is double billing taxpayers for artwork we’ll never see.”
The Canadian Taxpayers Federation obtained access-to-information records detailing all art rentals made by federal departments and agencies from the Canada Council for the Arts’ Art Bank between January 2016 and July 2024.
During that time, federal departments and agencies racked up $7,808,827 in art rentals.
That means since Prime Minister Justin Trudeau came to power, federal bureaucrats have been spending an average of $76,000 a month renting artwork for their offices.
“Every month, federal bureaucrats spend more money renting art than what the average Canadian earns in an entire year,” Terrazzano said. “It’s amazing that we need to say this, but maybe these bureaucrats could ease up at the taxpayer-funded Art Bank when record numbers of Canadians are lined up at food banks.”
Last year, the average Canadian worker made less than $70,000, according to data from Statistics Canada. In March 2024, Canada saw a record high two million visits to food banks, according to Food Banks Canada.
Federal departments and agencies made 1,445 rentals from the Art Bank between January 2016 and July 2024, according to the records.
The highest single rental came in April 2020, when a federal department or agency expensed $120,240 in artwork to taxpayers.
The records obtained by the CTF do not specify which federal departments or agencies expensed the art rentals.
The Art Bank contains more than 17,000 works of art from more than 3,000 artists, according to the CCA website.
“The Art Bank has the largest collection of contemporary Canadian art anywhere,” according to the CCA. “It houses paintings, sculptures, drawings, photographs and prints by emerging and established artists.”
The CCA is a federal Crown corporation, which dishes out hundreds of millions in grants to artists and arts organizations every year. In 2023-24, CCA grants totalled more than $300 million.
In 2022-23, the CCA received $423 million in federal funding, which accounts for about 90 per cent of the agency’s revenue.
So taxpayers not only foot the bill for this artwork through parliamentary appropriations to the CCA, but also get hit with a secondary expense when that artwork is later rented by a federal department or agency.
In Budget 2023, the government promised to find savings in the Crown corporations.
“The government will also work with federal Crown corporations to ensure they achieve comparable spending reductions, which would account for an estimated $1.3 billion over four years,” according to Budget 2023.
“Bureaucrats billing taxpayers $76,000 a month in art rentals is outrageous at the best of times, but with the government more than $1 trillion in debt and so many Canadians struggling, it’s utterly inexcusable,” Terrazzano said. “The government said it would find savings at Crown corporations, so defunding the Canada Council for the Arts is a perfect place to start.”
Federal departments and agencies expensing art rentals isn’t the only way taxpayers are hit with big bills so government officials can decorate their offices.
In July 2023, the CTF reported 52 Canadian Senators expensed $514,616 in art rentals to taxpayers since 2016.
Business
Federal funds FROZEN after massive fraud uncovered: Trump cuts off Minnesota child care money
The Trump administration has cut off all federal child care payments to Minnesota, ordering a sweeping audit of the state’s day care system as investigators dig into what officials describe as one of the largest fraud schemes ever tied to social service programs.
“We have frozen all child care payments to the state of Minnesota,” Deputy Health and Human Services Secretary Jim O’Neill wrote Tuesday afternoon, saying the move comes after mounting evidence that taxpayer dollars were being siphoned to sham or non-operational day care centers. The freeze follows a viral investigative video that put a national spotlight on facilities across Minneapolis that were receiving large sums of public money despite appearing closed or barely functioning.
According to Alex Adams, assistant secretary at HHS’s Administration for Children and Families, Minnesota has already received roughly $185 million in federal child care funding this year alone. Those funds, the administration says, will remain locked down until the state can demonstrate that payments are being used lawfully. “Funds will be released only when states prove they are being spent legitimately,” Adams said.
We have frozen all child care payments to the state of Minnesota.
You have probably read the serious allegations that the state of Minnesota has funneled millions of taxpayer dollars to fraudulent daycares across Minnesota over the past decade.
Today we have taken three actions… pic.twitter.com/VYbyf3WGop
— Deputy Secretary Jim O'Neill (@HHS_Jim) December 30, 2025
O’Neill accused Minnesota officials of allowing abuse to fester for years, alleging the state has “funneled millions of taxpayer dollars to fraudulent daycares across Minnesota over the past decade.” To halt further losses, HHS outlined a series of immediate enforcement steps. Going forward, states seeking reimbursement through the Administration for Children and Families will be required to provide receipts or photographic proof documenting how funds are spent.
The department has also formally demanded that Gov. Tim Walz order a “comprehensive audit” of the day care centers flagged by investigators. O’Neill said the review must include attendance records, licensing documents, complaints, investigative files, and inspection reports. He pointed directly to a video published Friday by YouTuber Nick Shirley, who visited multiple Minneapolis-area centers listed as receiving millions in public funds but found locations that appeared closed or inactive.
In addition, HHS has launched a dedicated fraud hotline and email address at childcare.gov to encourage tips from parents, providers, and the public. “We have turned off the money spigot and we are finding the fraud,” O’Neill said, urging anyone with information to come forward.
Federal prosecutors say the scope of the alleged abuse is staggering. Authorities have already confirmed at least $1 billion in fraud tied to Minnesota child care programs, with 92 people charged so far. The U.S. Attorney’s Office has warned the total could ultimately reach as high as $9 billion as investigators continue combing through records.
The funding freeze marks one of the most aggressive crackdowns yet by the Trump administration on state-run social programs accused of lax oversight, sending a clear message that federal dollars will not flow until Minnesota can account for where the money went — and who was cashing in.
Business
The Real Reason Canada’s Health Care System Is Failing
From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
By Conrad Eder
Conrad Eder supports universal health care, but not Canada’s broken version. Despite massive spending, Canadians face brutal wait times. He argues it’s time to allow private options, as other countries do, without abandoning universality.
It’s not about money. It’s about the rules shaping how Canada’s health care system works
Canada’s health care system isn’t failing because it lacks funding or public support. It’s failing because governments have tied it to restrictive rules that block private medical options used in other developed countries to deliver timely care.
Canada spends close to $400 billion a year on health care, placing it among the highest-spending countries in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Yet the system continues to struggle with some of the longest waits for care, the fewest doctors per capita and among the lowest numbers of hospital beds in the OECD. This is despite decades of spending increases, including growth of 4.5 per cent in 2023 and 5.7 per cent in 2024, according to estimates from the Canadian Institute for Health Information.
Canadians are losing confidence that government spending is the solution. In fact, many don’t even think it’s making a difference.
And who could blame them? Median health care wait times reached 30 weeks in 2024, up from 27.7 weeks in 2023, which was up from 27.4 weeks in 2022, according to annual surveys by the Fraser Institute.
Nevertheless, politicians continue to tout our universal health care system as a source of national pride and, according to national surveys, 74 per cent of Canadians agree. Yet only 56 per cent are satisfied with it. This gap reveals that while Canadians value universal health care in principle, they are frustrated with it in practice.
But it isn’t universal health care that’s the problem; it’s Canada’s uniquely restrictive version of it. In most provinces, laws restrict physicians from working simultaneously in public and private systems and prohibit private insurance for medically necessary services covered by medicare, constraints that do not exist in most other universal health care systems.
The United Kingdom, France, Germany and the Netherlands all maintain universal health care systems. Like Canada, they guarantee comprehensive insurance coverage for essential health care services. Yet they achieve better access to care than Canada, with patients seeing doctors sooner and benefiting from shorter surgical wait times.
In Germany, there are both public and private hospitals. In France, universal insurance covers procedures whether patients receive them in public hospitals or private clinics. In the Netherlands, all health insurance is private, with companies competing for customers while coverage remains guaranteed. In the United Kingdom, doctors working in public hospitals are allowed to maintain private practices.
All of these countries preserved their commitment to universal health care while allowing private alternatives to expand choice, absorb demand and deliver better access to care for everyone.
Only 26 per cent of Canadians can get same-day or next-day appointments with their family doctor, compared to 54 per cent of Dutch and 47 per cent of English patients. When specialist care is needed, 61 per cent of Canadians wait more than a month, compared to 25 per cent of Germans. For elective surgery, 90 per cent of French patients undergo procedures within four months, compared to 62 per cent of Canadians.
If other nations can deliver timely access to care while preserving universal coverage, so can Canada. Two changes, inspired by our peers, would preserve universal coverage and improve access for all.
First, allow physicians to provide services to patients in both public and private settings. This flexibility incentivizes doctors to maximize the time they spend providing patient care, expanding service capacity and reducing wait times for all patients. Those in the public system benefit from increased physician availability, as private options absorb demand that would otherwise strain public resources.
Second, permit private insurance for medically necessary services. This would allow Canadians to obtain coverage for private medical services, giving patients an affordable way to access health care options that best suit their needs. Private insurance would enable Canadians to customize their health coverage, empowering patients and supporting a more responsive health care system.
These proposals may seem radical to Canadians. They are not. They are standard practice everywhere else. And across the OECD, they coexist with universal health care. They can do the same in Canada.
Alberta has taken an important first step by allowing some physicians to work simultaneously in public and private settings through its new dual-practice model. More Canadian provinces should follow Alberta’s lead and go one step further by removing legislative barriers that prohibit private health insurance for medically necessary services. Private insurance is the natural complement to dual practice, transforming private health care from an exclusive luxury into a viable option for Canadian families.
Canadians take pride in their health care system. That pride should inspire reform, not prevent it. Canada’s health care crisis is real. It’s a crisis of self-imposed constraints preventing our universal system from functioning at the level Canadians deserve.
Policymakers can, and should, preserve universal health care in this country. But maintaining it will require a willingness to learn from those who have built systems that deliver universality and timely access to care, something Canada’s current system does not.
Conrad Eder is a policy analyst at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.
-
Alberta1 day agoThe Canadian Energy Centre’s biggest stories of 2025
-
Bruce Dowbiggin2 days agoIn Contentious Canada Reality Is Still Six Degrees Of Hockey
-
Business1 day agoResurfaced Video Shows How Somali Scammers Used Day Care Centers To Scam State
-
Business2 days agoDOOR TO DOOR: Feds descend on Minneapolis day cares tied to massive fraud
-
Addictions9 hours agoCoffee, Nicotine, and the Politics of Acceptable Addiction
-
Business2 days agoCanada needs serious tax cuts in 2026
-
Business1 day agoOttawa Is Still Dodging The China Interference Threat
-
Business1 day agoMinneapolis day care filmed empty suddenly fills with kids


