Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

National

Paul Wells: Perhaps Freeland isn’t the victim here. Perhaps it’s Freeland who set Trudeau up

Published

11 minute read

Made, perhaps, of sterner stuff?

Paul Wells

The minister of everything

Did Trudeau just blink?

And now we interrupt my own previously-quiet Sunday night for some rampant speculation. There is a lot going on. I am left to generate hypotheses that might explain some of it.

On Sunday night we watched the last two episodes of The Madness on Netflix (stylish but not entirely persuasive), then it came time to check the headlines, as one does in Ottawa after Netflix.

Holy frijoles: Sean Fraser is said to be leaving the federal cabinet and, when the time comes, federal politics altogether. This is surprising but plausible: the 338Canada projection (which, always remember, is not based on local polling, it’s just an extrapolation, but still) has him 17 points behind the Conservatives in his Central Nova riding, he’s got young children, and one wiseacre wrote 14 months ago that we should expect talent to leave this government:

The temptation of BMO

The temptation of BMO

·
October 16, 2023
Read full story

But that wasn’t even nearly the night’s biggest big-if-true story: John Ivison is reporting from his tropical outpost that Chrystia Freeland’s getting ready to deliver a fiscal update without the profligate, unworkable free-cheque plan. That’s the $250 “working Canadians rebate” described in this backgrounder, which I should now maybe screenshoot because who knows whether it’ll be there in the morning.

Instead I screenshot Chris Selley on X, who is reliably entertaining:

But here’s where the speculation begins. I’m not sure “they” tried and failed. I think there’s another hypothesis that fits the available data.


The double-reverse Morneau?

It’s been less than a week since the Globe published an article on “tensions” between the PMO and Freeland’s office over “GST holiday, $250 cheques.” The piece, by Globe Ottawa bureau chief Bob Fife and reporter Marieke Walsh, quoted many unnamed sources to the effect that “tensions have risen between Ms. Freeland’s office and the PMO over spending.”

You might say all of this appears to be similar to what happened with Ms. Freeland’s predecessor, Bill Morneau, before he departed the government in 2020. If so, you must be one senior Liberal, because Fife and Walsh quote “one senior Liberal” who says the current situation “appears to be similar to what happened with Ms. Freeland’s predecessor, Bill Morneau, before he departed the government in 2020.”

And indeed, the story was strongly reminiscent of the extraordinary moment, which I can still hardly believe, when a bored Prime Minister had his lackeys organize a leak campaign against his own finance minister during a global fiscal calamity in 2020. Then as now, reporters were breathlessly informed that Trudeau had, at some point, even managed to get The Great Mark Carney on the phone, as if that could justify anything.

(Indeed, one of the underappreciated aspects of Trudeau’s 2020 ejection of Morneau was the way Carney wandered through the story, entirely oblivious, before simply vanishing.)

So Tuesday’s Fife/Walsh story triggered much outrage in Ottawa circles. How dare the PMO set up another finance minister? And a woman at that, even as Trudeau himself was parading as a champion of feminism?

But if Ivison is correct that the cheques will be gone from Monday’s fall update, that leaves open a very different possibility.

Perhaps Freeland isn’t the victim here. Perhaps it’s Freeland who set Trudeau up.

Subscribe to Paul Wells at $5 a month or $50 a year, and lock in that rate before I hike it in the New Year.

Indeed, the quotes nearest the top of Fife and Walsh’s story suggest that at least some of their sources are not mere PMO conduits, but rather people who have spent some time energetically rolling their eyes at the PM’s behaviour. “The sources say the idea for a sales-tax break… was driven by the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), as was the pledge to send $250 benefit cheques,” the reporters write. “The Finance Department viewed the $6.28-billion plan as fiscally unwise, with one source saying Finance officials described the GST holiday as making little economic sense.

The Globe story does point out that the NDP supports the (also profligate, also unworkable) point-of-sale GST “holiday) but not the $250 cheques, because the NDP, like the Bloc, wants the cheques to go to more people, including seniors. My revered colleague Occam of Razor would say that’s the only explanation anyone needs for the apparent climbdown on the cheques: it’s only prudent to take everything out of a fiscal plan that might lead to a minority government’s defeat in the Commons.

But the tone of Tuesday’s Globe story, the moment of its appearance, and the apparent result — the wreck of the cheque plan — suggest this may be a case of something everyone in Ottawa has seen many times during the Trudeau government: a tactical decision to take a private dispute public, because if there’s one thing that can get this PMO’s attention, it’s an embarrassing headline.

Again, I need to emphasize: I don’t know Fife and Walsh’s sources or their motives. I have found that speculation about a reporter’s anonymous sources is usually just bad guesswork. And the repeated mentions in the Globe story of its “ten sources” suggests the reporters pieced together their account from several sources, that they weren’t passive conduits for anyone.

But as I’ve written a few times in the past, many organizations that deal with this government learned along ago that it is pointless to hope that their concerns will be addressed through routine channels. Instead, you have a much better chance of getting satisfaction by escalating your file out of a dusty cabinet and onto the front page of the Globe and Mail. As I wrote here more than two years ago:

“Everybody knows that if the government of Canada is doing something they don’t like, they should tell a reporter about it, because the government of Canada will instantly reverse course to make the bad headline stop hurting. Issues management squads have the only autonomy in this government. They react to headlines as Dracula did to garlic. This realization is now baked into the procedural book of everyone who deals with this government in any capacity — and, plainly, of increasing numbers of people who work inside it.”

Imagine reading Tuesday’s Globe story if you work in the PMO and you’re not actively scheming to get Chrystia Freeland out of the government. The story would be full of surprises for you: (1) the cheque plan is despised by the Finance Department; (2) somebody is mighty eager to make sure everyone knows it was your idea; (3) somebody is talking about the government losing its finance minister. If you don’t have Carney lined up to take the job, the prospect of a looming vacancy starts to look more like a threat than an opportunity.

Buy someone a gift subscription

I first met Chrystia Freeland in 1999, when she began a brief stint as deputy editor of the Globe and Mail. (Fife was then working for the Globe’s crosstown rivals at the National Post, as was I.) To say the least, I’ve seen little in recent years that suggests Freeland is a superb communications tactician. But brushing a stunned or recalcitrant PMO back by escalating a story onto the Globe’s front page doesn’t take a deft touch, either. These days, it seems just about everyone can do it.

Anyway, that’s my speculation. Here’s what we know, or will if these stories are confirmed on Monday: Trudeau has formidable resources available to keep himself in his cabinet, but he has no particular such influence over his ministers. All of whom are now being reminded of their autonomy by the example of Fraser. And a multi-billion-dollar scheme that seemed, only days ago, to be the point of the fall update now seems unlikely to be implemented.

 

Invite your friends and earn rewards

If you enjoy Paul Wells, share it with your friends and earn rewards when they subscribe.

Invite Friends

Business

Public Accounts of Canada Report Buried on Last Day of Sitting Session

Published on

The Opposition with Dan Knight

Trudeau Government Hides Exploding Deficit and Fiscal Mismanagement Amid Chaos and Distraction

Well, folks, here we go again. The Trudeau government—masterclass in obfuscation, fiscal recklessness, and zero accountability—just pulled off another slick political maneuver. This time, it’s the Public Accounts of Canada 2024, a document that should be front-page news, but this news bite is buried so deep in the news cycle you’d think it was radioactive.

Here’s what’s happening: the government dropped its final, audited financial statements for the fiscal year on the last day of the parliamentary sitting session, when no one’s watching. Why? Because it’s bad. Really bad. Let’s connect the dots.

First, we had the Fall Economic Statement released just yesterday, a forward-looking document that’s basically a glossy brochure for Trudeau’s latest spending spree. That’s what the media focused on. But the Public Accounts—that’s where you see the hard, cold truth: the deficit is exploding, hitting $61.9 billion, and Canada’s finances are way past the so-called “guardrails” Trudeau and Freeland promised us.

Let’s not forget, those guardrails were supposed to limit deficits to $40 billion, but Trudeau blew right past that, overspending by more than $20 billion. And now they’re scrambling to hide the numbers because they know Canadians will not tolerate this reckless fiscal mismanagement any longer.

Ah, yes, Chrystia Freeland—the “fiscally responsible” finance minister—who just resigned in the middle of this chaos. What are the odds? She’s out, claiming “irreconcilable differences” with Trudeau’s economic policies. Translation: she knew the books are in tatters, and she didn’t want her name on them when the inevitable reckoning comes.

Now ask yourself: if everything was fine, if Canada’s economy was strong and the government was keeping its promises, wouldn’t Trudeau and his pals want to shout this from the rooftops? Wouldn’t they want the opposition to read every page of those Public Accounts? Instead, they slid the report across the table on the last possible day—while the media was distracted, MPs were packing up, and Freeland was running for the hills.

This is the oldest trick in the book. When governments screw up, they don’t admit it. They bury the evidence, release it late, or throw out a flashy distraction. Trudeau just did all three in one week: the Fall Economic Statement, full of nice words but exposing Trudeau’s reckless spending; Chrystia Freeland’s resignation, a clear sign even she wanted no part of it; and Anita Anand quietly releasing the Public Accounts on the last day of the sitting session, hoping no one would notice as Trudeau’s crumbling leadership sucks up all the oxygen in the news cycle.

What’s in those Public Accounts that Trudeau doesn’t want you to see? Deficits far larger than what he promised? Ballooning spending on programs that are failing Canadians? Spiraling interest costs on our record-breaking debt? Likely all of the above.

Here’s the bottom line: Trudeau’s government has lost control of the country’s finances. They’re driving Canada into economic oblivion, and when the consequences hit, it won’t be politicians who pay the price. It’ll be hardworking Canadians—your taxes, your savings, your livelihoods.

And what does Trudeau do? He hides the truth, covers it up, and hopes you’re too distracted to care. This is what contempt for democracy looks like, and it’s a disgrace. Canadians deserve better.

That’s the real story here—Trudeau’s government has a deficit of trust, a deficit of competence, and now, a fiscal deficit so big it makes Freeland want to quit. You couldn’t make it up if you tried.

Stay tuned, folks, because this isn’t over. When the numbers come out, they’ll tell a story Trudeau can’t hide forever—and that story won’t be pretty.

What is the Public Accounts of Canada?

The Public Accounts of Canada is the official, audited financial report of the Government of Canada, providing a final and comprehensive overview of the federal government’s finances for the fiscal year, which runs from April 1 to March 31.

  • This document is produced annually by the Receiver General for Canada and is audited by the Auditor General of Canada to ensure its accuracy, reliability, and adherence to public sector accounting standards.
  • It includes detailed information about revenues, expenditures, deficits or surpluses, debt, and all financial activities of government departments, agencies, and Crown corporations.

The Public Accounts is a backward-looking document: it reports the final, audited numbers of what has already happened financially over the previous fiscal year.


How is it Different from the Fall Economic Statement?

The Fall Economic Statement is a forward-looking financial update presented by the government midway through the fiscal year, typically in November or December. It outlines the government’s current economic outlook, updates revenue and spending projections, and provides an estimate of deficits or surpluses for the upcoming years.

Key Differences Between the Public Accounts and the Fall Economic Statement

The Public Accounts of Canada and the Fall Economic Statement serve distinct purposes in the government’s financial reporting, primarily differing in their focus, timing, and level of scrutiny.

  • Timeframe:
    The Public Accounts are backward-looking, presenting the final, audited financial results for the previous fiscal year (April 1 to March 31). In contrast, the Fall Economic Statement is forward-looking, providing forecasts and plans for the current and upcoming fiscal years.
  • Purpose:
    The Public Accounts offer a definitive and detailed overview of the government’s financial performance, focusing on accountability and transparency. It includes actual revenues, expenditures, deficits, and debt levels. Meanwhile, the Fall Economic Statement serves as a mid-year economic and fiscal update, often outlining new spending initiatives, policies, and projections for future budgets.
  • Audit Status:
    A key distinction is that the Public Accounts are audited by the Auditor General of Canada. This means the numbers are verified and considered reliable. In contrast, the Fall Economic Statement consists of projections prepared by the Department of Finance and is not independently audited.
  • Content:
    The Public Accounts present actual, finalized financial data, including where taxpayer money was spent, how much debt was accumulated, and whether the deficit or surplus matched previous promises. The Fall Economic Statement, however, focuses on estimates—projecting government spending, deficits, and economic growth into the future.
  • Timing:
    Traditionally, the Public Accounts are tabled in the fall, typically between late September and October. This timing ensures that Parliament and the public have an opportunity to analyze the government’s financial performance before the year ends. The Fall Economic Statement, on the other hand, is released later in the fall, usually in November or December, as a political and economic update.

The Bottom Line

The Public Accounts of Canada is about facts and accountability, providing hard, audited numbers on what the government actually did with its finances. The Fall Economic Statement is about forecasts and priorities, giving Canadians a sense of where the government intends to go financially and politically. While both are important, only the Public Accounts holds the government accountable for its actual financial record.


Why it Matters

  • The Public Accounts hold the government accountable for its actual spending and deficits. Because they are audited, these numbers are considered the final word on the government’s fiscal performance.
  • The Fall Economic Statement, however, is a political document. It forecasts future spending, reflects policy priorities, and often contains new announcements or programs. While it gives an idea of where the government thinks finances are headed, it’s not final or independently audited.

Final Thoughts

The Public Accounts of Canada is a finalized, audited report that shows where the government’s money actually went—the truth, the real numbers, no spin, no glossy brochures. It’s the hard, cold record of how this government spent your hard-earned tax dollars. The Fall Economic Statement, by contrast, is just a wish list—a forward-looking document full of lofty promises, political spin, and projections that rarely match reality. One is about accountability. The other is about politics and promises.

Both matter, but only one tells Canadians the hard truth about the state of our country’s finances. And let’s be clear: this Public Accounts report isn’t going away. Come the next session, the Public Accounts Committee will be digging through every page of this government’s fiscal mismanagement. They’ll expose what Trudeau, Freeland, and now LeBlanc have done to this country’s finances—runaway deficits, bloated spending, mountains of debt our kids will have to pay off.

And where is the NDP in all this? They’ll criticize just enough to keep up appearances, but let’s not pretend they’re not part of the problem. They’ve traded your children’s future for a seat at Trudeau’s crumbling table. For what? A dental plan? A plan that sounds great on paper, but let’s face it: what good is getting your teeth cleaned when you can’t afford to put food on the table? What good is a government that pretends to care about affordability while driving this country further into debt?

Canadians deserve better than this. Our families, our children, and our seniors deserve better. This country was built on the promise of hard work, sacrifice, and the dream of a better life for the next generation. But that dream is being stolen—piece by piece—by a government with no respect for fiscal responsibility, no sense of accountability, and no real plan for the future. Instead, they’re mortgaging your kids’ future, spending money we don’t have on programs we can’t afford, all to cling to power a little longer.

This is about more than budgets and deficits. This is about Canada—about the values that built this country. We are a nation of workers, builders, and innovators. We are a people who believe in living within our means, taking responsibility for ourselves and our families, and handing something better to the next generation. That’s what makes Canada strong. And that’s what this government is destroying—recklessly, selfishly, and without shame.

Canadians are tired of the misplaced priorities. Tired of being told there’s no money for veterans, farmers, or small businesses while this government burns through billions on their pet projects and political handouts. Tired of watching their taxes go up, their cost of living skyrocket, and their dreams slip further and further out of reach.

It’s time to stop this madness. Canadians deserve a government that respects their sacrifices, lives within its means, and understands that every dollar it spends belongs to you—not them. This country is not Justin Trudeau’s personal playground. It’s your country. It’s our country. And it’s time to take it back.

We need an election. Canadians need to send a message to this government that enough is enough. We will not stand by while they gamble away our future. We will not let them bury the truth in backroom releases and holiday distractions. This is our Canada, and it’s time to fight for it. For our families, for our future, and for the country we love.

Support independent journalism by subscribing to The Opposition with Dan Knight .

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Continue Reading

National

As Trudeau’s government teeters, Pierre Poilievre pushes for immediate election call

Published on

As the smoke clears from Monday’s blockbuster cabinet resignations of Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland and Housing Minister Sean Fraser, Opposition leader Pierre Poilievre is challenging NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh to find the courage to break ties with the Liberals immediately.

Continue Reading

Trending

X