Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Business

The debt silver bullet? Ending corporate welfare

Published

5 minute read

From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

By Jay Goldberg

Canadians are worried about government debt and axing corporate welfare is the closest thing to a silver bullet politicians have to solve the problem.

Canada’s politicians spent $89 billion handing out taxpayer cash to corporations in 2021, the last year for which figures are available, according to the Fraser Institute.

To get a handle on swelling government debt at both the federal and provincial levels, it’s time to put corporate welfare on the chopping block.

And those who think taxpayers don’t care about government debt are sorely mistaken.

A recent Leger poll shows 81 per cent of Ontarians are concerned about the debt dive the province has taken over the past decade.

No doubt Canadian taxpayers are just as alarmed about the doubling of Canada’s federal debt during Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s nine years running Parliament Hill.

When an individual has a debt problem, the first step is to stop digging. The same is true of governments.

This year, just two of Canada’s 10 provinces are running balanced budgets. And Ottawa is nowhere close.

But look at the corporate welfare numbers and a path to solving Canada’s run-away government debt problem begins to emerge.

Take Ontario.

Ontario’s politicians have racked up $145 billion in new debt over the past decade, including more than $80 billion over the past six years under Premier Doug Ford.

Thanks to years of mismanagement, Ontario taxpayers will spend $13.9 billion on debt interest payments this year. That’s more than the province spends on post-secondary education.

And this year’s deficit is a whopping $9.8 billion.

Ontarians are concerned. And rightly so.

But take a quick gander at the Fraser Institute’s report and a path toward balance becomes clear.

The Ford government spent $22.1 billion in taxpayer handouts to corporations in 2021.

If this year’s handouts are even half of what they were in 2021, the Ford government could wipe out its deficit and produce a surplus by eliminating corporate welfare alone.

It’s unfair to place more and more debt at the feet of our children and grandchildren to give wealthy companies handouts.

It’s also unfair to pick winners and losers. The Ford government is taxing hardworking Ontarians, as well as small businesses, and handing billions over to wealthy corporations that don’t need taxpayer help.

Over the past few years, the Ford government has teamed up with the Trudeau Liberals to give billions to wealthy companies like HondaVolkswagen, the Ford Motor CompanyStellantis, and many others.

Each year, Ottawa and Queen’s Park ran big deficits while handing out taxpayer cash to wealthy companies like candy. In many cases, taxpayers are paying millions of dollars for every job created.

Corporate welfare is fueling government debt. And it’s time for it to stop.

Not only is corporate welfare insanely costly, but it simply doesn’t work.

Between 2011 and 2021, the Ontario government spent $100 billion on corporate welfare. Yet inflation-adjusted economic growth in Ontario was below one per cent, on average, during that decade.

If handing out billions to create jobs and grow the economy worked, surely, we’d have the evidence by now.

Queen’s Park isn’t the only place where the budget could be turned around if corporate welfare were a thing of the past.

The Trudeau government also spent $47 billion on corporate welfare in 2021, which roughly equates to its budget deficit this year.

If 2024 corporate welfare numbers are in line with 2021, the Trudeau government could balance its budget in one fell swoop.

Taxpayers are rightly concerned about growing government debt across the country. Ending handouts to wealthy companies is an obvious solution to the debt binge.

After all, you cannot borrow and subsidize your way to prosperity.

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

ESG

Can’t afford Rent? Groceries for your kids? Trudeau says suck it up and pay the tax!

Published on

Watch Canada’s Prime Minister tell an anti-poverty group, your ability to buy “groceries for my kids” is less important than sacrificing to pay his carbon tax.

In case you still thought there might be even the tiniest chance Justin Trudeau might come around.. well this settles it. He is as they say, ‘beyond the pale’.

Sure we’ve pieced this together over the last number of years, but it’s still SHOCKING to see him say it directly, proclaim it proudly. This week Trudeau received applause from an audience of the intellectually suffering at something called the “Global Citizen Now” panel discussion on the sidelines of the G20 Leaders’ Summit in Rio.

Much appreciation for the first short video below to Opposition Leader Pierre Poilievre who shared his ferocious reaction to Trudeau’s anti-human comments, challenging the current PM to call an immediate election.

Or course there will be no quick election call. To Justin, it’s more important to cling to the undercarriage of a taxpayer funded jet so he can fly the globe stunning audiences unfortunately already stunned by their utter terror of losing the planet.

In their horror at their inability to turn the switch off and let us all freeze/starve to death this winter, they applaud lovingly for their intellectual leader/sock model as he describes how hard it is to convince angry, hungry people they really need to suck it up.

If only he read a history book.. any history book.. apologies, any book at all. Truly even spending some time with the literary version of an Al Gore video rant would at lest keep JT occupied so he couldn’t speak for a few moments. I’m pretty sure every time he opens his mouth, the temperature in Canada rises as millions of frustrated hotheads (hello there) explode, spewing steam high up into the upper atmosphere where water particles do much more damage to our planet than the final exhaling of a non grocery-eating-planet-loving-Canadian.

Watch Pierre Poilievre’s video and assuage the ensuing headache by mapping out your route to a polling booth. If this doesn’t sell a couple of those ‘Axe the Tax’ shirts for the Poilievre team, well.. enjoy your stroll to the foodbank.

Here’s a link to his entire discussion. If you have a strong stomach and 20 minutes of your life to donate to a higher cause… No silly, not the intended cause of the anti-poverty group… But to the intellectual cause of understanding just how twisted the logic has become for those who fly around the world to wine and dine, only to break long enough to tell us they think it’s perfectly fine if we can’t buy groceries for our kids.

By the way, please save a bit of your shock and disappointment for the hapless host of the ‘anti-poverty’ Global Citizen. This was apparently on the sidelines of a G20 Summit.  I would expect this drivel to be called out at a respectable middle school debate. Apparently the ‘anti-poverty’ Global Citizen people aren’t overly concerned with poverty. Do we need to say that not being able to afford groceries is in fact THE definition of poverty?  Or course not. It would be much easier for them to change their name to Former Global Citizens.

You were warned.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau sits down for a conversation with Michael Scheldrick, co-founder of the anti-poverty group Global Citizen, on the sidelines of the G20 Leaders’ Summit Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Continue Reading

Trending

X