Trudeau reversed Chrétien’s legacy and rapidly expanded federal bureaucracy

Over the next weeks and months, there will be much discussion about Justin Trudeau’s legacy as prime minister. To provide some context, it’s worth comparing Trudeau’s fiscal record with that of another long-serving Liberal prime minister—Jean Chrétien.

In the early 1990s Canada’s federal finances were in shambles. Thanks to years of large budget deficits (and high interest rates), debt interest payments were consuming one-third of all federal revenue and the country stood at the brink of a full-blown fiscal crisis. Paul Martin, Chrétien’s finance minister, recognized the gravity of the threat and famously promised to eliminate the deficit “come hell or high water.” And that’s exactly what the Chrétien government did, thanks primarily to reductions in federal spending.

How’d they do it?

The government launched a program review, which examined all dimensions of spending in search of savings. The review led to a substantial reduction in federal government employment, which shrunk by nearly 15 per cent. While there were many components to the federal reforms of the 1990s, this reduction in the size of the federal bureaucracy clearly helped Chrétien and Martin eliminate the federal deficit.

Fast-forward to the present day and Justin Trudeau, who does not share his Liberal predecessors’ commitment to balanced budgets. Federal government employment has increased rapidly in recent years, with the Trudeau government adding more bureaucrats (in absolute and percentage terms) than were reduced during the Chrétien/Martin reform era.

Specifically, from 2015/16 to 2022/23, federal government employment (as measured in fulltime equivalents) increased by 26.1 per cent. By comparison, the Canadian population increased by 9.1 per cent over the same period.

Just as the reduction in federal employment contributed to the deficit reduction in the 1990s, the growth in federal employment has helped fuel the Trudeau government’s unending string of budget deficits since 2015/16. Incidentally, if during its nine years in power the Trudeau government had simply held the rate of growth in federal employment to the rate of population growth, federal spending would be $7.5 billion lower than it is today.

According to the Trudeau government’s latest projections, the federal deficit will reach an eye-popping $48.3 billion this fiscal year. And thanks to years of record-high spending under Trudeau, total federal debt will eclipse $2.15 trillion. Consequently, the federal government will spend $53.7 billion this year on debt interest payments—or $1,301 per Canadian.

Canadian history is clear—it’s difficult to predict the policy orientation of any premier or prime minister based on their political stripe. Prime Ministers Chrétien and Trudeau prove this point. Chrétien reduced federal employment with an eye on eliminating the federal deficit. Trudeau reversed this legacy by rapidly growing the federal bureaucracy. This is one important reason for the divergent fiscal outcomes between the two governments.

Under Prime Minister Chrétien, Canadians saw a string of balanced budgets. Under Prime Minister Trudeau, an unending series of deficits and massive debt accumulation, which Canadians must pay for today and for many years to come.

Ben Eisen

Senior Fellow, Fraser Institute

Jake Fuss

Director, Fiscal Studies, Fraser Institute

Related Topics:#BenEisen #FraserInstitute #JakeFuss TrudeauGovernmentBureaucracy TrudeauGovernmentJobs TrudeauSpending

Up Next

McDonald’s the latest corporation to retreat from DEI policies, commits instead to ‘Golden Rule’

Don't Miss

Mystery Terrorist: The Unknown Life and Violent Times of Illegal Border-Crosser Sidi Mohammed Abdallahi

Todayville

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

Andrew Scheer exposes the Mark Carney Canadians should know

Daily Caller / 3 hours ago

NEWT GINGRICH: Europe’s Elites Were Finally Told To Take A Look In The Mirror

armed forces / 3 hours ago

Trump fires chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff, appoints new military leader

Business

Worst kept secret—red tape strangling Canada’s economy

Published on February 22, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Matthew Lau

In the past nine years, business investment in Canada has fallen while increasing more than 30 per cent in the U.S. on a real per-person basis. Workers in Canada now receive barely half as much new capital per worker than in the U.S.

According to a new Statistics Canada report, government regulation has grown over the years and it’s hurting Canada’s economy. The report, which uses a regulatory burden measure devised by KPMG and Transport Canada, shows government regulatory requirements increased 2.1 per cent annually from 2006 to 2021, with the effect of reducing the business sector’s GDP, employment, labour productivity and investment.

Specifically, the growth in regulation over these years cut business-sector investment by an estimated nine per cent and “reduced business start-ups and business dynamism,” cut GDP in the business sector by 1.7 percentage points, cut employment growth by 1.3 percentage points, and labour productivity by 0.4 percentage points.

While the report only covered regulatory growth through 2021, in the past four years an avalanche of new regulations has made the already existing problem of overregulation worse.

The Trudeau government in particular has intensified its regulatory assault on the extraction sector with a greenhouse gas emissions cap, new fuel regulations and new methane emissions regulations. In the last few years, federal diktats and expansions of bureaucratic control have swept the auto industry, child care, supermarkets and many other sectors.

Again, the negative results are evident. Over the past nine years, Canada’s cumulative real growth in per-person GDP (an indicator of incomes and living standards) has been a paltry 1.7 per cent and trending downward, compared to 18.6 per cent and trending upward in the United States. Put differently, if the Canadian economy had tracked with the U.S. economy over the past nine years, average incomes in Canada would be much higher today.

Also in the past nine years, business investment in Canada has fallen while increasing more than 30 per cent in the U.S. on a real per-person basis. Workers in Canada now receive barely half as much new capital per worker than in the U.S., and only about two-thirds as much new capital (on average) as workers in other developed countries.

Consequently, Canada is mired in an economic growth crisis—a fact that even the Trudeau government does not deny. “We have more work to do,” said Anita Anand, then-president of the Treasury Board, last August, “to examine the causes of low productivity levels.” The Statistics Canada report, if nothing else, confirms what economists and the business community already knew—the regulatory burden is much of the problem.

Of course, regulation is not the only factor hurting Canada’s economy. Higher federal carbon taxes, higher payroll taxes and higher top marginal income tax rates are also weakening Canada’s productivity, GDP, business investment and entrepreneurship.

Finally, while the Statistics Canada report shows significant economic costs of regulation, the authors note that their estimate of the effect of regulatory accumulation on GDP is “much smaller” than the effect estimated in an American study published several years ago in the Review of Economic Dynamics. In other words, the negative effects of regulation in Canada may be even higher than StatsCan suggests.

Whether Statistics Canada has underestimated the economic costs of regulation or not, one thing is clear: reducing regulation and reversing the policy course of recent years would help get Canada out of its current economic rut. The country is effectively in a recession even if, as a result of rapid population growth fuelled by record levels of immigration, the GDP statistics do not meet the technical definition of a recession.

With dismal GDP and business investment numbers, a turnaround—both in policy and outcomes—can’t come quickly enough for Canadians.

Matthew Lau

Adjunct Scholar, Fraser Institute

Business

‘Out and out fraud’: DOGE questions $2 billion Biden grant to left-wing ‘green energy’ nonprofit`

Published on February 22, 2025

Todayville

From LifeSiteNews

By Calvin Freiburger

The EPA under the Biden administration awarded $2 billion to a ‘green energy’ group that appears to have been little more than a means to enrich left-wing activists.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Biden administration awarded $2 billion to a “green energy” nonprofit that appears to have been little more than a means to enrich left-wing activists such as former Democratic candidate Stacey Abrams.

Founded in 2023 as a coalition of nonprofits, corporations, unions, municipalities, and other groups, Power Forward Communities (PFC) bills itself as “the first national program to finance home energy efficiency upgrades at scale, saving Americans thousands of dollars on their utility bills every year.” It says it “will help homeowners, developers, and renters swap outdated, inefficient appliances with more efficient and modernized options, saving money for years ahead and ensuring our kids can grow up with cleaner, pollutant-free air.”

The organization’s website boasts more than 300 member organizations across 46 states but does not detail actual activities. It does have job postings for three open positions and a form for people to sign up for more information.

The Washington Free Beacon reported that the Trump administration’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) project, along with new EPA administrator Lee Zeldin, are raising questions about the $2 billion grant PFC received from the Biden EPA’s National Clean Investment Fund (NCIF), ostensibly for the “affordable decarbonization of homes and apartments throughout the country, with a particular focus on low-income and disadvantaged communities.”

PFC’s announcement of the grant is the organization’s only press release to date and is alarming given that the organization had somehow reported only $100 in revenue at the end of 2023.

“I made a commitment to members of Congress and to the American people to be a good steward of tax dollars and I’ve wasted no time in keeping my word,” Zeldin said. “When we learned about the Biden administration’s scheme to quickly park $20 billion outside the agency, we suspected that some organizations were created out of thin air just to take advantage of this.” Zeldin previously announced the Biden EPA had deposited the $20 billion in a Citibank account, apparently to make it harder for the next administration to retrieve and review it.

“As we continue to learn more about where some of this money went, it is even more apparent how far-reaching and widely accepted this waste and abuse has been,” he added. “It’s extremely concerning that an organization that reported just $100 in revenue in 2023 was chosen to receive $2 billion. That’s 20 million times the organization’s reported revenue.”

Daniel Turner, executive director of energy advocacy group Power the Future, told the Beacon that in his opinion “for an organization that has no experience in this, that was literally just established, and had $100 in the bank to receive a $2 billion grant — it doesn’t just fly in the face of common sense, it’s out and out fraud.”

Prominent among PFC’s insiders is Abrams, the former Georgia House minority leader best known for persistent false claims about having the state’s gubernatorial election stolen from her in 2018. Abrams founded two of PFC’s partner organizations (Southern Economic Advancement Project and Fair Count) and serves as lead counsel for a third group (Rewiring America) in the coalition. A longtime advocate of left-wing environmental policies, Abrams is also a member of the national advisory board for advocacy group Climate Power.