By Jack Mintz
Last week, I summed up 2023 as a year of poor economic performance, with high interest rates, declining real per capita GDP and shortages of housing and health care. Should we expect more of the same from 2024 or something better and brighter?
In the short term, the Trudeau government seems fixated on new redistributive programs such as denticare and pharmacare, rather than addressing the alarming decline in per capita GDP. Quite the contrary, its primary “growth” policy is to pursue a fast-paced energy transition regardless of the immediate GDP loss. Few plans are in place to improve private investment in innovation and investment, not unless you count extraordinarily reckless auto subsidies. And in Ottawa regulations grow like weeds, slowing the pace of development.
Many of the genuine elections could have a big impact on geopolitics and the world economy. Paul Singer, founder of Elliott Investment Management, argues that “The world is now completely dependent on the good sense of leaders to avoid an Armageddon.” Stock markets should be priced to reflect this political risk. Political developments could erode global trade and co-operation and aggravate hostilities in Eastern Europe, East Asia and the Middle East.
For Canada, the critical election takes place in the United States. But whoever wins the presidency in November (or later!), we’re likely to be hit by increasing U.S. protectionism. And if U.S. per capita GDP continues to rise faster than ours, as it did over the last decade, we will either find a new economic path or watch skilled workers and business investment literally go south on us.
With the winds of change blowing, Canada may see federal and provincial governments try a different approach to economic policy, one focused on economic growth rather than just redistribution. Both levels of government need to address our falling per capita GDP. If they do, Canadians will have something to cheer about by the end of 2024.
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.
The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is calling on the federal government to rein in the bureaucracy following today’s Parliamentary Budget Officer report showing the bureaucracy costs taxpayers $69.5 billion.
“The cost of the federal bureaucracy increased by 73 per cent since 2016, but it’s a good bet most Canadians aren’t seeing anywhere close to 73 per cent better services from the government,” said Franco Terrazzano, CTF Federal Director. “Taxpayers are getting soaked because the size and cost of the federal bureaucracy is out of control.”
Today’s PBO report estimates the federal bureaucracy cost taxpayers $69.5 billion in 2023-24. In 2016-17, the cost of the bureaucracy was $40.2 billion. That’s an increase of 72.9 per cent.
The most recent data shows the cost continues to rise quickly.
“Spending on personnel in the first five months of 2024-25 is up 8.0 per cent over the same period last year,” according to the PBO.
“I have noticed a marked increase in the number of public servants since 2016 and a proportional increase in spending,” said Parliamentary Budget Officer Yves Giroux. “But we haven’t seen similar improvements when it comes to service.”
The Trudeau government added 108,793 bureaucrats since 2016 – a 42 per cent increase. Canada’s population grew by 14 per cent during the same period. Had the bureaucracy only increased with population growth, there would be 72,491 fewer federal employees today.
The government awarded more than one million pay raises to bureaucrats in the last four years, according to access-to-information records obtained by the CTF. The government also rubberstamped $406 million in bonuses last year.
“The government added tens of thousands of extra bureaucrats, rubberstamped hundreds of millions in bonuses and awarded more than one million pay raises and all taxpayers seem to get out of it is higher taxes and more debt,” Terrazzano said. “For the government to balance the budget and provide tax relief, it will need to cut the size and cost of Ottawa’s bloated bureaucracy.”
The Most Devastating Report So Far
Carbon tax bureaucracy costs taxpayers $800 million
Can’t afford Rent? Groceries for your kids? Trudeau says suck it up and pay the tax!
Los Angeles Passes ‘Sanctuary City’ Ordinance In Wake Of Trump’s Deportation Plan
Green Energy Needs Minerals, Yet America Blocks New Mines
Dr. McCullough praises RFK Jr., urges him to pull COVID shots from the market
Province considering new Red Deer River reservoir east of Red Deer
Over 40% of people euthanized in Ontario lived in poorest parts of the province: government data
