Connect with us

National

Governor General gets $11,200 raise in 2024, third pay bump in three years

Published

4 minute read

News release from the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

Author: Franco Terrazzano

The Governor General’s salary has increased by $60,000, or 20 per cent, since 2019.

Governor General Mary Simon received a $11,200 raise in 2024, her third pay bump since being appointed to the role in 2021, driving her salary for this year up to $362,800.

“Canadians are struggling to afford a jug of milk or a package of ground beef, so the government shouldn’t be rubberstamping another raise for the governor general,” said Franco Terrazzano, CTF Federal Director. “Can the government show Canadians how they’re getting more value, because the governor general’s paycheque just went up a thousand dollars a month.”

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation confirmed Simon’s salary and latest raise with the Privy Council Office.

“For 2024, the Governor General’s salary, which is determined in accordance with the provisions of the Governor General’s Act … is $362,800,” a PCO spokesman told the CTF.

The Governor General’s salary has increased by $60,000, or 20 per cent, since 2019. Meanwhile, the average annual salary among full-time workers is less than $70,000, according to Statistics Canada data.

Table: Annual Governor General salary, per PCO data

Year

GG salary

2024

$362,800

2023

$351,600

2022

$342,100

2021

$328,700

2020

$310,100

2019

$302,800

On top of the $362,800 annual salary, the governor general receives a range of lavish perks, including a taxpayer-funded mansion, a platinum pension, a generous retirement allowance, a clothing budget, paid dry cleaning services and travel expenses.

Former governors general are also eligible for a full pension, of about $150,000 a year, regardless of how long they serve in office.

Even though Simon’s predecessor, Julie Payette, served in the role for a little more than three years, she will receive an estimated $4.8 million if she collects her pension till the age of 90.

The CTF estimates that Canada’s five living former governors general will receive more than $18 million if they continue to collect their pensions till the age of 90.

Former governors general can also expense taxpayers up to $206,000 annually for the rest of their lives, continuing up to six months after their deaths.

In May 2023, the National Post reported the governor general can expense up to $130,000 in clothing during their five-year mandates, with a $60,000 cap during the first year.

Simon and Payette combined to expense $88,000 in clothing to taxpayers since 2017, including a velvet dress with silk lining, designer gloves, suits, shoes and scarves, among other items.

Rideau Hall expensed $117,000 in dry-cleaning services since 2018, despite having in-house staff responsible for laundry. That’s an average dry cleaning tab of more than $1,800 per month.

It’s also enough money to dry clean 13,831 blouses, 6,204 dresses or 3,918 duvets, according to the prices at Majestic Cleaners in Ottawa.

In 2022, Simon’s first full year on the job, she spent $2.7 million on travel, according to government records obtained by the CTF.

Simon’s travel has sparked multiple controversies, including her nearly six-figure in-flight catering tab during a weeklong trip to the Middle East, and her $71,000 bill at IceLimo Luxury Travel during a four-day trip to Iceland.

In the aftermath of the scandals, a parliamentary committee recommended a range of reforms to the governor general’s travel budget, including a regular review of the cost-effectiveness of trips, a reduction in the size of delegations and less spending on snacks and drinks.

“The platinum pay and perks for the governor general should have been reined in years ago,” Terrazzano said. “A serious government would mandate the governor general’s office be subject to access-to-information requests, cut all international travel except for meetings with the monarchy, end the expense account for former governors general, reform the pension and scrap the clothing allowance.”

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

Business

A new federal bureaucracy will not deliver the affordable housing Canadians need

Published on

Governments are not real estate developers, and Canada should take note of the failure of New Zealand’s cancelled program, highlights a new MEI publication.

“The prospect of new homes is great, but execution is what matters,” says Renaud Brossard, vice president of Communications at the MEI and contributor to the report. “New Zealand’s government also thought more government intervention was the solution, but after seven years, its project had little to show for it.”

During the federal election, Prime Minister Mark Carney promised to establish a new Crown corporation, Build Canada Homes, to act as a developer of affordable housing. His plan includes $25 billion to finance prefabricated homes and an additional $10 billion in low-cost financing for developers building affordable homes.

This idea is not novel. In 2018, the New Zealand government launched the KiwiBuild program to address a lack of affordable housing. Starting with a budget of $1.7 billion, the project aimed to build 100,000 affordable homes by 2028.

In its first year, KiwiBuild successfully completed 49 units, a far cry from the 1,000-home target for that year. Experts estimated that at its initial rate, it would take the government 436 years to reach the 100,000-home target.

By the end of 2024, just 2,389 homes had been built. The program, which was abandoned in October 2024, has achieved barely 3 per cent of its goal, when including units still under construction.

One obstacle for KiwiBuild was how its target was set. The 100,000-home objective was developed with no rigorous process and no consideration for the availability of construction labour, leading to an overestimation of the program’s capabilities.

“What New Zealand’s government-backed home-building program shows is that building homes simply isn’t the government’s expertise,” said Mr. Brossard. “Once again, the source of the problem isn’t too little government intervention; it’s too much.”

According to the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation, Canada needs an additional 4.8 million homes to restore affordability levels. This would entail building between 430,000 to 480,000 new units annually. Figures on Canada’s housing starts show that we are currently not on track to meet this goal.

The MEI points to high development charges and long permitting delays as key impediments to accelerating the pace of construction.

Between 2020 and 2022 alone, development charges rose by 33 per cent across Canada. In Toronto, these charges now account for more than 25 per cent of the total cost of a home.

Canada also ranks well behind most OECD countries on the time it takes to obtain a construction permit.

“KiwiBuild shows us the limitations of a government-led approach,” said Mr. Brossard. “Instead of creating a whole new bureaucracy, the government should focus on creating a regulatory environment that allows developers to build the housing Canadians need.”

The MEI viewpoint is available here.

* * *

The MEI is an independent public policy think tank with offices in Montreal, Ottawa, and Calgary. Through its publications, media appearances, and advisory services to policymakers, the MEI stimulates public policy debate and reforms based on sound economics and entrepreneurship.

Continue Reading

Business

Ottawa Funded the China Ferry Deal—Then Pretended to Oppose It

Published on

The Opposition with Dan Knight

While Beijing-backed hackers infiltrated Canadian telecoms, federal and B.C. leaders quietly financed a billion-dollar shipbuilding deal with a Chinese state firm—then tried to pass the buck.

So just to recap—because this one’s almost too absurd to believe: BC Ferries cuts a billion-dollar deal with a Chinese state-owned shipyard to build four new ferries. Canada’s Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland—always quick to perform outrage when the cameras are on—writes a stern letter saying how “dismayed” she is. She scolds British Columbia for daring to do business with a hostile foreign regime that’s literally attacking our critical infrastructure in real time.

And then—wait for it—it turns out her own federal government quietly financed the whole thing.

Yes, really.

According to an explosive report from The Globe and Mail, the Canada Infrastructure Bank—a federal Crown corporation—provided $1 billion in low-interest financing for the very same China shipbuilding deal Freeland claimed to oppose. The contract was signed in March 2025. The outrage? That only came later, when the public found out about it in June.

Freeland’s letter to BC’s Transportation Minister was loaded with warnings. She talked about China’s “unjustified tariffs” and “cybersecurity threats.” She demanded assurances that “no federal funding” would support the purchase. But what she didn’t mention—what she conveniently left out—was that Ottawa had already cut the cheque. The financing was already in place. The loan had been approved. Freeland just didn’t say a word.

And when reporters asked for clarification, what did her office say? Nothing. They passed the buck to another minister. The new Infrastructure Minister, Gregor Robertson, now claims the government had “no influence” in the procurement decision. No influence? You loan a billion dollars to a company and have no opinion on where it goes?

Let’s be clear: This wasn’t some harmless miscommunication. If it wasn’t a cover-up, then it was sheer incompetence—the same brand of incompetence that’s driven our shipyards into obsolescence, our economy into dependence, and our country into managed decline. An entire federal cabinet stood by, watched this unfold, signed the cheque—and then pretended they had nothing to do with it.

And British Columbia’s government? Just as bad. Premier David Eby, the man who pretends to champion “BC First,” claims he was “not happy” with the China deal but says it’s “too late” to change course. Too late? This isn’t an asteroid heading for Earth. It’s a contract. And contracts can be rewritten, canceled, renegotiated—if anyone in charge had the political will to stand up and say, “No, we don’t hand billion-dollar infrastructure projects to hostile regimes.”

But instead, we get excuse after excuse. They say BC Ferries is independent. They say there was no capacity in Canada. They say we had no choice. All the while, Canadian shipyards sit idle, unionized workers are frozen out, and the Canadian taxpayer is stuck subsidizing Chinese shipbuilding—and Chinese espionage.

Because while all of this was happening, we now know that a Chinese state-sponsored hacking group called Salt Typhoon was actively breaching Canadian telecommunications networks. That’s not speculation—it’s confirmed in a federal cyber security bulletin dated June 19, 2025.

Chinese actors exploited a vulnerability in Cisco equipment and infiltrated the networks of at least one major Canadian telecom provider. They pulled config files, rerouted traffic through GRE tunnels, and monitored call metadata and SMS communications. Translation: They were spying. On us. On officials. On infrastructure.

So let’s break this down. In February, China hacked Canadian telecoms. In March, Canada quietly finances a massive shipbuilding contract with China. In June, Freeland pretends to be outraged—while hiding the fact that her own government bankrolled it.

And now we’re told, “There’s nothing to see here. No jurisdiction.”

Really?

Freeland has jurisdiction when it comes to issuing carbon taxes, banning handguns, and lecturing citizens about disinformation—but somehow has no jurisdiction when her own Infrastructure Bank gives a billion dollars to build ships in a country that’s attacking our networks and undermining our democracy?

And it gets worse. The interest rate on the loan? Just 1.8%. That’s below market. That’s a subsidy, plain and simple. The financial gap will be recorded as government funding. So even if the Liberals want to play word games about “no direct funding,” that distinction is meaningless. The money came from taxpayers. It went to BC Ferries. It ended up in the hands of the Chinese Communist Party.

So what do we call this? It’s not economic strategy. It’s not climate policy. It’s not forward-looking infrastructure planning.

It’s decline. Managed decline.

It’s a government that tells Canadians we’re too broke, too slow, too divided to build our own ships. So we’ll just outsource it. To the same regime our intelligence services say is spying on us and interfering in our elections.

This was a test. A big one. And the people who told you they were going to put “Canada First”—people like David Eby and Mark Carney—failed that test spectacularly. When it came time to make a real choice—stand with Canadian workers, Canadian industry, and Canadian sovereignty—or cave to foreign pressure and cheap outsourcing, they chose China.

And then they lied about it.

But Canadians aren’t stupid. We know what leadership looks like—and this isn’t it. We don’t need more slogans. We need action. We need courage. We need people in government who actually believe in this country and the people who built it.

Because Canada can build ships. Canada can defend its infrastructure. And Canada should never hand over critical national projects to a regime that’s actively working against our interests.

If this is what “Canada First” looks like under the Liberals and the BC NDP, then we need something better. It’s time to stop managing decline and start building again.

Call the election. Let Canadians choose a path forward—one rooted in strength, in sovereignty, and in pride. Let us choose leaders who put Canada first—for real.


Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight

I’m an independent Canadian journalist exposing corruption, delivering unfiltered truths and untold stories.
Join me on Substack for fearless reporting that goes beyond headlines.
Continue Reading

Trending

X