Support strong Canadian climate journalism for 2025
“Fix the budget.” It’s one of Pierre Poilievre’s patented “verb-the-noun” formulations for what he’d do as Canada’s next prime minister, and it remains an article of faith among many conservatives in Canada. But like most acts of faith, this is far more about belief than reality. For all their talk about being fiscally prudent, Conservative politicians in Canada have more or less abandoned the idea of balancing the budget.
Take Ontario’s Doug Ford, whose government has added $86 billion to the province’s debt since it was first elected in 2018. Even if you strip out the debt associated with COVID-19, his government has still added $66.5 billion to the provincial debt, which is $22.5 billion more than Kathleen Wynne’s Liberals during their five years in power. Even conservative think tanks are getting nervous: as the Fraser Institute noted earlier this year, Ford’s government has overseen the second- and third-highest years of per-person (inflation-adjusted) spending in Ontario’s history. “At every turn,” Jake Fuss and Grady Munro wrote, “the Ford government has demonstrated that it’s an irresponsible steward of Ontario’s finances.”
As if to really prove that point, the Ford government recently decided to spend $48 million ripping up bike lanes in Toronto in order to deliver what city staff describe as “minor” improvements in traffic. It also dedicated $100 million to a new program that will bring SpaceX’s Starlink satellite internet system to 15,000 households and businesses in rural Ontario at a per-unit cost of more than $6,600. “The province will cover equipment and installation costs, but not monthly fees,” the Globe and Mail noted.
Here’s the odd part: Starlink is already available to everyone in Ontario, and they could buy the equipment themselves for as low as $500 as their local Home Depot, Walmart, or Best Buy (who, of course, also sell it online). As PC Mag’s Brian Westover wrote in a recent how-to about the service, “Wherever you live in North America (and much of the world), Starlink is available and ready to provide speedy service.” The installation, meanwhile, is hardly worth the extra $6,000 — you simply put it somewhere with unobstructed views of the sky and plug it in. In rural Ontario, I doubt that’s much of a challenge.
But when it comes to the Ford government’s fiscal recklessness, nothing can top the way it’s handled the rebuilding of Ontario Place. According to a scathing new report from the province’s Auditor General, the project has been defined by selective communication, a lack of transparency, and a bidding process that was “irregular and subjective.”
It’s also already way more expensive than it needs to be. It will cost the public an estimated $2.24 billion, up considerably from estimates of between $335 million and $424 million in 2019. A big part of that increased cost is its unpopular decision to shutter the Ontario Science Centre and relocate it to the new Ontario Place, pitched to the public as a cost-saving measure. Instead, as the AG’s report shows, renovating the old location would have cost less than closing it down and building a new one.
None of this is behaviour consistent with the image of a fiscal conservative. As AM640 radio host Greg Brady wrote on social media, “I honestly don't think an Ontario Liberal government could spend as much throwaway money as this government has in the past 6 1/2 years if they TRIED.”
Ford isn’t the only Conservative premier governing like a spendthrift. In Alberta, Danielle Smith’s UCP spent $71.2 billion in its most recent budget, or 20 per cent more than predecessor Jason Kenney did before he left office in 2022. And when it comes to the previous NDP government that was routinely criticized by Smith and other Conservatives for failing to balance the budget, the contrast is even more striking. As the CBC’s Jason Markusoff noted earlier this year, “Smith hiked provincial spending in two years by more than the Notley government did in four years, between her final $56.2-billion budget in 2018 and the last one by the PCs.”
Yes, the Alberta government is running a surplus right now, but that’s built on resource revenues that will evaporate if oil prices drop. Oh, and guess what? JP Morgan’s forecast for the next two years has them doing just that.
It’s a similar story in Saskatchewan, where the province’s debt has nearly tripled to $21.1 billion since 2015 under the Saskatchewan Party government. As the Canadian Taxpayers Federation’s Gage Haubrich argued in a recent op-ed, “since becoming premier in 2018, Moe has balanced exactly one provincial budget. And that one balanced budget wasn’t the result of some newfound financial genius or a reduction in spending, but rather a huge increase in resource prices that drove provincial revenues to record-highs.”
If there was a fiscally conservative premier in this country, it was probably New Brunswick’s Blaine Higgs. But voters clearly didn’t care much about that when the provincial chequebook was balanced on the back of their healthcare system and other social spending. His government’s recent electoral defeat was a reminder of something that Justin Trudeau’s team realized back in 2015: deficits simply don’t matter to most people.
Progressive politicians would do well to remember that. Unless or until voters actually start punishing governments for their failure to balance budgets, they shouldn’t trip over themselves to please the tiny constituency of fiscal conservatives in the country. Instead, they focus on delivering the services Canadians want and find fair and just ways to pay for them. If nothing else, their Conservative critics won’t have much of a leg to stand on if they try to criticize them for it.
Comments
The rabid right doesn't need a leg to stand on to run their mouth.
Good one, I'm going to remember it. And here's one for you that I learned recently. It fits neocons wailing about too much government spending.......and lots of other sins as well:
EVERY ACCUSATION: A CONFESSION.
They assume the other guy is doing what they've been getting away with for years.
Good comment about the cons not needing a leg to run their mouth! Indeed, that's understatement.
What the cons ARE winning on isn't government balancing THEIR budget though, it's the vague hope-springs-eternal idea that they can help people balance their own personal budgets, despite the most inflationary costs being beyond government control. So why doesn't every government spokesperson preface ALL their remarks with that most salient information then?
The fact that they seem to willfully ignore ANY opportunity to introduce actual truth at EVERY turn, not to mention claiming that whole untapped area of context, period (even when it's an area that conservatives have completely abdicated) makes me conclude that the Liberals are not only enabling this ongoing fight, but perpetuating it. They're certainly starting to do it more than before, but have arguably been too cocky and complacent for too long, especially at a time when sheer repetition is apparently ALL.
I DID hear Karina Gould yesterday on a personal CBC interview before question period, but who sees that on social media? All that gets picked up is when Marc Miller suggested in question period the day before that PP "grow a pair" in the context of getting security clearance.
What she DID say was that the conservatives, in the context of their relentless, stupid accusations of Trudeau personally having broken this, that and every bloody thing, are in fact actively trying to break parliament with another American wannabe tactic, a "filibuster." It's based on an unprecedented con demand for documents that Liberals are refusing on that basis but reasonably offering it go to "committee" for assessment.
I guess we can only hope that the American attempt to break and dismantle THEIR entire government in real time will offer a cautionary tale and a stark contrast with OUR situation in the upcoming chaos, but the growing attraction to chaos itself still lurks.
Poli Sci 101.
The most valuable tools politicians have are tooth whitener, a mirror to perfect quick draw grins, and a little notebook with the top 10 slogans of the week. Conservations would bid far higher for these objects than progressives if they were available only at auctions.
Budgets? Too boring and complex for the average citizen. Stick to simple rhyming slogans, like axing taxes. Value for money? Leave that for the academics who no one listens to anyway.
When criticized, grin wider. Dismiss regularly with a wave of the hand. Avoid interviews, stick with quick scrums that are easy to leave. Wear louder ties and whiter shirts.
The electric blue suit is The Uniform of Success for populists, as described in the 'How to Dress Up an Empty Head' manual.
The more advanced narrartives are accomplished by progressives who are more educated in liberal arts and who can handle tough questions with more complex language that says nothing. They are rarely populists unless they can also enact popular policies. Balancing budgets isn't one of them. Fence sitting and two-faced narratives are their forte.
Conservatives can slash spending, but that's usually after other conservatives have produced a mountain of debt. Their trademark, though, is to cut deeply into social spending and divert the savings to their pet projects, usually related to highways and rewarding their donors with taxpayer money.
In all political catagories, there is a best before date that usually manifests itself in the third term or 10 years before the public lashes out to rid themselves of the bad taste. It is akin to slow moving salmonella poisoning from stale narraratives and mouldy personalities.
Conservatives
"...conservatives would bid far higher..."
These days with the right it's not so much grin wider as snarl meaner.
Where do think the radical right neoliberal Pierre Poilievre will cut spending? Every social program Canada has is threatened as well as every federal civil servant , especially those in science. CBC and Canada Post on the chopping block on idealology grounds. And even OAS as ii is our feds largest expense. There. Is no way a family of seniors making 100,000 a year should be receiving OAS! The provincial Conservative governments may be spending but Poilievre is atypical.
Is Ford virtue signalling his support for Leon Musk by wasting that money on Starlink?
Haven't we learned from Trump and Fox News that white lies matter? Simply accuse the other guys of doing exactly what you're doing and your base will believe it, and repeat it. I heard a woman on Trump's campaign team respond to a pre-election question about Trump inciting the January 25th riot on Capitol Hill by saying, "Do you know what the Democrats have planned if they lose? It's going to be far worse."
Ms. Smith, Moe, Ford and Poillievre are to varying degrees emblematic of the americanization of Canadian conservatives.