Business
Canadian Taxpayers Federation looking into value of CBC properties

From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation
CBC amasses half a billion in real estate
Author: Ryan Thorpe
The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation has amassed nearly half-a-billion dollars in real estate holdings, according to documents obtained by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation.
The CBC’s real estate portfolio, comprised of 12 properties scattered across Canada, is assessed at more than $444 million. The CBC leases another 72 properties, including five in foreign countries, that it refuses to disclose costs for.
“It sure seems the CBC is spending way more on its buildings than competitors spend, but what value do taxpayers get for all these properties?” said Franco Terrazzano, CTF Federal Director. “Taxpayers have every right to question why we’re paying for all these CBC buildings in Canada and in other countries.”
Records detailing the CBC’s real estate portfolio were released in response to a written order paper question from Conservative MP Adam Chambers (Simcoe North).
CBC’s most expensive is its Toronto headquarters, which is assessed at nearly $314 million.
For context, when TorStar – the parent company that publishes the Toronto Star – was sold in 2020, the price tag for the entire newspaper chain was $52 million. And when the Calgary Herald sold its building earlier this year, it went for $17.25 million. In 2012, the Globe and Mail sold its head offices in downtown Toronto for $136 million. The National Post sold its headquarters in Toronto for $24 million in 2012.
Table: CBC-owned property, assessed municipal value
Location |
Value |
Toronto, Ont. |
$313,866,000 |
Vancouver, B.C. |
$99,061,000 |
Winnipeg, Man. |
$11,718,000 |
St. Johns, N.L. |
$4,439,000 |
Yellowknife, NWT |
$3,181,720 |
Fredericton, N.B. |
$2,791,000 |
Charlottetown, P.E.I. |
$2,631,800 |
Saguenay, Que. |
$2,485,939 |
Whitehorse, Yuk. |
$1,847,410 |
Winnipeg, Man. |
$1,541,000 |
Thunder Bay, Ont. |
$537,000 |
Rankin Inlet, Nun. |
$314,600 |
Total |
$444,414,469 |
The CBC is refusing to disclose what it spends on the 72 other properties it currently leases in Canada and abroad, citing it as “commercially sensitive information.”
Outside of Canada, the CBC leases property in London, U.K., Mumbai, India, Paris, France, and New York City and Washington, U.S.A.
In Paris, France, the CBC leases offices in “a corner building on one of the prestigious avenues leading off the Arc de Triomphe,” located in the city’s 17th Arrondissement, on the right bank of the River Seine.
In London, U.K., Canada’s public broadcaster leases office space bordering the city’s Soho district, famous for its restaurants and nightlife, located a short drive from Buckingham Palace and Hyde Park.
And in New York City, the CBC leases office space in downtown Manhattan, a short walk from Rockefeller Centre and Central Park.
It also leases multiple properties in six Canadian cities, including two in Prince Rupert, B.C. (pop. 12,300) and two in Matane, Que. (pop. 14,000).
In Montreal, the CBC leases three properties, including its French-language headquarters on Papineau Avenue. While it is now refusing to say what it costs to lease its Montreal HQ, back in 2019, the CBC disclosed it was paying $20 million per year.
“Why does the CBC need to lease these properties in far-flung countries, let alone multiple properties in smaller Canadian towns, and how much is all of this costing taxpayers?” Terrazzano said. “The CBC costs taxpayers more than $1 billion every year, so at the very least it owes Canadians full transparency.”
In 2021, the CBC took $1.2 billion from taxpayers, including $21 million in “immediate operational support” to ensure its stability during the pandemic. In late-2022, the feds gave the CBC another $42 million to help it “recover from the pandemic,” as reported by the National Post.
The CBC gave staff $28.5 million in bonuses and pay raises in 2022. There are now 949 CBC staff taking home a six-figure annual salary, with the number of employees on the sunshine list doubling since Prime Minister Justin Trudeau came to power in 2015.
Agriculture
Canada’s supply management system is failing consumers

This article supplied by Troy Media.
The supply management system is cracking. With imports climbing, strict quotas in place and Bill C202 on the table, we’re struggling to feed ourselves
Canada’s supply management system, once seen as a pillar of food security and agricultural self-sufficiency, is failing at its most basic function:
ensuring a reliable domestic supply.
According to the Canadian Association of Regulated Importers, Canada imported more than 66.9 million kilograms of chicken as of June 14, a 54.6 per cent increase from the same period last year. That’s enough to feed 3.4 million Canadians for a full year based on average poultry consumption—roughly 446 million meals. Under a tightly managed quota system, those meals were supposed to be produced domestically. Instead imports now account for more than 12 per cent of this year’s domestic chicken production, revealing a growing dependence on foreign supply.
Supply management is Canada’s system for regulating dairy, poultry and egg production. It uses quotas and fixed prices to match domestic supply with demand while limiting imports, intended to protect farmers from global price swings and ensure stable supply.
To be fair, the avian influenza outbreak has disrupted poultry production and partially explains the shortfall. But even with that disruption, the numbers are staggering. Imports under trade quotas set by the World Trade Organization, the Canada-United States Mexico Agreement and the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership are running at or near their allowable monthly share—known as pro-rata
levels—signalling not just opportunity, but urgency. Supplementary import permits, meant to be used only in emergencies, have already surpassed 48 million kilograms, exceeding total annual import volumes in some previous years. This isn’t a seasonal hiccup. It’s a systemic failure.
The system, designed to buffer domestic markets from global volatility, is cracking under internal strain. When emergency imports become routine, we have to ask: what exactly is being managed?
Canada’s most recent regulated chicken production cycle, which ended May 31, saw one of the worst shortfalls in over 50 years. Strict quota limits stopped farmers from producing more to meet demand, leaving consumers with higher grocery bills and more imported food, shaking public confidence in the system.
Some defenders insist this is an isolated event. It’s not. For the second straight week, Canada has hit pro-rata import levels across all chicken categories. Bone-in and processed poultry, once minor players in emergency import programs, are now essential just to keep shelves stocked.
And the dysfunction doesn’t stop at chicken. Egg imports under the shortage allocation program have already topped 14 million dozen, a 104 per cent jump from last year. Not long ago, Canadians were mocking high U.S. egg prices. Now theirs have fallen. Ours haven’t.
All this in a country with $30 billion in quota value, supposedly designed to protect domestic production and reduce reliance on imports. Instead, we’re importing more and paying more.
Rather than addressing these failures, Ottawa is looking to entrench them. Bill C202, now before the Senate, seeks to shield supply management from future trade talks, making reform even harder. So we must ask: is this really what we’re protecting?
Meanwhile, our trading partners are taking full advantage. Chile, for instance, has increased chicken exports to Canada by more than 63 per cent, now accounting for nearly 96 per cent of CPTPP-origin imports. While Canada doubles down on protectionism, others are gaining long-term footholds in our market.
It’s time to face the facts. Supply management no longer guarantees supply. When a system meant to ensure resilience becomes a source of fragility, it’s no longer an asset—it’s an economic liability.
Dr. Sylvain Charlebois is a Canadian professor and researcher in food distribution and policy. He is senior director of the Agri-Food Analytics Lab at Dalhousie University and co-host of The Food Professor Podcast. He is frequently cited in the media for his insights on food prices, agricultural trends, and the global food supply chain.
Troy Media empowers Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in helping Canadians stay informed and engaged by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections and deepens understanding across the country.
Business
Prairie provinces and Newfoundland and Labrador see largest increases in size of government

From the Fraser Institute
By Jake Fuss and Grady Munro
A recent study found that Canada has experienced one of the largest increases in the size of government of any advanced country over the last decade. But within Canada, which provinces have led the way?
The size of government refers to the extent to which resources within the economy are controlled and directed by the government, and has important implications for economic growth, living standards, and economic freedom—the degree to which people are allowed to make their own economic choices.
Too much of anything can be harmful, and this is certainly true regarding the size of government. When government grows too large it begins to take on roles and resources that are better left to the private sector. For example, rather than focusing on core functions like maintaining the rule of law or national defence, a government that has grown too large might begin subsidizing certain businesses and industries over others (i.e. corporate welfare) in order to pick winners and losers in the market. As a result, economic growth slows and living standards are lower than they otherwise would be.
One way to measure the size of government is by calculating total general government spending as a share of the economy (GDP). General government spending refers to spending by governments at all levels (federal, provincial, and municipal), and by measuring this as a share of gross domestic product (GDP) we can compare across jurisdictions of different sizes.
A recent study compared the size of government in Canada as a whole with that of 39 other advanced economies worldwide, and found that Canada experienced the second-largest increase in the size of government (as a share of the economy) from 2014 to 2024. In other words, since 2014, governments in Canada have expanded their role within the economy faster than governments in virtually every other advanced country worldwide—including all other countries within the Group of Seven (France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States). Moreover, the study showed that Canada as a whole has exceeded the optimal size of government (estimated to fall between 24 and 32 per cent of GDP) at which a country can maximize their economic growth. Beyond that point, growth slows and is lower than it otherwise would be.
However, Canada is a decentralized country and provinces vary as to the extent to which governments direct overall economic activity. Using data from Statistics Canada, the following charts illustrate which provinces in Canada have the largest size of government and which have seen the largest increases since 2014.
The chart above shows total general government spending as a share of GDP for all ten provinces in 2023 (the latest year of available provincial data). The size of government in the provinces varies considerably, ranging from a high of 61.4 per cent in Nova Scotia to a low of 30.0 per cent in Alberta. There are geographical differences, as three Atlantic provinces (Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, and New Brunswick) have the largest governments while the three western-most provinces (Alberta, Saskatchewan, and British Columbia) have the smallest governments. However, as of 2023, all provinces except Alberta exceeded the optimal size of government—which again, is between 24 and 32 per cent of the economy.

To show which provinces have experienced the greatest increase in the size of government in recent years, the second chart shows the percentage point increase in total general government spending as a share of GDP from 2014 to 2023. It should be noted that this is measuring the expansion of the federal government’s role in the economy—which has been substantial nationwide—as well as growth in the respective provincial and municipal governments.
The increases in the size of government since 2014 are largest in four provinces: Newfoundland and Labrador (10.82 percentage points), Alberta (7.94 percentage points), Saskatchewan (7.31 percentage points), and Manitoba (7.17 percentage points). These are all dramatic increases—for perspective, in the study referenced above, Estonia’s 6.66 percentage point increase in its size of government was the largest out of 40 advanced countries.
The remaining six provinces experienced far lower increases in the size of government, ranging from a 2.74 percentage point increase in B.C. to a 0.44 percentage point increase in Quebec. However, since 2014, every province in Canada has seen government expand its role within the economy.
Over the last decade, Canada has experienced a substantial increase in the size of total government. Within the country, Newfoundland and Labrador and the three Prairie provinces have led the way in growing their respective governments.
-
Business2 days ago
Latest shakedown attempt by Canada Post underscores need for privatization
-
Business2 days ago
Why it’s time to repeal the oil tanker ban on B.C.’s north coast
-
Alberta2 days ago
Pierre Poilievre – Per Capita, Hardisty, Alberta Is the Most Important Little Town In Canada
-
Energy2 days ago
If Canada Wants to be the World’s Energy Partner, We Need to Act Like It
-
MxM News2 days ago
UPenn strips Lia Thomas of women’s swimming titles after Title IX investigation
-
Alberta2 days ago
Alberta Provincial Police – New chief of Independent Agency Police Service
-
COVID-191 day ago
Top COVID doctor given one of Canada’s highest honors
-
Crime2 days ago
Bryan Kohberger avoids death penalty in brutal killing of four Idaho students