National
Former BC Premier John Horgan passes away at 65

From Resource Works
He will be remembered as a principled, pragmatic, and honest man, and a popular premier during uncertain times.
John Horgan has passed away at 65 after a courageous third battle with cancer.
A born-and-raised Vancouver Islander, Horgan was a tough and resilient man who will be remembered as a popular, pragmatic premier who brought principles and honesty with him while navigating a changing economic and political landscape.
Regardless of partisan affiliation or belief, there is no question that Horgan truly loved his home province of BC and cared deeply for its people and their future.
Horgan’s path to the premier’s office took him across Canada and beyond, first from Victoria to Ontario, then on to Australia, before returning home to Vancouver Island. Between attending university as a young man, Horgan worked in a pulp mill in Ocean Falls, a small community on the Central Coast of BC. This experience provided him with real insight into the province’s resource sector and the communities that depended on it then—and still do today.
From the 1990s, Horgan worked for the BC New Democratic Party in various staff roles before starting his own business after 2001. In 2005, he returned to politics by being elected as the MLA for Malahat-Juan de Fuca (now Langford-Juan de Fuca). Horgan was re-elected five times by the riding’s voters.
In 2014, Horgan became the leader of the BC NDP, and in 2017, he became Premier of BC, the first NDP premier in 16 years. Once in the premier’s office, Horgan championed pragmatic, progressive policies that strove to balance economic growth with sustainability. His work in developing the province’s liquefied natural gas (LNG) sector was invaluable.
From the outset, Horgan recognized LNG’s potential to modernize the BC economy and make it a key player in global energy markets, and he worked hard to attract investment to the sector. In 2018, he unveiled a new LNG framework that paved the way for LNG Canada’s $40 billion investment in a project that would bring thousands of jobs to northern BC.
Horgan was confident that the LNG sector could coexist with his government’s climate goals and that BC would play a role in reducing global carbon emissions. His pragmatic, forward-thinking vision centered on the ambitious goal of exporting LNG to Asian markets to help them reduce their reliance on higher-emitting energy sources.
Forestry was another sector where Horgan made his mark. Having once worked in a pulp mill, Horgan recognized the importance of forestry to both the province’s history and economy. His approach emphasized sustainability and partnerships with First Nations, while increasing domestic production and reducing log exports. His attempts to modernize forestry had mixed results, but there was no questioning the honesty and good faith he brought to the table.
Another notable aspect of Horgan’s leadership was his commitment to the rule of law, even when it aroused frustration from fellow progressives. In 2020, during the Coastal GasLink protests, Horgan made it clear that the court rulings in favor of the project meant it would proceed regardless. That same year, Horgan acknowledged that the Trans Mountain pipeline project, which his government opposed, would move forward after another court ruling mandated its completion.
It should also be noted that court rulings were some of the only defeats he ever faced as premier, as he led the NDP to a historic victory in the 2020 election. Horgan was also unafraid to take responsibility for policies that went awry, such as stepping back from an unpopular $789-million proposal to rebuild the Royal BC Museum and accepting the blame for it.
Horgan’s leadership of BC during the COVID-19 oubtreak is another part of his legacy that will not be forgotten, especially his trust in British Columbians to be responsible, leading to some of Canada’s most relaxed restrictions during the pandemic.
In 2022, Horgan stepped down after beating cancer for the second time in his life, saying, “While I have a lot of energy, I must acknowledge this may not be the case two years from now.”
Perhaps one of the most important aspects of Horgan’s legacy was that he was a well-liked politician across the political spectrum. While many disagreed with him over policies, few could question that he was an honest and principled leader when it came to steering economic change, respecting the rule of law, and taking responsibility for his actions as premier.
Horgan was a fair, honest, and open-minded man—qualities shared by the best people we meet in life and ones we can only hope all politicians will emulate. We will miss John Joseph Horgan and send our heartfelt condolences to his family, especially his wife and two children.
Business
Federal government’s accounting change reduces transparency and accountability

From the Fraser Institute
By Jake Fuss and Grady Munro
Carney’s deficit-spending plan over the next four years dwarfs the plan from Justin Trudeau, the biggest spender (per-person, inflation-adjusted) in Canadian history, and will add many more billions to Canada’s mountain of federal debt. Yet Prime Minister Carney has tried to sell his plan as more responsible than his predecessor’s.
All Canadians should care about government transparency. In Ottawa, the federal government must provide timely and comprehensible reporting on federal finances so Canadians know whether the government is staying true to its promises. And yet, the Carney government’s new spending framework—which increases complexity and ambiguity in the federal budget—will actually reduce transparency and make it harder for Canadians to hold the government accountable.
The government plans to separate federal spending into two budgets: the operating budget and the capital budget. Spending on government salaries, cash transfers to the provinces (for health care, for example) and to people (e.g. Old Age Security) will fall within the operating budget, while spending on “anything that builds an asset” will fall within the capital budget. Prime Minister Carney plans to balance the operating budget by 2028/29 while increasing spending within the capital budget (which will be funded by more borrowing).
According to the Liberal Party platform, this accounting change will “create a more transparent categorization of the expenditure that contributes to capital formation in Canada.” But in reality, it will muddy the waters and make it harder to evaluate the state of federal finances.
First off, the change will make it more difficult to recognize the actual size of the deficit. While the Carney government plans to balance the operating budget by 2028/29, this does not mean it plans to stop borrowing money. In fact, it will continue to borrow to finance increased capital spending, and as a result, after accounting for both operating and capital spending, will increase planned deficits over the next four years by a projected $93.4 billion compared to the Trudeau government’s last spending plan. You read that right—Carney’s deficit-spending plan over the next four years dwarfs the plan from Justin Trudeau, the biggest spender (per-person, inflation-adjusted) in Canadian history, and will add many more billions to Canada’s mountain of federal debt. Yet Prime Minister Carney has tried to sell his plan as more responsible than his predecessor’s.
In addition to obscuring the amount of borrowing, splitting the budget allows the government to get creative with its accounting. Certain types of spending clearly fall into one category or another. For example, salaries for bureaucrats clearly represent day-to-day operations while funding for long-term infrastructure projects are clearly capital investments. But Carney’s definition of “capital spending” remains vague. Instead of limiting this spending category to direct investments in long-term assets such as roads, ports or military equipment, the government will also include in the capital budget new “incentives” that “support the formation of private sector capital (e.g. patents, plants, and technology) or which meaningfully raise private sector productivity.” In other words, corporate welfare.
Indeed, based on the government’s definition of capital spending, government subsidies to corporations—as long as they somehow relate to creating an asset—could potentially land in the same spending category as new infrastructure spending. Not only would this be inaccurate, but this broad definition means the government could potentially balance the operating budget simply by shifting spending over to the capital budget, as opposed to reducing spending. This would add to the debt but allow the government to maneuver under the guise of “responsible” budgeting.
Finally, rather than split federal spending into two budgets, to increase transparency the Carney government could give Canadians a better idea of how their tax dollars are spent by providing additional breakdowns of line items about operating and capital spending within the existing budget framework.
Clearly, Carney’s new spending framework, as laid out in the Liberal election platform, will only further complicate government finances and make it harder for Canadians to hold their government accountable.
Business
Carney poised to dethrone Trudeau as biggest spender in Canadian history

From the Fraser Institute
By Jake Fuss
The Liberals won the federal election partly due to the perception that Prime Minister Mark Carney will move his government back to the political centre and be more responsible with taxpayer dollars. But in fact, according to Carney’s fiscal plan, he doesn’t think Justin Trudeau was spending and borrowing enough.
To recap, the Trudeau government recorded 10 consecutive budget deficits, racked up $1.1 trillion in debt, recorded the six highest spending years (per person, adjusted for inflation) in Canadian history from 2018 to 2023, and last fall projected large deficits (and $400 billion in additional debt) over the next four years including a $42.2 billion deficit this fiscal year.
By contrast, under Carney’s plan, this year’s deficit will increase to a projected $62.4 billion while the combined deficits over the subsequent three years will be $67.7 billion higher than under Trudeau’s plan.
Consequently, the federal debt, and debt interest costs, will rise sharply. Under Trudeau’s plan, federal debt interest would have reached a projected $66.3 billion in 2028/29 compared to $68.7 billion under the new Carney plan. That’s roughly equivalent to what the government will spend on employment insurance (EI), the Canada Child Benefit and $10-a-day daycare combined. More taxpayer dollars will be diverted away from programs and services and towards servicing the debt.
Clearly, Carney plans to be a bigger spender than Justin Trudeau—who was the biggest spender in Canadian history.
On the campaign trail, Carney was creative in attempting to sell this as a responsible fiscal plan. For example, he split operating and capital spending into two separate budgets. According to his plan’s projections, the Carney government will balance the operating budget—which includes bureaucrat salaries, cash transfers (e.g. health-care funding) and benefits (e.g. Old Age Security)—by 2028/29, while borrowing huge sums to substantially increase capital spending, defined by Carney as anything that builds an asset. This is sleight-of-hand budgeting. Tell the audience to look somewhere—in this case, the operating budget—so it ignores what’s happening in the capital budget.
It’s also far from certain Carney will actually balance the operating budget. He’s banking on finding a mysterious $28.0 billion in savings from “increased government productivity.” His plan to use artificial intelligence and amalgamate service delivery will not magically deliver these savings. He’s already said no to cutting the bureaucracy or reducing any cash transfers to the provinces or individuals. With such a large chunk of spending exempt from review, it’s very difficult to see how meaningful cost savings will materialize.
And there’s no plan to pay for Carney’s spending explosion. Due to rising deficits and debt, the bill will come due later and younger generations of Canadians will bear this burden through higher taxes and/or fewer services.
Finally, there’s an obvious parallel between Carney and Trudeau on the inventive language used to justify more spending. According to Carney, his plan is not increasing spending but rather “investing” in the economy. Thus his campaign slogan “Spend less, invest more.” This wording is eerily similar to the 2015 and 2019 Trudeau election platforms, which claimed all new spending measures were merely “investments” that would increase economic growth. Regardless of the phrasing, Carney’s spending increases will produce the same results as under Trudeau—federal finances will continue to deteriorate without any improvement in economic growth. Canadian living standards (measured by per-person GDP) are lower today than they were seven years ago despite a massive increase in federal “investment” during the Trudeau years. Yet Carney, not content to double down on this failed approach, plans to accelerate it.
The numbers don’t lie; Carney’s fiscal plan includes more spending and borrowing than Trudeau’s plan. This will be a fiscal and economic disaster with Canadians paying the price.
-
Crime20 hours ago
Canada Blocked DEA Request to Investigate Massive Toronto Carfentanil Seizure for Terror Links
-
2025 Federal Election1 day ago
The Liberals torched their own agenda just to cling to power
-
Business1 day ago
Canada urgently needs a watchdog for government waste
-
Business2 days ago
Trump says he expects ‘great relationship’ with Carney, who ‘hated’ him less than Poilievre
-
COVID-1912 hours ago
Tulsi Gabbard says US funded ‘gain-of-function’ research at Wuhan lab at heart of COVID ‘leak’
-
Business12 hours ago
Top Canadian bank ditches UN-backed ‘net zero’ climate goals it helped create
-
Business1 day ago
Overregulation is choking Canadian businesses, says the MEI
-
2025 Federal Election1 day ago
The Last Of Us: Canada’s Chaos Election