Business
Canada’s economy has stagnated despite Ottawa’s spin
From the Fraser Institute
By Ben Eisen, Milagros Palacios and Lawrence Schembri
Canada’s inflation-adjusted per-person annual economic growth rate (0.7 per cent) is meaningfully worse than the G7 average (1.0 per cent) over this same period. The gap with the U.S. (1.2 per cent) is even larger. Only Italy performed worse than Canada.
Growth in gross domestic product (GDP), the total value of all goods and services produced in the economy annually, is one of the most frequently cited indicators of Canada’s economic performance. Journalists, politicians and analysts often compare various measures of Canada’s total GDP growth to other countries, or to Canada’s past performance, to assess the health of the economy and living standards. However, this statistic is misleading as a measure of living standards when population growth rates vary greatly across countries or over time.
Federal Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland, for example, recently boasted that Canada had experienced the “strongest economic growth in the G7” in 2022. Although the Trudeau government often uses international comparisons on aggregate GDP growth as evidence of economic success, it’s not the first to do so. In 2015, then-prime minister Stephen Harper said Canada’s GDP growth was “head and shoulders above all our G7 partners over the long term.”
Unfortunately, such statements do more to obscure public understanding of Canada’s economic performance than enlighten it. In reality, aggregate GDP growth statistics are not driven by productivity improvements and do not reflect rising living standards. Instead, they’re primarily the result of differences in population and labour force growth. In other words, they aren’t primarily the result of Canadians becoming better at producing goods and services (i.e. productivity) and thus generating more income for their families. Instead, they primarily reflect the fact that there are simply more people working, which increases the total amount of goods and services produced but doesn’t necessarily translate into increased living standards.
Let’s look at the numbers. Canada’s annual average GDP growth (with no adjustment for population) from 2000 to 2023 was the second-highest in the G7 at 1.8 per cent, just behind the United States at 1.9 per cent. That sounds good, until you make a simple adjustment for population changes by comparing GDP per person. Then a completely different story emerges.
Canada’s inflation-adjusted per-person annual economic growth rate (0.7 per cent) is meaningfully worse than the G7 average (1.0 per cent) over this same period. The gap with the U.S. (1.2 per cent) is even larger. Only Italy performed worse than Canada.
Why the inversion of results from good to bad? Because Canada has had by far the fastest population growth rate in the G7, growing at an annualized rate of 1.1 per cent—more than twice the annual population growth rate of the G7 as a whole at 0.5 per cent. In aggregate, Canada’s population increased by 29.8 per cent during this time period compared to just 11.5 per cent in the entire G7.
Clearly, aggregate GDP growth is a poor tool for international comparisons. It’s also not a good way to assess changes in Canada’s performance over time because Canada’s rate of population growth has not been constant. Starting in 2016, sharply higher rates of immigration have led to a pronounced increase in population growth. This increase has effectively partially obscured historically weak economic growth per person over the same period.
Specifically, from 2015 to 2023, under the Trudeau government, inflation-adjusted per-person economic growth averaged just 0.3 per cent. For historical perspective, per-person economic growth was 0.8 per cent annually under Brian Mulroney, 2.4 per cent under Jean Chrétien and 2.0 per cent under Paul Martin.
Due to Canada’s sharp increase in population growth in recent years, aggregate GDP growth is a misleading indicator for comparing economic growth performance across countries or time periods. Canada is not leading the G7, or doing well in historical terms, when it comes to economic growth measures that make simple adjustments for our rapidly growing population. In reality, we’ve become a growth laggard and our living standards have largely stagnated for the better part of a decade.
Authors:
Business
Budget 2025 continues to balloon spending and debt
The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is criticizing Prime Minister Mark Carney for ballooning spending and debt in Budget 2025.
“Budget 2025 shows the debt continues to spiral out of control because spending continues to spiral out of control,” said Franco Terrazzano, CTF Federal Director. “Carney needs to reverse course to get debt and spending under control because every dollar Canadians pay in federal sales tax is already going to pay interest charges on the debt.
“Carney isn’t close to balancing anything when he’s borrowing tens of billions of dollars every year.”
The federal deficit will increase significantly this year to $78.3 billion. There is no plan to balance the budget and stop borrowing money. The federal debt will reach $1.35 trillion by the end of this year.
Debt interest charges will cost taxpayers $55.6 billion this year, which is more than the federal government will send to the provinces in health transfers ($54.7 billion) or collect through the GST ($54.4 billion).
Budget 2025 increases spending by $38 billion this year to $581 billion. Despite promises to control spending in future years, Budget 2025 projects that overall spending will continue to rise by billions every year.
“Canadians don’t need another plan to create a plan to meet about cutting spending, Canadians need real spending cuts now,” Terrazzano said. “The government always tells Canadians that it will go on a diet Monday, but Monday never comes.
“And the government isn’t really finding savings if it’s planning to keep increasing spending every year.”
Budget 2025 commits to “strengthening” the industrial carbon tax and “setting a multi-decade industrial carbon price trajectory that targets net zero by 2050.”
“Carney’s hidden carbon tax will make it harder for Canadian businesses to compete and will push Canadian entrepreneurs to set up shop south of the border,” Terrazzano said. “Carney should scrap all carbon taxes, cut spending and stop taking so much money from taxpayers.”
Business
Federal budget: Carney government posts largest deficit in Canadian history outside pandemic
-
Federal deficit projected to exceed $78 billion
-
This is Ottawa’s tenth consecutive unbalanced budget
-
Every newborn baby in Canada now enters the world with a debt of more than $33,000.
Repackaging record spending as “investments” while offering no credible path back to balance is the opposite of responsible fiscal stewardship, asserts the MEI in response to the tabling of the federal budget this afternoon.
“Canadians should find a deficit this large extremely troubling,” says Emmanuelle B. Faubert, economist at the MEI. “The attempt to disguise it under a new wave of so-called investments makes it even more concerning.
“It’s one thing to spend money you don’t have; it’s yet another to shirk responsibility for it.”
The Carney government is projecting a deficit of $78.3 billion for 2025-2026, up from $48.3 billion last year.
Interest payments are projected to rise to $55.6 billion this upcoming fiscal year, but servicing the debt will mount rapidly: to $76.1 billion by 2030, a 37 per cent spike.
Current debt charges cost taxpayers more than federal healthcare transfers to provinces, which amount to $54 billion annually.
This budget deficit would bring the national debt to $1.48 trillion, and mark the tenth consecutive year without a balanced federal budget. Every newborn baby in Canada now enters the world with a debt of more than $33,000.
Much of the new spending is categorized as capital as opposed to operational, which is a new reclassification scheme unveiled by the Carney government that does nothing to change the total debt. The government’s net debt is predicted to grow by another 21 per cent by 2030, to $1.79 trillion.
The Build Canada Homes program, for one, has an initial $13-billion price tag. The MEI studied a similar program launched in New Zealand, which accomplished just 3 per cent of its total objective.
The MEI warns that this marks a shift toward increased central planning, with Canada becoming an economy where politicians, instead of businesses and consumers, decide which industries succeed.
Overtures in the budget hint at a possible future walk-back of the emissions cap, which the think tank has strongly advocated for. In March, the PBO released a report estimating that the emissions cap would reduce our collective prosperity by $20.5 billion in 2032 and result in 40,300 fewer jobs than there would otherwise be.
A clearer path toward shrinking the federal bureaucracy has been laid out, with the government planning to eliminate 16,000 full-time positions, representing 4.5 per cent of the workforce as of March 2025.
Economist Emmanuelle B. Faubert would like the government to go further. While Ottawa plans to maintain the size of the federal bureaucracy at about 330,000 employees by 2028-29 through attrition, the MEI sees this as insufficient, and urged a more ambitious approach in its pre-budget submission.
The MEI recommended cutting the federal workforce by 17.4 per cent, mirroring the Chrétien-era reductions of the 1990s, which would eliminate roughly 64,000 positions and save taxpayers $10 billion annually.
The MEI welcomes the decision to expand capital cost allowances, letting businesses write off new machinery and equipment more quickly. This measure promotes investment and productivity by reducing the upfront cost of doing business.
“The government may try to rebrand its debt, but Canadians will still be the ones paying it off for decades,” says Ms. Faubert. “Carney calls it a generational budget, and he’s right, but only because future generations will be stuck footing the bill.”
* * *
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.
-
Crime2 days agoPublic Execution of Anti-Cartel Mayor in Michoacán Prompts U.S. Offer to Intervene Against Cartels
-
Business1 day agoCarney government should retire misleading ‘G7’ talking point on economic growth
-
Aristotle Foundation2 days agoB.C. government laid groundwork for turning private property into Aboriginal land
-
Alberta1 day agoCanada’s heavy oil finds new fans as global demand rises
-
Censorship Industrial Complex1 day agoPro-freedom group warns Liberal bill could secretly cut off Canadians’ internet access
-
Brownstone Institute20 hours agoBizarre Decisions about Nicotine Pouches Lead to the Wrong Products on Shelves
-
Bruce Dowbiggin1 day agoA Story So Good Not Even The Elbows Up Crew Could Ruin It
-
Justice2 days agoA Justice System That Hates Punishment Can’t Protect the Innocent





