Connect with us

Opinion

Canada’s fertility, marriage rates plummet to record lows: report

Published

6 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Canada’s fertility rate hit a record low of 1.33 children per woman in 2022, according to a recently released report by the Macdonald-Laurier Institute.

A recently released report from major Canadian think tank the Macdonald-Laurier Institute has painted a dire picture for Canada’s future, noting that the nation’s marriage and fertility rates are at extreme lows and have been on the steady decline for years.  

According to the report, titled, “Decline and fall: Trends in family formation and fertility in Canada since 2001, the number of never-been-married Canadian adults has increased significantly since 2001, notably among those 45 years and younger.  

The report notes that being in a single, unmarried state for those under 30 has become the norm and that because of a decline in marriage rates, Canada’s fertility rates have been impacted as well.  

Also troubling is that amongst couples that do get married, many of them are choosing not to have kids, and those that do only have children only have one or two, which is not statistically sufficient in boosting Canada’s birth rate into positive territory.  

The report released concerning findings relating to the decline of the traditional nuclear family, noting that the proportion of those aged 25-29 who “are in a couple dropped by 10.9 percentage points between 2001-2021.” 

“Younger people are increasingly delaying marriage or common-law relationships into the late 30s or early 40s, with a growing fraction of people remaining single well into middle age,” notes the report. 

Also, Canada’s fertility rate was only “1.3 in 2022, down from 1.6 in 2016,” it noted. 

Canada’s fertility rate hit a record low of 1.33 children per woman in 2022. According to the data collected by Statistics Canada, this is the lowest fertility rate in the past century of record keeping. For context, in the same year, 97,211 Canadian babies were killed by abortion.     

Instead of promoting marriage and child-bearing, the federal government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has instead resorted to using immigration to boost the population.  

Governments should ‘worry’ about low birth rates 

“The most important step in addressing these problems is perhaps… to recognize that the declining family formation, dropping marriage rates, and deteriorating fertility are serious problems facing our society, and they should be a top priority for policymakers in our country,” noted Sargent. 

The Macdonald-Laurier Institute noted that Canada needs to ensure that there are “policies that make housing more affordable, use the tax system to incentivize family growth and the raising of children, subsidize daycare, and address the rising problem of credentialism by finding ways to reduce the formal educational requirements for jobs will allow young people to marry, afford a house, and have children earlier.” 

Some positives from the report note that in Canada, despite the fact of the current Liberal government, there are “incredible benefits, both in terms of income and broader well-being” by starting a family. 

“Adjusting for economies of scale (recognizing that couples require only 1.5 the income of a single person to have the same standard of living) the average single 35-45-year-old has only 49.2 percent of the income of their coupled counterpart,” notes the report. 

“Single parent homes have approximately 35-40 percent less income per family member relative to a two-parent family.” 

The report observed that married couples have a “significantly lower incidence of, and better survival rates from both cancer and cardiovascular disease, are less stressed, and are less likely to suffer from depression and other emotional pathologies.” 

As reported by LifeSiteNews earlier this month, a survey showed that more and more Canadians are delaying the start of families due to the rising cost of living.  

Also, instead of embracing new and current life, as taught by the Catholic Church, Trudeau’s government has instead promoted abortion, contraception, and euthanasia.  

As noted by LifeSiteNews contributor Jonathon Van Maren, a recent scheme by the Trudeau Liberals to offer free contraception to all Canadians, will only worsen Canada’s current demographic crisis.  

“Canada, like any nation, needs babies. This is an obvious, undeniable fact. It is also a truth that few seem capable of uttering,” wrote Van Maren. 

“Justin Trudeau is passionate about abortion, and his government is one of the most aggressive proponents of feticide in the world. Canada’s taxpayers fund the killing of the very children we desperately need.” 

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

National

Democracy Watch Renews Push for Independent Prosecutor in SNC-Lavalin Case

Published on

The Opposition with Dan Knight

Dan Knight's avatar Dan Knight

Group says Ontario Crown used “clearly incorrect” legal test to shield Trudeau from private prosecution, calls for independent process free of political ties

Democracy Watch has launched a fresh bid to reopen the door to prosecuting former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau over his alleged role in the 2018 SNC-Lavalin affair, accusing Ontario Crown Counsel of using a legally flawed standard to shut down its private prosecution and continuing what it calls “a smelly cover-up” that began under the Trudeau government.

Read the full press release here

In a new letter sent Wednesday to Ontario Attorney General Doug Downey and Randy Schwartz, the province’s Assistant Deputy Attorney General for Criminal Law, the non-partisan watchdog group is again calling for an independent special prosecutor to review evidence that Trudeau obstructed justice and breached public trust by pressuring then–Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould to intervene in the SNC-Lavalin prosecution seven years ago.

This latest appeal comes after Ontario’s Director of the Complex Prosecutions Bureau, John Corelli, used his authority in September to halt Democracy Watch’s private prosecution before it reached a preliminary “pre-enquête” hearing. In that letter, Corelli said there was “no reasonable prospect the Crown could prove that Mr. Trudeau acted with the requisite criminal intent.”

Democracy Watch disputes that reasoning, arguing it misstates the law.

“Crown prosecutors stopping this prosecution for a legally incorrect reason, just like the RCMP did in addition to suppressing key evidence, amounts to a smelly cover-up,” said Duff Conacher, the group’s co-founder and legal expert. “It shows clearly that Canada does not have independent, effective anti-corruption law enforcement and, as a result, corruption in the highest public offices across the country is effectively legal.”

The group’s new letter marks the second time it has asked Ontario’s Attorney General to intervene. In its first request in March, Democracy Watch urged Downey to establish a non-partisan selection committee to appoint a special prosecutor. Downey’s office declined that request in May.

Now, the group is reiterating the demand, saying the independent prosecutor should be chosen by a committee composed of people with no party ties, working alongside opposition leaders, to ensure public confidence in the process.

Conacher’s team argues that Corelli’s reasoning — that the Crown cannot prove Trudeau acted with “criminal intent” — applies the wrong legal test. In its filings, Democracy Watch cites the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in R. v. Beaudry (2007), which clarified that obstruction of justice requires only that an act be done “willfully” to frustrate the course of justice — not that it be done with corrupt or deceitful intent.

“The Supreme Court has already set the threshold,” Conacher said. “Proof of ‘criminal’ intent isn’t required. It’s enough that someone acted willfully to obstruct the process. That’s what the Crown ignored.”

The group also says that the case against Trudeau is unprecedented and cannot be dismissed out of hand without judicial review. It accuses the RCMP of conducting a “negligently weak and incomplete investigation” that left key questions unanswered and accepted the government’s refusal to release Cabinet records from the time.

Democracy Watch’s original filing included testimony and documents obtained from the RCMP after a two-year access battle. It alleges that the Mounties failed to interview key witnesses, including Wilson-Raybould’s chief of staff Jessica Prince and former Liberal minister Jane Philpott, and withheld portions of their answers in documents finally disclosed. The proposed pre-enquête hearing — which Corelli stopped — would have allowed those witnesses to testify under oath and allowed a judge to decide if the evidence was sufficient to proceed.

The group’s case was supported by Wayne Crookes, founder of Integrity B.C., and represented by Jen Danch of Swadron Associates law firm.

Conacher is now urging Ontario’s Attorney General to “do the right thing” and reverse course.

“Canadians can only hope Ontario’s Attorney General will work with opposition party leaders to establish a fully independent committee that will choose a fully independent special prosecutor to review the evidence,” Conacher said.

He also renewed his call for structural reform of Canada’s anti-corruption enforcement, noting that Quebec’s independent anti-corruption police and prosecution units (UPAC) have operated since 2011, while the RCMP remains under the direct control of Cabinet appointees.

“The RCMP lacks independence from the Prime Minister and Cabinet ministers who handpick its leadership,” Conacher said. “They serve at the pleasure of the government, so they are vulnerable to political interference. To ensure integrity, Canada needs a fully independent anti-corruption police force and independent prosecutors.”

Democracy Watch’s campaign underscores a broader concern that the Trudeau-era SNC-Lavalin controversy, which saw Wilson-Raybould’s resignation, Philpott’s exit, and an Ethics Commissioner finding of improper political pressure, has never been subjected to a full criminal review.

For Conacher, the issue is bigger than one case. It’s about restoring the principle that no one, not even a Prime Minister, stands above the law.

Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight .

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Continue Reading

Business

Over two thirds of Canadians say Ottawa should reduce size of federal bureaucracy

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Matthew Lau

From 2015 to 2024, headcount at Natural Resources Canada increased 39 per cent even though employment in Canada’s natural resources sector actually fell one per cent. Similarly, there was 382 per cent headcount growth at the federal department for Women and Gender Equality—obviously far higher than the actual growth in Canada’s female population.

According to a recent poll, there’s widespread support among Canadians for reducing the size of the federal bureaucracy. The support extends across the political spectrum. Among the political right, 82.8 per cent agree to reduce the federal bureaucracy compared to only 5.8 per cent who disagree (with the balance neither agreeing nor disagreeing); among political moderates 68.4 per cent agree and only 10.0 per cent disagree; and among the political left 44.8 per cent agree and 26.3 per cent disagree.

Taken together, “67 per cent agreed the federal bureaucracy should be significantly reduced. Only 12 per cent disagreed.” These results shouldn’t be surprising. The federal bureaucracy is ripe for cuts. From 2015 to 2024, the federal government added more than 110,000 new bureaucrats, a 43 per cent increase, which was nearly triple the rate of population growth.

This bureaucratic expansion was totally unjustified. From 2015 to 2024, headcount at Natural Resources Canada increased 39 per cent even though employment in Canada’s natural resources sector actually fell one per cent. Similarly, there was 382 per cent headcount growth at the federal department for Women and Gender Equality—obviously far higher than the actual growth in Canada’s female population. And there are many similar examples.

While in 2025 the number of federal public service jobs fell by three per cent, the cost of the federal bureaucracy actually increased as the number of fulltime equivalents, which accounts for whether those jobs were fulltime or part-time, went up. With the tax burden created by the federal bureaucracy rising so significantly in the past decade, it’s no wonder Canadians overwhelmingly support its reduction.

Another interesting poll result: “While 42 per cent of those surveyed supported the government using artificial intelligence tools to resolve bottlenecks in service delivery, 32 per cent opposed it, with 25 per cent on the fence.” The authors of the poll say the “plurality in favour is surprising, given the novelty of the technology.”

Yet if 67 per cent of Canadians agree with significantly shrinking the federal bureaucracy, then solid support for using AI to increasing efficiency should not be too surprising, even if the technology is relatively new. Separate research finds 58 per cent of Canadian workers say they use AI tools provided by their workplace, and although many of them do not necessarily use AI regularly, of those who report using AI the majority say it improves their productivity.

In fact, there’s massive potential for the government to leverage AI to increase efficiency and control labour expenses. According to a recent study by a think-tank at Toronto Metropolitan University (formerly known as Ryerson), while the federal public service and the overall Canadian workforce are similar in terms of the percentage of roles that could be made more productive by AI, federal employees were twice as likely (58 per cent versus 29 per cent) to have jobs “comprised of tasks that are more likely to be substituted or replaced” by AI.

The opportunity to improve public service efficiency and deliver massive savings to taxpayers is clearly there. However, whether the Carney government will take advantage of this opportunity is questionable. Unlike private businesses, which must continuously innovate and improve operational efficiency to compete in a free market, federal bureaucracies face no competition. As a result, there’s little pressure or incentive to reduce costs and increase efficiency, whether through AI or other process or organizational improvements.

In its upcoming budget and beyond, it would be a shame if the federal government does not, through AI or other changes, restrain the cost of its workforce. Taxpayers deserve, and clearly demand, a break from this ever-increasing burden.

Matthew Lau

Adjunct Scholar, Fraser Institute
Continue Reading

Trending

X