Business
Red Deer District Chamber responds to Federal Budget

From the Red Deer District Chamber of Commerce
The Red Deer and District Chamber has reviewed the federal budget and despite a few bright spots,
there are no efforts to boost productivity and innovation in the country which is sorely needed for
economic growth.
Scott Robinson CEO for the Red Deer District Chamber commented, “The budget’s tagline is “Fair-
ness for every generation”; however, it is unlikely that the spending will improve conditions and continuing to increase taxes and spending will simply add to the inflation and GDP stagnation that
we are facing, as public debt reaches record highs”
Highlights include:
• Carbon tax rebates are finally being introduced for small businesses (499 or fewer employees), with approximately 600,000 firms eligible for a share of $2.5 billion. Consumers began receiving these rebates over five years ago and now small businesses will finally see the return of some of the tax dollars collected through the carbon price’s fuel charge.
• A framework for open banking will allow consumers to easily access financial data across institutions, apps, and services. Specifics will be forthcoming before the end of 2024, but this could result in business opportunities and choices for consumers.
• The targeted 3.87 million net new homes by 2031 is a step toward combatting the housing crisis experienced in Red Deer and across the country. However, our city has yet to be successful in securing funding support through the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation’s (CHMC) Housing Accelerator Program, despite being the 56th most populated city in the country and a vacancy rate of 0.8 percent for 2023. We are hopeful to see additional federal investment in our city and have identified recommendations to all levels of government in the Chamber’s Homelessness Task Force Report.
Areas of particular concern:
• Increasing the capital gains tax through reducing exemptions is estimated by the federal government to bring in $20 billion in additional revenue over the next five years. The Red Deer Chamber of Commerce opposes increased taxation, especially when this represents an additional tax on already taxed income. This plan will likely result in decreased investment within the country.
• Deficits of $39.8 billion are projected for 2024-2025. The government also plans to spend $54.1 billion on debt servicing, with no plans at all to decrease total public debt. This amount equates to $2 billion more than is allocated to healthcare ($52.1 billion).
• $53 billion in new spending has been identified over the next five years. This continued spending and increasing debt will negatively impact investment and will continue to increase taxes for all.
“The federal government’s 2024 budget was an opportunity to enhance economic growth and set the country on a new path, toward prosperity and investment indicated Chamber CEO Scott Robinson. “In our view the initiatives suggested by the federal government will not benefit Red Deer and district, or indeed much of the country”. The Federal Budget presented by the Government yesterday just solidify how important it is for Chambers across Canada to advocate for economic growth, innovation, and productivity policies our country needs”.
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.
-
Business1 day ago
Canada urgently needs a watchdog for government waste
-
2025 Federal Election1 day ago
The Last Of Us: Canada’s Chaos Election
-
2025 Federal Election4 hours ago
Mark Carney vows to ‘deepen’ Canada’s ties with the world, usher in ‘new economy’
-
Health4 hours ago
RFK Jr. orders placebo safety trials for all new vaccines in major policy decision
-
Business1 day ago
Trump says he expects ‘great relationship’ with Carney, who ‘hated’ him less than Poilievre
-
Alberta1 day ago
‘Existing oil sands projects deliver some of the lowest-breakeven oil in North America’
-
Business1 day ago
Overregulation is choking Canadian businesses, says the MEI
-
Business12 hours ago
Top Canadian bank ditches UN-backed ‘net zero’ climate goals it helped create