From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

By Ryan Thorpe

Take the Eh Sayers Podcast from Statistics Canada, which has 21 episodes since January 2021. Episode topics have ranged from gender identity to climate change and misinformation to systemic racism.

The podcast has racked up 229 “estimated” subscribers, according to records.

To date, the podcast has cost $971,417.

Dozens of federal departments and agencies have launched podcasts in recent years, with the cost to taxpayers rising to millions of dollars once salary expenses are factored in. 

That’s according to government documents, as well as access-to-information records, obtained by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation.

“Canadians need the government delivering passports, not podcasts,” said Franco Terrazzano, CTF Federal Director. “Can anyone explain why taxpayers are paying for government bureaucrats to spend a bunch of money on podcasts nobody listens to?

“This isn’t providing taxpayers value for money, these podcasts are make-work projects for government bureaucrats we don’t need.”

Take the Eh Sayers Podcast from Statistics Canada, which has 21 episodes since January 2021. Episode topics have ranged from gender identity to climate change and misinformation to systemic racism.

The podcast has racked up 229 “estimated” subscribers, according to records.

To date, the podcast has cost $971,417, meaning taxpayers are on the hook for $4,241 for every subscriber. The podcast averages 1,414 downloads per episode and has 39 reviews on Apple.

There have been anywhere from three to five full-time Statistics Canada employees assigned to the podcast, according to the records.

An August 2023 episode on gender identity begins with a “drag story time” reading from “drag king” Cyril Cinder.

During a December 2023 episode on misinformation, the host and guest talk about the problem with giving “both sides of an issue equal time or consideration.”

An earlier episode, from December 2021, focuses on “the arts and crafts movement across Canada, its renaissance and its necessity.”

“If Statistics Canada bureaucrats want to produce podcasts on gender ideology, climate change or misinformation they can fill their boots on their own time with their own dime,” Terrazzano said. “If you want proof there are too many bureaucrats in Ottawa with too much time and tax dollars on their hands, look no further than these podcasts.”

Or take CCI and CHIN: In Our Words, from Canadian Heritage, that seeks to “preserve” the history of the department “through interviews with current and former staff members.”

Between September 2019 and September 2021, when it was discontinued, the podcast released seven episodes. It has 17 reviews on Apple.

That podcast cost taxpayers $155,736, which works out to a cost of more than $22,000 per episode.

The costs included $9,000 for “podcast training and consulting,” $2,000 for equipment and $115,000 in salary expenses for the full-time staff assigned to it.

The First Sixteen podcast, from Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, explores the “freshest ideas in agriculture and food.” It racked up $30,000 in expenses, on top of the salary costs for the full-time employee who works on it.

Healthy Canadians podcast, from the Public Health Agency of Canada, has four full-time employees assigned to it.

The average compensation for each full-time federal employee is $125,300 when pay, pension, paid time off, shift premiums and other benefits are considered, according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer.

Healthy Canadians also racked up $67,000 in expenses (over and above salary costs), including $34,000 spent on “podcast strategy, editorial planning and employee training.”

Business Unusual, a pandemic-era podcast produced by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, had 13 employees working on it, including two deputy ministers and two executives.

Government records released in November 2023 in response to an order paper question from Conservative MP Rob Moore reveal at least $1.7 million in podcast costs.

But that figure undercounts the true cost to taxpayers, because in most cases the departments did not include salary expenses for staff working on the podcasts.

In every case where salary expenses were included, it was the largest portion of costs.

“No wonder the government is more than $1 trillion in debt when it’s scheming up useless make-work projects for bureaucrats that accomplish nothing more than burning through tax dollars,” Terrazzano said. “With massive deficits and soaring debt, these taxpayer-funded podcasts should be the first thing on the chopping block.”

From Project Confederation

By Josh Andrus

Five years ago, I announced the launch of Project Confederation on Danielle Smith’s CHQR 770 radio show.

That interview changed my life forever.

The project launch was driven by a belief that federal policies – including, but not limited to, the carbon tax – were unfairly targeting Alberta and our economy.

Five years later, we find ourselves opening the next chapter of a long-running saga.

Slowly but surely, Canadians – not just Albertans – have worked out that carbon tax doesn’t make sense, doesn’t work, and isn’t constitutional.

And as the public backlash to the carbon tax grew, the federal government compromised the policy even further, making it even more unpopular and even less constitutional.

On Tuesday, Danielle Smith, now Alberta Premier, announced that her government is going to court to challenge the constitutionality of Ottawa’s selective carbon tax exemption on home heating oils.

The carbon tax, of course, is the levy charged for fuel and combustible waste as outlined in the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act and its regulations.

The carbon tax is a tax on everything.

Every product you consume relies on energy-intensive steps in the production cycle – whether it’s the combines harvesting crops, commercial trucks transporting goods, or the electricity powering lights and refrigeration at the grocery store, just to name a few.

This drives costs up throughout the production process in virtually every industry.

The carbon tax also serves as the flagship policy of the Liberal-NDP coalition government, which took office following the 2019 election – just two days before my first appearance on Danielle Smith’s show.

In the eyes of the federal government, the carbon tax represents a beacon to the world, signalling Canada’s new global position as a green, socialist utopia.

In the eyes of the voters, it represents a symbol of the Trudeau government’s unpopularity, a major contributor to ongoing affordability problems and a sluggish economy.

In the eyes of the provinces, it is a clear violation of provincial jurisdiction.

The Act requires provinces to establish these punitive carbon taxes, and if they don’t, the Act allows for Ottawa to impose carbon pricing.

When it was introduced, it faced immediate legal challenges from Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Ontario.

They were joined in opposition to the law by Quebec, Manitoba and New Brunswick – meaning that six provinces, making up over 80% of the Canadian population, believed the carbon tax was a violation of provincial jurisdiction.

The provinces contended that natural resources fall under provincial authority, and that the carbon tax essentially imposes a levy on resource development.

Ottawa, however, argued that climate change constitutes a national crisis and thus falls under federal responsibility.

In 2021, the Supreme Court ruled in favour of the federal government – on the premise that it could be applied as a “minimum national standard.”

“This is in fact the very premise of a federal scheme that imposes minimum national standards: Canada and the provinces are both free to legislate in relation to the same fact situation but the federal law is paramount.”

Just two years later, the Liberal-NDP coalition completely abandoned the minimum national standard by granting a carbon tax carve-out to home heating oils.

Here’s the catch.

In Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, less than one percent of households use home heating oils to keep their homes warm during cold weather.

That number rises to seven percent in New Brunswick, eighteen percent in Newfoundland and Labrador, thirty-two percent in Nova Scotia and forty percent in Prince Edward Island.

The carbon tax had become such an unpopular policy in Atlantic Canada that the Liberals, trying to stop their collapsing poll numbers, decided to try and regain some votes in the region.

If that weren’t enough, the Liberal government blatantly admitted that the decision was political.

On CTV’s Question Period, Rural Economic Development Minister Gudie Hutchings said  “I can tell you, the (Liberal) Atlantic caucus was vocal with what they’ve heard from their constituents, and perhaps they need to elect more Liberals in the Prairies so that we can have that conversation, as well.”

So much for the “minimum national standard.”

Immediately, the constitutionality of the carbon tax was called into question.

Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe said the move was “not about fairness or about families, it’s only about votes.”

Moe moved swiftly, announcing that SaskEnergy – the Crown corporation that supplies natural gas to residents – would no longer collect or remit the carbon tax on home heating bills in Saskatchewan.

In a misguided effort to curry political favour in the Atlantic provinces, the Liberals have completely compromised the legal standing of the carbon tax and opened the door for provinces to explore new legal avenues against their signature policy.

Now, the Alberta government is seizing that opportunity by filing an application for judicial review of the exemption with the Federal Court, requesting a declaration that the exemption is “both unconstitutional and unlawful.”

“Albertans simply cannot stand by for another winter while the federal government picks and chooses who their carbon tax applies to,” Smith said in a statement. “Since they won’t play fair, we’re going to take the federal government back to court.”

Minister of Justice Mickey Amery added that:

“This exemption is not only unfair to the vast majority of Canadians, but it is also unlawful as the federal government does not have the authority to make special exemptions for certain parts of the country under the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act.”

“The federal government isn’t even following its own laws now. Someone needs to hold them accountable, and Alberta is stepping up to do just that.”

The carbon tax has always been unfair to western Canadians, where households use more energy per capita, thanks to our geography and climate.

In a press conference, Danielle Smith went further, saying:

“We’re calling on (the federal government) to repeal the carbon tax. We’ve been calling for that for years. The retail carbon tax is just punitive to taxpayers. It’s punitive to consumers.”

We agree.

It adds an additional expense at every level of the economy, affecting everything from home heating to transportation, and it creates an environment of higher prices on the goods and services we all rely on.

It’s time to take the action that should have been taken long ago.

It’s time to repeal the carbon tax.

Please sign this petition and join our effort to hold the federal government accountable:

Once you’ve signed, please share with your friends, family, and every Canadian.

Regards,

Josh Andrus
Executive Director
Project Confederation