Mark Carney's has an uncanny ability to trick people into believing he is fiscally responsible as well as a shrewd negotiator. Nothing could be further from the turth.

Carney is as irresponsible with our money as his predecessor. Actually he is more incompetant than Trudeau. And he has Canada on a path similar to what we were in during the early 1990's facing a debt reckoning.

This editorial was written by Lorrie Goldtein of the Toronto Sun.

Study accuses Carney Liberals of 'substantially' worsening federal finances
Combined deficits from 2025-26 to 2029-30 will total $321.7 billion, compared to $154.4 billion projected by Trudeau

Prime Minister Mark Carney plans to spend more and run deficits more than twice as large over the next five years compared to those planned by the previous Liberal government, according to a new study by the Fraser Institute.

As a result, Carney's combined deficits are projected to total $321.7 billion from 2025-26 to 2029-30 — $167.3 billion higher than the $154.4 billion former prime minister Justin Trudeau was projected to spend during the same period, according to the report by the fiscally conservative think-tank.

The study says that will increase the total federal debt to a projected $2.9 trillion in 2029-30 or 79% of GDP.

In addition to running higher deficits, the Fraser Institute report says the Carney government plans to increase spending by $67.6 billion over five years compared to the Trudeau government's projections — $47.8 billion more for new programs and $19.8 billion more for servicing the debt.

Carney vowed 'different approach' to spending
This despite expecting slower total annual revenue growth from 2024-25 to 2029-30 of 14.2% or $72.3 billion, compared to 19.9% or $101.8 billion projected under Trudeau.

The study — "Comparing Federal Fiscal Plans: Is the Carney Government Truly Taking a Different Approach than its Predecessor? — is based on a comparison of the Trudeau government's last fall economic statement or "mini-budget" in December 2024 and Carney's first budget in November 2025.

"During the 2025 election, the Carney government promised to take a very different approach to federal finances than its predecessor," said study co-author Jake Fuss, noting Carney criticized Trudeau for "spending too much."

"But based on his first budget, spending is higher and deficits are double what even Trudeau planned to spend, which substantially worsens the state of federal finances."

Spending 'inappropriately' shifted?
The study is also critical of how Carney's budget divides government spending into operational spending — the cost of running the government — and capital spending on new infrastructure, while projecting a balanced operating budget by 2028-29.

While this is sensible in theory, the Fraser Institute study notes, the Parliamentary Budget Office has reported that 30% or $94 billion of the capital spending proposed in Carney's budget isn't, in fact, capital spending, but increased operating spending that may or may not lead to the creation of new assets.

"Simply put, nearly a third of the Carney government's planned capital investments should not be considered as such and instead represent operating spending or tax credits that have been inappropriately shifted over to the capital side of the budget," the Fraser Institute report says.

"Correcting this miscalculation shows that the Carney government is set to fall short of its commitment to balance operating spending against revenues."

Canadians know they live in a country that has embraced big government as the path to economic prosperity, but just how big it has become is alarming, and a new study says it is curtailing economic growth.

The fiscally conservative Fraser Institute, in a report released Thursday, estimates total public spending by federal, provincial and municipal governments grew to 43.6% of Canada's GDP in 2024, up from 37.4% in 2007 and far higher than the optimal level for economic growth of 26% to 30%.

"Put simply, the size of government in every Canadian province is above the optimal size to maximize economic growth," said Jake Fuss, co-author of the study, The Size of Government in Canada, 2024.

"In some provinces, it is twice as large as the optimal size."

In 2024, the only province where total government spending was close to 30% of GDP was Alberta, at 30.4%.

From 2007 to 2024, the size of government relative to the economy increased in nine of 10 provinces (except for P.E.I.), while from 2019 to 2024 it increased in every province.

In many provinces, government spending as a percentage of GDP is staggering — 61.2% in Nova Scotia in 2024; 60.6% in New Brunswick; 58.7% in P.E.I.; 52.7% in Manitoba; 50.1% in Quebec; 49.7% in Newfoundland and Labrador; 43.4% in Ontario; 40% in B.C.; 39.7% in Saskatchewan; 30.4% in Alberta.

At the same time, public sector employment steadily increased to 21.5% of all Canadian workers in 2024 and is now at its highest level since 2007, when it was 19.2%.

During that period, public sector employment in every province increased as a share of total employment.

As for what effect this rapid growth in the size and cost of government had on our economy, Prime Minister Mark Carney, when he was campaigning for Liberal leader, cited the high operational costs of the federal government as one of the reasons our economy was weak before U.S. President Donald Trump launched his global tariff war.

Over the past decade, Canada experienced the worst record of economic growth as defined by real GDP per capita, a widely accepted metric of the standard of living, of any federal government since that of R.B. Bennett during the Great Depression.
https://torontosun.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-big-government-cut-economic-growth

Neither Carney nor any premier is learning their lesson. They keep growing the size of their government. They keep spending more money, hiring more unnecessary employees, adding new bureaucracies and creating new red tape.

Millions of Americans can now claim Canadian citizenship by descent under Bill C-3.
Hopefully they're all conservatives.

This is a complete lie by Mark Carney.

Responding to the disastrous February job loss of 84k, Carney claims Canada gained NET 80,000 jobs:

"If you look at the performance of the labour market over the course of the last 6 months, we have created over 80,000 jobs net."

Here are the facts, over the last 6 months:
(September - February)

Total employed went from 21.039M to 20.783K = 255.8K job loss.

Private Sector went from 13.748M to 13.479M = 269.2k job loss.

Public Sector went from 4.598M to 4.623M = 25.7k job gain.

Either Mark Carney is lying or completely clueless to what is going on in Canada. Both are equally alarming.

https://x.com/KirkLubimov/status/2032513786331140259

This Liberal Party's obsession with our emissions is a big part of why Canada is losing it's developed country status.

Every Goddamn Liberal and NDP MP.

by  Joseph Fournier
Commentary
Canada is facing a productivity crisis that can no longer be waved away as a statistical quirk or an academic concern. The Bank of Canada has warned repeatedly that our economic output per worker is falling behind our peers, and the consequences are already visible: stagnant wages, declining investment, and a shrinking capacity to compete in global markets.
Yet at the very moment when the country needs to unleash its most productive industries, the federal government continues to tax them more heavily than any other advanced economy.
The industrial carbon tax, part of the federal carbon pricing system for large industrial facilities, is a direct tax on productivity itself.
Imagine a worker who generates five days' worth of revenue for their employer while only working four. That is what high productivity looks like: more value created per hour, more prosperity per unit of effort.
Now imagine forcing that same worker to perform the same job while carrying a backpack full of rocks. They may still get the work done, but they will do it more slowly, at greater cost, and with less competitive edge.
This is precisely what the industrial carbon tax is doing to Canada's most productive sectors.
The tax will ultimately add roughly $8 to $9 per gigajoule to natural gas, while the fuel itself costs only about $1.70 per gigajoule in Alberta. It will drive up the cost of that energy to four to five times its original price.
No industrial economy can thrive under a regime where the tax on energy dwarfs the cost of the energy itself. And no government that claims to care about productivity can justify a policy that forces factories, mills, refineries, and food processors to pay dramatically more for industrial heat than their competitors across the border.
This is not an abstract concern. It is already showing up in grocery bills. Canadians are bracing for what many economists warn will be a second wave of food inflation. The first wave was triggered by the global supply chain rupture during the 2020–22 COVID-19 lockdowns.
The second wave is being manufactured domestically under federal policy.
A large industrial bakery or food processor in Alberta or Saskatchewan will have to pay far more to fire its ovens and dryers than a similar plant in the United States, where recent regulatory changes have removed federal climate policy constraints on industrial energy use.
When a Canadian plant pays significantly more for heat than a competitor in North Dakota, the outcome is inevitable: higher prices and a growing incentive to shift production south. That pressure extends beyond a single plant. This is the quiet part of the productivity crisis that few in Ottawa seem willing to acknowledge.
Canada's highest productivity industries are also its most energy reliant.
Mining, refining, petrochemicals, steelmaking, fertilizer production, and advanced manufacturing all rely on large volumes of affordable, reliable energy. These sectors routinely generate labour productivity far above the national average and pay wages that support families, communities, and regional economies.
They are the backbone of the country's export capacity and the anchor of its industrial base.
When the cost of energy rises by a factor of five, companies do not simply absorb the difference. They cut investment, delay expansion, automate more slowly, reduce hiring, offer smaller wage increases, or close facilities entirely.
A tax that was sold as a tool to reduce emissions has become a tool that reduces productivity, competitiveness, and national resilience.
The timing could not be worse.
Since 2020, Canadians have been leaving Toronto, Vancouver, and Montreal in record numbers and moving toward rural and mid-sized communities where industrial jobs still offer stability. That shift represents a quiet but powerful rebalancing of the national economy.
But the industrial carbon tax is choking off the very industries that make this rural revival possible. Blue-collar jobs in mining, energy, construction, and manufacturing are the front line of Canada's productivity recovery. They are also the sectors most exposed to global competition.
When Ottawa forces these industries to pay dramatically more for energy than their American counterparts, it is effectively asking Canadian workers to run a marathon while breathing through a straw.
Taxing the energy required to transport Canadian goods to global markets guarantees that the United States will remain our dominant trading partner, not because of geography, but because Ottawa has made every other market prohibitively expensive to reach.
Canada cannot tax its way to higher productivity, and it cannot punish its most productive industries without harming national prosperity.
The industrial carbon tax must end.
Canadians should demand a credible plan from Ottawa to attract investment into the sectors that actually generate wealth: mining, refining, petrochemicals, manufacturing, and energy.
These industries built the country once and they can do it again if government gets out of the way.
Joseph Fournier is a senior fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

We just recently imported LNG from Australia.
If it were the other way around, Canadians would be richer AND Australia wouldn't be facing critical shortages.

Instead of prioritizing unemployed young Canadians for jobs, training, and workforce opportunities, the Liberals want to expand Express Entry immigration.

That will only push young Canadians further away from jobs that get them the income and experience they need.

Current immigration levels are already straining housing, healthcare, and job opportunities for Canadians.

While there STILL isn't any clear plan on how the THREE MILLION non-citizen temporary residents whose permits expire by the end of 2026 will leave Canada once their visas expire.

Justine and the Conman are accomplishing their goal.