Check It Out: Spending cut suggestions for government
By Joan Janzen
When asked why she didn't report her stolen credit card, a woman answered, “Because the thief was spending less than me.”
On that note, I'll begin this week's topic on government spending. Franco Terrazzano from the Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF) said in a recent podcast that Canadians often ask how the government can cut spending. Once again, the CTF offered a few suggestions.
Anyone with a microphone and decent lighting can begin doing a podcast at minimal cost; however, the government is not just 'anyone.'
Ryan Thorpe from CTF did some digging and discovered that dozens of federal departments have launched podcasts that Canadians have never heard about. These podcasts are costing taxpayers millions of dollars.
Ryan learned Statistics Canada has a podcast, which costs taxpayers nearly a million dollars to produce. They have released twenty-one episodes since January and have 229 subscribers, who could possibly be other government agencies. Canadians know Statistics Canada as a data collection agency; however, their episodes address topics such as gender identity, climate change, arts and crafts, systemic racism, and misinformation.
The Health Agency of Canada employs four full-time staff members on its podcast. Immigration Refugees and Citizenship Canada has thirteen staffers working on its podcast, including two Deputy Ministers, and outsourced $34,000 in costs on editorial strategy.
"We have people getting paid to do podcasts that no one is watching," Franco observed. But there's more.
Canadian Heritage has a podcast about the history of the Canadian Heritage department, in which they interview current and former staff. The cost per episode works out to be $22,000!
"It's bureaucrats talking to other bureaucrats, and we're paying for it," Ryan observed. Eliminating government podcasts that no one listens to would be a good start on spending cuts.
The CTF has also been reporting that the government wants to move the election date from October 20 to October 27. Apparently, the original date conflicts with the religious holiday of Diwali, but 79 MPs won't be eligible for lifetime pensions until October 21, 2025. In order to qualify for a lifetime pension, an MP needs to have been in parliament for at least six years.
If the election was delayed by a week, these 79 politicians, who have just barely served six years, would each receive a $2 million pension. The total cost to taxpayers would be $120 million. Cipher from Northern Perspective said he did some digging and reported 32 of the MPs were Conservative, 22 Liberal, six NDP and 19 were Bloc Québécois. The Conservatives, Bloc Québécois and the NDP are opposed to moving the election date. An interesting side note: Jagmeet Singh qualifies for his lifetime pension in February 2025.
The CTF reported that MPs' salaries range from $200,000 to $300,000 annually and receive annual pay raises. It's also worth noting that MPs and MLAs who lose their seats or don't seek re-election are eligible for a transition allowance ranging from $36,525 to $109,578, depending on their tenure. They also take home a $100,000 severance.
"So they should be able to save for their own retirement," Franco observed.
An article by Gage Haubrich from CTF said the CTF is calling on the Saskatchewan government to end the transition allowance for former provincial politicians, including MLAs, which will cost taxpayers almost $3 million this year.
"Ordinary Saskatchewanians don't get a golden parachute when they leave their jobs, and we shouldn't be forced to fund one for politicians," Gage said.
Those are a couple of ways the government could easily make significant spending cuts without negatively impacting the lives of everyday Canadians. But you can be sure there are many, many more possibilities because the government thinks of more ways to spend our taxpayer dollars than we ever could.