Mark Slapinski - Carney’s Budget Officer Sounds Warning Bell

00:00:00.040 Mark Carney's right-hand man has an urgent warning.

00:00:03.040 If the Canadian Prime Minister doesn't immediately resign,

00:00:05.820 Canada is going to go bankrupt.

00:00:07.920 It's unclear what strategy the government will actually employ politically,

00:00:11.600 but opposition parties are also figuring out

00:00:13.400 if they're willing to force an election over this budget

00:00:15.520 due to be tabled Tuesday.

00:00:17.160 On the content of the budget,

00:00:18.720 government sources tell us the document itself has not been finalized.

00:00:22.040 So what do we need to watch for?

00:00:23.880 Jason Jakes is the Interim Parliamentary Budget Officer.

00:00:26.700 Hi, Mr. Jakes. Pleasure to welcome you back to studio.

00:00:28.580 Thanks for making the time.

00:00:29.400 Oh, my gosh. Thank you so much for the invitation.

00:00:31.420 We're all, of course, thinking of and looking ahead to the budget.

00:00:34.620 You've got a new report out today on capital spending on defense

00:00:38.540 that I think is kind of interesting in the context of the budget.

00:00:41.360 You make two very specific findings about how much they're spending now

00:00:45.620 and also how much they've been unable to spend.

00:00:48.080 What do you think Canadians should know about that

00:00:51.080 in light of the budget coming down the road?

00:00:53.500 Well, I think on your first point,

00:00:55.760 I think that's one of the key highlights,

00:00:57.700 and that we currently have within the government of Canada's spending plan for defense.

00:01:03.080 So this is the capital plan.

00:01:04.660 So this is the F-35s along with the Navy and other types of armaments.

00:01:11.160 We're looking at around $300 billion over the next 20 years,

00:01:14.540 and that's only for NATO 2%.

00:01:17.420 So this goes back, the data we're looking at goes back to June.

00:01:20.800 It does not include the additional commitment that's been made since that period of time

00:01:24.900 to get up to NATO 5%.

00:01:26.300 So if we're at 2%, $300 billion at 2%, we're looking at substantially more.

00:01:32.540 So additional potentially hundreds of billions of dollars on defense in order to hit those targets.

00:01:37.460 So let me translate what he's saying here.

00:01:39.900 Canada is in serious trouble and Carney needs to step down.

00:01:43.920 Of course, he's being a bit more gentle with his words than I am,

00:01:47.100 but I'm going to say it straight.

00:01:48.600 He's saying that Carney needs to go.

00:01:50.720 Put it this way, if Carney doesn't step down or he's not forced out next week,

00:01:55.160 Canada is going to be in more debt than it's ever been in before.

00:01:58.300 Just a quick note, I'm being heavily censored on YouTube.

00:02:02.120 So if you see this part, let me know in the comment section,

00:02:04.780 give me a quick like, and make sure you're still subscribed.

00:02:08.000 Thank you.

00:02:08.660 Now let's watch Parliamentary Budget Officer Jason Jakes

00:02:11.320 continue to give Canada more bad news about the upcoming budget.

00:02:14.940 In historical context, like how much is that?

00:02:18.860 How much money is that compared to what we usually spend?

00:02:22.420 It is, historically, it is a multiple of what most Canadians would be familiar with.

00:02:27.860 I know there are probably some viewers who would remember World War II,

00:02:32.140 so we're getting close to that period of time,

00:02:35.040 a little bit after probably the 1950s or so.

00:02:38.820 I think during the 1980s and 1970s,

00:02:41.420 we would see defense spending at around 3% of GDP, 3.5%,

00:02:45.300 going up to 5%, even with the dual purpose aspect.

00:02:49.960 So spending on infrastructure that could be used for defense as well as other areas,

00:02:53.700 even with that, it's a very high number.

00:02:56.700 And critically, it's a really big increase within a very short period of time.

00:03:01.560 So in that context, I actually want to ask you,

00:03:03.140 because part of your analysis also reflected on the allocation of money,

00:03:07.380 but not spending it over time.

00:03:09.200 And I'm wondering, given that the scope of the planned increase,

00:03:12.980 if that would be a concern for you moving forward?

00:03:15.440 I think it's less of a concern for us,

00:03:20.340 because we only keep track of the numbers in the budget.

00:03:22.980 It definitely should be a concern for the government,

00:03:25.440 because as you point out, what we've seen,

00:03:27.540 at least in the first five or six years of the original plan,

00:03:30.620 was that there's close to $20 billion that they planned to spend on equipment.

00:03:34.600 That was not spent.

00:03:36.460 And in the situation where not only do you have to spend the money

00:03:39.120 to achieve the NATO commitment,

00:03:40.800 but as everyone realizes there are very real and imminent threats

00:03:44.320 the Canada faces at this point,

00:03:46.000 you actually need to procure the equipment and the material.

00:03:49.160 And as time goes by, if you're not able to spend the money,

00:03:52.380 you're not able to procure the equipment.

00:03:54.600 And as well, from an accounting perspective,

00:03:56.980 everyone knows how pernicious inflation is.

00:03:59.520 And so if you don't actually acquire the equipment in the time period provided,

00:04:05.740 by the time you do, the money is worth less.

00:04:08.440 So potentially you have to buy less than when you originally anticipated,

00:04:12.120 or you have to pay more, or a combination of the two.

00:04:15.180 So the overall budget is under a week away.

00:04:18.320 When you get that budget and you're able to look at it,

00:04:21.200 what kinds of fiscal anchors will you be utilizing to assess the sustainability?

00:04:26.640 I think the first one is the one that most economists would look to.

00:04:32.180 And I'd say it's the one that the government of Canada has looked to in the past,

00:04:35.720 and that's the debt-to-GDP anchor.

00:04:38.720 So what does debt look like in comparison to the overall economy?

00:04:43.400 And is debt growing faster than overall economic growth?

00:04:46.840 And the government of Canada itself has indicated that a declining debt-to-GDP ratio

00:04:51.300 is a very important indicator of fiscal sustainability,

00:04:54.140 as well as important for ensuring or securing Canada's AAA credit rating.

00:04:58.720 It's also something that the Liberal Party of Canada campaigned on

00:05:01.520 as part of their election platform in April.

00:05:04.900 And most recently, the Prime Minister indicated, I believe it was September 17th,

00:05:10.260 that declining debt was something that was part of the fiscal anchors

00:05:13.800 for the current government.

00:05:14.960 So that's definitely the first thing that I'll be looking at.

00:05:17.320 Based on what you've seen announced thus far,

00:05:20.140 and quite a bit has come out about what their intended spending is,

00:05:23.200 we don't know necessarily exactly what they're going to do

00:05:27.020 on the spending where government operations are concerned.

00:05:30.440 But based on what you've seen so far,

00:05:32.260 do you think it is realistic that that ratio would go down?

00:05:36.820 It's definitely possible.

00:05:38.380 And I think certainly, again, we don't have a lot of clarity right now,

00:05:42.460 precisely what the government has in mind.

00:05:44.000 One could foresee a situation where spending and the deficits

00:05:48.440 are substantially higher in the initial years,

00:05:50.580 and there's a substantial increase in spending on capital.

00:05:53.960 And at the same time, in the outer years,

00:05:56.160 economic growth as a result of those investments starts to pick up.

00:05:59.840 And as a result of that,

00:06:00.840 you have a declining debt-to-GDP ratio in the outer years.

00:06:04.200 And that's, again, what one would hope to see

00:06:06.400 with the potential additional spending that's on the table.

00:06:09.420 The other point of consideration,

00:06:11.040 and something else that we're going to be looking at in detail

00:06:13.400 on this coming Tuesday on the budget, are the cuts.

00:06:17.880 So the Prime Minister has used the word austerity.

00:06:20.660 And I was working for the Parliamentary Budget Office in 2012

00:06:23.740 with Kevin Page,

00:06:25.300 when Kevin had to take the government to court

00:06:27.360 around the transparency or lack thereof

00:06:29.800 with respect to the impact of the cuts.

00:06:32.240 So something we're going to be looking at in detail is,

00:06:35.400 are the cuts actually provided?

00:06:37.560 Is there a listing of the cuts?

00:06:38.640 Can we see the cuts by program?

00:06:41.500 Do we know which public servants are being laid off across those programs?

00:06:45.920 And can the government actually articulate clear service-level impacts?

00:06:50.440 Because if...

00:06:51.200 Is that what constitutes transparency in your mind?

00:06:53.760 Like, those things need to be spelled out?

00:06:55.480 You can't just say, you know,

00:06:56.980 we're going to adjust the workforce by 10,000?

00:06:59.860 Oh, no.

00:07:00.400 And again, going back to the precedent set by Kevin

00:07:03.780 and the office as part of Budget 2012,

00:07:06.340 that's the foundation.

00:07:07.720 Without that information,

00:07:08.800 parliamentarians,

00:07:09.900 they really won't know what they're voting on

00:07:11.640 in terms of spending constraint and cuts.

00:07:14.060 So that's something that we're definitely going to be looking at in detail

00:07:16.960 as soon as we get our hands on the budget.

00:07:19.400 One final question for you on the scope of those cuts.

00:07:21.720 Because yesterday, the finance minister said something very interesting,

00:07:24.620 which I had not heard him say before

00:07:26.420 in response to questions about what you just mentioned.

00:07:28.520 In that, basically, the size of the public service

00:07:32.300 had to get to a more sustainable level.

00:07:35.200 Sustainable is the word, I believe, that he used.

00:07:37.480 And he referenced a period before COVID.

00:07:40.240 If you look at the size of the public service now

00:07:42.720 versus pre-pandemic,

00:07:44.620 what would the scope of that kind of cut look like?

00:07:48.620 Yeah.

00:07:49.400 If you go back to pre-pandemic,

00:07:52.840 you're looking at tens of thousands of positions

00:07:55.880 potentially eliminated across the public service.

00:07:58.520 Again, on our end,

00:08:01.540 something, it's less about the people

00:08:03.660 and it's really about the programs.

00:08:05.440 So public servants are hired to support government programs

00:08:08.960 that the people of Canada benefit from.

00:08:11.880 And that's why, notwithstanding,

00:08:13.900 it's a good starting point to figure out

00:08:15.360 how many public servants might be affected

00:08:17.520 by the budget on Tuesday.

00:08:18.620 What we're more interested in is

00:08:20.920 what are the actual service-level impacts

00:08:22.940 and what are Canadians going to feel?

00:08:25.260 Because on our end,

00:08:26.160 one of the things that,

00:08:27.280 as an independent parliamentary budget office,

00:08:29.280 one of the things we've seen in the past

00:08:30.600 is if the government doesn't have a clear sense

00:08:33.040 of the service-level impacts,

00:08:34.680 there's a very high risk of retrenchment.

00:08:36.960 So if something is announced,

00:08:38.440 the service-level impacts are significant,

00:08:40.760 and politically,

00:08:41.540 it's not sustainable to actually carry it out

00:08:43.940 or actually implement

00:08:44.740 what they've initially announced.

00:08:46.040 And just to be clear,

00:08:47.080 is it acceptable if they say

00:08:48.600 stage one in this budget is the volume,

00:08:51.240 stage two is figuring out how that unfolds?

00:08:55.240 I guess it comes back to,

00:08:56.640 as a transparency organization,

00:08:59.100 absolutely not.

00:09:00.160 Okay.

00:09:00.540 Yeah.

00:09:01.080 Canada is at a very important crossroads right now,

00:09:03.940 arguably more important than any other crossroads

00:09:06.380 that we've ever been at before,

00:09:08.160 even more so than World War II.

00:09:10.380 On one hand,

00:09:11.060 we have the option of MPs doing the right thing

00:09:13.300 and forcing Carney out of parliament.

00:09:15.640 On the other hand,

00:09:16.960 MPs can vote with Carney,

00:09:19.180 and his budget will destroy our economy

00:09:21.240 and the lives of her children

00:09:22.820 and her grandchildren.

00:09:24.580 Now, Carney would be right to resign.

00:09:26.900 However, a man with an ego as big as his

00:09:29.380 simply will not do the right thing.

00:09:31.660 Now, of course,

00:09:32.420 Carney's PBO,

00:09:33.820 the parliamentary budget officer,

00:09:35.540 didn't directly call for Carney's resignation.

00:09:38.280 But if you listen closely,

00:09:39.780 if you read between the lines,

00:09:41.020 that's exactly what he's saying.

00:09:43.300 If this budget passes,

00:09:44.880 we're going to be living under austerity measures

00:09:46.820 that are worse than World War II,

00:09:49.300 and that's with the sky-high trillion dollar deficit

00:09:52.820 that comes along with it.

00:09:54.360 Carney misled Canadians.

00:09:56.160 He misled voters.

00:09:57.500 He misled the liberals.

00:09:59.000 He misled everyone.

00:10:00.380 He's supposed to get a deal with Donald Trump.

00:10:02.220 It's been eight months.

00:10:03.300 There's no deal.

00:10:04.500 Actually, we have worse tariffs

00:10:05.860 than we did before he got into office.

00:10:08.140 He was supposed to fix the economy.

00:10:09.560 He was supposed to get projects going.

00:10:11.940 Build, baby, build.

00:10:12.720 Those were his words.

00:10:14.120 Where are the projects?

00:10:15.440 Canada doesn't have one major project

00:10:17.760 that has been passed by him

00:10:19.760 since he's been in office.

00:10:21.440 Let that one sink in.

00:10:22.800 All Carney has done

00:10:23.700 is use the prime minister's office

00:10:25.420 to enrich himself,

00:10:26.840 and he's using taxpayer money

00:10:28.280 as his personal ATM.

00:10:30.600 He's flying all over the world,

00:10:32.500 staying at nice hotels,

00:10:34.140 eating fancy meals,

00:10:35.940 burning money like it doesn't mean nothing.

00:10:38.000 And of course,

00:10:39.440 your money doesn't mean anything to him

00:10:41.200 because he can take it

00:10:42.520 whether you like it or not.

00:10:44.420 And on top of that,

00:10:45.040 he's got a bunch of stupid people

00:10:46.260 that will vote for him

00:10:47.340 no matter what he does.

00:10:48.600 People in Canada,

00:10:49.620 including children,

00:10:50.680 are literally starving.

00:10:52.280 And I'm not being hyperbolic.

00:10:54.100 Food bank usage in this country

00:10:55.660 has more than doubled since 2019.

00:10:58.520 Trudeau created the mess,

00:11:00.140 and Carney is making it worse.

00:11:02.300 Now I hope more Canadians are waking up

00:11:04.260 and realizing that Carney is a fraud.

00:11:06.640 Now, of course,

00:11:08.200 most liberals will never wake up,

00:11:10.120 but all we need is enough liberals

00:11:11.560 to wake up,

00:11:12.700 admit that they made a mistake,

00:11:14.780 and vote blue next time.

00:11:16.600 The good news is that

00:11:17.440 we might have a Christmas election.

00:11:19.380 So if Canadians come to their senses,

00:11:21.720 some of them realize

00:11:22.600 they made a mistake,

00:11:23.380 the liberal ones,

00:11:24.500 they vote Polly Eve,

00:11:25.700 we could have a majority,

00:11:27.620 possibly a supermajority.

00:11:29.280 Once again,

00:11:30.240 have some faith,

00:11:31.420 have some patience,

00:11:32.680 we're going to win,

00:11:33.580 and we're going to win big.

00:11:34.400 Have a great night,

00:11:35.840 have a great weekend,

00:11:37.060 happy Halloween.

Mark Slapinski - November 01, 2025

Carney’s Budget Officer Sounds Warning Bell

Episode Stats

Length

Words per Minute

Word Count

Sentence Count

Summary

Transcript