‘When you ditch consolidated spending figures… it makes it difficult to get a full financial picture,’ said economist Trevor Tombe
Published Feb 21, 2025 • Last updated 2 minutes ago • 3 minute read
You can save this article by registering for free here. Or sign-in if you have an account.
Mark Carney, candidate for the leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada, arrives during a news conference in Vancouver, B.C., Thursday, Feb. 13, 2025.Photo by ETHAN CAIRNS /THE CANADIAN PRESS
Article content
OTTAWA — Liberal leadership candidate Mark Carney’s new pitch for separate federal operating and capital budgets has some Albertans feeling a tinge of déjà vu, and not the warm and fuzzy sort.
Trevor Tombe, an economist at the University of Calgary, says he immediately noticed the similarities between Carney’s proposal and short-lived accounting rules introduced by then Alberta Progressive Conservative premier Alison Redford more than a decade ago.
Advertisement 2
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS
Enjoy the latest local, national and international news.
Exclusive articles by Conrad Black, Barbara Kay and others. Plus, special edition NP Platformed and First Reading newsletters and virtual events.
Unlimited online access to National Post and 15 news sites with one account.
National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on.
Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword.
Support local journalism.
SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE ARTICLES
Enjoy the latest local, national and international news.
Exclusive articles by Conrad Black, Barbara Kay and others. Plus, special edition NP Platformed and First Reading newsletters and virtual events.
Unlimited online access to National Post and 15 news sites with one account.
National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on.
Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword.
Support local journalism.
REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES
Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.
Access articles from across Canada with one account.
Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments.
Enjoy additional articles per month.
Get email updates from your favourite authors.
THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK.
Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.
Access articles from across Canada with one account
Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments
Enjoy additional articles per month
Get email updates from your favourite authors
Don’t have an account? Create Account
or
Article content
“That was my first thought,” said Tombe. “And it wasn’t a good thought, because it was a disaster when Redford tried that in the 2010s.”
The new accounting rules, first used in Redford’s 2013 budget, divided public expenditures into three categories: operational spending, capital spending and savings.
Redford and then finance minister Doug Horner said at the time the new rules would give Albertans a clearer picture of how their tax dollars were being spent.
Tombe says, with hindsight, the opposite was the case.
“When you ditch consolidated spending figures, and sort everything into these different buckets, that becomes a problem, because it makes it difficult to get a full financial picture,” said Tombe.
Tombe said the convoluted accounting in Redford’s 2013 and 2014 budgets left him and other economists having to add up some of the numbers on their own.
And it wasn’t just the ivory-tower eggheads who were rankled, as Redford’s contentious accounting rules soon became a political albatross.
Alberta’s auditor general slammed the two Redford budgets for failing to meet “basic public sector accounting standards” in a scathing mid-2014 report. Critics on the right linked the fast-and-loose accounting rules to the ballooning of the province’s debt under Redford’s watch.
First Reading
Your guide to the world of Canadian politics. (Subscriber exclusive on Saturdays)
By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc.
Thanks for signing up!
A welcome email is on its way. If you don’t see it, please check your junk folder.
The next issue of First Reading will soon be in your inbox.
We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again
Article content
Advertisement 3
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
“It’s fair to say that (Redford) made choices to hide the deficit,” said Tombe.
Multiple scandals surrounding Redford’s personal use of taxpayer dollars led to her resignation in March 2014, just two years into her mandate.
Shortly after Redford’s departure, six former Alberta ministers of finance and treasury board presidents wrote a joint op-ed in the Calgary Herald calling on the next Progressive Conservative leader to ditch Redford’s accounting rules and go back to the ones used under Ralph Klein.
One of the editorial’s co-authors, Ted Morton, said that bringing in the widely panned accounting rules was Redford’s “third and final strike” as premier.
Carney’s campaign announced on Wednesday that, if he becomes prime minister, he’ll split the federal government’s operating and capital budgets as part of a plan to “spend less and invest more.”
Carney says he’ll balance operational spending, such as program spending and transfers to provinces and individuals, over his first three years in office.
He added, in a Wednesday interview, that he was willing to continue borrowing money indefinitely to finance major capital projects like pipelines and transportation infrastructure.
Advertisement 4
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
“Where we are willing to borrow is to invest and grow this economy,” said Carney.
Economist and former finance official Jack Mintz says that capital-based budgeting schemes like the one floated by Carney tend to run into spending problems, largely because capital is a hard concept to define.
“One of the issues to get into is, how do you define capital? And some of the governments would go, like, if you spend money on teachers, you’re creating human capital. So that’s becomes capital,” said Mintz.
“In the end, it doesn’t matter, because if you take capital out, and you don’t have revenues to cover it, then you’re going to have borrow money, and your debt is going to go up.“
Get more deep-dive National Post political coverage and analysis in your inbox with the Political Hack newsletter, where Ottawa bureau chief Stuart Thomson and political analyst Tasha Kheiriddin get at what’s really going on behind the scenes on Parliament Hill every Wednesday and Friday, exclusively for subscribers.Sign up here.
Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.