Excerpts from the latest Fiscal Monitor: 2015 vs 2016

[Rwede]

March 2016: budgetary deficit of $9.4 billion

There was a budgetary deficit of $9.4 billion in March 2016, compared to a budgetary deficit of $3.0 billion reported for March 2015.


April 2015 to March 2016: budgetary deficit of $2.0 billion

For the April to March period of the 2015–16 fiscal year, the Government posted a budgetary deficit of $2.0 billion, compared to a surplus of $2.9 billion reported for the same period of 2014–15.


April 2015 to March 2016

Program expenses increased by $16.6 billion, or 6.6 per cent, to $266.0 billion.


With a budgetary deficit of $2.0 billion and a financial requirement of $10.6 billion from non-budgetary transactions, there was a financial requirement of $12.6 billion for the April 2015 to March 2016 period, compared to a financial requirement of $4.3 billion for the same period the previous year.


Net financing activities up $22.5 billion

The Government financed its financial requirement of $12.6 billion and increased cash balances by $9.9 billion by increasing unmatured debt by $22.5 billion. The increase in unmatured debt was achieved primarily through the issuance of marketable bonds and treasury bills.

[Gone_Fishin]

*removed*

[erinmore3775]

I always find it interesting when a contributor posts a series of snippets from an unnamed report. Then includes as their final statement "The Government financed its financial requirement of $12.6 billion and increased cash balances by $9.9 billion by increasing unmatured debt by $22.5 billion. The increase in unmatured debt was achieved primarily through the issuance of marketable bonds and treasury bills." The inference being that the current federal government is fiscally foolish and a spend thrift out of control.

I would argue that this current government is no different than any other government that has been in power over the last 15 years. In fact their economic plans compare favorably with the best demonstrated fiscal plans of past Liberal and Conservative governments.

Please examine the following detailed references.

http://www.rbc.com/economics/economic-reports/pdf/provincial-forecasts/prov_fiscal.pdf

https://www.fin.gc.ca/fiscmon-revfin/2016-01-eng.asp

The RBC review clearly indicates that when compared to GDP there has been little change in Canada's federal debt ratio or its revenue ratio over the past 15 years. There have been ups and downs but statistically it is a flat line. The differences appear in the program expense ratios and the overall debt amounts required to put these policies/programs in place.

All governments over the past 15 years have grown Canada's debt to implement programs. However, some governments have also been more successful than others in reducing Canada's debt. The federal government of the recent past and it appears this current government had and perhaps will have the poorest records of federal debt reduction. I urge people to compare, from a statistical point of view, the federal fiscal performance and that of BC over the past 15 years. BC is held up as one of the best fiscally manged provinces. The statistics of comparison mirror each other extremely well.

Canada remains a resource based economy. In the past it has been buoyed by its energy and housing sectors. With the collapse of the oil sector, borrowing will be one of the main sources for economic maintenance for the foreseeable future. This is not a question of party, or leadership, or age, or photo ops. It deals with fiscal reality and it is a constant pattern in Canada's fiscal history.