Mc's efforts do seem to be paying off somewhat with a softening of China's trade stance and possibly India's. Don't think the western farmers are unhappy with selling grain to CN of the Maritines selling some lobster. Small incremental stuff but positions are changing and they don't change overnight.
No doubt the spending will come up as there are many projects under consideration.
Some complained about our deteriorating military. neglected for a long time. Now that the chickens are coming home to roost it'll take a few dollars to over several years to, hopefully, come up to snuff.
You going to go see that AVRO in Calgary?
The spending part they have nailed ....... admittedly a long read but for those interested...
Since the Liberals were
elected in October 2015, Canada’s federal debt has roughly doubled in nominal terms, rising from about $615–616 billion in 2015 to around $1.23–1.24 trillion by 2024. A larger increase than all previous Canadian Governments combined right back to Confederation.....
Federal debt at Carney’s start (effectively 2024‑25): roughly $1.35–1.40 trillion.
Federal debt in 2025–26 (latest estimates): roughly $1.42–1.45 trillion, depending on the source and whether you use net or gross debt.
That implies an increase of about $70–100 billion in nominal federal debt since Carney became PM, roughly 5–7% on top of an already‑high base. This is of course in excess of spending from their sources of revenue from taxation for example.
And of course don't forget they have now come up with a new accounting method. The old grifter logic....
The Canadian federal government has introduced a “Capital Budgeting Framework” that splits spending into two high‑level categories:
Operational (day‑to‑day) spending, and
Capital investment (or “investment”) spending.
This doesn’t replace the old Public Accounts format; it adds a parallel lens on how spending is presented in the budget and related documents.
What counts as “operational” spending
Under the new framework, operational spending is essentially what the government spends on running government and paying people, including:
Salaries, benefits, and administration costs.
Transfers to persons (e.g., Old Age Security, GIS, benefits‑type programs).
Transfers to provinces and territories for health, social, and related programs.
These are treated as current‑use expenses, not as investments, and are intended to be constrained by a future “balanced operating budget” target (Carney’s government has signaled a goal of balancing the operating budget by about 2028–29).
What counts as “capital investment” spending
Capital investment is defined broadly as any government expense or tax expenditure that contributes to capital formation, whether the asset sits on the federal books or on those of a private firm, Indigenous community, or another level of government.
How the government reports it now
In practice, the government now:
Maintains the traditional Public Accounts (still compliant with Canadian public‑sector accounting standards), so you can still see the full deficit and debt picture.
Adds a new capital‑investment lens in the federal budget: a separate table or section showing how much is classified as capital investment versus operational spending, even though the budget still shows a single overall deficit number.
Uses this split rhetorically to argue that operating spending is “under control” while borrowing is being used mainly for long‑term investments (which are presented as pay‑for‑themselves over time).
Criticisms and caveats
Watchdogs and economists have pointed out that the definition of “capital investment” is unusually broad—it includes some items that do not appear as capital assets on the government’s balance sheet, which can blur the line between true investment and ordinary spending. The Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO) and think‑tanks argue this risks reducing transparency, because the same dollar of debt can be framed as “investing in the future” instead of “current‑use spending.”
