Skip to main content
Search Liberal.ca

[Info-graphic] Canada’s national debt : Liberals vs. Conservatives

Posted on March 28, 2012 | No Comments

Canada's National Debt


 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Sign up for updates

Help spread the word by sharing this with your friends.

Short link:

Email this to your friends.
Sender: Sender:
Recipients: Recipients:

Load from: Gmail · Yahoo! · Hotmail · AOL

Personal Message: Personal Message:

We will never share your email address.

We'd love to hear your opinion. Your comments won't be posted on the website.
Sender: Sender:

We will never share your email address.

Join the conversation  

Please note that comments are moderated with the goal of stimulating an intelligent and fruitful discussion. As such, we ask that you use language that is civil and respectful, and refrain from attacks of any kind. We reserve the right to remove or not post any comments or information that does not meet these requirements.
  1. Avatar of Donald Richard Truman Donald Richard Truman said on

    This is the sort of clarity the dictators in the reform party will never understand. Keep up the excellent work.

    Vote
      0  
  2. Avatar of Jeff Marshall Jeff Marshall said on

    Flaherty is already bringing up “draconian” cuts of Chretien and Martin. Lets include Mulrooney on this graph to illustrate the situation the Conservatives left then

    Vote
      0  
  3. Avatar of Bruno Santia Bruno Santia said on

    I like the graph idea but I ask myself…”how would Harper and the Conservatives respond to this?” …..and here is the trap…

    They would claim they were in a minority situation and were pushed by Liberals, among others, to stimulate, stimulate, stimulate….which brings us to the belt squeeze we’ll see in tomorrow’s budget.

    They will twist the facts and figures to reflect their intended message…

    Smarter people than me have already warned in these pages that we can’t win an “ad” fight with them. They have deeper pockets right now. We can win the hearts of Canadians, hands down, if we focus our collective efforts and communicating our vision of a Future Canada with central Liberal values…

    Vote
      0  
    • Avatar of Martin Showell Martin Showell said on

      I get your point Bruno. But, I don’t think the conservatives are going to say the Liberals “pushed” them into making decisions, that makes them look weak and it’s not their style. Besides, pretty easily countered anyway.

      I think the bigger point is … wouldn’t it be nice to see the conservatives on the defensive for a change? See them dance and equivocate and prevaricate and point fingers, cry foul and say “but we had to – the Liberals made us”.

      I’d kinda like to see that :-)

      Vote
        0  
      • Avatar of Bruno Santia Bruno Santia said on

        Good point Martin, and therein lies the value of the exchange of ideas on this site.

        That said, i really wonder if now is the right time to spend money when they seem to be self-destructing and on the run anyway.

        I was the first to contribute and challenge other members to join me in supporting a response. (yes, 24 hours before the official request came down. This site has my challenge and time submitted)
        BUT, in further reflection, I think we may be wiser to bank the money and watch them deal with their budget challenges.

        Whenever we do decide to respond, I do encourage us us to do do as The Liberal party not any individual!

        Vote
          0  
        • Avatar of Martin Showell Martin Showell said on

          I’ve been thinking the same thing – bide our time and save our money. Now that the initial “sting” of that attack on Mr. Rae has worn off a bit, cooler thoughts prevail.

          I particularly like the message from Mssr. Trudeau: “So you may see an ad that takes on Stephen Harper – on his record, built on facts and figures – launched at an opportune moment. But more likely, you’ll see ads, released over time, that tell the story of what Liberals believe in and want to work with Canadians to build.”

          We’ll see what the party brain trust comes up with.

          Vote
            0  
  4. Avatar of Don Girard Don Girard said on

    The chart idea is good, it puts real perspective to the numbers that are other wise mind boggling. I think if we had charts showing the public sector employment numbers and payroll costs over the same period we could show that some of the numbers the conservatives have used were manipulated by their spending habits, like hiring more people to keep unemployment numbers down, as Mulroney did with people who did not even show up for a job and still got paid.

    A chart to show the cost of the jets verses the costs of operating and maintaining those jets, the purchase price I bet will appear inconsequential.

    These are the types of things we have to do publically, charts etc to show what we did after the Mulroney fiasco, charts to show what we would have done so far in the Harper reign, as opposed to the things we catered to in order to keep parliament running, as co-operative players in the minority government.

    I would also like to see a chart to show pension benefits of average Canadians, public sector workers, and politicians. Canadians would vote for us big time if we made us all equal citizens when it comes to pensions, since the majority of us pay for pensions we do not even have access to. It seems that politicians think they are better then average Canadians, or work harder, or ?? how they think other then greed. I do not think our own politicians would like this, but I bet our membership would have a different perspective.

    WE do not have to defend these charts, as long as they are honest, and we can put them on TV often at minimal time spaces, social media, etc.
    Ask me for more money for these and I will donate, ask me for money to counter CPC attack ads with like ads and I will not.

    Vote
      0  
  5. Avatar of Debby Somfay Debby Somfay said on

    Would it be too risky in having a graph that also demonstrates what happens when you decrease the GST over time? Revenue .less…less ,less

    Vote
      0  
  6. Avatar of Aaron Bouman Aaron Bouman said on

    The fact of the matter must be made known, conservatives caused the recession. When Brian Mulroney introduced free trade it immediatly began the out sourcing of Ontario’s manufacturing sector, leaving the province to pay the welfare bill: but with less taxable income and greater demand for public revenue borrowing was Premier Rae’s only option short of Harris cuts. Then Harper signed NAFTA and multinational corporate out sourcing continued the de-industrialization of the province, now with record deficits and unemployment Ontario is headed for bankruptcy. The Conservatives sold us out, the next generation is inheriting their deficit trade policies just like America inherited their trade deficit from Reagan. Now Flaherty, the man who bankrupted Ontario under Mike Harris, is our finance Minister. Ontario’s deficit is an indicator of the lost taxable income from free trade, now to add to this crippling burden the federal cons want to download their deficit on to the provinces, just like how Harris downloaded his loss of revenue from tax cuts on to the municipalities. So what do the parties propose we do? The cons want to privatize and cut, the NDP want to stick their head in the sand and keep spending. McGuinty wants modest realistic cuts to reduce long term interst payments with out shock therapy. The problem is the fallacy that the cons are reducing the deficit when they are causing it, but they repeat their lies so many times people begin to think its true.

    Vote
      0  
  7. Avatar of chris larsen chris larsen said on

    Dear Liberal Party the graph is not in constant dollars making the graph useless and meaningless. Aaron blaming everything on free trade is interesting but it begs a simple question where there recessions before free trade?

    Vote
      0  
    • Avatar of Martin Showell Martin Showell said on

      Could you explain “constant dollars” please?

      Vote
        0  
  8. Avatar of Aaron Bouman Aaron Bouman said on

    There were recessions before free trade because of usury and fractional reserve central banking, which is aggravated if unregulated. Free trade is a caatalyst because it greatly accelerates deficits and inflation by increasing unemployment, increasing demand for public revenue while decreasing taxable income. The extreme opposite of free trade can cause recessions by cutting off investments, if population grows faster than GDP this can also cause recessions.

    Vote
      0  
    • Avatar of Bruno Santia Bruno Santia said on

      At the risk of coming across as a total ignoramus, can you please explain to some of us non-financial gurus what you just said?

      Vote
        0  
  9. Avatar of Aaron Bouman Aaron Bouman said on

    But free trade isn’t the only conservative policy causing the recession. Deficit spending on prisons when crime is down and on pointless wars is also hurting the budget, toughening laws to put more people in jail for drug use will cost more. We’ll have to pay for these people when they are in jail and when they can’t get a job with a criminal record. Harper’s support for the NAFTA super highway will worsen the recession, making the province pay for the crime bill will also hurt. Billions were wasted on G20, if Harper can get his internet surveillance aganda forwarded that will increase internet bills. Cutting taxes is decreasing government revenue increasing cuts and the deficit, corporate tax cuts are subsidizing out sourcing and millionaires’ pay check; they aren’t going to hire Canadians when Harper’s NAFTA gives them a cheaper foreign labor market in places like communist china.

    Vote
      0  
    • Avatar of Don Girard Don Girard said on

      One must not forget the foreign farm workers we pay to fly here and then pay at a rate that puts our workers our of work, so that we can compete with cheap foreign agriculture products. It seems that if we raised our mimimum wages we would keep work at home, collect more tax, via income and HST. I would rather pay more for Canadian products then pay more tax to keep people on welfare and unemployment, and pay MP’s their welfare via pensions.

      P.S. we are now hiring foreign workers for more then agriculture. When will it be our jobs that are farmed out to cheap foreign workers, it is coming under Conservative policy for the oil industry.

      Vote
        0  
  10. Avatar of said on

    Well, it says it all ! First, Conservatives are not ”conservatives” and second, it’s driving us backwards.

    Vote
      0  
  11. Avatar of Jacqueline Fillion Jacqueline Fillion said on

    I would like a graph that is more explicit with respect to Mulroney’s gov’t all the way to Harper. Show the blue and red and name, names….
    Great about the fundraising.

    Vote
      0  
  12. Avatar of Aaron Bouman Aaron Bouman said on

    OK. Basically if the government wants more money then they collect in taxes they have to borrow it from a bank like RBC. The government issues a bond to the bank, which is an IOU to the bank saying the government will pay the bank back. The bank contracts the issuance of the currency, printing the money, then the bank loans it to the government with interest. Banks can also do this with private borrowers, you take out a loan or mortgage and have to pay it back with interest. This is how new money is created and its called usury. But the money is only created as the principle on the loan, the interest doesn’t exist on all the money in circulation. So in order for the government to pay the interest they have to borrow more money, but they are charged interest for the new money too. Over time this increases the deficit and causes inflation raising prices to make up for all the money being created to pay interest to the bank’s shareholders. Eventually compound interest will make the debt so large the province, after many cuts and tax increases, will default. This causes a credit crunch then everything is cut and all the taxes are payed to the banks. Fractional reserve banking is when a bank can loan depositor’s money to make interest off it, if everyone were to try to withdraw their money at once the banks wouldn’t have it. This is what happened in 1929, banks had been loaning depositor’s money on the stock market and depositor’s had borrowed money from the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve bankers sold their stock when prices were highest, then the Fed bankers called their loans. Everyone rushed to the bank to withdraw their money so the banks sold all their stock at the same time lowering the value of the stock losing depositor’s life savings and crashing the stock market. The Federal Reserve bankers then bought the stock at depressed prices basically taking everyone’s life savings. This is how the monetary system operates, and it was Brian Mulroney who got rid of reserve requirements. Paul Martin introduced banking regulations since the system is too self-serving and powerful to operate as it pleases, Harper opposed the regulations as conservatives oppose government interference and regulations. If it were up to the cons the market would be unregulated and we would be living life before the industrial revolution. The NDP use inflation and borrowing to redistribute the wealth.

    Vote
      0  
    • Avatar of Don Girard Don Girard said on

      The only money that is questionably safe is the 100,000 that is guaranteed to be safe from risk in each bank account, everything else is at high risk in a real melt down.

      The USA total debt and ours as well, would theoeitically make us bankrupt, if we were a small business which can not print money to pay off our debt.

      What are safe deposits if printing money and inflation can render it valueless!

      Vote
        0  
  13. Avatar of James Mills James Mills said on

    These numbers should be reported as % GDP. As % GDP Liberal governments have operated far lower debt than Conservatives. The debt must be reported as Federal Government and Provincial + Municipal Government; because, the Federal government policies largely determine Provincial government debt.

    In 1945, at the end of WWII, Canadas War Debt was over 150% GDP. Since that time, here is Canada’s Aggregate Debt (all levels of government) the last year the each of the following Prime Ministers left office …
    YEAR … Aggregate Government Debt %GDP . (Prime Minister)
    1948 … 120.2 %GDP . (Mackenzie King. Liberal)
    1957 … 60 %GDP . (St. Laurent, Liberal)
    1963 … 62 %GDP . (Diefenbaker, Conservative)
    1968 … 54 %GDP . (Pearson, Liberal)
    1979 … 45 %GDP . (Trudeau, Liberal)
    1980 … 46 %GDP . (Clark, Conservative)
    1984 … 62 %GDP . (Trudeau and Turner, Liberal)
    1993 … 96 %GDP . (Mulroney and Campbell, Conservative)
    2003 … 77 %GDP . (Chretien, Liberal)
    2005 … 72 %GDP . (Martin, Liberal)
    2011 … 85 % GDP (Harper Conservative and climbing …)

    Vote
      0  
  14. Avatar of James Mills James Mills said on

    Below is Tabulated Canada’s Gross Nation Debt as % GDP since 1970.
    Source: Department of Finance Canada, Oct 2011, Fiscal Reference Tables (See TABLE 56.)
    Link: http://www.fin.gc.ca/frt-trf/2011/frt-trf-11-eng.asp

    YEAR … GROSS NATIONAL DEBT
    1970 … 54.3 % GDP
    1971 … 55.3 % GDP
    1972 … 53.5 % GDP
    1973 … 48 % GDP
    1974 … 45.8 % GDP
    1975 … 45.2 % GDP
    1976 … 43.6 % GDP
    1977 … 45.1 % GDP
    1978 … 48 % GDP
    1979 … 45.3 % GDP
    1980 … 45.6 % GDP
    1981 … 46.9 % GDP
    1982 … 52.7 % GDP
    1983 … 58.4 % GDP
    1984 … 61.7 % GDP
    1985 … 66.9 % GDP
    1986 … 71 % GDP
    1987 … 71.4 % GDP
    1988 … 71.1 % GDP
    1989 … 72.2 % GDP
    1990 … 75.2 % GDP
    1991 … 82.3 % GDP
    1992 … 90.2 % GDP
    1993 … 96.3 % GDP
    1994 … 98 % GDP
    1995 … 101.6 % GDP
    1996 … 101.7 % GDP
    1997 … 96.3 % GDP
    1998 … 95.2 % GDP
    1999 … 91.4 % GDP
    2000 … 82.1 % GDP
    2001 … 82.7 % GDP
    2002 … 80.6 % GDP
    2003 … 76.6 % GDP
    2004 … 72.6 % GDP
    2005 … 71.6 % GDP
    2006 … 70.3 % GDP
    2007 … 66.5 % GDP
    2008 … 71.3 % GDP
    2009 … 83.4 % GDP
    2010 … 84.2 % GDP

    Vote
      0  
  15. Avatar of Aaron Bouman Aaron Bouman said on

    Exactly, notice how the debt always goes down when the liberals are in charge with no cuts, and when the cons are in charge the debt and cuts increase. Your chart is accurate because it doesn’t hide the bills the cons download on to the provinces and cities. The Liberals need to send your chart to people.

    Vote
      0  
    • Avatar of Don Girard Don Girard said on

      The only time the liberals increased debt was with Trudeau, when the world had the oil crunch, when price and wage controls were implemented to get control of inflation caused by the huge increase in oil.

      Vote
        0  
  16. Avatar of James Mills James Mills said on

    It appears that the historical data makes a table too long for one post. Hence, I am posting this by decade in several posts. ….
    Source: Department of Finance Canada, Oct 2011, Fiscal Reference Tables (See TABLE 56.)
    Link: http://www.fin.gc.ca/frt-trf/2011/frt-trf-11-eng.asp

    YEAR … GROSS NATIONAL DEBT
    1980 … 45.6 % GDP
    1979 … 45.3 % GDP
    1978 … 48 % GDP
    1977 … 45.1 % GDP
    1976 … 43.6 % GDP
    1975 … 45.2 % GDP
    1974 … 45.8 % GDP
    1973 … 48 % GDP
    1972 … 53.5 % GDP
    1971 … 55.3 % GDP
    1970 … 54.3 % GDP

    Vote
      0  
  17. Avatar of James Mills James Mills said on

    The data, year by year, from 1970 through 2010, for Gross National Debt as % GDP it tabulated in TABLE 56 of: Fiscal Reference Tables (Department of Finance Canada, Oct 2011).
    Here is the Link:
    http://www.fin.gc.ca/frt-trf/2011/frt-trf-11-eng.asp

    (I have tried to post the whole data set, but it appears be too long to post.)

    Also, the downloading of debt to the Provinces and Municipalities should be mentioned.
    When Trudeau left office in 1984 aggregate Provincial & Municipal debt was 24 %GDP. From 1984 until 1992, while Mulroney was in office, aggregate Provincial & Municipal debt increased 37 %GDP by 1992. From 1993 to 2006, under the Chretien and Martin Liberals, aggregate Provincial & Municipal debt increased from 37 %GDP to 42 %GDP. When Harper took office aggregate Provincial & Municipal debt was 42% GDP, and now it is 50 %GDP.

    Vote
      0  
  18. Avatar of James Mills James Mills said on

    Gross National Debt as % GDP it tabulated is tabukated, year by year, from 1970 through 2010, in TABLE 56 of: Fiscal Reference Tables (Department of Finance Canada, Oct 2011).
    Here is the Link:
    http://www.fin.gc.ca/frt-trf/2011/frt-trf-11-eng.asp

    Also, the downloading of debt to the Provinces and Municipalities should be mentioned.
    When Trudeau left office in 1984 aggregate Provincial & Municipal debt was 24 %GDP. From 1984 until 1992, while Mulroney was in office, aggregate Provincial & Municipal debt increased 37 %GDP by 1992. From 1993 to 2006, under the Chretien and Martin Liberals, aggregate Provincial & Municipal debt increased from 37 %GDP to 42 %GDP. When Harper took office aggregate Provincial & Municipal debt was 42% GDP, and now it is 50 %GDP.

    Vote
      0  
  19. Avatar of Don Girard Don Girard said on

    These charts are a good idea also because it shows that it is conservative culture and policy that creates these deficits, and not specifically the people in the party are any one time. It would also be interesting to show how NDP or socialist left leaning parties caused deficits when compared to CPC and LPC. I believe, wothout statistics though, that the NDP actually does even better the CPC.

    We have to remember that we are losing votes to both the extreme ends of policy, and financial behaviour. Forgetting the NDP to focus mostly on the CPC would be a serious error.

    Vote
      0  
  20. Avatar of Aaron Bouman Aaron Bouman said on

    The NDP are a socialist welfare party. When ever they are in charge they borrow billions of dollars, most of Ontario’s debt is from the compound interest on the 9 billion the NDP borrowed last time they ran Ontario. Where does the money go? Free housing for the unemployed, raising welfare to be higher than minmum wage, raising union pay and benefits; in other words no new jobs are created to back the money so it just causes massive inflation and debt. If one person has 100 dollars and another has 10 with the price of bread 10 the NDP will borrow 90 to hand out to the poor guy. Does this help? No because now bread costs 18, so the guy with 100 lost all his/her money they worked for. Guess who had the 100, the person who hires people or at least they did before their money was taken away by inflation. But the NDP also like to use taxes to redistribute the wealth, so if inflation doesn’t do it they’ll just tax businesses into the ground to hand out to the workers. But they wont be workers for long because inflation and taxes bankrupt business, then the NDP just borrow more money so everyone can be on welfare and everything is free and everyone is equal (sound familiar?). But thats the joke, it isn’t free its a loan and a poorly invested one at that because it wasn’t used to increase GDP. So the NDP just blame the rich and tax them again until everyone is unemployed living off inflation carrying wheel barrels of “free” money to buy bread, until the province defaults and the free ride ends with everyone homeless having exhausted the government’s credit. Why on Earth young voters would think turning Ontario into the Weimar Republic would solve youth unemployment is beyond me,some people who vote NDP do so selfishly wanting more welfare; like the NDP they dont care about debt or inflation. But is this any different than the wealthy conservative voter who wants a tax cut, selfishly not caring that it will decrease public revenue possibly bankrupting the province. Corporate welfare is just as bad for deficit reduction and with free trade the tax cut isn’t even invested in Canada’s economy. Conservative austerity and NDP bankruptcy are two sides of the same worthless coin. But if you want to nail the NDP make a chart showing the number of people on welfare under different provincial governments.

    Vote
      0  
  21. Avatar of James Mills James Mills said on

    Hello Don. You say the only Liberal who raised aggregate debt was Trudeau. Actually, Trudeau did not raise debt above the level of the Diefenbaker Conservatives. You are correct; Trudeau increased the deficit only during the last 3 years of his government.

    If you want to check out the year by year aggregate debt this is tabulated from 1971 through 2010 in Fiscal Reference Tables (Department of Finance Canada, Oct 2011).
    Here is the Link:
    http://www.fin.gc.ca/frt-trf/2011/frt-trf-11-eng.asp
    Gross National Debt is in Table 56.

    Also, the downloading of debt to the Provinces and Municipalities should be mentioned. When Trudeau left office in 1984 aggregate Provincial & Municipal debt was 24 %GDP. From 1984 until 1992, while Mulroney was in office, aggregate Provincial & Municipal debt increased 37 %GDP by 1992. From 1993 to 2006, under the Chretien and Martin Liberals, aggregate Provincial & Municipal debt increased from 37 %GDP to 42 %GDP. When Harper took office aggregate Provincial & Municipal debt was 42% GDP, and now it is 50 %GDP.

    Vote
      0  
  22. Avatar of James Mills James Mills said on

    Hello Don. You say the only Liberal who raised aggregate debt was Trudeau. Actually, Trudeau did not raise debt above the level of the Diefenbaker Conservatives. (See my post below) You are correct; Trudeau increased the deficit only during the last 3 years of his government.

    If you want to check out the year by year aggregate debt this is tabulated from 1971 through 2010 in Fiscal Reference Tables (Department of Finance Canada, Oct 2011).
    Here is the Link:
    http://www.fin.gc.ca/frt-trf/2011/frt-trf-11-eng.asp
    Gross National Debt is in Table 56.

    Vote
      0  
  23. Avatar of James Mills James Mills said on

    My apologies for repeatedly posting almost identical comments. Having trouble with my computer, and when I got it fixed everything in the queue was transmitted evidently.

    Vote
      0  
  24. Avatar of Peter Skipper Peter Skipper said on

    I like the charts. We should use them in the next election. Cuts through some of the rhetoric with some evidence the average voter can comprehend. The Republican record in the America and the Tory record in Canada do not merit their mantra that they are the best caregivers of the public purse. Yet this myth persists.

    Vote
      0  
  25. Avatar of Don Girard Don Girard said on

    I am no economist, but what is done in one term of government is most often manifested in the next term. Mulroney’s disaster years manifested in his 2nd term, his 2nd term deficits were not reversed until the liberal 2nd term surpluses which were a result of their first term after Mulroney. Harpers first terms were a result of liberal surpluses, and Harpers following terms are the manifestation of his 1st terms, deficits, the world recession was only occurring after the 1st term CPC economic policy has set the deficit in motion. Now we are getting the result of the world recession policy, and the deficits are not changing much.

    The chart shows the changes and how each term was not the result of current term policy but as a result of the predecessor. So if you want to see what a government, Bob Rae’s provincial policy or Chretian’s liberal policy was, check the years after the policy was made, not the 1st years they were in power, but the subsequent years.

    Vote
      0  

Join the conversation

You might also be interested in:
By the numbers: Canada's national debt