
5 Takeaways From the Costed Liberal Platform
Liberal Leader Mark Carney released his costed platform during the advance polling weekend, shortly after the leaders' debates, promising $129 billion in new spending and no plan to balance the budget.
Carney said this platform is needed to respond to the emergency situation created by the U.S. administration's tariffs, which he said is the 'biggest crisis of our lifetimes.'
Billions of dollars are earmarked to build infrastructure across the country and to support those affected by the trade conflict.
Carney has also released a robust climate plan, though climate change has not been a key topic during the election campaign, and pledged to make Canada a leader on the world stage with a new foreign policy.
Focus on 'Nation-Building'
In the context of the upended relationship with the United States, the Liberal platform has elements seeking to boost Canada's economy by way of major infrastructure projects and elimination of internal trade barriers.
Carney said he would keep the Impact Assessment Act in place, which the Conservatives cite as a key impediment to building major projects, but he has pledged to reduce red tape around project approval. He said he would create a 'Major Federal Project Office' to render a decision on projects within two years instead of five, and create a mechanism to recognize project assessments conducted by the provinces.
The Liberals' platform says it intends to invest in 'nation-building infrastructure on a scale not seen in generations.' The major projects noted include the Port of Churchill in Manitoba, hydrogen production in Edmonton, solar energy generation in Cowessess, Sask., and a high-speed rail line between Windsor, Ont., and Quebec City.
Related Stories
4/21/2025
4/20/2025
The federal government already had involvement in most of these projects. Ottawa
The Liberals have pledged to establish a 'Nation-building Project Fund' to support these efforts, with $6.8 billion earmarked over the next four years.
Other potential investments in infrastructure projects include replacing the George Massey Tunnel in B.C., supporting Alberta to build a passenger rail link between Calgary and Edmonton, and investing in the Quebec City tramway.
Another measure aimed at boosting internal and external trade is the 'Trade Diversification Corridors Fund.' This would represent a $5 billion investment over four years to invest in ports, railways, airports, and highways to facilitate the shipment of goods between provinces and with other countries.
Doubling the Indigenous Loan Guarantee Program from $5 billion to $10 billion is also listed as a measure to help advance nation-building infrastructure projects. This measure was
The Liberals also want to build an east-west electricity grid, but this specific measure is not costed. The purpose is to open new markets for large electricity producers in Quebec and Manitoba in order to 'enhance connectivity to low-emissions electricity needed for industry and the broader economy to reach net-zero emissions.'
$129 Billion in New Spending
A Carney government would unleash the federal purse with billions in new spending. New measures over four years, from 2025
–
26 to 2028
–
29, would
The largest spending would come during the first year, fiscal 2025
–
26, at over $35 billion. The following three years would see nearly $33 billion, nearly $30 billion, and over $31 billion in new spending.
The higher spending in 2025
–
26 can be attributed in part to measures to counter the impacts of the U.S. tariffs.
The measures having the most impact on increased spending include Carney's promise to lower the tax rate by 1 percentage point for the lowest income bracket, reducing the rate from 15 percent to 14 percent. The measure would reduce federal revenues by nearly $22 billion over the four years, according to the platform.
The cancellation of the capital gains tax increase will also cause a revenue shortfall of $12.5 billion over four years.
Other big ticket items include new spending in defence which would cost some $18 billion over four years.
Carney's plan to involve the federal government in affordable home building also represents one of the largest new spending elements, with a projected budget of $11.8 billion over four years for the Build Canada Homes initiative.
No Plan to Balance Budget
Similar to his predecessor Justin Trudeau, Carney has no stated intention to balance the books. He is planning to run larger deficits than the Trudeau government had projected in its 2024 Fall Economic Statement (FES) last December.
Carney said he would balance the operating budget by 2028 by separating out what are deemed as government capital investments. The Conservatives have
The FES projected deficits of $42.2 billion in fiscal 2025
–
26, $31 billion in 2026-
–
27, $30.4 billion in 2027
–
28, and $27.8 billion in 2028
–
29.
For the same respective fiscal years, the costed Liberal platform projects deficits of $62.3 billion, $59.9 billion, $54.8 billion, and $47.8 billion. This would add nearly $225 billion to the federal debt in those four years.
Carney's platform also departs from the Trudeau government's attempt to maintain the deficit below 1 percent of GDP as a fiscal anchor.
The Liberal leader was asked by reporters to comment on this direction on April 21.
'This is a fundamentally different approach' Carney said. 'It's an entirely new government, it's a fundamentally different approach.' He said the previous government had grown spending at an annual rate of 9 percent while his would limit it to 2 percent.
'The second element that's different—fundamentally different, that meets the moment—is that we are in a crisis, the worst crisis of our lifetimes,' Carney added.
He said this crisis is more serious than when former prime ministers Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin faced a fiscal crisis and balanced the budget, given there's a 'reordering of our relationship with the United States and the global economy.'
'We need to build, we need to invest,' he said.
No Fuel Charge, Beefed-Up Climate Plan
Carney has been a strong advocate of policies to reach net-zero emissions, such as carbon taxes, but has not made this a core theme of his campaign. He has presented himself as a 'pragmatist' seeking to build the strongest economy in the G7. He set to zero the rate of the
The Liberal platform, however, suggests the climate change agenda would remain strong under Carney. It speaks of a 'sustainable transition,' usually implying moving away from oil and gas to lower carbon-emitting forms of energy.
The platform says that 'action now will be far less costly than the impacts we will face in the years to come.' This was similar messaging used by former Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault to justify the carbon tax, saying that paying the cost now will save on climate change-induced natural disasters later.
The platform warns about not losing 'sight of the impact our choices will have on our children and grandchildren,' while still recognizing the value of conventional energy to make Canada an 'energy superpower.'
But concretely, measures in the platform are not geared toward boosting conventional energy. The platform says Canadians industry has an 'obligation' to reduce its emissions as fast as possible.
Carney said he would increase the burden on industry to compensate for the loss in emissions reductions created by setting the fuel charge rate to zero. His platform said carbon pricing for industry will be improved while making sure Canadian industry remains competitive.
A new climate measure Carney would introduce is the carbon border adjustment mechanism, a type of tariff on foreign goods high in carbon to help protect Canadian industries that are less competitive because of domestic carbon pricing. The Liberal platform projects the mechanism would bring in $100 million in revenues in fiscal 2027
–
28 and $400 million in 2028
–
29.
Other moves to build the low-carbon energy sector involves kickstarting the 'clean energy supply chain' by investing in the critical minerals sector. This is backed by $350 million in new spending to accelerate minerals exploration and extraction, along with other tax credits.
The Liberals also want to expand the electric vehicle charging network by building thousands of new stations by 2027, with $76 million in spending over four years, while also looking to reinstate the $5,000 EV subsidy.
'Lead' the World
Foreign policy is rarely a top election issue, but the impact of U.S. President Donald Trump's administration on Canada and the world has made it one. The Liberals have focused on the deterioration of the relationship with the United States in their messaging and on Trump's comments about wanting to make Canada the '51st state.'
Trump is 'trying to break us so that America can own us,' Carney has often repeated. Carney, who was affiliated with international organizations like the United Nations and the World Economic Forum, argues that Trump is upending the international trade order and pulling back on America's leadership role.
'As America retreats from the world, Canada will lead it,' Carney said on April 21.
Similarly, Trudeau had sought to
Trudeau multiplied foreign trips but Canada's standing in the world did not improve demonstrably.
Carney's platform speaks highly of Canada's contribution to the United Nations, saying that Canada will defend the ideals of democracy and human rights as America is 'casting a shadow.'
Carney has pledged to 'restore' Canada's diplomatic presence abroad by producing a new foreign policy, something not done since 2005. The Liberals say they intend to increase diplomatic representation abroad to expand trade and 'restore Canadian leadership.'
The Liberals' foreign policy will also include providing international aid at a level of no less than $800 million annually. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has said this is an area where he would make cuts, saying Canada should not fund foreign bureaucracies, 'terrorists,' and 'dictators.'
Trudeau had an international aid policy that was self-described as 'feminist,' but this term is not used in Carney's platform. There is still the stated intention, however, to support women and girls by funding sexual and reproductive health care abroad.
Carney also wants to increase funding to the LGBTQ2I International Assistance Program by $8 million over four years. The program, seeking to support LGBT individuals in developing countries, is currently
The Canadian Press contributed to this report.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Hamilton Spectator
4 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
‘Uphill battle': Criminal Code must include definition for femicide, advocates say
TORONTO - As police in Ontario increasingly investigate killings of women and girls as femicides, advocates say a firm definition of the term must be embedded in the Criminal Code. It's a change they hope could be on the table soon after Prime Minister Mark Carney proposed cracking down on intimate partner violence in this year's federal election campaign. Ottawa police, who have been using the term since August 2024, said last week they were investigating the death of a 54-year-old woman as a femicide. They arrested a 57-year-old man and charged him with second-degree murder. Last month, Kingston Police logged its first use of the label in a news release. Police said they determined the death of a 25-year-old woman to be a femicide because it occurred 'in the context of intimate partner violence,' and they arrested a 26-year-old man for first-degree murder. They confirmed it was their first time describing a homicide in this way. Police use the word so rarely that the Kingston example was a 'very significant' move, said Myrna Dawson, founder and director of the Canadian Femicide Observatory for Justice and Accountability. 'That's not something that's really in their vocabulary right now. It's not something that is in many people's vocabulary as much as it should be,' she said. Dawson, who is also a sociology professor at the University of Guelph, said the lack of Criminal Code definition is part of the reason why. The observatory defines femicide as the killing of women and girls because of their gender. The group also uses a framework from the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime that lists 10 specific indicators that a crime could be considered femicide. They include a woman or girl being killed by her intimate partner or family member, a victim having had a history of being harassed and sexual violence playing a role in the crime. In some cases, more than one factor can be at play. 'They're killed in distinct ways from men and boys, and they're killed in many ways because of men and boys being entitled to relationships with them and expecting that women don't get to decide when they don't want a relationship any longer,' Dawson said. Using the UN framework, her group has counted 1,014 femicides across Canada since it began tracking the killing of women and girls in 2018. That included 187 femicides last year. A current or former intimate partner was accused in nearly half of those cases, the observatory found. Family members were accused in another 28 per cent of cases. Only six per cent of alleged perpetrators were strangers to the victims. Though Kingston police have now called one case a femicide, the group's data suggests at least four killings since 2018 could meet the definition. Other groups are attempting the same work. The Ontario Association of Interval Houses, which tracks cases in the province, has identified five femicides in Kingston since late 2019. Its executive director, Marlene Ham, said that without a universally recognized definition for femicide, different groups will end up with different numbers. Adding a definition of femicide to the Criminal Code would allow better data on violence against women to be captured by police and national agencies such as Statistics Canada, both advocates said. Kingston Police spokesperson Const. Anthony Colangeli declined to answer questions about what motivated the force to use the term femicide and whether it plans to use similar terminology in the future. An Ottawa police spokesperson said the force started using the word femicide to 'highlight the realities of gender-based violence faced by women in our community.' 'By using appropriate language to refer to these murders, we are continuing conversations about this subject that is often considered 'private.' We are raising awareness about an epidemic that is occurring and labelling these deaths appropriately,' the spokesperson said in an email. In the absence of an agreed-upon definition, Ottawa police have come up with a list of 14 forms of violence that fall into the category of femicide, including intimate partner violence killings, the torture and misogynistic slaying of women, the killing of Indigenous women and girls, killing related to sexual violence and the 'non-intimate killings of women and girls.' The force confirmed it does not use femicide to describe women killed in murder-suicides — something Dawson said should change as it is 'a very common scenario in femicide cases.' Other police forces, such as the Toronto Police Service, don't use the term femicide because it currently has no bearing on which charges police lay in homicides. The force does, however, lay terrorism charges in homicides where misogyny is a motivating factor. Dawson says police are 'fighting an uphill battle' when it comes to using femicide terminology more consistently. 'Police really need leaders to take the initiative, and by that I mean the federal government who decides what is a criminal offence and what should be labelled and legislated officially,' she said. Carney promised in the campaign to make killings motivated by hate — including femicide — a 'constructive first-degree offence,' which means a first-degree murder charge would be laid even if the slaying was not planned and deliberate. Chantalle Aubertin, a spokesperson for Justice Minister Sean Fraser, said in a statement the government is 'determined to bring forward legislation to advance this commitment as soon as possible.' Should the federal government enshrine a definition of femicide, Statistics Canada could record better data, Dawson said. The agency already tracks homicides reported by police each year, and the genders of the accused perpetrators and victims. While a 2023 report on gender-related homicides of women and girls broke down some indicators of femicide, it only addressed some of the UN's indicators. 'The more we know about these killings and the more we can contextualize them within that understanding of femicide, the more awareness that we can ultimately build and continue to have these discussions about prevention,' Ham said, noting a history of threats, violence and coercive control is present in many cases. It's important to keep the conversation about violence toward women going, Dawson added, with an emphasis on how these killings differ from those targeting boys and men. 'That's what we're trying to emphasize because if we don't recognize that, then our prevention efforts also don't recognize that, and we don't recognize the urgency of this.' This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 8, 2025. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
£10k to invest? A UK share, investment trust and ETF to consider for an £870 second income this year
Diversification's critical when seeking a reliable second income over time. A broad portfolio can absorb individual dividend shocks better than one containing just a handful of stocks. Spreading risk over a number of investments doesn't mean settling for inferior returns either. Take the following shares, investment trusts and exchange-traded funds (ETFs), for example: Stock Forward dividend yield Target Healthcare REIT 8.6% iShares World Equity High Income ETF 9% Phoenix Group (LSE:PHNX) 8.5% As you can see, the dividend yield on each of these stocks comfortably beats the FTSE 100 average (currently around 3.4%). It means a £10,000 investment spread equally across them could — if broker forecasts are accurate — provide an £870 passive income over the next year alone. What's more, a portfolio containing just these three stocks would provide (in my view) exceptional diversification. In total, these investments deliver exposure to 346 different companies spanning multiple sectors and global regions. Here's why I think they're worth serious consideration today. Real estate investment trust (REIT) Target Healthcare's set up to deliver a steady stream of dividends to shareholders. These entities must pay at least 90% of annual earnings out this way in exchange for juicy tax breaks. By focusing on the care home sector — it owns 94 in total — this trust has exceptional long-term potential as the UK's elderly population booms. It also benefits from the sector's highly stable nature, while inflation-linked leases boost earnings visibility still further. Be mindful though, that labour shortages in the nursing industry could dent future returns. Please note that tax treatment depends on the individual circumstances of each client and may be subject to change in future. The content in this article is provided for information purposes only. It is not intended to be, neither does it constitute, any form of tax advice. The iShares World Equity High Income ETF is focused primarily on high-yield and dividend growth stocks. In total, it holds 344 different businesses around the globe, from tech giants Nvidia and Microsoft to insurers like Axa, telecoms such as Deutsche Telekom and banks such as JPMorgan. However, it also earns income from safe havens like cash and US Treasuries, which provides strength during economic downturns. The fund's focused primarily on US shares. In total, these account for 67.8% of total holdings. I don't think this is overly excessive, but bear in mind that this could impact the fund's growth potential if sentiment towards US assets more broadly cools. Phoenix Group, like Legal & General and M&G, is a highly cash-generative financial services provider. And so like those other businesses, it offers one of the three highest forward dividend yields on the FTSE 100 today. In fact, Phoenix has a sound track record of beating its cash generation forecasts and providing subsequent meaty windfalls to shareholders. During 2024, total cash generation was expected at £1.4bn-£1.5bn. In the end it came in at a whopping £1.8bn! Like Target Healthcare, I believe it's well-placed to capitalise on Britain's growing older population. I'm optimistic demand for its savings and retirement products will grow steadily. On the downside, this year's predicted dividend is covered just 1.1 times by expected earnings. However, a Solvency II ratio of 172% could give it scope to meet analysts' dividend forecasts, even if this year's profits disappoint. The post £10k to invest? A UK share, investment trust and ETF to consider for an £870 second income this year appeared first on The Motley Fool UK. More reading 5 Stocks For Trying To Build Wealth After 50 One Top Growth Stock from the Motley Fool JPMorgan Chase is an advertising partner of Motley Fool Money. Royston Wild has positions in Legal & General Group Plc and Target Healthcare REIT Plc. The Motley Fool UK has recommended M&g Plc and Nvidia. Views expressed on the companies mentioned in this article are those of the writer and therefore may differ from the official recommendations we make in our subscription services such as Share Advisor, Hidden Winners and Pro. Here at The Motley Fool we believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. Motley Fool UK 2025 Sign in to access your portfolio

Yahoo
12 hours ago
- Yahoo
What if Alberta really did vote to separate?
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith is using sovereignty sentiments in Alberta as a kind of implied threat to get a better deal for the province. In a letter to Mark Carney in the run-up to the recent first ministers conference in Saskatoon, Smith told the prime minister that failure to build additional pipelines for Alberta oil would 'send an unwelcome signal to Albertans concerned about Ottawa's commitment to national unity.' Accordingly, it's worth asking: what would happen if Alberta did vote to leave? Two historical touch points are the 1995 sovereignty referendum in Québec and the Brexit vote in the United Kingdom in 2016. In different ways, both examples drive home one inevitable point: in the event of a vote to pursue sovereignty, the future of Alberta would have to be negotiated one painful and uncertain step at a time. Sovereignty is an assertion of independent governmental authority, notably including a monopoly over the legitimate use of force over a defined people and territory. Unlike provinces in a country like Canada, sovereign countries co-operate with each other if — and only if — it's in their interests to do so. Some proponents of separatism have argued that an independent Alberta could rely on international law to secure continued access to tidewater through Canada. The idea seems to form the basis of Smith's assertions that one nation cannot 'landlock' another under international law. But that's not the case. What's more, international law — even if it does apply in theory — doesn't always hold in practice. That's because between countries, formal anarchy prevails: no one has the responsibility to enforce international law on their own. If one country breaks international law, it's up to other countries to respond. If that doesn't happen, then it just doesn't happen. Simply put, if Alberta were to leave Canada, it would lose all enforceable rights and protections offered by the Canadian Constitution and enforced by the institutions and courts. In their place, Alberta would get exactly — and only — what it can bargain for. The Québec independence saga has in many ways clarified and refined the path to potential secession for provinces in Canada, and hints at what can happen in the aftermath of a sovereignty referendum. In the wake of the near miss that was the 1995 referendum — when those wanting to remain in Canada defeated those who voted to separate with the narrowest of margins — Jean Chretien's Liberal government took rapid steps to respond. Plan A focused on actions aimed at addressing Québec's grievances, not unlike Carney's quest for a national consensus to build an additional pipeline. Another course of action, known as Plan B, defined the path to secession. The federal government asked the Supreme Court of Canada for a clarification on the legality of sovereignty. It then passed the Clarity Act, which enshrined into law Ottawa's understanding of the court's answer. The reference and act both made clear that any secession attempt could be triggered only by a 'clear majority' on a 'clear question.' The act also illuminated the stakes of secession. The preamble of the legislation, for instance, spells out that provincial sovereignty would mean the end of guaranteed Canadian citizenship for departing provincial residents. The act also lays out some of the points to be negotiated in the event of secession, 'including the division of assets and liabilities, any changes to the borders of the province, the rights, interests and territorial claims of the Aboriginal peoples of Canada, and the protection of minority rights.' Simply put, everything would be on the table if Albertans opted to separate. Brexit provides an example of just how painful that process can be. After voting to leave the European Union, the U.K. found itself bogged down in a difficult negotiation process that continues to this day. Political, economic and trade rights — even including the border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland — have all been painfully reconstituted through complex negotiations. Despite the promises made by those who advocated in favour of Brexit, the U.K. will continue to pay in perpetuity for access to the limited EU services it still retains. The U.K. is dealing with these challenges even though it was already a sovereign state. Alberta is not. Everything between a sovereign Alberta and its neighbours would be subject to difficult negotiations, both in the initial days of an independent Albertan state and any subsequent discussions. Once independent, Alberta would be a landlocked, oil-exporting nation. It would be negotiating with Canada — and the United States, its neighbour to the south — over every aspect of its new relationship. Its borders with other provinces and territories would need be negotiated, as would the status of marginalized populations and Indigenous Peoples within Alberta. The status of lands subject to treaty — in other words, most of the province — would have to be negotiated. Indigenous Peoples themselves have already made clear they have no interest in secession and would mount a vigorous defence of Indigenous rights as they exist within Canada. After all, if Canada is divisible, so is Alberta. A new republic has no automatic claims to territory with respect to Indigenous Peoples and treaty lands. Once borders were settled, Alberta would have little leverage and would need a lot of help as a country of about 4.5 million negotiating with neighbours of 35 million in Canada and 350 million in the U.S. Who would be its allies? Nothing would be guaranteed, not Alberta's admission to the United Nations, the establishment of an Albertan currency and exchange rates, national and continental defence, the management of shared borders and citizenship rules or the terms of cross-border trade and investment. Access to Canadian ports would be at Canada's discretion, negotiated on terms Canada considered in its interests. Alberta could no more force a pipeline through Canada than through the United States. Of course, a republic of Alberta would be free to pursue deeper relations with the American republic to its south. The U.S president, however, has already made clear what would be the likely terms for free trade: accession. Here, too, there would be no guarantees. Alberta could just as easily become an American territory, with limited representation, as it could a 51st state. 'Puerto Rico North' is as possible as 'Alaska South.' Gone too would be any claims to share collective goods. Alberta's neighbours would have no incentive, for instance, to help with the inevitable post-oil clean-up, estimated in the hundreds of billions of dollars. Simply put, if Alberta were to vote to leave Canada, it would truly be on its own. This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organisation bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Stewart Prest, University of British Columbia Read more: Why Alberta's push for independence pales in comparison to Scotland's in 2014 Alberta has long accused Ottawa of trying to destroy its oil industry. Here's why that's a dangerous myth Coal in Alberta: Neither public outrage nor waning global demand seem to matter to Danielle Smith Stewart Prest does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.