Yes, there has to be a desire to deliver and achieve meaningful targets.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you, Mr. Giroux, for your frankness and professionalism.

[Translation]

You know, Mr. Giroux, you’re generating so much interest that we don’t want to let you go.

I have one last question. The supplementary estimates are one thing, but we can’t leave the 2023 Fall Economic Statement out of our discussions. In your opinion, were there any warning signs a year or two ago that the government didn’t see and that should have prompted better control over spending? Should we see this as a surprise that came out of nowhere for those in power? I wouldn’t dare name Mr. Trudeau and Ms. Freeland, but did they get hit with a surprise that they didn’t see coming in their spending?

When you’re managing a national budget, we’re talking about close to $500 billion; you can’t possibly anticipate everything. You can, however, see the general direction in which things are moving, and it was foreseeable that there would be an economic slowdown once the COVID subsidies came to an end. It was also foreseeable that interest rates would affect the servicing of the debt, because interest rates did start to go up. That wasn’t yesterday or last week, so it could have been predicted to some extent.

Could we have known how high they would go? I don’t think so. Many people can say they did, and in retrospect, many of them were right, but not that many when you look at the historical record. On the other hand, the general direction was predictable. It was also foreseeable that there would be a slowdown. The nature and magnitude of the slowdown and just how high interest rates would go were not easily predictable, but the general direction was.

[English]

I have a general question. I would like your opinion, given the Fall Economic Statement and what we’re looking at.

With interest rates now at a 20-year high, the cost to borrow all that money has spiked from $20.3 billion in 2020-21 to $46.5 billion in this fiscal year. The debt service charges will march even higher in years to come. Carrying the debt is expected to cost the federal treasury $60.7 billion in 2028-29, according to the economic statement — this means that the debt service charges are now amongst the most costly line items in the federal budget.

There are two extremes and two arguments that we hear all the time. We hear the argument saying that, to put it in perspective, we’re spending $28.9 billion on the Canadian Armed Forces. A number means nothing if you don’t compare it to the trends, or compare it to a ratio or to something else. We both know that. The $28.9 billion is about $18 billion less than what the government will send in payments to bankers and bondholders. Then, you look at the other side, and if we compare ourselves to the G7 and G20, the favourable argument is that we’re still amongst the top of the class.

Every argument is partisan; let’s face it. It’s those who want to get to power, and those who are in power and want to keep the power. I’d like your perspective on that. We’ve had a pandemic. We’ve gone through what we have gone through. We now have these numbers in front of us.

A partisan argument would be “Compared to that number, look how much higher it is today.” Interest rates are higher. I don’t think it’s our government’s fault that there has been a global inflation crisis and supply chain issues like the ones we have lived through. I’d like your perspective. Is that sustainable going forward? How do we compare, if you have those numbers up front, to the G7 or G20 nations, and what about the performance — an independent opinion rather than the partisan opinions I usually hear from both sides?

When we compare ourself to the G7 countries on a debt-to-GDP level, we are at the top of the class because, in good part, we have decided to have a fiscal environment that was reasonably prudent for several years. I’m not talking necessarily recently, but since the 1990s, we have made structural changes to governments — provincial, federal and so on. We have that. But we have also decided to refund some of our pension obligations — the Canada Pension Plan and the Quebec Pension Plan. That’s counted against our debt because most other countries don’t have a nest egg of that nature. It is an obligation that they will have to pay — an obligation they have toward future and current retirees — whereas we have a nest egg. Taking that into account, we’re at the top of the class when it comes to the G7 countries.

If we look at the G20 countries, which would include countries such as Australia and New Zealand, then we’re not in such great shape. Some people have said, “If you compare Canada with the rest of the G7 countries, it’s like comparing yourself to the back of the bus or the bottom of the class.” I think that’s exaggerated and unfair. But if we compare ourselves to Australia — a similar-sized country with a similar parliamentary system — then I think we need to improve because they are in a better fiscal situation.

I don’t think it’s either all black or all white. It’s somewhere among the shades of grey.

Yes, I think our debt is sustainable. As I mentioned earlier, if the government were to introduce a disabilities bill — that would be very ambitious and generous — as well as a national pharmacare program, then it would be close to unsustainable without increasing taxes.

Thank you.

[Translation]

As usual, you answered the questions well. We want to congratulate you and your team of professionals, because you undoubtedly represent what Canada is all about, which is the quality of service we receive from people who work for governments, both federal and provincial, I must admit.

[English]

You have always been very informative and instructive. That’s real professionalism that you’re showing to all Canadians.

Honourable senators, our next meeting will be Tuesday, November 28, at 9 a.m., to resume our study of Bill C-241 and Supplementary Estimates (B).

[Translation]

Before adjourning the meeting, I’d like to thank the entire support team of this committee, those who are visible around the room as well as those in the background. Thank you for your teamwork, which enables us to do our job as parliamentarians.

(The committee adjourned.)