Twenty-eight per cent of working Canadians are living paycheque to paycheque and would struggle to meet their financial obligations if their pay was delayed by just one week, according to a survey from the National Payroll Institute released Tuesday.This climbed from just under a quarter last year to its highest level in five years, said Peter Tzanetakis, president and chief executive at the institute.And about 44 per cent of working Canadians are now financially stressed, rising from just one third last year to a record high, according to the institute.
This is more than double the proportion of respondents who reported being financially comfortable.
“It’s more than a warning sign,” said Peter Tzanetakis, president of the National Payroll Institute. “The jump in financial stress that we’ve seen just in the course of one year can be characterized as a financial crisis.”
Everyday costs, particularly for groceries and household products, were the top source of financial stress (55 per cent), followed by personal debt (46 per cent) in the survey.
The forced savings accumulated during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic as more Canadians stayed at home have dissipated, said Tzanetakis. “What’s happened of late is people are back at work, inflation is significant, rising costs and housing affordability are all contributing to this financial stress.”
Consumer prices climbed three per cent in August compared with the same month a year ago, according to the latest inflation data from Statistics Canada, with gas prices surging nearly 23 per cent.
Half of employed Canadians now spend all or more of their net pay, jumping from 41 per cent in 2025, according to the institute. Tzanetakis said this a huge problem, as eroded savings means working Canadians cannot easily absorb financial shocks or even rising costs.
This can also lead to greater reliance on high-interest debt, such as credit cards, to fund the costs of everyday essentials, he added. “That just exacerbates the problem because they are in that cycle of increasing their debt just to meet their financial obligations, and it’s a tough situation to get out of.”
**
— Marc Nixon (@MarcNixon24) September 29, 2026
CANADIAN ECONOMY STALLS OUT This might be why Donald Trump said Mark Carney will apologize. Get on his hands and knees and beg for a trade deal in three weeks. https://t.co/eUgBOe1yE5
— Marc Nixon (@MarcNixon24) September 29, 2026
**
On Tuesday, a new round of U.S. tariffs and product bans will hit Canadian exports, putting thousands of jobs at risk across the country.
Facing new 50% tariffs are goods such as specialty cheeses, furniture and mattresses. Facing bans are alcohol, motorcycles and whey products. Even before these new measures, the impact of the tariffs imposed by Washington was being felt.
At Stelco in Hamilton, about 500 steelworkers received layoff notices on Monday. Meanwhile at the White House in Washington, U.S. President Donald Trump announced a massive new $15-billion steel plant to be built in Iowa, employing nearly 2,000 people once operational.
There was also an announcement about a multibillion-dollar iron ore mine in Minnesota that will supply the new steel mill. Inside the Oval Office, Trump and his team were jubilant.
“These are your 232 tariffs, the steel tariffs at work. Without those tariffs, this mine doesn’t get built and this steel plant does not get built,” U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said.
**
And just like that, Canada’s shrinking population went the way of its technical recession—revised away. Statistics Canada (StatCan) data shows that the country’s population grew in Q3 2026. More importantly, the data includes the upward revisions we’ve been discussing for months. It turns out that the much-discussed population contraction plaguing the country didn’t exist. The revisions reveal a bigger population, but more importantly, a much worse economy. ...
(Sidebar: oh, it's not shrinking.)
Canada’s economy was doing really well for a country with a shrinking population. Now that it’s not shrinking, the economic reality is a disaster, validating how many feel. GDP growing 0.8% in Q2 2026 at the seasonally adjusted annual rate is impressive with a 0.5% population drop. Not so much if the population is growing 0.5% over that same period.
Breaking down that growth reveals how problematic those GDP numbers really were. Exports of goods represented 1.23 percentage points of that 0.8% growth, due mostly to higher oil prices. That means Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz did more for Canada’s GDP than its policymakers. A war between two other countries was a bigger boost than near-pandemic levels of new debt. The math is even more disturbing when it comes to the job market.
Canada’s employment data relies heavily on population estimates. The job data would have collected the number of NPRs with a job, but the population estimates wouldn’t have. This inflates the number of workers while underestimating the total number of people. We previously estimated that the undercount means the 6.7% unemployment rate is closer to 7.6%. That would make it the third-highest report since the pandemic, and it was a conservative call. We used the national average for the share in the labour force, but it’s typically much higher for NPRs.
StatCan confirmed it will revise the employment data in the coming months. However, the methodology means the revisions will be slowly introduced. Funny how reality can’t hit all at once when it impacts national optics negatively, eh?
The population revisions are surprising for a few reasons, and not just the upward ones. Upward revisions reveal a fragile economy, masked by ignoring hundreds of thousands of workers. They also make slow home sales and a sharp climb in rental vacancies even more troubling.
Also:
Hiring practices by select Tim Hortons franchisees saw foreign workers account for 60 to 80 percent of payroll at some restaurants. Figures were disclosed in bankruptcy court filings by one operator who blamed “changes to Temporary Foreign Worker programs” for insolvency: “Recruiting employees is challenging.”
Your corrupt government and you:
The newly tabled revamp to the federal infrastructure approvals process — Bill C-39 — comes with the tagline, "One project, one decision, in one year." But this seems to be more a suggestion than a rule.
If passed, the bill would make numerous changes to federal laws that determine whether or not infrastructure gets built. The intent is to streamline the approvals process and to give a better estimate to prospective builders of when to expect a green light.
So, while proponents at present must work with multiple federal authorities to get their project approved, sometimes one after another, Bill C-39 would designate one federal authority as the point of contact.
In cases where multiple assessments are needed from different federal bodies, Bill C-39 would have these run at the same time, rather than in sequence. Sequential assessments have been a problem in the past: a positive outcome under the Impact Assessment Act, which can take years to obtain, can be derailed by a negative Species at Risk Act assessment — or it can be later tossed out in court. This was what happened to Canadian Nuclear Laboratories when it tried to build a long-term nuclear waste storage facility at one of its research sites in Ontario.
And, when certain federal authorities are deciding what conditions to impose on a project they would like to approve under certain legislation, Bill C-39 would require them to take into account the "technical, economic and practical feasibility" of said conditions. This would apply to the Canadian Energy Regulator (CER), the federal transport minister with respect to the Canadian Navigable Waters Act, the environment minister with respect to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, and the ministers who carry out the Species at Risk Act.
The bill is still in its early days, but at this point it's received more praise than criticism. Part of that is no doubt marketing: the bill is couched as a way to grow the country's independence and focus on what we can control, which is a major reason many Canadians support this country being an "energy superpower," according to federal public opinion research conducted back in March. The prime minister knows his audience.
But it's true that a more simplified project approval process is needed. It wasn't surprising that Alberta Premier Danielle Smith showed optimism when asked about the new legislation. And, in an interview with the Globe and Mail, Cenovus Energy board chair Alex Pourbaix called it "fantastic": "The devil is always in the details, but if we can truly get to one review, a decision in one year — that makes the Canadian regulatory permitting system very similar to the U.S. and other places in the world whose economies are going great guns."
That is exactly where the problem lies with Bill C-39: the details. There are a number of major caveats to "One project, one decision, one year" that threaten to get in the way of a timely, simple decision.
One issue, put simply in the federal backgrounder, is that "One project, one decision would not apply" to projects regulated by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) and the CER. For projects that fall under CER authority — pipelines, power lines and such — the draft legislation merely states that the CER "may" work with other federal authorities to co-ordinate their respective reviews, Indigenous consultations and the timing of their decisions. The CNSC is given a similar option: it "may" co-ordinate the review process and Indigenous consultations with other entities.
(Sidebar: they're special, so special that they don't need to be held to account for anything.)
Additionally, some projects will see the introduction of new masters. The government backgrounder puts it more simply than the legislation: projects with "potential significant adverse federal impacts" are to be made "jointly with the minister responsible for the relevant sector" or cabinet. At present, under the Impact Assessment Act, a second minister is not involved in making these decisions. Perhaps this change will amount to a trivial extra signature in practice, but it could also lead to more bureaucracy and delay.
A whole lot of delay is worked into the draft legislation, regardless of the notional "one year" timeline.
"One year" also comes with an asterisk. Under the Bill C-39 scheme, timelines for complete reviews on new pipelines and power lines under 300 kilometres by the Canada Energy Regulator can be extended by 90 days to facilitate more Indigenous consultations. A complete review in these cases would be required within 300 days of the proponent's application and a decision would be required "as soon as possible" afterwards, which means a 90-day extension would push the decision past its one-year time limit. The draft legislation would also allow for time to be excluded in calculating whether timelines for issuing approvals have been met. The amount of time and the justification for it would be up to the government, so if an approval was running behind schedule, the government could just declare it is on time.
**
It’s up to federal departments to decide what text messages they conceal from the public, says the Treasury Board. Electronic records may be destroyed “as appropriate” under a policy drafted 26 years ago: “Isn’t there a risk to destroying text messages? Yes.”
**
Execs @FinanceCanada would be shielded from legal liability for costly errors, incompetence or negligence under Minister @FPChampagne budget Bill #C31. Members of @SenateCA banking committee expressed alarm. “Have we experienced an epidemic of civil lawsuits against civil servants?” — Senator Toni Varone https://t.co/Hra20HLSi1 #cdnpoli
**
— Holly Doan (@hollyanndoan) September 25, 2026
Canadians are struggling to buy food, pay rent and fill up their gas tanks https://t.co/d7vXGHsDoV
— Dean Allison (@DeanAllisonMP) September 28, 2026
**
Canada's so-called leadership class is just one big cartel. We're not a nation, just of bunch of serfs living under an olgigarchy.
— Yvonne C (@CountryGardener) September 25, 2026
A lying and desperate oligarchy:
The video starts off with a lie as the baseline premise. Carney was not asked about a U.S. military invasion or similar from the USA. It was Carney who initiated that conversation with the NYT by saying he prepared for contingencies against Trump's 51st state comments. In essence, the motive for this comment is not difficult to see. Carney was using the 'elbows up', 51st state, sovereignty, national pride narrative with such success, he thought there was no upper limit to it. So, he claims his administration planned combat against a U.S. invasion. It's the same tactic, just taken too far into the world of absurdity. Which should tell you what all the prior stuff was about.
— TheLastRefuge (@TheLastRefuge2) September 26, 2026
It's not about safety:
WATCH: Last week, Carney Liberal heritage minister Marc Miller was asked if his new internet censorship bill would help stop twisted freaks from counselling children to s*icide on the internet. Marc Miller couldn't answer. He had no idea if his own bill covers this topic. What he could tell you, however, was that it would decide what kind of discussions the Liberals consider "legitimate." If the Liberals want an internet law protecting kids from sexual and violent content, then do that. Don't bring the political censorship into it.
— Canada Proud (@WeAreCanProud) September 28, 2026
Also:
Posting photos of homeless people or street addicts on the internet would be criminalized under a Commons petition sponsored by Deputy Government House Leader Arielle Kayabaga. The petition follows complaints, including from MPs, of public disorder in major cities: “There are needles around on the street. There is excrement on the street.”
Oh, my:
In 2003, the RCMP’s Native Indian Residential Schools Task Force ended an eight-year, province-wide investigation of 15 B.C. schools—including Kamloops. It examined allegations of murder and of children and infants secretly buried on school grounds. Not one of those allegations was substantiated.
— Wiretap Media (@WiretapMediaCa) September 27, 2026
The Allison Inquiry, held from September 8-11, 2026, in Ottawa, featured testimony that should have dominated headlines. Conservative MP Dean Allison convened four days of independent hearings on Parliament Hill to hear from Canadians who reported injuries after COVID-19 vaccination. Fifty witnesses were selected from more than 1,400 applicants who applied to testify. Their stories were devastating—lives shattered, careers lost, families under enormous strain, and serious medical conditions too often dismissed or left untreated.
What’s particularly damning is the testimony of former CBC journalist Rodney Palmer, who revealed that CBC News essentially became a “government mouthpiece” during the pandemic. Palmer testified that the CBC—the organization that trained him—had ceased independent reporting and become a state propaganda organ. His testimony indicated “a coordinated propaganda campaign at CBC to foment fear of the virus, promote COVID drugs and suppress reporting on any vaccine harm.”
Yet mainstream media coverage was virtually nonexistent—CBC, with offices just across the street from the hearing room, didn’t send a single reporter. This despite testimony revealing what Irvin Studin described as “the biggest health policy mistake in Canadian history at best, or a crime against humanity at worst.”
The media’s willingness to participate in this cover-up becomes less surprising when examining the financial relationship. As Palmer testified during the Allison Inquiry, “Mainstream media in Canada has been bought and paid for by government, which officially means that Canada is only receiving propaganda that will positively promote the ruling powers.” This isn’t hyperbole—it’s structural reality.
Brigitte Stegemann, known as “GG” or “Oma” to her family, was suffering from stomach cancer and chose to end her life under Canada’s physician-assisted suicide program, Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) on July 10.
However, two days before the procedure was to be performed, her granddaughter and caregiver, Brigitte Kranendonk, asked her grandmother if she was aware what was going to happen to her.
“I used very frank terms. I said: ‘Do you know that you’re going to die on Friday?’” she asked, according to the Daily Mail.
Stegemann, apparently having no memory of requesting to end her life through the program, started “bawling” for 45 minutes, saying “I’ve made a mistake.”
Canada’s medically assisted suicide is responsible for nearly one in 10 deaths in some part of the country — with one area seeing rates over 13%.
Lanaudière — a mountainous region of Quebec just north of Montreal — had 13.4% of its deaths come from Canada’s medical assistance in dying program (MAID) in 2025, official records showed.
Across French-speaking Quebec, which is Canada’s second most populous province, 6,268 died by assisted suicide that year.
