Why Canadians should mourn the lost art of budget secrecy

Budget secrecy ensures that everyone, from markets to media to Parliament, gets the full picture at the same time. That’s not an outdated concept nor undemocratic; that’s fair and productive, writes Kim Moody. Photo by Tony Caldwell/Postmedia files

Article content

Once upon a time, the federal budget contents were a carefully guarded secret until the Finance Minister rose in the House of Commons to announce the budget. Secrecy is not a statutory requirement but, as pointed out by former house speaker John Fraser in 1987, “Budgetary secrecy is a matter of parliamentary convention. Its purpose is to prevent anybody from gaining a private advantage by reason of obtaining advance budgetary information.” So, again, budget secrecy is intended to prevent insiders from gaining an unfair advantage from advance knowledge of tax/spending measures, or from using market sensitive information. 

Article content

Article content

Historically, budget secrecy has been taken very seriously. In the U.K., where much of our Parliamentary Convention is taken from, any breach of budget secrecy could lead to the resignation of the chancellor of the exchequer, the U.K. equivalent of the finance minister. In Canada, our Parliamentary Convention has been less strict. For example, in 1983, finance minister Marc Lalonde inadvertently leaked budget documents by letting a television crew film him in his office, where copies of the budget were sitting on his desk before their release. This generated quite the stir, but Lalonde did not resign.   

Article content

Article content

Article content

In 1989, finance minister Michael Wilson was the subject of a leak when television reporter Doug Small revealed the government’s budget on-air after receiving the document from a person who worked at a recycling plant where copies of the budget had been disposed. Small revealed various spending cuts and tax increases laid out in the budget. Wilson reacted by introducing the budget early in a quickly arranged press conference. He did not resign, but criminal charges were filed against Small and others who were involved in obtaining the documents. The charges were later dropped.

Article content

Article content

For the past 20 years or so, there has been a deliberate erosion of budget secrecy. Prior to budget day, many of the spending announcements — especially the larger ones — have been purposely “leaked” or announced by the government of the day. Many new tax measures are also “strategically” leaked to friendly journalists. In recent years, budget day has become a theatrical formality — with most of the substance already leaked or announced in advance. 

Article content

Article content

In my opinion, the “leak/advance announcement” culture has enabled governments to frame the public narrative and secure buy-in from media ahead of the formal release.

Article content

Some are not troubled by this shift, positing that budget secrecy undermines democratic accountability by limiting public and parliamentary debate before key decisions are made. They claim that announcements in advance allow stakeholders to prepare, prevents political spin and improves policy outcomes through broader consultation. In an age of open data and rapid information flow, they say, strict budget secrecy is outdated, unrealistic and counterproductive.