Canada's $24.5 Billion Ukraine Gamble: Generosity or Governance Failure?

The Announcement That Should Have Sparked a National Debate

On December 27, 2025, Prime Minister Mark Carney stood beside Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at a Halifax-area airport and announced an additional $2.5 billion in economic assistance for Ukraine. With this latest commitment, Canada's total support since Russia's full-scale invasion in February 2022 has reached $24.5 billion—making Canada one of the largest per-capita contributors to Ukraine's war effort and reconstruction among G7 nations.

"The barbarism that we saw overnight—the attack on Kyiv—shows just how important it is that we stand with Ukraine during this difficult time," Carney declared.

But for millions of Canadians struggling to find a family doctor, facing crushing rent burdens, or watching the federal deficit balloon to $78 billion, a different question echoes: What about our difficult time?

The Domestic Crisis We're Ignoring

Healthcare: A National Emergency

The numbers are staggering. According to SecondStreet.org's research, at least 23,746 Canadians died on healthcare waitlists between April 2024 and March 2025—patients who never received the surgeries or diagnostic scans they desperately needed. This figure likely underestimates the true toll, as Alberta doesn't track waitlist deaths, and most provinces don't count patients who die waiting for specialists.

Canada spent $244 billion on healthcare in 2024-25, an all-time high. Yet despite ranking third-highest in healthcare spending as a share of GDP among OECD nations, we rank 26th in physicians per capita, 25th in hospital beds, and a dismal 29th in wait times.

An estimated 6.5 million Canadians lack regular access to a family physician. With a shortage of 22,823 family doctors and only 1,300 new graduates entering the workforce annually, we will never solve this crisis at the current pace. Meanwhile, 20% of family doctors plan to retire within five years.

In 1993, Canadians waited an average of 9.3 weeks to see a specialist and receive treatment. In 2024, that wait has ballooned to 30 weeks.

The Fiscal Abyss

Budget 2025 projects a federal deficit of $78.3 billion—nearly double what was forecast in the 2024 Fall Economic Statement. The accumulated federal debt now stands at $1.27 trillion, with the deficit-to-GDP ratio at 2.5%—the highest outside of a recession since 1995-96.

Canada's economy shrank 0.3% in October 2025 and contracted 1.6% annualized in Q2—narrowly avoiding a technical recession. Growth projections for 2026 have been slashed to just 1.2%.

We are borrowing money we don't have to give to a country 7,000 kilometres away while our own economy sputters.

Housing: The Unaffordable Dream

Vancouver residents spend 35.6% of their income on rent—$2,891 monthly on average. Toronto isn't far behind. Financial advisors recommend spending no more than 30% of gross income on housing, but for millions of Canadians in major cities, 40-50% has become the brutal norm.

The federal government admits it needs to build 480,000 homes annually for a decade—double the normal rate—just to restore affordability to pre-pandemic levels. Even if they achieve this historically unprecedented goal, their own estimates show housing will be less affordable for nearly half the country by 2035.

The Constitutional Question: Does Carney Have the Authority?

Canadians rightfully ask: Does the Prime Minister have the legal authority to commit billions in foreign aid without explicit Parliamentary approval?

The answer is nuanced but troubling.

Under Canada's constitutional framework, the conduct of foreign affairs—including international negotiations and agreements—rests with the Crown through royal prerogative. The Prime Minister and Cabinet wield significant executive authority over foreign policy decisions.

However, bills calling for the spending of public revenues must originate in the House of Commons. International assistance levels are set by the Minister of Finance and Prime Minister and tabled for approval through the annual budget process. Cabinet ministers are collectively accountable to Parliament for all decisions, and the Prime Minister can only exercise authority with the consent of the majority of MPs.

In practice, this means the government can announce foreign aid commitments, but the actual spending requires Parliamentary approval through the budget. The question isn't whether Carney can announce such aid—it's whether Parliament will rubber-stamp it, and whether Canadians have any meaningful voice in this process.

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has branded Carney's move "reckless virtue-signaling," demanding Parliamentary scrutiny and declaring: "We're borrowing from our kids to fund Zelenskyy's folly."

Yet where are the procedural challenges? Where is the Parliamentary debate? Both major parties have historically supported Ukraine aid, leaving citizens with few avenues to express dissent through their representatives.

The Corruption Elephant in the Room

Let's address the uncomfortable truth about the recipient of Canadian generosity.

Ukraine scored 35 out of 100 on Transparency International's 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index, ranking 105th out of 180 countries. While this represents improvement over the past decade, recent events paint a troubling picture.

In November 2025, a National Anti-Corruption Bureau investigation into an alleged $100 million kickback scheme at Energoatom led to the resignation of Ukraine's Justice Minister and Energy Minister, plus the dismissal of Energoatom's supervisory board. On November 28, investigators raided the home of presidential chief of staff Andriy Yermak—Zelenskyy's closest advisor—who was dismissed later that day after reports he had worked to curtail the independence of anti-corruption bodies.

This isn't ancient history. This is weeks before Carney handed Ukraine another $2.5 billion.

Are we comfortable sending billions to a country where the President's chief of staff was just ousted in a corruption scandal? Where ministers are resigning over alleged kickback schemes? Canada has legitimate national security interests in supporting Ukraine against Russian aggression—but at what cost, and with what accountability mechanisms?

The Strategic Counter-Argument

Fairness demands acknowledging the case for supporting Ukraine.

Russia's invasion represents a fundamental challenge to the international rules-based order. If territorial conquest through military force goes unchecked, the implications for Canadian Arctic sovereignty, global stability, and democratic values are severe. The $24.5 billion spent on Ukraine may be cheaper than the alternative: a world where authoritarian powers redraw borders at will.

Much of Canada's "aid" isn't cash disappearing into Ukrainian coffers. The recent $2.5 billion announcement helps unlock financing from the IMF, World Bank, and European Bank for Reconstruction and Development—loan guarantees and debt service suspension that leverage Canadian commitments into larger international support packages.

Canada's contribution has also been praised internationally. At the G7 Summit in Alberta, Carney announced a $2 billion package for Ukrainian military purchases. Such commitments strengthen Canada's diplomatic standing and relationships with allies.

The Core Problem: Priorities Distorted by Elite Consensus

The fundamental issue isn't whether Ukraine deserves support. It's that elite consensus has replaced democratic deliberation on questions of fiscal priority.

No Canadian voted for a $78 billion deficit. No Canadian voted for 30-week waits to see a specialist. No Canadian voted for 23,746 of their fellow citizens to die on waitlists.

Yet when asked to choose between domestic healthcare and international commitments, our government has made its priorities clear—without meaningfully consulting the electorate.

Polling reveals the divide: 52% of Conservative supporters believe Canada has been "too generous" with Ukraine support, compared to just 8% of Liberals. This isn't a fringe position—it represents millions of Canadians whose concerns are dismissed as isolationism or insufficient moral clarity.

What Can Ordinary Canadians Do?

1. Demand Parliamentary Accountability

Contact your Member of Parliament. Demand recorded votes on foreign aid packages. Insist that aid commitments face genuine scrutiny, not rubber-stamp approval. Ask your MP directly: "How do you justify $2.5 billion for Ukraine when constituents in your riding are dying on waitlists?"

2. Make It an Election Issue

With a federal election on the horizon, make candidates answer hard questions about fiscal priorities. Don't accept vague platitudes about "standing with Ukraine" and "investing in healthcare." Demand specific trade-offs: If we're spending $24.5 billion abroad, what domestic programs are being sacrificed?

3. Support Transparency Initiatives

Organizations like SecondStreet.org are doing essential work tracking waitlist deaths and government accountability. Support their efforts to shine light on domestic failures.

4. Recognize the Complexity

Avoid the trap of false binaries. Supporting Canadian healthcare doesn't mean abandoning Ukraine. But demanding accountability for how our money is spent—both domestically and internationally—is the essence of democratic citizenship.

5. Vote Strategically

If your current representative won't listen, find one who will. Democracy only works when elected officials fear electoral consequences for ignoring constituent priorities.

Conclusion: Charity Beyond Our Means?

The question isn't whether Canada should support Ukraine. It's whether we can afford to be quite so generous while our own house burns.

$24.5 billion could hire thousands of physicians, build hundreds of healthcare facilities, and dramatically reduce the waitlists killing our fellow citizens. It could address the doctor shortage that leaves 6.5 million Canadians without primary care. It could make a meaningful dent in the housing crisis crushing young families.

Instead, that money flows to a country 7,000 kilometres away—a country with serious, ongoing corruption problems—while Canadians die waiting for care their tax dollars are supposed to provide.

This isn't isolationism. It's asking for basic democratic accountability. When our government borrows $78 billion annually while sending billions abroad, ordinary Canadians have every right to ask: Whose interests are being served?

Mark Carney didn't ask Canadians whether they wanted to send another $2.5 billion to Ukraine. He announced it as fait accompli. The decision was made by elites, for reasons that serve elite priorities—diplomatic standing, international reputation, geopolitical strategy.

Those priorities aren't illegitimate. But neither is the grandmother in Brampton who can't find a family doctor, the young couple in Vancouver who will never afford a home, or the 23,746 families who lost loved ones on waitlists this year.

Their priorities matter too. And until our government starts acting like it, Canadians have every right to question whether we're being governed or merely managed.

---

This editorial represents the opinion of stopbleeding.ca's editorial board. We welcome responses and alternative perspectives.