If there was any mystery around this year’s Saskatchewan provincial budget, it was how the government would respond to the Trump tariff threat through public policy.
The premier had already telegraphed that he would focus on health, education, affordability and community safety in his speech to the Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities (SARM). But how Saskatchewan workers, consumers and rural producers would be protected from the economic consequences of the trade war was still an unsettled question.
We got our answer today. For a budget titled Delivering for You, it might have been better characterized as Delivering for a Few.
Saskatchewan Minister of Finance Jim Reiter said the fluidity of the tariff situation made it impossible to build the direct effects into this budget:
“We do not know whether the tariffs are going to last for three days, three months or three years, nor do we know at what rate these tariffs will be levied over time,” the budget reads.
To that end, Saskatchewan’s 2025 budget just pretends that the trade war isn’t happening.
While the budget offers a worst case scenario—where an ongoing trade war could reduce the value of Saskatchewan exports to the U.S. by $8.2 billion (30.4 per cent), reduce GDP by 5.8 per cent, and cost the province $1.4 billion in revenues—none of these assumptions are built into the budget.
Instead, the government assumes growth in all major revenue sources over last year, estimating a revenue increase of $1.2 billion. It’s akin to burying your head in the sand.
This budget only further showcases this government’s refusal to accept the reality of the tariff situation and the end of free trade as the new status-quo. It has been fixated on negotiating its way out of this since the beginning, refusing to employ any tactics that might upset the Americans.
But as CCPA Director of the Trade and Investment Research Project Stuart Trew has written, even the mere threat of tariffs are producing profound economic harm—whether or not they are actually implemented.
To not adequately prepare for this seems to be a real dereliction of duty. Both B.C. and Alberta introduced contingency funds to directly address the impacts of tariffs in their respective budgets.
Rather than adopt a Pollyannish view of the future, the Saskatchewan government could have assured people that it is prepared to address the fallout of the trade war by making much more robust investments in health care, education and long-term care—as well as advancing rapid job training initiatives, post-secondary opportunities, income and housing supports, enhanced local procurement and aggressive anti-gouging legislation.
While the 2025 budget increased funding in health care, education and infrastructure spending is no doubt welcome, this is a budget that absolutely failed to meet the moment.
