Justice System Spending in Canada: A Decade of Change

Sara Santos-Vigneault
Nov 17
4 min read

Written by: Sara Santos-Vigneault

Date: November 17, 2025

Canadian Parliament buildings with a red flag on the clock tower, green copper roofs, and a lush green landscape under a clear blue sky. — Photo by Aleksandr Galenko on Unsplash

Trends in Department of Justice Canada Expenditures (2013–2023)

Over the past ten years, verified spending data, federal budget policy shifts, and commentary from respected voices in the legal sector reflect the changing financial priorities of Canada's justice system.

During this period, the system has experienced both incremental investment and unexpected contraction.

Marked by fluctuating program funding, administrative restructuring, and waves of hiring followed by workforce reductions, all of which have influenced how justice is accessed and delivered nationwide.

Departmental Budget Summary

Below is a verified summary of actual spending for the Department of Justice Canada over the last decade. These figures reflect departmental expenditures, not total justice system costs such as policing or provincial court operations.

Fiscal Year	Actual Spending (approx.)
2013–14	$737 million
2014–15	$709 million
2015–16	$683 million
2016–17	$684 million
2017–18	$683 million
2018–19	$684 million
2019–20	$813 million
2020–21	$833 million
2021–22	$907 million
2022–23	$983 million

Federal Spending Cuts Starting in 2024

According to the 2024–25 Departmental Plan, Justice Canada will see:

$6.65 million cut in 2024–25
$9.69 million cut in 2025–26
$15.11 million annually in ongoing reductions from 2026 onward [2]

These reductions are part of the federal government's Refocusing Government Spending initiative, introduced in Budget 2023. The department aims to meet these targets through operational efficiencies, fewer contracted services, and reallocating resources internally.

Key areas affected include:

Professional services such as translation, consulting, and external legal work
Office space and travel reductions due to increased hybrid work
Direct funding cuts to:
- Contraventions Act Program
- Integrated Market Enforcement Teams Reserve Fund
- Special Advocates Program
- State-Funded Counsel Program

Justice Canada has stated publicly that these reductions will focus on administrative and internal functions, asserting there will be no adverse effect on services to Canadians. However, this statement is increasingly disputed.

In June 2025, over 260 employees at Justice Canada were notified of job impacts as part of a federal workforce adjustment process. According to the Union of Safety and Justice Employees (USJE), the department has acknowledged that job losses will occur [3]. The USJE strongly criticized the process, noting the negative impact on federal public servants who provide essential services across the justice system, according to statements made by the Union of Safety and Justice Employees (USJE) in June 2025.

"Justice Canada’s claim that front-line services are protected does not hold up when hundreds of positions are being eliminated, including those that directly support courts, tribunals, and legal aid administration."USJE, June 2025 [3]

The Association of Justice Counsel further reported that at least 27 indeterminate employees were formally given "Affected Status" under the federal workforce adjustment directive, as part of the same reductions [4].

Staffing statistics also reveal a broader contradiction. While the department had increased its full-time equivalents (FTEs) from approximately 4,900 in 2021–22 to over 5,158 in 2022–23, it is now undergoing cuts that appear to reverse that trend [5].

This situation has raised alarm among legal observers who argue that cuts to so-called 'administrative' roles often bleed into frontline services. Court clerks, tribunal staff, legal analysts, and technical legal coordinators - many of whom are classified as administrative - are essential for delivering timely and equitable access to justice. Reductions in these positions can directly result in case delays, hearing postponements, or limited support for vulnerable litigants navigating the legal system.

While Justice Canada’s official position maintains that core legal service delivery remains intact, the evidence of job reductions suggests otherwise. As workforce reductions proceed alongside program cuts, the broader concern remains: whether the justice system will be adequately staffed to maintain fair and functional access for the public.

Canadian banknotes ($5, $10, $20, $50, $100) and coins scattered on a white surface, featuring colorful designs and faces. — Photo by PiggyBank on Unsplash

Public Commentary on Justice Budgeting

Multiple legal and advocacy groups have raised alarms about the impact of ongoing or proposed cuts.

"The deep spending cuts announced in Budget 2025 risk undermining the very systems Canadians depend on to uphold fairness, accountability, and public safety." Association of Justice Counsel [6]
"The budget notably proposes to cut more than $20 million over three years from support services for administrative tribunals." Canadian Bar Association [7]
"The Legal Aid Ontario budget was cut by almost 30%, and funding was eliminated for refugee and immigration cases." Rt. Hon. Beverley McLachlin [8]

Reflecting on a Decade of Budget Trends

While the Department of Justice Canada's overall budget has grown modestly since 2019, the earlier half of the decade was marked by funding freezes. Moreover, planned reductions beginning in 2024 raise new concerns. Legal professionals and public advocates continue to press for sustained investment in legal aid, court resources, and tribunal systems to avoid further erosion of access to justice.

The road ahead poses significant challenges. Ongoing fiscal restraint, rising case volumes, and a growing public demand for timely access to justice will test the resilience of Canada's legal infrastructure.

In particular, the cumulative impact of administrative and staffing cuts may strain judicial processes and legal supports already operating near capacity.

Still, there are opportunities for renewal. Strategic investment in technology, equitable legal aid expansion, and a renewed commitment to supporting front-line justice workers could begin to reverse the erosion. Future policy decisions must recognize that a well-funded justice system is not a luxury, it is a public necessity.

The coming years will determine whether Canada chooses to strengthen its justice system or allow incremental disinvestment to quietly undermine its foundational role in democracy and fairness.