Multi-Billion Dollar Climate Program Became a ‘Tick Box Exercise’: Internal Report

A multi-billion-dollar Trudeau-era funding program for developing nations to address climate issues became a “‘tick box’ exercise” with unclear benchmarks, according to a recently released internal report from Global Affairs Canada (GAC).

The internal report looked at the efficacy of Canada’s climate finance programming between 2010 and 2024, finding that while Canada sent $6.2 billion abroad as part of a $9.15 billion commitment for climate initiatives in developing countries, there were major gaps in oversight and program outcome targets.

The finance program expanded significantly under former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who unsuccessfully attempted to gain Canada a seat on the U.N. Security Council in 2020.

The department’s internal report, dated June 2025, quotes departmental staff who felt the distribution of funds lacked proper attention and required too much money to be handed out too quickly.

“Departmental staff identified fulfilling an increasing number of budget targets challenging within a commitment time frame as it impacted project selection and made the process feel like a ‘tick box’ exercise,” the report reads, adding that some staff “questioned whether disbursements prioritized meeting targets without knowing what results were achieved.”

In particular, Global Affair’s internal report found that a large amount of unconditionally repayable contributions (URCs) comprising the main part of funding handed out were better suited to help meet climate goals in higher-income nations, and thus left program managers with less options to meet the department’s targets in lower-income nations. It also found that two teams involved in estimating URC financial risk management used different approaches and assumptions in their decisions, due to unclear roles and responsibilities.

The report also says grants that would have been more effective to help lower-income countries were often already locked into funding core contributions to large multilateral organizations, and thus couldn’t be effectively redirected and repurposed to directly support developing countries.

Some involved in the program said that the “broad” objectives of the program left them with insufficient guidance to know who to fund and what exact objectives were defined in disbursing funding.

“In applying the broad [climate financing] objectives, the [Government of Canada] and GAC provided limited guidance to define Canada’s [climate financing] ambition in terms of sought results, focusing instead on fulfilling an increasing number of budget targets,” the report notes. “A document review confirmed that there was little focus on defining commitment-level results.”

Trudeau said that combating climate change was a key goal for his government and its policy direction.

“We are determined to help the UN make greater strides in support of its goals for all humanity,” Trudeau remarked in New York in the spring of 2016 while pitching Canada’s bid for a seat on the Security Council.

In terms of recommendations, the report calls for a clearer strategic focus for future money devoted to climate initiatives as well as more effectively managing financial risks in distributing funds. It also calls for increased oversight and better metrics for measuring whether a project is actually succeeding in meeting its objectives or not.