Government has inherent bias for more government

One of the authors of this op-ed resides in a municipality, which recently launched an online survey to gauge the preferences of residents with respect to its upcoming budget, which is laudable, but the questions illustrate a problem within government: a bias for more government.

The City of Coquitlam in British Columbia asked respondents whether it should increase, decrease or simply maintain the same level of spending in 2025 for policing, recreation, water and sewage, infrastructure and others items. The problem: there wasn’t a single question on whether residents prefer tax reductions.

Moreover, there was no discussion or context about how increased spending for these activities must come from taxpayers in the form of either having more taxpayers (city population increases) and/or higher tax rates for those residing in the city. What’s clear from the survey is that the municipal government prefers to spend more.

And this bias towards more government within government is not restricted to this local municipality. Other municipalities, provincial governments and certainly the Trudeau federal government have favoured more spending.

Under Prime Minister Trudeau federal spending has reached never-before-seen levels, even after adjusting for inflation. Consider, for instance, that per-person federal spending (excluding interest costs) will reach $11,901 this fiscal year (inflation-adjusted), well above previous levels of per-person spending including during the 2008-09 financial crisis and both world wars. The rationale is that Ottawa is delivering services demanded by Canadians.

But is that true? Are Canadians demanding national pharmacare, national dental benefits and a national daycare program? The answer depends on whether the costs of those programs are included in the discussion.

A 2022 poll asked Canadians about their support for all three programs. Support ranged from 69 per cent for national daycare, to 72 per cent for dental care, to 79 per cent for pharmacare. Here’s the problem, though. The questions were asked without respondents considering any costs. In other words, the respondents were asked whether they support these programs assuming they don’t affect their taxes.

But of course, taxpayers must pay for government spending, and when those costs are included, Canadians are much less supportive. In the same poll, when increased spending is linked with an increase in the GST, support plummets to 36 per cent for daycare, 40 per cent for pharmacare and 42 per cent for dental care.

And these results are not unique. A 2020 poll by the Angus Reid Institute found 86 per cent support for a national prescription drug program—but that support drops by almost half (47 per cent) if a one-percentage point increase in the middle-class personal income tax rate is included.

One explanation for the dramatic change in support rests in another poll, which found that 74 per cent of respondents felt the average Canadian family was overtaxed.

So it’s convenient for governments to avoid connecting more spending with higher taxes.

This internal government support for more government also shows up in our tax mix. Canadian governments rely on less visible taxes than our counterparts in the OECD, a group of high-income, developed countries. For instance, Canadian governments collect 6.8 per cent of the economy (GDP) in consumption taxes such as the GST, which are quite visible and transparent because the cost shows up directly on your bill. That ranks Canada 31st of 38 OECD countries and well below the OECD average of 10.0 per cent.

Alternatively, we rely on personal income tax revenues to a much greater degree and, because these taxes are automatically deducted from the paycheques of Canadians, they are much less apparent to workers. Canada collects 12.3 per cent of the economy in personal income taxes, ranking us 6th highest for our reliance on personal income taxes and above the OECD average of 8.3 per cent.

And a complying media aids the push for more government spending. According to a recent study, when reporting on the announcement of three new federal programs (pharmacare, dental care and national daycare) the CBC and CTV only included the cost of these programs in 4 per cent of their television news coverage. Most of the coverage related to the nature of the new programs, their potential impact on Canadians, and the responses from the Conservative, NDP and Bloc Quebecois. Simply put, the main television coverage didn’t query the government on the cost of these new programs and how taxpayers would pay the bill, leaving many viewers with the mistaken impression that the programs are costless.

Indeed, it’s interesting to note that the same study found that 99.4 per cent of press releases issued by the federal government related to these three programs excluded any information on their costs or impact on the budget.

The inherent bias within government for more government is increasingly clear, and supported by a lack of skepticism in the media. Canadians need clearer information from government on the potential benefits and costs of new or expanded spending, and the media must do a better job of critically covering government initiatives. Only then can we realistically understand what Canadians actually demand from government.

Jason Clemens

Executive Vice President, Fraser Institute

Jake Fuss

Director, Fiscal Studies, Fraser Institute

Related Topics:#FraserInstitute #GovernmentSpending #JakeFuss #JasonClemens GovernmentBureacracy

Up Next

Mystery Terrorist: The Unknown Life and Violent Times of Illegal Border-Crosser Sidi Mohammed Abdallahi

Don't Miss

Why should Liberal MPs defend the carbon tax now?

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Trudeau clinging like a ‘low-key autocrat’: Jeremy Nuttall

National / 57 mins ago

Court challenge to Trudeau’s suspension of Parliament could result in early election

Energy / 1 hour ago

Coal: one million tons an hour

Business

2025 Energy Outlook: Steering Through Recovery and Policy Shifts

Published on January 9, 2025

Todayville

From EnergyNow.ca

By Leonard Herchen & Yuchen Wang of GLJ

Their long-term real price forecast projects WTI at USD $74.00 per barrel and Henry Hub natural gas at USD $4.00 per MMBtu in 2025 dollars, signaling expectations of market stabilization and sustained global demand.

The energy markets in 2025 are undergoing transformative structural changes, highlighted by the operational launch of key infrastructure projects such as LNG Canada. This development significantly enhances Canada’s ability to meet rising global LNG demand while alleviating long-standing supply bottlenecks. At the same time, economic recovery across major markets remains uneven, shaping varied trends in energy demand and production activity.

Geopolitical dynamics are poised to redefine the competitive landscape, with the return of a Trump-led U.S. administration introducing potential shifts in trade policies, regulatory frameworks, and relationships with leading energy-producing nations. These changes, coupled with climate policy advancements and an accelerated global transition toward renewable energy, present additional complexities for the oil and gas sector.

Amid these uncertainties, GLJ’s analysts express confidence in the resilience of market fundamentals. Their long-term real price forecast projects WTI at USD $74.00 per barrel and Henry Hub natural gas at USD $4.00 per MMBtu in 2025 dollars, signaling expectations of market stabilization and sustained global demand.

Oil Prices

The oil market in 2025 reflects a delicate balance between supply and demand. During Q4 2024, WTI prices remained stable, fluctuating between $69 and $73 per barrel. This stability highlights the market’s resilience, even in the face of a slower global economic recovery and geopolitical challenges, including weaker demand in regions like China and increased production in North America.

Geopolitical risks remain pivotal, with ongoing tensions in the Middle East and sanctions on oil-exporting nations such as Iran and Venezuela threatening supply disruptions. While OPEC+ production cuts continue to provide vital support to prices by tightening global supply, these efforts are partially offset by the rising output of non-OPEC producers, notably in the U.S. and Canada.

The Trans Mountain Expansion (TMX) project is reshaping the pricing dynamics of WCS crude relative to WTI. By increasing export capacity to the West Coast, TMX has created conditions for a sustained narrowing of the WCS-WTI differential, moving away from seasonal fluctuations.

The return of a Trump-led U.S. administration introduces additional challenges. Deregulation policies aimed at boosting domestic oil production may exert downward pressure on prices, while potential trade tariffs and revised international agreements could further complicate global oil flows.

In this dynamic environment, GLJ forecasts WTI to average $71.25 per barrel and Brent $75.25 per barrel in 2025. These projections reflect robust long-term fundamentals, including sustained global demand and ongoing efforts to manage supply dynamics, emphasizing the market’s resilience despite near-term uncertainties.

Natural Gas Prices

In 2025, GLJ’s forecast suggests Henry Hub prices will average $3.20 per MMBtu, supported by steady domestic demand, seasonal winter peaks, and robust LNG exports. U.S. natural gas continues to play a critical role globally, ensuring supply security for key markets in Europe and Asia. The combination of growing industrial use, power generation demand, and stable production levels provides a solid foundation for price stability.

For the Canadian market, GLJ projects AECO natural gas prices to average $2.05 per MMBtu in 2025, representing a recovery from the lows of 2024. This improvement is attributed to easing regional oversupply and stabilizing demand. However, challenges persist, as production continues to outpace infrastructure expansion, prompting a downward adjustment of GLJ’s long-term AECO price forecast by $0.40 per MMBtu. The ramp-up of LNG Canada’s operations is expected to progressively enhance market dynamics and address these challenges.

On a global scale, LNG benchmarks such as NBP, TTF, and JKM have remained relatively stable, supported by high storage levels in Europe and balanced supply-demand conditions. European suppliers have effectively managed storage drawdowns, ensuring sufficient reserves for winter. Nevertheless, these benchmarks remain susceptible to market volatility driven by geopolitical uncertainties.

The CAD/USD Exchange Rate

The Canadian dollar experienced sharp depreciation during the last quarter of 2024, with the CAD/USD exchange rate falling below 0.70 USD. Economists have attributed this decline to the strength of the U.S. economy and its currency, the widening gap between the Bank of Canada and the U.S. Federal Reserve’s lending rates, as well as tariff threats and a political crisis in Ottawa. These factors have created a favorable environment for the U.S. dollar, putting downward pressure on the Canadian dollar.

Looking ahead to 2025, GLJ forecasts a CAD/USD exchange rate averaging 0.705 USD, underpinned by steady oil and gas revenues and enhanced export capacity from major projects such as LNG Canada and the TMX and eventual resolution of internal political issues and return to normalcy in US tariff policy.

Nevertheless, the outlook for the Canadian dollar remains uncertain, shaped by global economic recovery—particularly in China—and U.S. policy decisions under the Trump administration. While near-term challenges persist, Canada’s resource-driven economy and strategic energy export position provide a degree of resilience. In the absence of significant economic or geopolitical disruptions, GLJ projects the CAD/USD exchange rate to stabilize around 0.75 USD over the long term.

In 2025, GLJ expanded its database to include forecasts for Colombia Vasconia and Castilla Crude, as well as lithium prices, reflecting the increasing focus on diverse energy and resource markets. The addition of lithium forecasts aligns with the growing global emphasis on energy transition minerals critical for electric vehicles and battery storage solutions. A separate blog, set to be published next week on the GLJ website, will explore the lithium price forecast in greater depth, offering a detailed analysis and strategic implications for the energy sector.

GLJ’s forecast values for key benchmarks is as follows:

Business

Liberal Leadership Candidates should scrap the carbon tax

Published on January 9, 2025

Todayville

From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

By Kris Sims

As Liberal leadership campaigns are preparing to launch, the Canadian Taxpayers Federation is calling on all Liberal leadership candidates to commit to scrapping the carbon tax, especially with the next carbon tax hike coming on April 1.

“This was Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s costly failure and the carbon tax should go out the door with him,” said Kris Sims, CTF Alberta Director. “Why would the next Liberal leader want to keep this political millstone and continue to punish taxpayers whenever they fill up at the gas station or pay their home-heating bill?”

The new leader of the Liberal Party will face a rapidly approaching deadline for a key carbon tax decision.

Parliament resumes on March 24 and opposition parties have all promised to immediately bring down the government and trigger an election.

The carbon tax is set to increase April 1.

“A carbon tax hike in the first days of an election will absolutely infuriate taxpayers,” said Sims. “And pausing that hike would be a half measure that taxpayers would view as a silly pre-election gimmick.

“The next Liberal leader is facing a stark choice: kick off the election by hiking the carbon tax or scrap the failed scheme completely.”

Prior to the carbon tax hike last spring, a Leger poll showed 69 per cent of Canadians opposed the increase.

After the April increase, the carbon tax will cost 21 cents per litre of gasoline, 25 cents per litre of diesel and 18 cents per cubic metre of natural gas.

At those rates, the carbon tax will cost about $15 extra to fill a minivan, about $27 extra to fill a pickup truck and about $250 extra to fill a big rig truck. The average Canadian household will need to pay about $390 extra on their home heating bills for natural gas.

The Canadian Trucking Alliance reports the carbon tax cost the long haul trucking industry $2 billion in 2024.

The Parliamentary Budget Officer reports the carbon tax will cost Canadian farmers $1 billion over the next five years.

The PBO also confirmed, again, that the carbon tax costs the average Canadian family more money than they get back in rebates.

“The carbon tax makes Canadians pay more for everything, from fuel to food,” said Sims. “Continuing to punish Canadians with the pointless carbon tax would be political suicide so taxpayers expect anyone hoping to become prime minister to immediately commit to scrapping the carbon tax.”