Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Uncategorized

14% of Canadians struggling to heat, cool their homes: Statistics Canada

Published

7 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

‘In 2023, 14 percent of Canadian households reported that they kept their dwelling at an unsafe or uncomfortable temperature for at least 1 month in the past 12 months because of unaffordable heating or cooling costs,’ StatsCan reported.

Statistics Canada has found that as energy costs continue to rise, some Canadians are unable to afford to properly heat or cool their homes. 

On October 30, Statistics Canada reported that many Canadians are keeping their homes at “unsafe or uncomfortable” temperatures as they are unable to pay energy bills amid Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s ongoing energy regulations and taxes.

“In the face of rising energy prices, not all Canadian households are able to adequately heat and cool their dwellings, resulting in possible increased risk of climate-related morbidity and even death,” StatsCan wrote.   

“In 2023, 14 percent of Canadian households reported that they kept their dwelling at an unsafe or uncomfortable temperature for at least 1 month in the past 12 months because of unaffordable heating or cooling costs,” the report continued.  

The research found that over a quarter of households (26 percent) in 2023 did not use air conditioning. Similarly, 26 percent of Canadians do not have air conditioning or cooling equipment in their homes.   

36 percent of those who went without air conditioning lived in the lowest income bracket, while only 15 percent were in the highest income bracket.  

Furthermore, Canadians living in apartments are least likely to have air conditioning. Numbers revealed 38 percent of Canadians in low-rise apartments and 33 percent of Canadians in high-rise apartment do not use air conditioning.  

According to StatsCan, a lack of air condition can “lead to dangerous living conditions and has been linked to an increased risk of heat-related morbidity and mortality.” 

The report found that 2 percent of households were so affected by their home being too hot or too cold that a member of their household required medical care.  

As energy bills continue to rise, one in seven Canadians have been forced to go without necessities, such as food and medicine, to pay their energy bills. Additionally, about 8 percent revealed that they have had to go without necessities for at least three months.  

Research found that 27 percent of those who have had to sacrifice basic necessities to pay energy bills are single-parent families. Single parents are 1.5 times more likely to forfeit necessities than couples with children and 3 times more likely than couples without children.  

Additionally, some Canadians are unable to make their payments at all. In the past 12 months, 3 percent of households said their energy was disconnected or shut off, while one in ten reported that they could not pay their bill on time or at all. 

The StatsCan findings come amid ongoing debate over Trudeau’s carbon tax, which extends to many forms of home heating.  

Trudeau recently determined to suspend the carbon tax for home heating oil, a decision which has been criticized for benefiting Atlantic provinces, a historically Liberal stronghold, while leaving western and Conservative provinces literally out in the cold.    

As a result, Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe said his province will stop collecting a federal carbon tax on natural gas used to heat homes come January 1, 2024, unless it gets a similar tax break as the Atlantic Canadian provinces.   

However, Trudeau, along with other Liberal officials, have announced that no more concessions are to be made.  

“There will absolutely not be any other carve-outs or suspensions of the price on pollution,” Trudeau told reporters. “This is designed to phase out home heating oil, the way we made a decision to phase out coal… This is specifically about ending the use of home heating oil.”    

Trudeau’s statement was supported by both Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkinson and Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault.    

Wilkinson dismissed Moe’s demand of further tax relief, saying, “There will be no more carve-outs coming.”    

“We expect him to comply with the laws of the land,” he added. “It is a requirement that they collect that or that it be collected in some way.”   

Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) leader Pierre Poilievre condemned the rising energy costs citing the carbon tax as a driving factor and making reference to the StatsCan report.   

“Already, 14 percent of Canadians are living with unsafe temperatures in their homes. One in 10 have missed a heating bill in the last 12 months. Will he, before people go cold and hungry, axe the tax so that people can keep the heat on?” he asked in Parliament.  

Trudeau’s decision comes as Atlantic Liberals are beginning to vote alongside Conservatives to end the carbon tax. The Atlantic provinces have voted primarily Liberal since 2015, but recent polls reveal that many Canadians living there plan to vote Conservative.    

Trudeau’s carbon tax, framed as a way to reduce carbon emissions, has cost Canadians hundreds more annually despite rebates.     

The Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer calculated the total carbon tax costs for fuel in 2023 minus the government rebates. The steepest increase is for Albertans, who will pay an average of $710 extra per household. Following Alberta is Ontario with a $478 increase.  

Prince Edward Island households will pay an extra $465, Nova Scotia $431, Saskatchewan $410, Manitoba $386, and Newfoundland and Labrador $347.   

The increased costs are only expected to rise, as a recent report revealed that a carbon tax of more than $350 per tonne is needed to reach Trudeau’s net-zero goals by 2050.     

Currently, Canadians living in provinces under the federal carbon pricing scheme pay $65 per tonne, but the Trudeau government has a goal of $170 per tonne by 2030.

Uncategorized

Taxpayers Federation calling on BC Government to scrap failed Carbon Tax

Published on

From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

By Carson Binda 

BC Government promised carbon tax would reduce CO2 by 33%. It has done nothing.

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is calling on the British Columbia government to scrap the carbon tax as new data shows the province’s carbon emissions have continued to rise, despite the oldest carbon tax in the country.

“The carbon tax isn’t reducing carbon emissions like the politicians promised,” said Carson Binda, B.C. Director for the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. “Premier David Eby needs to axe the tax now to save British Columbians money.”

Emissions data from the provincial government shows that British Columbia’s emissions have risen since the introduction of a carbon tax.

Total emissions in 2007, the last year without a provincial carbon tax, stood at 65.5 MtCO2e, while 2022 emissions data shows an increase to 65.6 MtCO2e.

When the carbon tax was introduced, the B.C. government pledged that it would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 33 per cent.

The Eby government plans to increase the B.C. carbon tax again on April 1, 2025. After that increase, the carbon tax will add 21 cents to the cost of a litre of natural gas, 25 cents per litre of diesel and 18 cents per cubic meter of natural gas.

“The carbon tax has cost British Columbians a lot of money, but it hasn’t helped the environment as promised,” Binda said. “Eby has a simple choice: scrap the carbon tax before April 1, or force British Columbians to pay even more to heat our homes and drive to work.”

If a family fills up the minivan once per week for a year, the carbon tax will cost them $728. The carbon tax on natural gas will add $435 to the average family’s home heating bills in the 12 months after the April 1 carbon tax hike.

Other provinces, like Saskatchewan, have unilaterally stopped collecting the carbon tax on essentials like home heating and have not faced consequences from Ottawa.

“British Columbians need real relief from the costs of the provincial carbon tax,” Binda said. “Eby needs to stop waiting for permission from the leaderless federal government and scrap the tax on British Columbians.”

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

The problem with deficits and debt

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill and Jake Fuss

This fiscal year (2024/25), the federal government and eight out of 10 provinces project a budget deficit, meaning they’re spending more than collecting in revenues. Unfortunately, this trend isn’t new. Many Canadian governments—including the federal government—have routinely ran deficits over the last decade.

But why should Canadians care? If you listen to some politicians (and even some economists), they say deficits—and the debt they produce—are no big deal. But in reality, the consequences of government debt are real and land squarely on everyday Canadians.

Budget deficits, which occur when the government spends more than it collects in revenue over the fiscal year, fuel debt accumulation. For example, since 2015, the federal government’s large and persistent deficits have more than doubled total federal debt, which will reach a projected $2.2 trillion this fiscal year. That has real world consequences. Here are a few of them:

Diverted Program Spending: Just as Canadians must pay interest on their own mortgages or car loans, taxpayers must pay interest on government debt. Each dollar spent paying interest is a dollar diverted from public programs such as health care and education, or potential tax relief. This fiscal year, federal debt interest costs will reach $53.7 billion or $1,301 per Canadian. And that number doesn’t include provincial government debt interest, which varies by province. In Ontario, for example, debt interest costs are projected to be $12.7 billion or $789 per Ontarian.

Higher Taxes in the Future: When governments run deficits, they’re borrowing to pay for today’s spending. But eventually someone (i.e. future generations of Canadians) must pay for this borrowing in the form of higher taxes. For example, if you’re a 16-year-old Canadian in 2025, you’ll pay an estimated $29,663 over your lifetime in additional personal income taxes (that you would otherwise not pay) due to Canada’s ballooning federal debt. By comparison, a 65-year-old will pay an estimated $2,433. Younger Canadians clearly bear a disproportionately large share of the government debt being accumulated currently.

Risks of rising interest rates: When governments run deficits, they increase demand for borrowing. In other words, governments compete with individuals, families and businesses for the savings available for borrowing. In response, interest rates rise, and subsequently, so does the cost of servicing government debt. Of course, the private sector also must pay these higher interest rates, which can reduce the level of private investment in the economy. In other words, private investment that would have occurred no longer does because of higher interest rates, which reduces overall economic growth—the foundation for job-creation and prosperity. Not surprisingly, as government debt has increased, business investment has declined—specifically, business investment per worker fell from $18,363 in 2014 to $14,687 in 2021 (inflation-adjusted).

Risk of Inflation: When governments increase spending, particularly with borrowed money, they add more money to the economy, which can fuel inflation. According to a 2023 report from Scotiabank, government spending contributed significantly to higher interest rates in Canada, accounting for an estimated 42 per cent of the increase in the Bank of Canada’s rate since the first quarter of 2022. As a result, many Canadians have seen the costs of their borrowing—mortgages, car loans, lines of credit—soar in recent years.

Recession Risks: The accumulation of deficits and debt, which do not enhance productivity in the economy, weaken the government’s ability to deal with future challenges including economic downturns because the government has less fiscal capacity available to take on more debt. That’s because during a recession, government spending automatically increases and government revenues decrease, even before policymakers react with any specific measures. For example, as unemployment rises, employment insurance (EI) payments automatically increase, while revenues for EI decrease. Therefore, when a downturn or recession hits, and the government wants to spend even more money beyond these automatic programs, it must go further into debt.

Government debt comes with major consequences for Canadians. To alleviate the pain of government debt on Canadians, our policymakers should work to balance their budgets in 2025.

Tegan Hill

Director, Alberta Policy, Fraser Institute

Jake Fuss

Director, Fiscal Studies, Fraser Institute
Continue Reading

Trending

X