From the Fraser Institute

By Vincent Geloso

In the 10 years following privatization, prices for stamps and other postal services fell by 11 per cent in Austria, 15 per cent in the Netherlands and 17 per cent in Germany (adjusted for inflation). All these countries now have lower postal prices than the European average.

Canada Post wants to increase the price of a stamp by 25 cents to $1.24 to keep up with inflation and rising costs. But Canada Post has often relied on this reasoning for previous price increases since it stopped being a government department and became a Crown corporation in 1981. Since then, it’s jacked up prices every time it’s had “financial difficulties.”

The source of these difficulties has changed over time. It used to be the modernization of infrastructure, then the problems of pensions, then the rise of the Internet. The answer is, however, always the same. Prices must increase. Indeed, since 1981 stamp prices have increased 98 per cent (after adjusting for inflation). In other words, the price for stamps have increased far beyond the rate of inflation.

Why does Canada Post keep getting away with this?

Because it has a monopoly over most of the letter market in Canada. And while it competes with private companies (UPS, for example) in the parcel market, Canada Post can borrow money at much lower costs than its rivals because it is a Crown corporation ultimately backed by taxpayers. That’s a huge advantage.

Normally, a company facing losses and declining demand would innovate and reduce costs. Otherwise, it would likely be bought out by competitors or go bankrupt. However, due to its monopoly over most of the letter market, Canada Post lacks this incentive. In can simply pass the burden onto consumers by raising prices, which is exactly what it has done since the 1980s. And as a Crown corporation, it cannot be purchased by another company without express approval from Ottawa.

So, what’s the solution?

In Europe, due to a directive from the European Commission, all letters regardless of weight have been open to competition since 2013. The directive does not mandate the privatization of state-owned postal companies; it simply ends postal monopolies. Combined with local liberalization efforts before 2013, this directive has forced state-owned postal service providers to better control costs because they cannot turn to taxpayers (for subsidies) or consumers (by raising prices) to bail them out.

Some countries such as the Netherlands, Austria and Germany went further and privatized their postal operators. With privatization, the discipline of competition is combined with the discipline imposed by shareholders seeking to maximize profits and increase sales.

In the 10 years following privatization, prices for stamps and other postal services fell by 11 per cent in Austria, 15 per cent in the Netherlands and 17 per cent in Germany (adjusted for inflation). All these countries now have lower postal prices than the European average.

Predictably, postal service providers in these countries found new methods of organizing their activities, tying multiple services together to generate economies of scale, and moved fast in adopting new information and logistical technologies. Due to the incentives of competition, providers focused their efforts on controlling costs—a focus Canada Post will never achieve as long as it’s a Crown corporation with a monopoly.

If approved by federal regulators, Canada Post’s latest price increase would go into effect in January. Policymakers in Ottawa should finally put postal liberalization and privatization on the table. Otherwise, it’s only a matter of time before a new problem emerges, which Canada Post will use to justify another price increase.

From the Fraser Institute

By Julio Mejía and Elmira Aliakbari

Nearly 30 per cent of EV owners worldwide intend to switch back to internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles.

According to new data released this week, electric vehicle (EV) sales in Europe plummeted by 36 per cent in Europe including a 69 per cent drop in Germany, the continent’s largest auto market. And according to a recent survey by McKinsey & Company, nearly 30 per cent of EV owners worldwide intend to switch back to internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles. Clearly, in light of growing consumer hesitation and a global slowdown in EV sales, the ambitious timelines set by governments for the EV transition are increasingly at odds with market realities.

In Canada, the Trudeau government has mandated that all new passenger vehicles and light trucks must be zero-emission by 2035, with interim targets of 20 per cent by 2026 and 60 per cent by 2030. But only 8.1 per cent (139,521) of the 1.7 million new vehicles sold in Canada in 2023 were electric, according to Statistics Canada. And it takes an average of 55 days to sell an EV in Canada—33 days longer than in 2023 and four days more than a gasoline-powered car. To achieve the Trudeau government’s 2026 target, EV sales would need to more than double in just two years and increase more than sevenfold by 2030 (assuming no change in total vehicle sales). Such rapid growth within a short timeframe is questionable at best.

It’s a similar story in the United States where the Biden administration has mandated that nearly 60 per cent of new vehicles sold must be electric by 2032 even though demand in 2024 has been lighter than expected and nearly half of American EV owners say they’re likely to switch back to ICEs. In Europe, the United Kingdom and the European Union plan to ban the sale of new ICE vehicles by 2035 yet, as previously noted, EV sales are plummeting.

Some automakers have already responded to the realities of the EV market. In April, Tesla laid off 10 per cent of its global workforce. Ford announced it will cancel the production of an electric SUV, delay the production of an electric pickup truck, and postpone the start of EV production at its Oakville, Ontario plant by two years. General Motors abandoned its goal of producing 400,000 EVs by mid-2024 due to lower-than-expected sales and revealed in August it would delay the start of production at its battery plant in Indiana by about one year, pushing the timeline to 2027.

The EV transition also faces another major hurdle—a shortage of minerals for EV batteries that can only be addressed by opening a massive number of new mines in record time. According to a 2023 study, to meet international EV adoption mandates by 2030, the world would need 50 new lithium mines, 60 new nickel mines, 17 new cobalt mines, 50 new mines for cathode production, 40 new mines for anode materials, 90 new mines for minerals needed to produce battery cells, and 81 new mines for the body and motors of the EVs themselves, for a total of 388 new mines worldwide. For context, in 2021 there were only 340 metal mines operating in Canada and the U.S. combined.

Identifying, planning and constructing a mine is a slow process. For instance, lithium production timelines range from six to nine years and for nickel 13 to 18 years—both of these elements remain critical for EV batteries. Clearly, today’s aggressive government timelines for EV adoption clash with the realities of mineral mining.

The facts are undeniable. Governments can’t dictate consumer choices via mandate. The fantastic EV adoption timelines of the Trudeau government and other governments in the western world are increasingly out of touch with the realities of production and market demand. These governments have overestimated their ability to shape the auto industry, which is why EV mandates will fail.