Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Economy

Canada living standards falling behind rest of developed world

Published

5 minute read

From the Fraser Institute

By Alex Whalen, Milagros Palacios, and Lawrence Schembri

On Canada Day, Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland proclaimed that “Canada is the best country in the world,” yet Canadians are getting poorer relative to their peers in many other countries and our living standards are falling. This trend is expected to continue well into the future, unless our policymakers make significant changes.

Economists often measure living standards by real gross domestic product (GDP) per person—in other words, the inflation-adjusted monetary value of what a country produces in goods and services divided by its population.

As noted in a new study published by the Fraser Institute, from 2002 to 2014, Canada’s GDP per-person growth roughly kept pace with the rest of the OECD. But from 2014 to 2022, the latest year of available comparable data, Canada’s annual average growth rate declined sharply, ranking third-lowest among 30 countries over the period. Consequently, in dollar terms, Canada’s GDP per person increased only $1,325 during this time period, compared to the OECD average increase of $5,070 (all values in 2015 U.S. dollars).

Moreover, between 2014 and 2022, Canada’s GDP per person declined from 80.4 per cent of the U.S. level to 72.3 per cent, and lost substantial ground to key allies and trading partners such as the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Australia.

And according to OECD projections, Canada will have the lowest projected average annual growth rate of GDP per person (at 0.78 per cent) from 2030 to 2060 when our GDP per person will be below the OECD average by $8,617. This represents a swing of more than $11,000 from where it was in 2002.

Why is this happening?

Several reasons, including historically weak business investment over the past decade, a substantial shift in the composition of permanent and temporary immigrants towards those with less education and fewer skills, and subdued technological innovation and adoption. These factors have combined to produce very low or negative labour productivity growth due to weak growth in the education and skills of the average worker and the amount of capital (namely plant, machinery and equipment) per worker.

While most advanced countries are experiencing similar trends, the situation in Canada is among the worst. Consequently, our relative decline in living standards grows exponentially because Canada’s poor performance compounds over time.

To break out of this rut and prevent this further decline in Canada’s living standards relative to our peers, policymakers must enact comprehensive and bold policy changes to encourage business investment and innovation, promote worker education and training, and achieve better immigration outcomes where more is not always better.

As a starting point, governments should improve the climate for business investment and for investment in education and training by streamlining regulation and major project approvals and reducing current and expected future tax burdens on firms and workers.

Levels of government debt and debt interest costs are approaching thresholds of unsustainability not seen since the 1990s. Governments, including the federal government, must exercise spending restraint to put their finances on a more sustainable path to mitigate the “crowding out” effects of government spending and debt in private markets, and thereby promote private investment. In addition, policies that liberalise intra-provincial and international trade and foster more competition, especially in key industries (e.g. transportation, communication, finance) would help boost investment, productivity and living standards.

Because GDP per person is so closely connected to incomes and living standards, Canada’s decline relative to our peer countries on this key metric should concern all Canadians. Given Canada’s projected continued poor performance, our country needs a major series of policy reforms to avoid further declines in living standards.

Business

It Took Trump To Get Canada Serious About Free Trade With Itself

Published on

From the  Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Lee Harding

Trump’s protectionism has jolted Canada into finally beginning to tear down interprovincial trade barriers

The threat of Donald Trump’s tariffs and the potential collapse of North American free trade have prompted Canada to look inward. With international trade under pressure, the country is—at last—taking meaningful steps to improve trade within its borders.

Canada’s Constitution gives provinces control over many key economic levers. While Ottawa manages international trade, the provinces regulate licensing, certification and procurement rules. These fragmented regulations have long acted as internal trade barriers, forcing companies and professionals to navigate duplicate approval processes when operating across provincial lines.

These restrictions increase costs, delay projects and limit job opportunities for businesses and workers. For consumers, they mean higher prices and fewer choices. Economists estimate that these barriers hold back up to $200 billion of Canada’s economy annually, roughly eight per cent of the country’s GDP.

Ironically, it wasn’t until after Canada signed the North American Free Trade Agreement that it began to address domestic trade restrictions. In 1994, the first ministers signed the Agreement on Internal Trade (AIT), committing to equal treatment of bidders on provincial and municipal contracts. Subsequent regional agreements, such as Alberta and British Columbia’s Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement in 2007, and the New West Partnership that followed, expanded cooperation to include broader credential recognition and enforceable dispute resolution.

In 2017, the Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA) replaced the AIT to streamline trade among provinces and territories. While more ambitious in scope, the CFTA’s effectiveness has been limited by a patchwork of exemptions and slow implementation.

Now, however, Trump’s protectionism has reignited momentum to fix the problem. In recent months, provincial and territorial labour market ministers met with their federal counterpart to strengthen the CFTA. Their goal: to remove longstanding barriers and unlock the full potential of Canada’s internal market.

According to a March 5 CFTA press release, five governments have agreed to eliminate 40 exemptions they previously claimed for themselves. A June 1 deadline has been set to produce an action plan for nationwide mutual recognition of professional credentials. Ministers are also working on the mutual recognition of consumer goods, excluding food, so that if a product is approved for sale in one province, it can be sold anywhere in Canada without added red tape.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford has signalled that his province won’t wait for consensus. Ontario is dropping all its CFTA exemptions, allowing medical professionals to begin practising while awaiting registration with provincial regulators.

Ontario has partnered with Nova Scotia and New Brunswick to implement mutual recognition of goods, services and registered workers. These provinces have also enabled direct-to-consumer alcohol sales, letting individuals purchase alcohol directly from producers for personal consumption.

A joint CFTA statement says other provinces intend to follow suit, except Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland and Labrador.

These developments are long overdue. Confederation happened more than 150 years ago, and prohibition ended more than a century ago, yet Canadians still face barriers when trying to buy a bottle of wine from another province or find work across a provincial line.

Perhaps now, Canada will finally become the economic union it was always meant to be. Few would thank Donald Trump, but without his tariffs, this renewed urgency to break down internal trade barriers might never have emerged.

Lee Harding is a research fellow with the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

Continue Reading

Alberta

Low oil prices could have big consequences for Alberta’s finances

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill

Amid the tariff war, the price of West Texas Intermediate oil—a common benchmark—recently dropped below US$60 per barrel. Given every $1 drop in oil prices is an estimated $750 million hit to provincial revenues, if oil prices remain low for long, there could be big implications for Alberta’s budget.

The Smith government already projects a $5.2 billion budget deficit in 2025/26 with continued deficits over the following two years. This year’s deficit is based on oil prices averaging US$68.00 per barrel. While the budget does include a $4 billion “contingency” for unforeseen events, given the economic and fiscal impact of Trump’s tariffs, it could quickly be eaten up.

Budget deficits come with costs for Albertans, who will already pay a projected $600 each in provincial government debt interest in 2025/26. That’s money that could have gone towards health care and education, or even tax relief.

Unfortunately, this is all part of the resource revenue rollercoaster that’s are all too familiar to Albertans.

Resource revenue (including oil and gas royalties) is inherently volatile. In the last 10 years alone, it has been as high as $25.2 billion in 2022/23 and as low as $2.8 billion in 2015/16. The provincial government typically enjoys budget surpluses—and increases government spending—when oil prices and resource revenue is relatively high, but is thrown into deficits when resource revenues inevitably fall.

Fortunately, the Smith government can mitigate this volatility.

The key is limiting the level of resource revenue included in the budget to a set stable amount. Any resource revenue above that stable amount is automatically saved in a rainy-day fund to be withdrawn to maintain that stable amount in the budget during years of relatively low resource revenue. The logic is simple: save during the good times so you can weather the storm during bad times.

Indeed, if the Smith government had created a rainy-day account in 2023, for example, it could have already built up a sizeable fund to help stabilize the budget when resource revenue declines. While the Smith government has deposited some money in the Heritage Fund in recent years, it has not created a dedicated rainy-day account or introduced a similar mechanism to help stabilize provincial finances.

Limiting the amount of resource revenue in the budget, particularly during times of relatively high resource revenue, also tempers demand for higher spending, which is only fiscally sustainable with permanently high resource revenues. In other words, if the government creates a rainy-day account, spending would become more closely align with stable ongoing levels of revenue.

And it’s not too late. To end the boom-bust cycle and finally help stabilize provincial finances, the Smith government should create a rainy-day account.

Continue Reading

Trending

X