Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Economy

Federal government’s turbo-charged immigration helping drive housing demand

Published

5 minute read

From the Fraser Institute

By Jock Finlayson

Unusually brisk population growth is putting considerable strain on public services and infrastructure, in part because the federal government did essentially nothing to plan or prepare for the dramatic surge in immigration that its own policies sanctioned.

According to a recent Statistics Canada report, Canada’s population has just hit the level it was previously expected to reach in 2028. That startling finding underscores the extraordinary growth of the country’s population since the pandemic, driven by record inflows of both permanent and “temporary” immigrants.

A rapidly expanding population can bring some benefits, notably by stimulating overall economic activity and providing additional workers. But it’s not an alloyed good. The number of Canadian residents is increasing faster than economic output (gross domestic product), which has translated into an unprecedented series of declines in per-person GDP over the last several quarters. Productivity is stagnant, as newcomers struggle to find their way in the economy and job market. In addition, a significant share of new immigrants don’t seek or obtain employment, dampening immigration’s contribution to the growth of economic output.

Meanwhile, unusually brisk population growth is putting considerable strain on public services and infrastructure, in part because the federal government did essentially nothing to plan or prepare for the dramatic surge in immigration that its own policies sanctioned. The “downstream” challenge of managing the pressures flowing from turbo-charged immigration falls mainly to provinces and municipalities, not faraway Ottawa.

All of this has implications for the hottest issue in Canadian politics today—housing affordability and supply. Like the rest of us, newcomers need a place to live. Immigration is the predominant source of incremental housing demand in much of the country, particularly big cities. Demand for housing also comes from the existing Canadian population, as young adults establish separate households, marriages dissolve, and people move to other communities or neighbourhoods for work, education or to retire.

Unfortunately, homebuilding has been running far behind what’s necessary to accommodate immigration, let alone meet the demand from household formation among current residents. In 1972, when the population stood at 22 million, roughly 220,000 new homes were added to the Canadian housing stock. In 2023, with a population of 40 million, housing starts were only a little higher than half a century ago.

This brings us to the Trudeau government’s multi-faceted housing plan, rolled out over the past year and finalized with great fanfare in the 2024 federal budget. The government has pledged to somehow build 3.9 million new homes by 2031—just seven years from now. This is equivalent to 550,00 housing starts per year. It’s an aspirational target, but also a patently unrealistic one.

The federal government has little control over what happens in the towns, cities and provinces where most of the policy and regulatory decisions affecting homebuilding and community development are made. Moreover, the Canadian construction sector doesn’t have the spare human resources or organizational capacity to quickly double housing starts. Even today, the construction sector’s “job vacancy rate” is higher than the all-industry average.

The year 2021 marked an all-time record for Canadian housing starts at 270,000. Starts fell over 2022-23, amid higher interest rates. This year, RBC Economics projects housing starts of 251,000, rising to 273,000 in 2025. To put it mildly, these figures are inconsistent with Ottawa’s ambitious plan to deliver 550,00 new homes per year.

We’ll likely see more and faster homebuilding over the next few years, as governments at all levels direct more money and political attention to housing. But a doubling of housing starts simply won’t occur within the Trudeau government’s politically manufactured timeline. One thing seems certain—Canada’s housing “crisis” will continue to fester.

Economy

Returning Trump To The White House Would Reverse Biden’s ‘Energy Ideocracy

Published on

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By DAVID BLACKMON

With a second term for former President Donald Trump suddenly seeming far more likely in the wake of President Joe Biden’s shocking debate performance, the decision by a Louisiana federal judge Monday to place a hold on the Biden Energy Department’s bizarre “pause” on Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) permitting highlights a clear example of how energy policy would shift with a Trump win in November.

In rendering his decision, Federal District Judge James Cain, Jr. called the justifications for the paus offered by Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm and DOE staff “completely without reason or logic and is perhaps the epiphany of ideocracy.”

Oof. Of course, that is pretty much what I wrote here about it back in February after the policy was put in place, though I did leave out the part about “ideocracy.”

Simply put, a second Trump presidency would put a quick end to interventionist efforts by the federal government to pick winners and losers in the energy space. Such ideocratic efforts have throughout history most often created unintended consequences that do great damage to impacted industries and the overall economy.

Indeed, Biden’s ideocratic efforts to force adoption of electric vehicles on an increasingly reluctant American public are already doing great damage to the domestic auto industry.

Last month, Fisker became the latest in a succession of pure-play EV makers to go into bankruptcy. Peer company Rivian was teetering on the brink of having to make a similar move before it was bailed out by angel investor Volkswagen’s pledge to pour $5 billion of new capital into its operations in the coming years.

Ford Motor Company has struggled in its own efforts to mount a successful line of EVs, reporting billions of dollars in losses in the process. Investor pressures became so intense after the company lost $132,000 on every unit sold in Q1 2024 that management announced a move to delay and cancel billions in planned additional EV investments in favor of shifting focus to hybrid cars instead.

Biden’s and Interior Secretary Deb Haaland’s similarly ideocratic efforts to subsidize massive wind developments off the North Atlantic shores of New England have predictably produced similarly damaging results. A parade of planned projects by major wind developers like Equinor, Orsted, and BP have been cancelled as Biden-induced inflation caused their costs to mushroom. A few have been renewed, but with renegotiated power supply rates that will cause utility customers’ bills to explode. Add to that the fact that at least 98 marine mammals — some listed as endangered species — have washed up dead on the beaches of New Jersey alone as wind development has ramped up. You can also add ecological disaster to the economic damage related to this ideocratic pursuit.

Economic and other displacements related to Biden’s ideocratic subsidies for wind and solar industrial installations onshore have become so noticeable and impactful that they are now being opposed in local communities all over the country, with many being rejected outright. Energy Analyst Robert Bryce keeps an excellent comprehensive database of these rejections at his own website.

Even with the local pushback, though, many more proposed wind and solar sites have been approved and developed while benefitting from an array of federal and state subsidies and tax incentives. Unfortunately, the flooding of power grids in Texas and across the rest of the country with unpredictable intermittent generation has had the ideocratic impact of dramatically reducing the stability and reliability of electricity service across the country.

The simple truth is that, in describing the Biden/Granholm LNG permitting pause as “perhaps the epiphany of ideocracy,” Judge Cain could have just as well have been describing the entirety of the administration’s energy policies.

I am asked every day by friends, family and readers alike what changes a second Trump administration would bring to energy policy. It is a question I have always struggled to answer in 50 words or less.

But now, thanks to Judge Cain, I will have a ready answer: “Trump would reverse Biden’s energy ideocracy.”

David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Featured Image Credit: Official White House Photo by Adam Schultz

Continue Reading

Economy

Government services faltering despite Ottawa’s tax hikes

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Matthew Lau

Compare this growth of almost 50 per cent to the growth rate of private-sector employment—from 2015 to 2023, combined growth for the private sector and self-employment was about 11 per cent.

According to a study published by the Fraser Institute, 44.6 per cent of the average family’s income will be consumed by taxes of all kinds in 2024. Thus June 13—which is 44.6 per cent of the way through the year—was “Tax Freedom Day.” In other words, on average, the work done and income earned from January 1 to June 12 is consumed by government. This tax bill, most Canadians believe, is too high, but alas a tax-happy federal government is unlikely to provide relief.

Indeed, the Trudeau government recently made another effort to push Tax Freedom Day further back into the year with its increase to capital gains taxes, adding to its long record of tax increases since coming to office in 2015. The list of tax hikes includes a new top income tax bracket in 2016, the carbon tax first imposed in 2019 and increased every year since, five consecutive annual Canada Pension Plan tax hikes from 2020 to 2024, special taxation of financial institutions imposed in 2022, continued threats of special taxation of grocery stores, and announced plans for a tax on share buybacks.

With such enthusiasm for tax hikes, it cannot be a surprise that since the Trudeau government took office in 2015, the number of employees at the Canada Revenue Agency increased from around 40,000 to almost 60,000 by 2023. Compare this growth of almost 50 per cent to the growth rate of private-sector employment—from 2015 to 2023, combined growth for the private sector and self-employment was about 11 per cent.

But alas, all these new taxes and government growth have not yielded positive results. From the third quarter of 2015 to the first quarter of 2024, growth in real GDP per-person (a common indicator of living standards) was less than 1 per cent cumulatively versus nearly 16 per cent in the United States. The productivity improvements that deliver sustainable economic growth rely on business investment, but that has badly stalled in Canada, too. Since the third quarter of 2015, real business investment in machinery, equipment and non-residential structures is down about 19 per cent on a per-person basis.

Nor have Canadians received improved government services as a result of higher taxes.

Health access is getting worse, with wait times for medical care continuing to increase. And even the Liberals have effectively admitted their national child-care program, which they began implementing in 2021, has created widespread shortages.

Similarly, on two core federal government functions—public safety and national defence—even as Canadians pay new and higher taxes, outcomes are dismal. Crime is rising and Canada’s military readiness is “dangerously inefficient.” In fact, at the end of last year the commander of the Royal Canadian Navy said it “faces some very serious challenges right now that could mean we fail to meet our force posture and readiness commitments in 2024 and beyond” and that “the air force and the army are facing similar challenges.”

And Canada’s passport offices continue to be in a state of disarray and the federal government has missed its own deadline for allowing Canadians to renew passports online.

Polling data show Canadians believe they pay too much tax. No one should be surprised. The Trudeau government’s new and higher taxes have contributed significantly to the country’s stagnating economy and declining business confidence, and have been accompanied by deteriorating government services across the board. Raising taxes won’t make things any better. Cutting taxes would.

Continue Reading

Trending

X