Federal government should stay in its lane

There’s been more talk this year than normal about the need for governments, particularly Ottawa, to “stay in their own lane.” But what does this actually mean when it comes to the practical taxing, spending and regulating done by provincial and federal governments?

The rules of the road, so to speak, are laid out in sections 91 and 92 of the Canadian Constitution. As noted economist Jack Mintz recently explained, the federal government was allocated responsibility for areas of national priority such as defence and foreign relations, criminal law, and national industries such as transportation, communication and financial institutions. The provinces, on the other hand, were allotted responsibilities deemed to be closer to the people such as health care, education, social services and municipalities.

Simply put, the principle of staying in one’s lane means the federal and provincial governments respect one another’s areas of responsibility and work collaboratively when there are joint interests and/or overlapping responsibilities such as environmental issues.

The experience of the mid-1990s through to roughly 2015 shows the tangible benefits of having each level of government focus on their areas of responsibility. Recall that the Liberal Chrétien government fundamentally removed itself from several areas of provincial jurisdiction, particularly welfare and social services, in its historic 1995 budget.

But the election of the Trudeau government in 2015 represented a marked change in approach. The tax and spending policies of the Trudeau government, which broke a 20-year consensus, favoured ever-increasing spending, higher taxes and much higher levels of borrowing. Federal spending (excluding interest payments on debt) has increased from $273.6 billion in 2015-16 when Trudeau first took office to an expected $483.6 billion this year, an increase of 76.7 per cent.

Federal taxes on most Canadians, including the middle class, have also increased despite the Trudeau government promising lower taxes. And despite the tax increases, borrowing has also increased. Consequently, the national debt has ballooned from $1.1 trillion when Trudeau took office to an estimated $2.1 trillion this year.

Despite these massive spending increases, there are serious questions about core areas of federal responsibility. Consider, for example, the major problems with Canada’s defence spending.

Canada has been called out by both NATO officials and our counterparts within NATO for failing to meet our commitments. As a NATO country, Canada is committed to spend 2 per cent of the value of our economy (GDP) annually on defence. The latest estimate is that Canada will spend 1.4 per cent of GDP on defence and we’re the only country without a plan to reach the target by 2030. The Parliamentary Budget Officer recently estimated that to reach our NATO commitment, defence spending would have to increase by $21.3 billion in 2029-30, which given the state of federal finances would entail much higher borrowing and/or higher taxes.

So, while the Trudeau government has increased federal spending markedly, it has not spent those funds on core areas of federal responsibility. Instead, Trudeau’s Ottawa has increasingly involved itself in provincial areas of responsibility. Consider three new national initiatives that are all squarely provincial areas of responsibility: pharmacare, $10-a-day daycare and dental care.

And the amounts involved in these programs are not incidental. In Budget 2021, the Trudeau government announced $27.2 billion over five years for the new $10-a-day daycare initiative, Budget 2023 committed $13.0 billion for the dental benefit over five years, and Budget 2024 included a first step towards national pharmacare with spending of $1.5 billion over five years to cover most contraceptives and some diabetes medications.

So, while the Trudeau government has deprioritized core areas of federal responsibility such as defence, it has increasingly intruded on areas of provincial responsibility.

Canada works best when provincial and federal governments recognize and adhere to their roles within Confederation as was more the norm for more than two decades. The Trudeau government’s intrusion into provincial jurisdiction has increased tensions with the provinces, likely created unsustainable new programs that will ultimately put enormous financial pressure on the provinces, and led to a less well-functioning federal government. Staying in one’s lane makes sense for both driving and political governance.

Authors:

Jason Clemens

Executive Vice President, Fraser Institute

Jake Fuss

Director, Fiscal Studies, Fraser Institute

Related Topics:#FederalDebt #FederalGovernmentSpending #FraserInstitute #JakeFuss #JasonClemens #ProvincialJurisdiction

Up Next

Questions linger after Coutts verdict

Don't Miss

Integrative Approaches For Cancer

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

California’s soaring electricity rates strain consumers, impact climate goals

Crime / 2 hours ago

Former UK MP says ‘nothing was done’ with child trafficking information given to police, MI5

National / 5 hours ago

Chrystia Freeland’s WEF page deleted after she announces bid to replace Trudeau

Business

Opposition leader Poilievre calling for end of prorogation to deal with Trump’s tariffs

Published on January 21, 2025

Todayville

From Conservative Party Communications

The Hon. Pierre Poilievre, Leader of the Conservative Party of Canada and the Official Opposition, released the following statement on the threat of tariffs from the US:

“Canada is facing a critical challenge. On February 1st we are facing the risk of unjustified 25% tariffs by our largest trading partner that would have damaging consequences across our country. Our American counterparts say they want to stop the illegal flow of drugs and other criminal activity at our border. The Liberal government admits their weak border is a problem. That is why they announced a multibillion-dollar border plan—a plan they cannot fund because they shut down Parliament, preventing MPs and Senators from authorizing the funds.

“We also need retaliatory tariffs, something that requires urgent Parliamentary consideration.

“Yet, Liberals have shut Parliament in the middle of this crisis. Canada has never been so weak, and things have never been so out of control. Liberals are putting themselves and their leadership politics ahead of the country. Freeland and Carney are fighting for power rather than fighting for Canada.

“Common Sense Conservatives are calling for Trudeau to reopen Parliament now to pass new border controls, agree on trade retaliation and prepare a plan to rescue Canada’s weak economy.

“The Prime Minister has the power to ask the Governor General to cut short prorogation and get our Parliament working.

“Open Parliament. Take back control. Put Canada First.”

Business

Trump, taunts and trade—Canada’s response is a decade out of date

Published on January 21, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Ross McKitrick

Canadian federal politicians are floundering in their responses to Donald Trump’s tariff and annexation threats. Unfortunately, they’re stuck in a 2016 mindset, still thinking Trump is a temporary aberration who should be disdained and ignored by the global community. But a lot has changed. Anyone wanting to understand Trump’s current priorities should spend less time looking at trade statistics and more time understanding the details of the lawfare campaigns against him. Canadian officials who had to look up who Kash Patel is, or who don’t know why Nathan Wade’s girlfriend finds herself in legal jeopardy, will find the next four years bewildering.

Three years ago, Trump was on the ropes. His first term had been derailed by phony accusations of Russian collusion and a Ukrainian quid pro quo. After 2020, the Biden Justice Department and numerous Democrat prosecutors devised implausible legal theories to launch multiple criminal cases against him and people who worked in his administration. In summer 2022, the FBI raided Mar-a-Lago and leaked to the press rumours of stolen nuclear codes and theft of government secrets. After Trump announced his candidacy in 2022, he was hit by wave after wave of indictments and civil suits strategically filed in deep blue districts. His legal bills soared while his lawyers past and present battled well-funded disbarment campaigns aimed at making it impossible for him to obtain counsel. He was assessed hundreds of millions of dollars in civil penalties and faced life in prison if convicted.

This would have broken many men. But when he was mug-shotted in Georgia on Aug. 24, 2023, his scowl signalled he was not giving in. In the 11 months from that day to his fist pump in Butler, Pennsylvania, Trump managed to defeat and discredit the lawfare attacks, assemble and lead a highly effective campaign team, knock Joe Biden off the Democratic ticket, run a series of near daily (and sometimes twice daily) rallies, win over top business leaders in Silicon Valley, open up a commanding lead in the polls and not only survive an assassination attempt but turn it into an image of triumph. On election day, he won the popular vote and carried the White House and both Houses of Congress.

It’s Trump’s world now, and Canadians should understand two things about it. First, he feels no loyalty to domestic and multilateral institutions that have governed the world for the past half century. Most of them opposed him last time and many were actively weaponized against him. In his mind, and in the thinking of his supporters, he didn’t just defeat the Democrats, he defeated the Republican establishment, most of Washington including the intelligence agencies, the entire corporate media, the courts, woke corporations, the United Nations and its derivatives, universities and academic authorities, and any foreign governments in league with the World Economic Forum. And it isn’t paranoia; they all had some role in trying to bring him down. Gaining credibility with the new Trump team will require showing how you have also fought against at least some of these groups.

Second, Trump has earned the right to govern in his own style, including saying whatever he wants. He’s a negotiator who likes trash-talking, so get used to it and learn to decode his messages.

When Trump first threatened tariffs, he linked it to two demands: stop the fentanyl going into the United States from Canada and meet our NATO spending targets. We should have done both long ago. In response, Trudeau should have launched an immediate national action plan on military readiness, border security and crackdowns on fentanyl labs. His failure to do so invited escalation. Which, luckily, only consisted of taunts about annexation. Rather than getting whiny and defensive, the best response (in addition to dealing with the border and defence issues) would have been to troll back by saying that Canada would fight any attempt to bring our people under the jurisdiction of the corrupt U.S. Department of Justice, and we will never form a union with a country that refuses to require every state to mandate photo I.D. to vote and has so many election problems as a result.

As to Trump’s complaints about the U.S. trade deficit with Canada, this is a made-in-Washington problem. The U.S. currently imports $4 trillion in goods and services from the rest of the world but only sells $3 trillion back in exports. Trump looks at that and says we’re ripping them off. But that trillion-dollar difference shows up in the U.S. National Income and Product Accounts as the capital account balance. The rest of the world buys that much in U.S. financial instruments each year, including treasury bills that keep Washington functioning. The U.S. savings rate is not high enough to cover the federal government deficit and all the other domestic borrowing needs. So the Americans look to other countries to cover the difference. Canada’s persistent trade surplus with the U.S. ($108 billion in 2023) partly funds that need. Money that goes to buying financial instruments can’t be spent on goods and services.

So the other response to the annexation taunts should be to remind Trump that all the tariffs in the world won’t shrink the trade deficit as long as Congress needs to borrow so much money each year. Eliminate the budget deficit and the trade deficit will disappear, too. And then there will be less money in D.C. to fund lawfare and corruption. Win-win.