Ottawa touts wait lists for dysfunctional child-care program

Ahead of its April 16 budget release, the Trudeau government effectively admitted its national child-care program, which it began implementing in 2021, has created widespread shortages. “We’re seeing wait lists increase across the country,” said Jenna Sudds, federal minister in charge of child care.

The government has tried to cast the shortages as the result of skyrocketing demand for a popular federal program. But when government makes billions of dollars in subsidies available, of course there will be massive demand among people wanting to get their hands on the cash. That doesn’t mean the program is a success; it means the government is wrecking a market by throwing supply and demand out of whack.

Vancouver has a shortfall of about 15,000 child-care spaces for children up to age 12. In Niagara Region, the wait list for toddlers and preschoolers has expanded by 227 per cent in just the past two years. Clearly, the child-care sector has been thrown into disorder.

But if shortages illustrate a government program’s benefits, then the average 44-week wait time to get orthopedic surgery in Canada is evidence of the success of government health care. Our health-care system must be great—look how many people are lining up for it!

To try to mitigate the shortages, the Trudeau government announced $1 billion in low-interest loans and $60 million in non-repayable grants to expand and renovate child-care spaces. Additional money will be spent in the form of student loan forgiveness and training for workers in the sector. Both the shortages and new spending confirm what skeptics of national government daycare predicted from the outset—the original budget of $30 billion over five years, then $9.2 billion annually after that, underestimated what taxpayers would eventually shell out.

The new spending also exacerbates two government-created problems in child care. The first is that the $1 billion in loans and $60 million in grants are available only to public and non-profit providers. So excluded from the program are parents who want to take care of children at home, children who are cared for by grandparents or other relatives, and private for-profit providers. Instead of getting child-care help, they’ll foot the tax bill to pay for the government-preferred forms of child care.

The discrimination against private for-profit providers is a clear problem with the existing federal child-care strategy. “Frankly, Canada’s national daycare system excludes many more Canadians than it includes,” Cardus researcher Andrea Mrozek wrote last year. In Nova Scotia, where the federal government wants to move “to a fully not-for-profit and publicly managed system,” even provincial Liberal Leader Zach Churchill has lamented the exclusion of the private sector.

The second problem made worse is the spending is done increasingly through different streams and programs, diverting money towards administrative and bureaucratic bloat instead of actual child care. Based on a municipal memo back in 2022, it’s already estimated Peel Region in Ontario needs 40 additional bureaucrats to deal with child care. In British Columbia, the City of Cranbrook recently issued a 26-page request for proposals for consultants to prepare grant applications to the provincial government for child-care funds.

The ever-increasing government budget for child care, apparently, is great for the government sector and consultants hired to help move government money around. It’s a disaster, however, for parents who cannot find child care and taxpayers who pay billions for shortages—a reality unchanged by the Trudeau government’s latest announcement.

Author:

Matthew Lau

Adjunct Scholar, Fraser Institute

Related Topics:#Daycare #FraserInstitute #MatthewLau #NationalChildcareProgram

Up Next

Canadian MPs pass motion demanding Trudeau hold ‘carbon tax emergency meeting’ with all premiers

Don't Miss

Federal government should tackle Canada’s productivity crisis in upcoming budget

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

The Digital Services Tax Q&A: “It was going to be complicated and messy”

Alberta / 8 hours ago

Pierre Poilievre – Per Capita, Hardisty, Alberta Is the Most Important Little Town In Canada

International / 8 hours ago

Elon Musk forms America Party after split with Trump

Business

National dental program likely more costly than advertised

Published on July 4, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Matthew Lau

At the beginning of June, the Canadian Dental Care Plan expanded to include all eligible adults. To be eligible, you must: not have access to dental insurance, have filed your 2024 tax return in Canada, have an adjusted family net income under $90,000, and be a Canadian resident for tax purposes.

As a result, millions more Canadians will be able to access certain dental services at reduced—or no—out-of-pocket costs, as government shoves the costs onto the backs of taxpayers. The first half of the proposition, accessing services at reduced or no out-of-pocket costs, is always popular; the second half, paying higher taxes, is less so.

A Leger poll conducted in 2022 found 72 per cent of Canadians supported a national dental program for Canadians with family incomes up to $90,000—but when asked whether they would support the program if it’s paid for by an increase in the sales tax, support fell to 42 per cent. The taxpayer burden is considerable; when first announced two years ago, the estimated price tag was $13 billion over five years, and then $4.4 billion ongoing.

Already, there are signs the final cost to taxpayers will far exceed these estimates. Dr. Maneesh Jain, the immediate past-president of the Ontario Dental Association, has pointed out that according to Health Canada the average patient saved more than $850 in out-of-pocket costs in the program’s first year. However, the Trudeau government’s initial projections in the 2023 federal budget amounted to $280 per eligible Canadian per year.

Not all eligible Canadians will necessarily access dental services every year, but the massive gap between $850 and $280 suggests the initial price tag may well have understated taxpayer costs—a habit of the federal government, which over the past decade has routinely spent above its initial projections and consistently revises its spending estimates higher with each fiscal update.

To make matters worse there are also significant administrative costs. According to a story in Canadian Affairs, “Dental associations across Canada are flagging concerns with the plan’s structure and sustainability. They say the Canadian Dental Care Plan imposes significant administrative burdens on dentists, and that the majority of eligible patients are being denied care for complex dental treatments.”

Determining eligibility and coverage is a huge burden. Canadians must first apply through the government portal, then wait weeks for Sun Life (the insurer selected by the federal government) to confirm their eligibility and coverage. Unless dentists refuse to provide treatment until they have that confirmation, they or their staff must sometimes chase down patients after the fact for any co-pay or fees not covered.

Moreover, family income determines coverage eligibility, but even if patients are enrolled in the government program, dentists may not be able to access this information quickly. This leaves dentists in what Dr. Hans Herchen, president of the Alberta Dental Association, describes as the “very awkward spot” of having to verify their patients’ family income.

Dentists must also try to explain the program, which features high rejection rates, to patients. According to Dr. Anita Gartner, president of the British Columbia Dental Association, more than half of applications for complex treatment are rejected without explanation. This reduces trust in the government program.

Finally, the program creates “moral hazard” where people are encouraged to take riskier behaviour because they do not bear the full costs. For example, while we can significantly curtail tooth decay by diligent toothbrushing and flossing, people might be encouraged to neglect these activities if their dental services are paid by taxpayers instead of out-of-pocket. It’s a principle of basic economics that socializing costs will encourage people to incur higher costs than is really appropriate (see Canada’s health-care system).

At a projected ongoing cost of $4.4 billion to taxpayers, the newly expanded national dental program is already not cheap. Alas, not only may the true taxpayer cost be much higher than this initial projection, but like many other government initiatives, the dental program already seems to be more costly than initially advertised.

Matthew Lau

Adjunct Scholar, Fraser Institute

Business

Prairie provinces and Newfoundland and Labrador see largest increases in size of government

Published on July 3, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Jake Fuss and Grady Munro

A recent study found that Canada has experienced one of the largest increases in the size of government of any advanced country over the last decade. But within Canada, which provinces have led the way?

The size of government refers to the extent to which resources within the economy are controlled and directed by the government, and has important implications for economic growth, living standards, and economic freedom—the degree to which people are allowed to make their own economic choices.

Too much of anything can be harmful, and this is certainly true regarding the size of government. When government grows too large it begins to take on roles and resources that are better left to the private sector. For example, rather than focusing on core functions like maintaining the rule of law or national defence, a government that has grown too large might begin subsidizing certain businesses and industries over others (i.e. corporate welfare) in order to pick winners and losers in the market. As a result, economic growth slows and living standards are lower than they otherwise would be.

One way to measure the size of government is by calculating total general government spending as a share of the economy (GDP). General government spending refers to spending by governments at all levels (federal, provincial, and municipal), and by measuring this as a share of gross domestic product (GDP) we can compare across jurisdictions of different sizes.

A recent study compared the size of government in Canada as a whole with that of 39 other advanced economies worldwide, and found that Canada experienced the second-largest increase in the size of government (as a share of the economy) from 2014 to 2024. In other words, since 2014, governments in Canada have expanded their role within the economy faster than governments in virtually every other advanced country worldwide—including all other countries within the Group of Seven (France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States). Moreover, the study showed that Canada as a whole has exceeded the optimal size of government (estimated to fall between 24 and 32 per cent of GDP) at which a country can maximize their economic growth. Beyond that point, growth slows and is lower than it otherwise would be.

However, Canada is a decentralized country and provinces vary as to the extent to which governments direct overall economic activity. Using data from Statistics Canada, the following charts illustrate which provinces in Canada have the largest size of government and which have seen the largest increases since 2014.

The chart above shows total general government spending as a share of GDP for all ten provinces in 2023 (the latest year of available provincial data). The size of government in the provinces varies considerably, ranging from a high of 61.4 per cent in Nova Scotia to a low of 30.0 per cent in Alberta. There are geographical differences, as three Atlantic provinces (Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, and New Brunswick) have the largest governments while the three western-most provinces (Alberta, Saskatchewan, and British Columbia) have the smallest governments. However, as of 2023, all provinces except Alberta exceeded the optimal size of government—which again, is between 24 and 32 per cent of the economy.

To show which provinces have experienced the greatest increase in the size of government in recent years, the second chart shows the percentage point increase in total general government spending as a share of GDP from 2014 to 2023. It should be noted that this is measuring the expansion of the federal government’s role in the economy—which has been substantial nationwide—as well as growth in the respective provincial and municipal governments.

The increases in the size of government since 2014 are largest in four provinces: Newfoundland and Labrador (10.82 percentage points), Alberta (7.94 percentage points), Saskatchewan (7.31 percentage points), and Manitoba (7.17 percentage points). These are all dramatic increases—for perspective, in the study referenced above, Estonia’s 6.66 percentage point increase in its size of government was the largest out of 40 advanced countries.

The remaining six provinces experienced far lower increases in the size of government, ranging from a 2.74 percentage point increase in B.C. to a 0.44 percentage point increase in Quebec. However, since 2014, every province in Canada has seen government expand its role within the economy.

Over the last decade, Canada has experienced a substantial increase in the size of total government. Within the country, Newfoundland and Labrador and the three Prairie provinces have led the way in growing their respective governments.