September 28, 2006
Address by the Honourable Jim Flaherty, Minister of Finance, to the
Queen’s University Institute of Intergovernmental Relations Conference
Fiscal Federalism and the Future of Canada
Kingston, Ontario
Check against delivery
I’m going to speak tonight about where we are in terms of restoring
fiscal balance. I realize that it is not a topic that is perhaps the most
exciting after-dinner topic, but it is important for our country and
certainly for our future internationally when we think of the strength of
our economic union.
I'd like to thank the Queen’s University Institute of Intergovernmental
Relations for the opportunity to be here tonight. Before I get into some of
the basic principles, let me say this: we have not made the decisions that
we are going to necessarily make with respect to the important issues of
Equalization and transfer payments. We have set out a course that we intend
to follow, which we did in Budget 2006 on May 2nd this year. We released an
important part on moving toward fiscal balance in Canada at that time, which
I’m sure many of you have referenced at the time to see. And we laid out a
schedule, a plan of what we would do and that is we would release the paper,
which was released with the budget; that we would proceed with a
federal-provincial-territorial finance ministers conference, which we did at
Niagara-on-the-Lake at the end of June; that there would be further
consultations and discussions by various federal ministers on
infrastructure, post-secondary education, other intergovernmental issues
during the summer and fall, which are continuing, have been happening and
are continuing; that we would address the issue further in the fall economic
update, the fiscal update which I will do in a month or so; and that we
would move forward with the fiscal conclusions in Budget 2007, which would
be in the new year, which of course would give us our fiscal plan for 2007–2008.
And that plan hasn’t changed. We are on track, the consultations are
taking place and the decision-making process will follow. We have more
conversations to have with our provincial and territorial colleagues and
they are continuing. I say that by way of context for what I’m going to
say in terms of the principles that we are embracing in terms of those
issues of Equalization and fiscal balance.
Canada’s federation is a world success story. We are a model to others:
we have a successful federation with effective governance and respect and
recognition of diversity and pragmatic consensus. As a federation, Canada
will always have some regional stresses and strains. Our common strength has
been in how we address these, overcome them and build a stronger economy.
And if you think of what we’ve, has been, accomplished in this country
in the past 10 years, think of our fiscal situation, economic and social
policy, foreign defence policy, the deficit. You know, two decades ago few
would have believed that Canada could be deficit-free. And, in fact, many in
the elites in our society would have been divided on the benefits of a
deficit-free approach at all to fiscal policy. Zero balance on the deficit
has become the policy preference and larger reality at the federal level and
throughout most of our provinces. Similarly with debt: debt levels, which
peaked in the early 1990s, have declined steadily as a percentage of our
GDP, and that reduction in debt and deficit spending has not increased
unemployment, as some proto-Keynesians might have predicted.
But rather we, it has contributed through more moderate tax levels and
enhanced investments, incentives in the provinces and nationally to greater
workforce participation and higher overall employment.
Now the government of which I am a part has some clear views on the
priorities going forward for the economic and social infrastructure of
Canada. Simply put, number one, we are liberating the forces of investment.
Secondly, moderating the cost of government—heard about some of that this
week. And thirdly, enhancing the depth and capacity of capital markets to
sustain not only an ever more technologically acute economic base in Canada,
but also an ever more outward-looking Canadian economy.
So why does this matter and why do I raise it? Because the nature of
constitutional roles and responsibilities and the fiscal arrangements that
flow from them are critical not just to delivering services to people, but
to our ability as a country to stay competitive and create jobs and
opportunities for our citizens. We need to contemplate restoring fiscal
balance in the additional context of economic growth and a stronger economic
union in Canada.
I’m mindful that our collective effort to restore fiscal balance is not
an end in itself but rather a means to an end. A means to a stronger
economy, to better services for people and a stronger federation for
Canadians.
Why restore fiscal balance? Well as we look at restoring fiscal balance
it is important to pause and consider the word "balance."
Confederation itself was a reflection of the desire for balance between the
Houses of Parliament, between the executive and legislative branches,
between regions and religions, between the two orders of government
themselves. Confederation would not have happened without seeking balance.
But this is of course 2006 and not 1867 and that balance has changed, and
not necessarily for the better. Prime Minister Harper and our new government
believes sincerely that the federal government has grown, over-reached in
many ways, some of which violate the very spirit of the original
Constitution of Canada.
To leave it out of sync means to be untroubled by the stresses imposed on
the core agreement and the essential nature of Confederation itself. That is
why we’ve put this issue on the national agenda. Simply put, a federal
government that overtaxed Canadians in all parts of Canada, then used
overarching surpluses to launch boutique federal programs in areas of
provincial jurisdiction and went on year-end March spending sprees with no
parliamentary authority, practised neither good finance, financial
management, nor good governance. And this was the approach of the previous
government.
The neglect of core federal responsibilities has blurred accountability,
created needless intergovernmental resentments and discouraged progress in
the priority areas of Canadians. The budget planning was neither effective
nor transparent, with large unplanned surpluses the norm, not the exception.
And despite recent significant increases in federal transfers, notably in
health care and Equalization and the Territorial Formula Financing, the
absence of clear principles behind these replenishments has helped undermine
the important consensus and support all Canadians must give for fair and
effective fiscal arrangements. To be direct, not only must fiscal
arrangements be fair, they must be seen to be fair. Unfortunately, that has
become less and less the case in Canada.
So now, in a federation like Canada fiscal arrangements are far more than
a line-item transfer in the federal budget. They are in many ways the
political expression of how our country governs itself. They are the
underpinning of Canadian values themselves: of sharing, yes, but also of
fairness and reasonableness.
So to restore fiscal balance we must start with principles. Our
government will not be a government of grand assertions and over-reaching
visions that are impractical and unsustainable. We leave that to our
political opponents. We are instead determined to be a government of
practical progress on the crucial economic, geopolitical and social
infrastructure priorities that reflect our values and principles as
Canadians. And that, of course, includes restoring fiscal balance.
When I presented our government’s budget, our first budget in May, we
set out five fundamental principles for restoring fiscal balance. First of
all, accountability through clarity of roles and responsibilities. Secondly,
fiscal responsibility and budget transparency. Thirdly, predictable
long-term fiscal arrangements. Fourth, a competitive and effective economic
union. And fifth, effective collaborative management of the federation.
In the short time that we have been in office Canada’s New Government
has already taken a number of steps to restore fiscal balance. First, by
focusing on federal areas of responsibility. This means investing in Canada’s
capacity to meet its obligations internationally as part of our military
alliances, our North American obligations and partnership, and our
international humanitarian commitments. From our "Canada First"
defence plan and our mission in Afghanistan, to increased border and
security investments, to protecting Canadian families by tackling crime, our
government is clearly asserting itself in its core areas of responsibility.
That’s what we were elected to do and that’s what we are doing.
At the same time, we are addressing what might be called the fiscal
imbalance existing between the government, the federal government, with
taxpayers by delivering over $20 billion, $20 billion in tax reductions
in every we tax: income taxes, corporate taxes, big business, small
business, consumption tax, GST and even excise taxes.
We introduced a more transparent approach to budget planning; we tabled a
new Federal Accountability Act; and just this week we reduced the national
debt by $13.2 billion, one of the largest debt relief payments in
Canadian history—in fact, the third largest in Canadian history.
We have also reduced program spending for the first time in nine years
and put a strategy in place to deliver $2 billion in savings over two years
by eliminating inefficient and wasteful programs and tightening spending
control. And we will do more in terms of effective ongoing spending
management control in the Government of Canada.
This will help boost our strong macroeconomic fundamentals. As a country
in the G7, we have a good reputation in terms of our debt situation and our
balanced budget. We have good employment figures, good inflation figures,
and our economic growth is unparalleled in recent years.
We have stellar fiscal performance with nine years of federal surpluses
and the lowest debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7. We also have the best per capita
growth record and the highest employment growth in the G7 since 1997.
Similarly, the fiscal federalism fundamentals have also improved. Federal
transfers are now at historic highs with $42 billion in cash transfers
to the provinces and territories as well as almost $19 billion in tax
transfers each and every year. The Canada Health Transfer is set to grow at
6 per cent annually, which is built into the base, so it’s more than
6 per cent, of course, per annum going forward over the 10 years of that
agreement. This year alone it’s an additional $1.1 billion to the
provinces under the CHT.
12 of the 13 provincial and territorial governments have recorded
surpluses last year, some bigger than anticipated, and together the
aggregate surplus is almost equal to our own federal surplus of $13.2
billion. The only province not running a surplus presently is the province
of Prince Edward Island.
Debt levels are coming down, but it remains true that the total
provincial-territorial debt is still roughly half of that of the federal
government of Canada. We made significant new investments in infrastructure
and just this week confirmed an additional $3.3-billion one-time transfer
through trust to the provinces and territories for post-secondary education,
public transit and affordable housing.
We also have to bear in mind that in Canada sub-national governments,
sub-national governments raise the largest share of total government
revenues among industrialized federal countries. Moreover, Canada’s the
only country where more than half of total government revenues are raised at
the sub-national level.
So clearly we’ve moved the yardstick forward but we believe there is
more to do. In the budget in May, as part of our plan to restore fiscal
balance, we promised to take action in the following four areas: First of
all, and we’ve been talking about this at dinner tonight, of course to
develop a new approach to long-term funding for post-secondary education and
skills training. Secondly, to develop a new framework for long-term funding
for infrastructure. Third, to renew and strengthen Equalization and
Territorial Formula Financing programs. And fourth, to outline an approach
for allocation of unplanned surpluses.
So let me take a moment to expand on these points. First of all, on
post-secondary education and training I don’t need to convince anyone
here, I’m sure, of the importance of post-secondary education for the
future of our country. This is one of the cornerstones of our success as a
nation, but we are facing real pressures to do more. So by providing
predictable long-term funding for post-secondary education we can train our
future researchers, scientists and innovators and have a better chance of
keeping them here in Canada.
The ladder of success need not end up in the United States or in Asia.
The need for talented, educated people in this country is too great, and we
are facing a severe shortage of skilled labour as well as increased
competition from emerging economies around the globe. With better
cooperation between governments, we can eliminate the barriers to higher
education, university and community college, get a better linkage between
the education and training offered and the job skills and talents needed,
and build upon our centres of excellence that exist across Canada.
On infrastructure, increasingly this is a key to a competitive,
productive economy and we need to act on this. Without the ability to move
people and goods along our highways and at our border crossings in
particular, our economy would grind to a halt. The Detroit-Windsor border
crossing, for example, is 30 per cent of our economy crossing it and is in
dire need of resolution.
In today’s interdependent world of trade and security, modern, smart
infrastructure is not a luxury, it is a necessity. In fact, many of our
major urban centres today are experiencing severe gridlock, aging
infrastructure, lost productivity. In the GTA alone it is estimated we are
losing $2 billion a year due to inefficient infrastructure. In Toronto the
401 near the Highway 400 is the busiest section of the busiest highway in
the world, according to the World Bank.
The solution will require a significant amount of time and a significant
amount of commitment in spending. This speaks clearly here, now, to a core
responsibility of the federal government. That’s why we have no choice but
to adopt a long-term funding framework for infrastructure. We have already
made inroads with an unprecedented $16.5 billion for infrastructure over the
next four years, which is in this year’s budget, including full GST relief
for municipalities, the sharing of a portion of the federal excise tax
gasoline and federal infrastructure initiatives for highways, border
crossings, strategic infrastructure and municipal projects.
Perhaps no current fiscal federalism issue has generated as much recent
commentary as Equalization. It is worth reminding ourselves at the outset of
what Equalization is and what it is not. It’s provided for, as I’m sure
almost everyone in this room knows, by the Constitution, section 36(2),
which clearly articulates the purpose of Equalization:
"Parliament and the government of Canada are committed to the
principles of making Equalization payments to ensure that provincial
governments have sufficient revenues to provide reasonably comparable levels
of public services at reasonably comparable levels of taxation."
The point here—and I have to make this point often across Canada—is
that Equalization is a federal program that provides transfers directly to
the provinces and territories. Sometimes the Equalization program has been
characterized quite differently as a transfer from one province to another.
And as you know this is simply not true, and I’ve had the experience of a
provincial finance minister, and we’re all sitting around the table there
saying my people aren’t going to sign any more cheques to other people in
other provinces and I had to caution him that when we sit around the table
together we don’t do that, because Equalization is a federal program paid
for with taxes that people pay to the Government of Canada, and isn’t a
matter of one province, the taxpayers of one province, subsidizing taxpayers
in another province. It’s important as Canadians that we recognize the
federal nature of the Equalization constitutional obligation of the
Government of Canada.
One thing that we are good at as Canadians is debating issues of
jurisdiction, division of powers and of course money. Recently there have
been some good contributions to the debate, and I know that Al O’Brien is
here tonight, I saw him earlier, the former treasurer of Alberta. He and his
expert panel on Equalization produced a terrific report and has resulted in
much constructive debate this year in Canada. And, also, I know members are
here of the report by the council, the reports by the Council of the
Federation, which are also much-appreciated contributions to public debate
on this issue in Canada, as well as numerous articles and books by various
persons in the academy and I’m sure that some of you have written those
books, some of you here tonight.
I want to thank all of you for your contributions to the discussion. I’m
not surprised to learn that the O’Brien report has emerged as a major
focus of attention. Al O’Brien is here tonight. You can, if you have any
difficult questions, please feel free to bring them to him. We discussed the
O’Brien committee report with the provincial and territorial ministers of
finance at Niagara-on-the-Lake. Mr. O’Brien and two of his colleagues very
kindly came and sat with us and went through the important elements of the
report, of course, and listened to and tried to respond to questions from
the various ministers of finance several months ago, as the premiers also
did when they met with Mr. O’Brien.
The O’Brien report presents an approach that strikes a certain balance
amongst the very diverse views that exist. It proposes returning
Equalization to its formula base and principle-based roots. The report, the
proposals include a 10-province standard; 50 per cent inclusion of
resources; a cap to ensure that the fiscal capacity of a province that
receives Equalization payments does not exceed that of the province that
does not receive Equalization payments; more stable and predictable
payments; and a more transparent and simplified program, among other
recommendations.
To say that provincial opinion on Equalization is divided would be a bit
of an understatement. In deciding how to move forward with this important
program as part of our plan to restore fiscal plan, we will need to balance
the competing demands in a manner that is fair to all Canadians.
For all the very direct and sometimes single-minded suggestions we
receive on how to fix Equalization, it is worth bearing in mind that our job
as a national government requires us to consider the interests of Canada and
Canadians as a whole in all parts of this great country.
Our government firmly believes that unanticipated surpluses, the last
area I wanted to mention, should be used primarily to reduce the debt and
reduce federal taxes rather than to launch new policies in areas where the
federal government is not best placed to design or deliver programs.
This, in turn, creates tax room that provinces and territories can
consider filling for their specific needs and purposes. It supports the
premise that governments need to be accountable to Canadians for their
taxing and spending decisions. That clarity of roles and responsibilities is
essential by ensuring that Canadians can hold governments accountable for
their actions.
At the same time—and I’m going to speak for a moment here now about
the economic union and issues relating to that—at the same time it is
imperative that governments cooperate better and remove the barriers to
competitiveness and efficiency within Canada’s economic union. It is
simply unacceptable that there are fewer international barriers to trade and
mobility in the European Union then there are here in Canada. A strong and
prosperous economic union is essential if we are to remain ahead of the
productivity and competitiveness curve.
By addressing these structural impediments, we as Canadians can increase
our standard of living, strengthen our economy and make Canada a more
attractive place for foreign direct investment. The first steps include
reducing interprovincial trade barriers; building consensus toward adopting
a common securities regulator; encouraging harmonization of federal and
provincial taxes; establishing a new foreign credentials recognition agency
and provincial-territorial agencies responsible for professional
accreditation; and adopting measures to improve work incentives for
low-income Canadians to help them rationally enter the workforce in Canada.
To assist us on this front we can look to the agreement struck between
the province of British Columbia and the province of Alberta with respect to
labour mobility, a terrific agreement which was spoken well of. And I’m
pleased that a number of other provinces are looking fondly on that
agreement as a constructive way, I dare say, at long last of knocking down
some of these barriers with an effective enforcement mechanism. Those two
provinces have adopted an accord and a dispute resolution mechanism that
could be held up and is being held up by many as a national model for
Canada.
Now I’ve gone on almost as long as it seems. Let me conclude with a few
final thoughts. Our government is deeply committed to facing this difficult
issue head-on, as we have been, and delivering for citizens, families and
taxpayers of Canada. We are a different government, as we were talking about
in the House of Commons today in response to questions. We acknowledge the
fiscal imbalance in Canada and now we’re moving forward to address the
issue.
Our government is deeply committed to making use of the opportunity that
we have today to make our economic union stronger as part of our discussion
toward restoring fiscal balance in Canada. Our goal should not simply be to
have a country fit for the 21st century but a country equipped to lead in
the 21st century. And by tackling the issue of fiscal balance, we are going
where the previous government, as I indicated, failed to go.
We are reaching further, we are focused, committed and markedly
different. The Canada that emerges from this will be one that is confident
and prudent, idealistic and practical, impressive without being
self-obsessed. As a trading nation with the longest coastline on three
oceans in the world, our perspective must be global and our context deeply
international.
But the days of externalizing our internal problems and refusing to face
them directly ourselves are gone. We are in a minority parliament so the
ideas of other parties matter greatly and are taken into consideration. But
our prime minister is working hard to provide Canadians with stable,
balanced and effective government. And if I have one message for you
tonight, it is that the government serving Canadians today is different than
the last government and that we will face squarely the issues that matter to
Canadians, including these issues of Equalization and fiscal balance.
Our priorities are more focused and they are less numerous. Our fiscal
stance is more precise and disciplined and our belief in a more compelling
federal-provincial partnership is more determined. And I hope this is of
some assistance to you in understanding the fundamentals that we embrace, as
we move forward in our consultation and toward resolution of the important
issues of Equalization and fiscal balance. Thank you very much.
|