Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

FRASER INSTITUTE -- At key moments, when facing big challenges, these governments were willing to reform and reduce spending


On Thursday, the United Conservative Party led by Premier Jason Kenney delivered its first budget. On the campaign trail, UCP members regularly stressed the need to tackle Alberta’s deficit, which is projected to total $8.7 billion in 2019/20. The government’s first budget shows it’s willing to meet those words with action. Alberta’s era of fiscal complacency has ended.

First, let’s look at the grim reality of Alberta’s finances. 


The province has run budget deficits every year except one since 2008/09. Largely as a result, provincial net debt has soared to nearly $37 billion. And yet, despite the severity of these challenges, fiscal policy in Alberta has in recent years been characterized by unrelenting complacency.

For example, instead of confronting the deficit challenge, the NDP government of Rachel Notley allowed it to fester. Alberta kept increasing nominal government program spending year after year. Predictably, large deficits remained and the debt kept growing.

But in this budget, the Kenney government will finally reduce nominal spending, with a spending decrease of 1.6 per cent over four years. As a result, Alberta is now forecast to reduce its budget deficit in coming years before returning to balance in 2022 / 23. And shrinking, and then eliminating, the deficit will slow the pace of debt accumulation.

Taxpayers always pay the interest on government debt, which takes away money that could otherwise be used for tax relief or public services.


Of course, this budget marks the beginning of the process—not the end. The government must remain committed to its spending targets, which will require meaningful program reforms in the health and education sectors.

Further, government-sector workers in Alberta enjoy a 9.6% pay premium over similarly-skilled and educated private-sector employees. To slay the deficit on schedule, the government will likely have to reduce this gap.

There are bound to be some who criticize the size of the government’s planned spending reductions. On this point, some historical context is needed.

During the 1990s, governments across Canada introduced much larger spending reductions to eliminate their deficits, including the Romanow NDP government in Saskatchewan, the Chretien federal Liberals and the Alberta government, which in the ’90s reduced program spending by approximately 20 per cent.

At key moments, when facing big challenges, these governments were willing to reform and reduce spending. It’s important to keep this history in mind and recognize that the spending reductions in Thursday’s budget are moderate by comparison.

None of this is to say the government’s plan is perfect. Indeed, there are risks to a four-year path to budgetary balance.

Again, as seen in the 1990s, faster deficit-reduction efforts (over two or three years) have a much more consistent record of success. Indeed, a faster path to balance in Alberta would have meant less debt accumulation in coming years. The slower four-year path also means a longer period of exposure to various revenue risks (including a recession), which could derail the plan.

Notwithstanding these points, if the Kenney government follows through on its plan, its first budget will represent a turning point in Alberta fiscal history. The previous government refused to reduce spending at all, instead waiting and hoping for resource revenue gains to eliminate the deficit.

This budget takes an active approach to the deficit, planning to reduce government spending over time by reforming programs.

It seems Alberta’s era of fiscal complacency has finally come to an end.


AUTHORS:

Steve Lafleur is Senior Policy Analyst at the Fraser Institute. He holds an M.A. in Political Science from Wilfrid Laurier University and a B.A. from Laurentian University where he studied Political Science and Economics.

Ben Eisen is a Senior Fellow in Fiscal and Provincial Prosperity Studies and former Director of Provincial Prosperity Studies at the Fraser Institute. He holds a BA from the University of Toronto and an MPP from the University of Toronto’s School of Public Policy and Governance.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

FORSETH -- Given the noted infractions of this agreement with OneBC leader Dallas Brodie, I request the Party immediate suspend the leadership campaign of Yuri Fulmer

I have personally emailed the following to the Board and Administration of the Conservative Party of BC:   TODAY (03/30) Yuri Fulmer, a candidate for the leadership of the Conservative Party of BC, made a pact with ONEBC leader Dallas Broldie, that if he is elected will commit the Conservative Party to the following. Specifically, the pact states : This Memorandum of Understanding outlines the definitive electoral and governing alliance that will be executed upon Yuri Fulmer’s election as Leader of the Conservative Party of British Columbia OneBC Party commits to not nominating or authorizing candidates in 88 of British Columbia’s 93 electoral districts. In exchange, the Conservative Party of BC, under the leadership of Yuri Fulmer, commits to not nominating or authorizing candidates in five (5) specific electoral districts . OneBC will be the sole standard-bearer for the right in those five districts. The specific ridings will be determined through mutual negotiation and fin...

Delays to the replacement of the Red Bridge? Kamloops North Thompson MLA Ward Stamer says they are, “Totally Unacceptable.”

I think it’s totally unacceptable that on one hand the Ministry of Transportation and Transit (MoTT) is saying they’re going to be responsible for putting together multiple replacement options with public engagement, and then in the same breath they're saying, ‘Oh, and by the way, we're going to start our geotechnical environmental and archaeological site assessments on both sides of the river, possibly beginning this summer.’ According to Stamer, that should already have been done. “Obviously, we're pretty sure it will be in the same location because there's really no other place to put it. So, if you're going to put in a bridge, you think that at least you'd be doing the archaeological assessments first off”, stated Stamer.   “If it's determined it has to be a free-span bridge, and it can't have anything or very minimal impact in the riverbed, they should already be determining that. It would help in the design, wouldn't it?” Stamer indicated...

Your government has a gambling problem (Troy Media)

Provinces call it “revenue,” but it looks a lot like exploitation of the marginalized The odds of winning Lotto Max are about 1 in 33 million. You’re statistically more likely to be struck by lightning than to win it. But your government is betting that statistics won’t hold you back; they’re counting on it. Across Canada, provincial governments not only regulate gambling, they also maintain a monopoly on lottery and gaming by owning and operating the entire legal market. That means every scratch card is government-issued, gambling odds are government-set, casino ads are government-funded and lottery billboards are government-paid. And these are not incidental government activities. They generate significant revenues that governments have powerful incentives to expand, not constrain. It would be one thing for our governments to encourage us to engage in healthy activities. We can quibble about whether the government should be trying to convince us to be more active or eat more vegetabl...

Labels

Show more