Canadian red tape is worse than Trump tariffs, say industry groups - "Nighbor said over the past decade overlapping government policies, mostly environmental regulation, have “chilled strategic investments” and become “a productivity and competitiveness killer, driving away investment”... “I’ve heard of resource projects that require hundreds of permits, due to federal, provincial and municipal requirements,” said David Pierce, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce’s vice-president of government relations... “Ottawa is focused on helping a few big players, with every other unwashed business owner stuck in the old, unworkable system.” Canadian businesses face approximately $51.5bn in compliance costs annually, just under $18bn of which is considered “red tape”, the CIFB reported earlier this year. “There’s clearly a disconnect between statements and implementation,” said Brian Kingston, president of the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers’ Association. “The longer this goes on, with no resolution on US tariffs, it will have real implications for investments in this country.” This week, Rogers Communications, one of Canada’s top two telecommunication companies, announced approximately $1bn worth of spending cuts, or 30 per cent, blaming in part the “punitive” regulatory environment. In November last year, Saskatchewan-based Nutrien, the world’s largest potash fertiliser producer, announced plans to build a $1bn port in Longview, Washington, over Canada’s west coast, citing regulations as a key factor in its decision. Heather Exner-Pirot, a policy director at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute think-tank, said Ottawa is promoting critical mineral investment but long approval timelines and a heavy regulatory burden can “add an extra 12-14 per cent to the cost of building a new mine. “Canada could be way richer and stronger than it is,” she said. “Our biggest problem is ourselves.” A mine in Canada takes 20 years to build, according to S&P Global. Carney is also trying to turn Canada into an “energy superpower,” considering its vast oil and natural gas resources, as a pivot to Asian and European markets. But a tentative agreement signed in November between Ottawa and Alberta to build a million-barrel-a-day pipeline missed an April 1 deadline. Industry blames regulatory hurdles, a costly decarbonisation requirement and the lack of clarity around carbon pricing. “Capital goes where it is welcome. And for too long, it hasn’t felt welcome here,” said TC Energy chief executive François Poirier. A spokesperson for Enbridge, North America’s biggest pipeline producer that sends most of Canada’s oil south to the US, said “changes in policy and (the) regulatory environment need to happen”. “Not only for a new pipeline to be considered, but for producers to have confidence to increase production,” the person said... Canada faces other domestic challenges such as stagnant productivity, anti-competitive behaviour and a tax regime that repels investment and inhibits the economy. In July last year Carney pledged to lift intra-provincial trade barriers — which act as cross-border regulations and fees — but the dysfunctional system remains mostly intact due to myriad vested interests. The IMF reported that Canada’s economy could gain nearly 7 per cent, or C$210bn, in real GDP by removing these persistent protectionist mechanisms. “The economic cost is undeniable,” says National Bank chief economist Stéfane Marion in a note to clients last year. “It seems that for Canadian policymakers, ‘regulation’ is the most beautiful word in the dictionary.”"
Of course, left wingers love regulation and hate the private sector, so they dismissed this. Left wing logic: if you want any regulation reduced, it means you want people to die and rivers to be polluted beyond repair, and reducing regulation only increases profits, with no positive spillovers to the economy or workers
“Canada: The Industrial Implosion” v. the United States - "“According to the latest national accounts data, real investment in industrial machinery & equipment [in Canada] fell in Q2 to its lowest level on record (data back to 1981). As today’s Hot Chart shows, the divergence with the U.S. is nothing short of appalling,” wrote Stéfane Marion and Matthieu Arseneau, at Economics and Strategy, National Bank of Canada, in a note sent to subscribers today. “How did we get here? Years of excessive regulation, and a chronic lack of ambition by successive governments in promoting domestic transformation of our natural resources—recently made worse by Washington’s protectionist agenda,” they wrote. Their note included this stunning chart of investment in industrial machinery and equipment in the US and in Canada. Investment in both countries had roughly tracked on a similar trend for decades through 2012, and then the bottom fell out in Canada, while investment in the US continued roughly along trend... “That failure has eroded Canada’s manufacturing base and left us at risk of becoming irrelevant in global supply chains. To Ottawa’s credit, the pledge to quickly ramp up military spending to 3.5%–5% of GDP could help catalyze a reindustrialization. But time is of the essence—if we are to salvage what’s left of the sector. “What Canada needs is a wartime multi-pronged strategy that ends the dithering: a competitive tax regime, a sweeping reduction in red tape, and clear laws on how we intend to develop our natural resources. Clarence Decatur Howe—the architect of Canadian industrialization—showed what determined leadership can achieve. Canada must now draw on that inspiration to rebuild its industrial base before it’s too late.”"
There was a ton of cope from left wingers, even though RBC and even the
CBC pointed in the same direction
New oil pipeline to B.C. will take more than an MOU, says RBC chief economist - "Supporters of Canada’s energy sector hoping for a new oil pipeline to the West Coast are going to need more than a deal between Alberta and Ottawa to get there, according to the chief economist of Canada’s biggest bank. “This is an entire sector that has repeatedly been pushed into a position where it could not grow,” Frances Donald, of the Royal Bank of Canada, told a Calgary audience. Donald said industries — including oil and gas — need consistency for an extended period to be confident enough to invest. “It is not one person, but it is a change of culture within a country,” she said. “We cannot expect that to come in one year with one policy or one pipeline.”... “Everybody wants to hear there’s one thing we can do that could change the story,” Donald said. “But that’s not a holistic way to expect business confidence to shift after over a decade of having moved the pendulum in the (other) direction.” For years, oil company executives have argued that a laundry list of federal policies were hindering their ability to build pipelines and expand. Then, Prime Minister Mark Carney vowed to make Canada an “energy superpower,” and struck a deal with Alberta that could pave the way for a new oil pipeline to the British Columbia coast. Despite support from governments in Alberta and Ottawa, no private proponent has expressed interest in the project. Meanwhile, a proposed route to B.C.’s northern coast has triggered strong opposition among some First Nations and Premier David Eby... The MOU was critical in resetting the relationship between Alberta and Ottawa, but some analysts are wary that it may not lead to a meaningful endpoint. “I don’t think we can keep on getting further delays, because that just creates more domestic policy uncertainty,” said Mark Parsons, chief economist of ATB Financial. Some players in Alberta’s oilsands remain hopeful, but the remaining pieces — particularly around industrial carbon pricing — may require significant change. It will be difficult for the industry to grow production without “fundamental” changes to government policies and regulations, Jon McKenzie, chief executive of Cenovus Energy, told the Calgary Herald."
How ignorant. Doesn't she know Mark Carney is a master economist who's doing great things for the country and has a long list of achievements, and that MOUs are as good as signed deals involving large sums of money? She must be Maple MAGA!
John Weissenberger: Liberals have perfected the practice of announcing things they will never do - "One time-honoured tradition of inaction, forming a Royal Commission to study the matter, seems to have been replaced by the creation of new agencies. After all, agencies employ more people. The federal Liberals have done this twice in the area of infrastructure alone. Both times, the approach was similar, appoint a senior executive from the private sector then leave them to languish in bureaucratic limbo. The Trudeau government’s Canada Infrastructure Bank, set up in 2017 with $35 billion to be spent over 10 years, was meant to “ de-risk ” projects, enticing otherwise reluctant investors. It’s meagre results came under significant criticism, as did the healthy six-figure salaries of its executives. Now there is the “Major Projects Office,” announced in August 2025, meant to “speed up projects through faster permitting and coordinated funding.” The message seems to be “our process is so onerous we need more process to clear it up,” kind of like downing some hair of the dog the morning after the night before. Critics assert the office has clearly added more regulations and red tape. Similar to the Infrastructure Bank, it employs hand-picked executives earning healthy salaries. Reportedly based in Calgary, it aims to “have offices (that is, offices of the Office) in other major Canadian cities.” The 15 projects referred to the Office, visible on a handy interactive map , are “in process.” The gap between talk and action remains. Carney’s government also appears to be confused about the difference between memoranda of understanding (MOUs), by definition representing the “early stages of negotiations.” and actual binding agreements. The prime minister and his cabinet have burned a lot of jet fuel accumulating economic or trade MOUs, with “agreements to negotiate” at a future date. Carney’s recent trip to India, for instance, reportedly committed to a trade deal by the end of this year. Mark your calendars for a “recommitment” to be announced in the coming months. Many Canadians, mainly Albertans, are scrutinizing one particular MOU, that involves an awaited new oil pipeline to tidewater. Skeptics maintain that, if the Liberals had really changed their Guilbeault-vian ways, they’d have simply approved the pipeline, not saddled the province with yet another Byzantine process. It doesn’t take a tin foil hat to recall that, not so long ago, the prime minister spoke of keeping 80 per cent of our hydrocarbons in the ground. To be fair, Ottawa’s execution deficit derives partly from general societal confusion between talk and action, plus the misguided belief that, if only the right process is applied the desired result inevitably follows. Interminable planning sessions, “stakeholder” meetings and consultations then become ends in and of themselves, benefitting only consultants billing by the hour. The process becomes the purpose. This is exacerbated by some professions, like lawyers, being over-represented in politics, government and the Liberal cabinet specifically. Their yen for rule-making proliferates, effective project management, not so much ( see latest $6.6 billion federal IT blowout). We end up with the worst of both worlds– failed government programs and a hobbled private sector. The experience of previous governments, however, proves effective project planning and execution is possible, starting from first principles. It begins with clear ministerial mandate letters, which holds politicians and bureaucrats to task, firm deadlines, project tracking and budgetary vigilance. The Carney government has 358,000 public servants at its disposal and, inexplicably, spends over $19 billion on consultants. So it’s clearly not resources that are lacking, it’s leadership. Actions speak louder than words, to quote another old saying, so does inaction. On the other hand, it might be better if they did nothing. They’re good at it. Think how easy would it be to, say, stop processing immigration applications, or cripple resource development? That would help a lot. Their dogged persistence in having government do a lot of things badly and preventing others from doing things well — i.e. the Liberal mode of government — is a real problem."
Hey Canadians, want to build a pipeline? Your pension might just help you do it - "Opening up just five per cent of all Canadian government-owned assets to private investors could generate between $25 billion and $50 billion that could then be redeployed into riskier builds of new infrastructure, Bank of Nova Scotia economists said in a report last June. A more ambitious asset recycling program, with a larger number of government-owned assets put on the block, could bring in more than $100 billion. But successive Canadian governments have been reluctant to privatize on the scale embraced by their counterparts in other developed countries, and the lack of large-scale, cash-generating assets available for private investment has driven tensions between Canada’s globetrotting pensions and a federal government that has pushed for years to get them to invest more at home."
Left wingers hate privatization. This is one explanation for lower investment and productivity
Posthaste: This dormant pipeline needs to be restarted for the sake of Canada, economists say - "A natural gas pipeline that has been dormant since 2013 should be reopened, says a new report from National Bank of Canada . TC Energy Corp. ‘s Line 2 has been inactive for more than a decade, but economists at National Bank say now is the time to restart the pipeline, which runs through Ontario and Quebec and forms part of the Canadian Mainline... The trio estimate the additional natural gas from a reopened Line 2 could generate electricity equivalent to 20 per cent of the peak demand in Ontario. Electricity demand in Ontario is expected to rise 75 per cent by 2050 from 2025 due to industrial expansion, electric-vehicle supply chain manufacturing, demand from data centres and an increasing population. National Bank said electricity produced by gas-fired plants would act as a “reliable” stopgap until the province’s new nuclear energy facilities are up and running. Ontario is building the first of four small modular nuclear reactors, with the first scheduled to start operating by the end of the decade. Ontario is also looking at constructing two other larger-scale nuclear projects. Another reason why the economists think TC Energy should restart Line 2 is that a Mainline tolling agreement — the amount charged to ship gas through the pipeline — is set to expire at year-end. Natural gas demand has doubled since the company signed a deal with shippers that runs from 2021 to 2026. At the same time, TC Energy is looking into the feasibility of expanding its Mainline pipeline into eastern markets. Meanwhile, the goals of the so-called energy transition have evolved into an energy “trilemma.” That leaves policymakers seeking to balance energy affordability, reliability/security and decarbonization... “Reactivating and optimizing existing capacity — rather than pursuing new greenfield corridors — is capital-efficient, operationally pragmatic and likely to encounter fewer social and environmental hurdles,” the economists said. Last year in the early days of U.S. President Donald Trump’s assault on Canada’s economy, a Bloomberg poll found that a majority of Canadians supported the government paying for an oil pipeline to transport crude oil from Alberta to eastern Canada."
GOLDSTEIN: Toronto facing stagnant living standards Study | Toronto Sun - "Once considered an economic powerhouse, Toronto today faces rising unemployment, weak income growth and stagnant living standard... The latest data from Statistics Canada shows the city’s economy is struggling with an unemployment rate in the Toronto census metropolitan area (CMA) of 7.9% in January, higher than the Canadian rate of 6.5% and the Ontario rate of 7.3%. But the new analysis from the fiscally conservative think tank, which takes a longer-term look at the Toronto economy going back to 2000 and examines recent trends in unemployment, median employment income and before-tax household income, paints a much grimmer picture. It says while the city experienced relatively rapid population and employment growth which may have presented a false sense of vibrancy and prosperity, there has been persistently high unemployment in recent years, particularly since the pandemic in 2020. “The data show that the city has seen economic stagnation and limited growth in living standards since the turn of the century,” the study — “Stagnant Living Standards in the City of Toronto” — by Ben Eisen and Nathaniel Li concludes, disputing previous studies using shorter-term data. In fact, the study says, “by 2024, Toronto’s unemployment rate was 8.0%, 2.1 percentage points higher than the average for all of Canada CMAs and 1.7 percentage points higher than the average for Ontario CMAs” with “the third-highest unemployment rate in Canada, behind only Windsor and Red Deer.” Similarly, the data for median employment income — the point where half of earners make more and half less than the median point — is “dismal” according to the study. It found that from 2000 to 2023, inflation-adjusted median employment income growth in the Toronto CMA decreased by 0.2%, compared to an average of 5% growth for Ontario CMAs and 15.1% for Canadian CMAs. The news was equally bad using the metric of median pre-tax household income — the midpoint of total household income before taxes are paid, where half of households earn more than the median and half less. While the Toronto CMA ranked 11th out of 42 CMAs in 2000, by 2023 it had fallen to 30th place. According to the study, the percentage change in before tax median household income during this period, “shows near complete stagnation in Toronto … “With cumulative growth of just 2.0%, this ranks Toronto at the fifth-worst performance in Canada.”... The study concludes that “far from being an economic powerhouse, the evidence … points to rising unemployment, weak income growth and stagnant living standards in Canada’s largest metropolitan area.” Given that Toronto accounts for about 20% of Canada’s Gross Domestic Product, the study concludes, its “weak economic performance … represents not only a local concern, but also a potential headwind for national economic performance.”"
Time for more left wing policies like "taxing the 'rich'" and regulation on "greed". Government run grocery stores will be a great way to destroy the private sector with taxpayer-subsidised competition
Left wingers keep boasting about Toronto being the economic engine of the province, ignoring the trajectory
We should copy Mexico City : r/FoodToronto - "I remember when they trialed a food cart system in Toronto. It was a failure in the end, but I imagine it wasn't because of poor food. I am googling but can't find details but from memory there were issues about the locations because the hot dog vendors had the best ones and didn't want to give them up. I say we should give it another go, I would love more variety in the street foods available!"
"I had a co-worker who's wife worked in city hall at the time, so I heard a bit inside gossip about what happened. The city official in charge of the health regulations governing the carts put so many rules on them and kept adding more and more (conveniently summarized in a 75-page guide) so that no food cart on the market satisfied the requirements and any potential food cart owner who had bought a cart after it was announced had wasted their money. Eventually one cart manufacturer agreed to custom-make the carts, but they are ridiculously expensive - at least twice the cost of a typical cart used in other cities - and you have to get them through the city procurement office since they're custom-made for Toronto. There were also the location fights you mention, but it was more from brick-and-mortar restaurants than from hot dog vendors. Restaurant owners wanted a guarantee that no food would be sold near them, so carts have to be at least 25 meters away (or 30 meters away if they're a truck) from an existing restaurant, which really limits them in the downtown core or in really any commercial neighbourhood with significant foot traffic."
"Yep, it was called Toronto a la Cart. Launched in 2010 as a 3 year pilot, it died in 2011 due to overregulation on everything. The carts were $30,000 and the annual license $3,500. Some quick Google searching says the carts were really heavy at 360 kilograms, not even towable, required at least 2 people to load and unload from trucks, had a small cooking top, broke frequently and had nothing to protect the cart and food sellers from the weather. There was a single vendor selling the cart, which the City approved without even looking at prototypes or getting feedback from potential food sellers. The licensing cost, cost of the cart, being assigned specific street locations that they couldn't choose and the carts consistently malfunctioning meant every owner went into huge debt. There was only one cart left (also in debt) just a year and a half into the program, at which point the City shut it down. Toronto a la Cart was a total embarrassment. Would love to see the Councillors be named."
"They also couldn't cook with the cart! The food had to be cooked offsite at a commercial kitchen and simply reheated. The owner of the cart had to be there like 80% of the time. Just stupid amount of rules."
"Damn, if you had to put together two reasons why this country isn’t better it’s unnecessary overregulation and government granted monopolies"
"If I recall, it was one asshole who operated a shitty bar in East York (that has since shut down) leading the charge about how carts don't pay property tax and it's not fair for them to compete against an operation with lower overhead."
"That, and it cost a lot for the cart itself because of handwash stations and other requirements on the cart's features."
"All the fees they charged, combined with onerous location restrictions (can't be within X meters of a restaurant, can't have more than one truck per block, etc) meant that it just wasn't worth it to open a cart up even with the program trial. IIRC you had to buy the cart from the city to be eligible as well (and of course, they jacked the price up)."
Clearly, the fact that it failed shows that there is no sustainable demand for street food outside of hotdogs
Time for more regulation to protect people
Ryan Gerritsen🇨🇦🇳🇱 on X - "The Liberal party has Patrick Pichette a former Senior VP of Google on stage who lives in Europe by the way, say that if Canadians want to leave Canada to work in the US they need to pay an exit tax of half a million dollars. The guy did the very thing to get a Microsoft job decades ago and paid 30 bucks. Now he wants young Canadians to be trapped here. The Liberals are nuts."
Kirk Lubimov on X - "Liberal boomers just love destroying the opportunities for future generations and pulling up the ladder behind themselves. This guy, Patrick Pichette, who built his career working for American companies, thinks young talented Canadians should not be able to go work for American companies without paying a penalty; "Make them pay if they leave." How about Canada actually competes for talent and develop companies instead of think on how to geographically imprison talent? This from the Liberal Party convention. Oh, and he doesn't live in Canada himself anymore."
Canadians concerned about rising government deficits, believe middle-class will foot the bill: poll - "Recent deficits have added to existing concerns about Canada’s overall debt levels — a problem that spans government, household and corporate debt — at a time when economic growth has been flat. With governments increasingly in the red, 29 per cent of respondents to the Leger poll now expect that middle-class taxpayers will ultimately be on the hook to cover government largesse. Another 25 per cent said “future generations of taxpayers” will take the brunt of costs, while 24 per cent believe it will be the “richest 10 per cent” of Canadians, and 22 per cent believe corporations will have to shoulder the burden... Manitoba (21 per cent), Saskatchewan (21 per cent) and B.C. (22 per cent) were the least likely to say the middle class will pay, with B.C. respondents most likely to say big corporations would have to fill the gap. Conservative Party of Canada supporters were the most likely to say that debt costs would fall to the middle class, at 34 per cent, while federal Liberals were the least likely, at 25 per cent. So far, provincial governments and Ottawa have tried to avoid appearing to put the burden on the middle or lower classes... Andrew Enns, executive vice-president for Leger’s central Canada operations, said there are likely a suite of reasons behind the expectation that middle-class earners will assume the burden of paying back the debt, from Canada’s persistent affordability challenges to historical precedents. While new tax hikes often target the highest-income earners, much of the overall burden from inflation or rising public debts tends to fall on the middle class in one way or another. “ While governments often say they are targeting any tax measures at the wealthy, somehow it always seems to be the more populous middle class that has to foot the bill,” he said... The Leger poll also surveyed people on their views toward forcing government employees to return to the office at least four days a week. Sixty-five per cent of respondents supported the move, while 24 per cent opposed and 11 per cent didn’t know. Of those respondents, 66 per cent said they believe the office is the most productive environment for government workers, while 17 per cent said “at home” and another 17 per cent said they didn’t know. CPC supporters were most likely to consider the office as the most productive workplace, at 77 per cent, while NDP voters were the least likely, at 43 per cent."
Left wingers are economically illiterate, so they keep supporting increased spending
Barrhead RCMP: Grocery theft "off the rails" as cost of living bites : r/AlbertaNewspapers - "What a backwater hole. Now full MAGA, too stupid to even defend their own economy. When the UCP decided to shut down one of their biggest employers (ADLC), there was practically no resistance from their MLA, the town, or the residents."
"Hate to break it to ya but food inflation isn't something exclusive to Alberta and the UCP."
"No but they could provide better social safety nets, infrastructures and renewable energies so that everything else isn't so expensive so that their citizens they are supposed to work for don't suffer needlessly. But instead, the oil rich get richer, and the vulnerable take it on the chin"
"As a British Columbian I can assure you none of these things have made anything cheaper for us. I mean I agree with you but our cost of living is higher and our food is equally as expensive. I'm certainly not pro UCP but food inflation, cost of living, poverty and heathcare are all national issues that every province is struggling significantly with."
Kirk Lubimov on X - "🚨Canada's private sector is shrinking while the public sector is continuing to bloat. Over the past 12 months the public sector gained 53.1k jobs while the private sector lost 9.1k jobs. Over 25.5% of employed Canadians now work for the government. One of the highest ratios on record. Completely unsustainable."
The cope will probably be that in uncertain times it's good that the government provides stability.
