Politically, equalization payments have been an interesting topic
ever since the system has been implemented. At both the federal and
provincial level, the topic has been debated since inception, and is often seen
in opinion articles throughout media outlets. The purpose of the equalization
program is to provide a similar level of social services across Canada,
including education and social assistance. This ensures Canadians are treated
equally nationwide as theoretically the same level quality of service should be
granted in all provinces. Equal treatment of all Canadian citizens should lower
rivalry between provinces, and assist against high differentiation levels of
quality of living between Canadian citizens. Additionally, with regional
fiscal disparities countered, this should lower the temptation of citizens to
migrate to another province to search for a better life, and instead contribute
to their home province. Lastly, the province of Quebec historically has a
higher interest in social programs, and thus equalization payments assist in
quelling the motivation of separatism. Overall, equalization payments are
systematically unifying Canadian citizens allowing for equal treatment
regardless of geographical location.
Equalization payments began in 1957 as a method to ensure that all
provinces had similar social programs that were acceptable, ensuring equality
among the provinces as the program’s title suggests. With different resources
and populations in each province, it is expected that some provinces will have
stronger economies than others, thus allowing for more taxation revenue and a
different level of service to be delivered from provincial governments. The
provinces that have stronger economies that contribute to the equalization
program are colloquially defined as have provinces while provinces who receive
from the program are known as have-not provinces. Quebec is by far the largest
receiver of equalization payments, with $8.5 billion transferred to the French speaking
province in 2010/2011. The major contributors through throughout the program’s
history have been Ontario with their commercial and manufacturing economy and
Alberta with their oil revenues. However, in 2009 Ontario qualified as a
have-not province while Newfoundland and Labrador ceased to qualify as a
have-not province.
Throughout the equalization payment system’s history, there have
been multiple changes in the calculation method. In 2007, the equalization
program was reformed based on the recommendations made by the Expert Panel on
Equalization, or the O’Brien Report. The report recommended increasing funding
to the equalization program by $900 million annually, more transparency, reject
deals that favour provinces, and include all 10 provinces in the calculation of
the national standard. Currently, the formula to calculate equalization
payments is based on comparing provincial revenues and estimating fiscal
capacity of each province in five different categories.These categories are
personal income taxes, business income taxes, sales taxes, property taxes and
natural resource revenues. After this data is gathered, the per capita amount
is calculated in each category and each province is compared categorically to
the average of the 10 provinces to decide who receives equalization payments.
By using an average of 10 provinces in five distinct revenue
sources, the government objectively has made a large contribution to enable
that Canadians are granted the same quality of service from West to East coast.
However, the program has faced controversy as the have provinces often
criticize equalization payments for its unfairness, while the have not demand
more financial support. Additionally, some analysts have correlated
equalization payments to the Atlantic region`s slow economic growth,
attributing reliance on the payments as a reason for provincial governments not
to encourage economic activity. This is because the higher the growth of the
economy, the higher the revenue in forms of taxation the province receives,
which leads to lower equalization payments. However, the federal government has
recognized the lack of incentive and addressed it with special programs such as
the Atlantic Accords, which allows for a delay period between the lessening of
equalization payments while other sources of revenue such as resources are
being developed. As a result of the adoption of fair policies for the
equalization program, all provincial governments should have the correct amount
of financial resources to provide their population with the same quality of
service across Canada.
Quality of service should be equal in education and health care
across Canada. However, according to Heather Smith, president of United Nurses
of Alberta, the shortage of nurses in Alberta has reached around 1400 due to
cuts in post-secondary programs. Estimations suggest that in the next 20 years,
75% of all jobs will require post secondary training.This statistic is
troubling, and reveals the value in governmental subsidization in post-secondary
education. Equalization payments can help stem the education cuts that have
occurred in provinces such as British Colombia, and ensure that provinces have
the correct tools to adequately accommodate correct training of their workforce
to contribute and succeed in the world economy.
With different economies across Canada, and different median
rates, Canadians have different levels of income that differentiating
provincially. In 2001, Ontario and Alberta led the way with the highest income
per capita rates while Newfoundland and PEI had the lowest. Interestingly,
Quebec was at the average, even though they receive by far the highest amount
of financial support from the equalization payment program. These statistics
reveal that some provincial economies provide more opportunity and higher
levels of income than others. Recognizing this, the Canada Health Act ensures
that Ottawa assists in health funding provided that the administration is
public, healthcare is accessible and portable, universality, and comprehensive.
This is one social program that reveals the federal government’s intentions of
ensuring that all Canadians are provided with equal governmental support.
However, some provinces have begun to cut health care expenditures
due to looming deficits that threaten the province’s future. For example,
Ontario has seen health care spending decline from 50% of the budget in 1981 to
34% of the budget currently.Some have suggested that efficiency and process
changes can be made, but as Ontario has become a have not province they will
need federal support to continue a strong level of health care service. To
ensure that all provinces provide similar health care service to all Canadians,
the equalization payment system gives provinces some latitude in healthcare.
The concept of brain drain has been discussed internationally.
Basically, it is the concept that if a nation does not provide opportunity for
their most intelligent or ambitious citizens, they will migrate to another
location that does. Similarly, this concept can be applied on a
provincial level within Canada. Exemplifying this is British Colombia, which
has seen an increasing migrant outflow with its higher cost of living than
other provinces. Most of the British Colombian talent has settled in Alberta,
where the economic activity is far greater as oil exploration drives
opportunity for entrepreneurs. Problematically, engineers or other skilled
tradespeople are needed in British Colombia for economic growth, but according
to the Director of Research and Learning with BC Human Resources Management
Association someone can simply “fly in and fly out from Alberta and make a lot
more money [relative to the cost of living].”
The problem of brain drain affects most provinces who are
economically lower contributors to national GDP than other provinces, as
Newfoundland and Labrador have also suffered from brain drain in 2008.New
resource projects in the Atlantic region have assisted in lowering the
migration, but the problem still exists as younger talent who are mobile seek
better opportunity and higher quality of life in provinces such as Alberta or
Ontario. Equalization payments can help solve this problem as they grant
provincial governments additional tools to entice talent and skilled trades to
stay in their home province by providing programs which can create opportunity.
Programs such as offering post-secondary graduates tuition/tax rebates have
been created in Saskatchewan, Manitoba and New Brunswick. Nova Scotia has sent
out representatives of provincial industries armed with incentives to attempt
to persuade migrants to move back home.With the assistance of equalization
programs, provincial governments are given the tools to fight brain drain and
retain the talent necessary for bolstering economic growth.
Some critics have suggested that provinces given equalization
tools will not use the funds to bolster the economy. With provinces being given
the tools in the form of additional funds through equalization payments to
fight brain drain in terms of education and talent migration, it is more likely
a province will eventually not require equalization payments. Saskatchewan has
gone from being a have not province to a have province, while Newfoundland and
Labrador have joined them. While ensuring a steady budget, the provinces have
made economic gains in terms of natural gas exploration. It is difficult to say
that without equalization payments, the talent that has explored and harvested
these resources to add to the provinces wealth, would have stayed within the
province. Obviously, some outside help has been granted, but with examples such
as Saskatchewan it is very hard to suggest that equalization payments are an
addiction that prevents governments from pushing economic growth.
Additionally, critics have long accused Quebec of taking far too
much federal assistance in proportion to other provinces. Agreeably, Quebec
does take the highest percentage of equalization payments with $7.4 billion in
2012. Some economists such as Yourri Chassin from the Montreal Economic
Institute have stated that there is little incentive for Quebec to develop
their economy as they receive so much from the federal government. This is
arguable, as Newfoundland and Saskatchewan have pulled out of their have not
status by developing their economy. A better argument in favour of Quebec
receiving equalization payments can be made by looking at their past.
Historically, Quebec’s Roman Catholic inspired society has had a government
providing extensive social services involving a larger government. These
services include the lowest tuition rates in Canada, and $7 a day daycare.
Although Quebec’s taxation rate remains higher than all the other provinces,
the government has had difficulty meeting their budget as they try to preserve
their culture. Laws such as the French Language Charter are enforced to protect
the Quebec culture, or distinct society, but often deter business. Quebec
has a different culture than the rest of Canada, and that culture is often
protected at a certain financial expense.
With two referendums in Quebec and the continual threat of
separation, it is reasonable to argue that equalization payments have kept
Quebec within confederation and prevented secession. Without equalization
payments, the Quebec government would face a larger budget deficit, and a much
more difficult time in providing the same type of service that Quebeckers have
grown accustomed to. It is interesting to note that Quebec on a per capita
basis actually receives the second less amount of equalization payments, with
PEI being the highest. Ensuring Quebec receives some support from the
confederation to continue their distinct society is crucial to ensure that
separation does not occur.
Equalization payments have often been criticized across Canada.
However, often the criticisms are based on misconceptions surrounding the
payment system. The largest misconception is that Alberta and the other have
provinces fund the have-not provinces. During the Alberta election, Wildrose
Party leader Danielle Smith criticized the equalization payment immensely
stating specifically that Quebec benefits at Alberta’s expense. Ms. Smith is
incorrect, equalization payments are paid directly from the federal
government’s coffers, and is not a directly transferred from another province.
The federal government collects taxes their income from a wide variety of
sources such as GST, federal portion of gas, or other federal portions of
taxation. If the equalization payment was ended, this would not affect the
amount collected from each province, it would simply end the payments received
by have not provinces. Additionally, the federal government collects revenue
from all Canadian sources equally, and does not receive specific payments from
provincial governments based on economic growth. Basically, the equalization
payment program is not a direct financial transfer from province to province,
more so financial assistance from the federal government with revenue it
collects with or without the equalization program.
Although the preceding argument is probably the largest criticism,
some falsely state that the equalization program allows for have-not provinces
to charge lower tax rates in their province. This is simply not true, as Quebec
has one of the highest tax rates compared to Alberta which has one of the
lowest. Others argue that provinces should raise taxes themselves in order to
fund their own governments. Unfortunately, provinces all were not given equal
resources. PEI’s population of around 146 000 does not have the manpower nor
the resources of a province like Alberta to fund their social programs. Raising
taxes would most likely impair PEI’s economy further with today’s highly
competitive international market. As a result, federal assistance is necessary
to ensure that all Canadians have similar social services.
Equalization payments allow Canadians to be treated relatively
equally nationwide in terms of social assistance indifferent of the economic
provincial condition. The main objection of the equalization payment system is
to provide all Canadians with the same level of social services from the East
to West coast without discrimination. Hypothetically, this program should
ensure that Canadians are treated equally across the confederation. Equality
among provinces should lower provincial rivalry and differentiation in national
living standards, thus lowering provincial migration or brain drain.
Additionally, equalization payments most likely have played a part in the
prevention of Quebec secession and successful stifling of the separation
movement. Equalization payments will always be a continual topic of discussion
and critique; however the general idea promotes equality among Canadians
regardless of the province which promotes unification.
3 comments:
You are mistaken. If you take money from my pocket, put in a separate account, then transfer it to someone else, it is no different than taking it from me and giving it away directly.
I am so tired of reading post by peoples without any REAL understanding of the equalization. Lets say that Québec separate tomorrow, Canadian from Alberta will still pay the same federal income tax and the "have-not" province would receive less money. Its a per capita formula, Québec contribute to 15 billions in that pot and receive a lot less per citizan than PIE New-Foundland and Manitoba.
Get your back to Math
chenlina20160428
christian louboutin outlet
coach factory outlet
michael kors outlet
coach outlet store online
toms shoes
air jordans
kate spade handbags
ray bans
cheap oakley sunglasses
adidas uk
mont blanc pens
cheap oakley sunglasses
gucci outlet
jordan concords
louis vuitton
louis vuitton
polo ralph lauren
nike sb shoes
oakley vault
coach outlet
coach outlet
toms shoes
marc jacobs handbags
michael kors outlet
ray ban sunglasses
replica rolex watches
coach outlet
caoch outlet
coach factory outlet
canada goose
louis vuitton outlet
christian louboutin outlet
louis vuitton handbags
polo ralph kids
christian louboutin outlet
supra shoes
kobe 9
air max 90
michael kors handbags
louis vuitton outlet
as
Post a Comment