Despite Jake Fas, deputy director of fiscal research at the Fraser Institute, claiming a return to financial responsibility, most governments across Canada remain blind to signs of a balanced budget. Claims to continue to increase spending.
“Unexpectedly high commodity prices and a faster-than-expected economic recovery from COVID have led to a significant increase in government revenue forecasts across the country.” He said.. “Increased revenues are usually welcome news, as governments can use additional funding to reduce deficits and balance budgets perfectly.”
“For example, 2022 revenues are $ 30.5 billion higher than the Trudeau government predicted last year’s budget. The federal government did not significantly reduce its deficit in 2022 compared to its previous budget. We have introduced an additional $ 22.4 billion in program spending, “he added.
In 2022, eight of the ten states chose not to strive for a balanced budget, and five states, including Saskatchewan and Newfoundland and Labrador, will return to a balanced budget, according to Fas. rice field.
Four years. In states such as Ontario and Quebec, there are no signs of budget balancing before 2027/2028.
According to Fas, the “bright places” are in New Brunswick and Alberta, “predicting a relatively small surplus,” and New Brunswick is actually able to balance the budget during a pandemic.
Despite these glorious points, Fuss states that the inability of most governments to start working towards a balanced budget will have dire consequences in the future.
“Unable to curb government spending in most regions means that the Government of Canada will add debt that does not otherwise exist, making it even more difficult to improve fiscal sustainability,” he said. I warned you.
“Residents of all states are already paying more than $ 550 a year for government debt interest. As interest rates rise, government debt interest payments consume more income and medical care. And less money left for priorities such as education. “
A Newly released report Fuss and his colleague Miragros Palacios delve into a study that measures what Canadians think about the program in which this spending occurred.
“The current debate on such programs is largely based on the belief that they enjoy overwhelming support, as the government rationalizes much of this spending by saying that Canadians support it. I insist.
But they say most polls showing this huge amount of support didn’t cost the program.
Much of the federal budget relies on borrowing from taxes, so adding this context to the questions asked by Canadians gives a better picture of how Canadians feel about spending. They insist.
They first asked for a Leger poll asking if Canadians would support the program, and then asked for costly follow-up to see how the answers differed.
One question was about a national Pharma Care program proposal.
When asked if they generally supported the idea, 79 percent of respondents said they supported the country’s pharmacies.
Asked the same question, but with a warning that this would mean an increase in GST from 5% to 7%, Fuss and Palacios said, “Given the potential tax impact of Canadians, total support is halved. It was discovered that it would be reduced.
To varying degrees, Fuss and Palacios have found similar dynamics in day care and dentistry across the country. 69% expressed general support for day care across the country when first asked, and dropped to 36% when the increase in GST was mentioned.
For national dentistry, 72% generally supported this idea, but with the GST increase, it also dropped to 42%.
follow
Shane Miller is an Ontario-based political writer.