Liberal Party centralization pushes daggers into the free market



Editor’s Note: This is the third in a series of surveys of the economic foundations of each party prior to the 2021 federal elections. Read the first here and the second here.

Canada has the majesty of a local government. But when reading the incumbent Liberal Party’s elaborate economic base, it’s hard to decipher where the federal government ends and where lower-level governments begin.

Apart from Quebec’s clear case, meaningful autonomy is already on the ropes and liberal plans will provide a knockout punch. This means that the party’s economic policies (from delegation to accidental financing) are accelerating the tendency of the Ottawa ruling class to lower levels of government, which is merely an administrative puppet. The very detailed level at which the platform outlines local policies is contrary to belief.

Underlying the continued takeover of state and local jurisdictions is the idea of ​​vast centralization. Lack of confidence in bottom-up growth, individual initiatives, and trial-and-error experiments in markets and policies. The natural conclusion that arises from decentralization and disdain for emergency order is centralization to the highest level available, domestically or globally.

There are no restrictions on federal intervention

Pause to ask yourself which domains remain in Canadian life where the federal government does not control the roost. Especially during the COVID-19 era, the Prime Minister of the state made this question visionary, especially by surrendering to Ottawa’s demands.

But beyond the freedom of citizens, there are the most basic principles of a free market economy. It’s a property. After the COVID-19 measures, the Liberal Party’s housing plan, “Minna no Ie,” is their number one priority, and we can see the platform centralization theme materialize.

Perhaps to surpass Conservative leader Erin O’Toole, the liberal platform promises 1.4 million new homes instead of one million. Neither leader can fulfill his promise. The Liberal Party launched the “National Housing Strategy” in 2017. This is an “ambitious 10-year plan to invest more than $ 72 billion to build supply.” But four years later, Congressional budget officials reported that, with little success, wasted money and grand ideas were caught in a “delayed implementation.”

There should be no national housing strategy that in itself evokes a Soviet-style language. The liberal belief seems to be that if you don’t succeed at first, you start over. The party’s plans have done little yet to deal with many supply-blocking log jams, such as green belts, zoning, and occupational licenses.

However, this plan has a variety of pleasing plans, such as tax exemption savings, home remodeling tax credits, rental programs, price fixing, and even “housing”, enough to squint people. Accelerator Fund. All of these are aimed at how central planners can buy a home, who can’t, and how (to support a sensitive voting block) without doing anything to resolve the crisis. ) Allows you to operate.

The devil is in the details, so it gets worse. Be careful if you buy a house or vast land and do not occupy it. Beginning January 1, 2022, national taxes will be levied on vacant properties owned by non-Canadian non-residents. Managing this will open a can of worms, but opening the door to wholesale diversion is only the narrow end of the wedge.

The platform promises: “Work with the municipality to identify vacant or underused assets that need to be converted to homes based on the principles of use or loss.” Federal authorities come and peruse your home. What can they not do if they can see in their eyes whether it is being fully utilized as an excuse for confiscation?

Onslaught that divides and becomes poor

If there is one policy in favor of Canadians that will benefit the economy, it is open trade between states. Allowing people to freely trade their workforce and commodities across the country is an easy way to boost economic growth quickly and permanently and to make Canada more competitive.

However, it has been declining for decades and has not appeared in the platform of liberalism, as interstate trade does not fit the centralization agenda. This policy will unite Canadians and become a legitimate region for facilitating the federal government.

The leveling system, on the other hand, redistributes tax revenues between states and divides the country. This is one of the main complaints behind the growing demand for western independence from Canada, manifested in the Federal Maverick Party and the Wild Rose Independence Party in Alberta.

Leveling has already been implemented and is not mentioned in the liberal platform as it is in line with the centralization agenda. Although slow, leveling is eating up state autonomy and finances. Atlantic Canada, in particular, has long failed to reform, even among obvious immigrants, as leveling payments have emerged in the region’s protracted mediocrity.

These two policies seek a solution, but instead, reading the platform has to go through a false, distorted justification potpourri for power integration in Ottawa. Not only does this integration hinder growth, but it also divides the members from each other because they compete for most of the shrinking pie.

An endless deficit exacerbates the problem. Liberal platforms justify spending with the voodoo multiplier effect, without even pretending to work on balanced budgets. Diverting limited capital to government spending overwhelms private investment. This is crucial to resolving Canada’s stagnant economic upturn. Taxpayer-funded childcare is one of the voting-buying schemes that disguises economic stimulus.

This reluctance to face financial reality is carried over to student loans. The Liberal Party plans to suspend interest for another two years and permanently abolish the part controlled by the federal government. When inflation exceeds 3%, lenders are returning less than they gave. Why make a funding loan when there is little incentive to repay the loan?

In the race to the bottom with the campaign’s enthusiastic pitch and endless promises, the big loser appears to be Canadian federalism. It’s not just the Liberal Party in promoting Ottawa’s centralization, but its sophisticated and extreme tactics underlie the reason Canada has become a developed country.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

Fergus Hodgson

Fergus Hodgson is the founder and editor-in-chief of the Latin American intelligence publication Econ Americas. He is also a roving editor of the Gold Newsletter and a researcher at the Frontier Public Policy Center.