14% of Canadians struggling to heat, cool their homes: Statistics Canada

‘In 2023, 14 percent of Canadian households reported that they kept their dwelling at an unsafe or uncomfortable temperature for at least 1 month in the past 12 months because of unaffordable heating or cooling costs,’ StatsCan reported.

Statistics Canada has found that as energy costs continue to rise, some Canadians are unable to afford to properly heat or cool their homes.

On October 30, Statistics Canada reported that many Canadians are keeping their homes at “unsafe or uncomfortable” temperatures as they are unable to pay energy bills amid Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s ongoing energy regulations and taxes.

“In the face of rising energy prices, not all Canadian households are able to adequately heat and cool their dwellings, resulting in possible increased risk of climate-related morbidity and even death,” StatsCan wrote.

“In 2023, 14 percent of Canadian households reported that they kept their dwelling at an unsafe or uncomfortable temperature for at least 1 month in the past 12 months because of unaffordable heating or cooling costs,” the report continued.

The research found that over a quarter of households (26 percent) in 2023 did not use air conditioning. Similarly, 26 percent of Canadians do not have air conditioning or cooling equipment in their homes.

36 percent of those who went without air conditioning lived in the lowest income bracket, while only 15 percent were in the highest income bracket.

Furthermore, Canadians living in apartments are least likely to have air conditioning. Numbers revealed 38 percent of Canadians in low-rise apartments and 33 percent of Canadians in high-rise apartment do not use air conditioning.

According to StatsCan, a lack of air condition can “lead to dangerous living conditions and has been linked to an increased risk of heat-related morbidity and mortality.”

The report found that 2 percent of households were so affected by their home being too hot or too cold that a member of their household required medical care.

As energy bills continue to rise, one in seven Canadians have been forced to go without necessities, such as food and medicine, to pay their energy bills. Additionally, about 8 percent revealed that they have had to go without necessities for at least three months.

Research found that 27 percent of those who have had to sacrifice basic necessities to pay energy bills are single-parent families. Single parents are 1.5 times more likely to forfeit necessities than couples with children and 3 times more likely than couples without children.

Additionally, some Canadians are unable to make their payments at all. In the past 12 months, 3 percent of households said their energy was disconnected or shut off, while one in ten reported that they could not pay their bill on time or at all.

The StatsCan findings come amid ongoing debate over Trudeau’s carbon tax, which extends to many forms of home heating.

Trudeau recently determined to suspend the carbon tax for home heating oil, a decision which has been criticized for benefiting Atlantic provinces, a historically Liberal stronghold, while leaving western and Conservative provinces literally out in the cold.  

As a result, Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe said his province will stop collecting a federal carbon tax on natural gas used to heat homes come January 1, 2024, unless it gets a similar tax break as the Atlantic Canadian provinces.  

However, Trudeau, along with other Liberal officials, have announced that no more concessions are to be made. 

“There will absolutely not be any other carve-outs or suspensions of the price on pollution,” Trudeau told reporters. “This is designed to phase out home heating oil, the way we made a decision to phase out coal… This is specifically about ending the use of home heating oil.”   

Trudeau’s statement was supported by both Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkinson and Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault.   

Wilkinson dismissed Moe’s demand of further tax relief, saying, “There will be no more carve-outs coming.”   

“We expect him to comply with the laws of the land,” he added. “It is a requirement that they collect that or that it be collected in some way.”  

Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) leader Pierre Poilievre condemned the rising energy costs citing the carbon tax as a driving factor and making reference to the StatsCan report.

“Already, 14 percent of Canadians are living with unsafe temperatures in their homes. One in 10 have missed a heating bill in the last 12 months. Will he, before people go cold and hungry, axe the tax so that people can keep the heat on?” he asked in Parliament.

Trudeau’s decision comes as Atlantic Liberals are beginning to vote alongside Conservatives to end the carbon tax. The Atlantic provinces have voted primarily Liberal since 2015, but recent polls reveal that many Canadians living there plan to vote Conservative.  

Trudeau’s carbon tax, framed as a way to reduce carbon emissions, has cost Canadians hundreds more annually despite rebates.    

The Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer calculated the total carbon tax costs for fuel in 2023 minus the government rebates. The steepest increase is for Albertans, who will pay an average of $710 extra per household. Following Alberta is Ontario with a $478 increase. 

Prince Edward Island households will pay an extra $465, Nova Scotia $431, Saskatchewan $410, Manitoba $386, and Newfoundland and Labrador $347.  

The increased costs are only expected to rise, as a recent report revealed that a carbon tax of more than $350 per tonne is needed to reach Trudeau’s net-zero goals by 2050.     

Currently, Canadians living in provinces under the federal carbon pricing scheme pay $65 per tonne, but the Trudeau government has a goal of $170 per tonne by 2030.

Related Topics:#ClareMarieMerkowsky #EnergyAffordability #EnergyInflation #LifeSiteNews #StatisticsCanada #StatsCan #UnaffordableHeating

Up Next

Oil and gas in the global economy through 2050

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

RFK Jr. purges CDC vaccine panel, citing decades of ‘skewed science’

Immigration / 13 hours ago

Mass immigration can cause enormous shifts in local culture, national identity, and community cohesion

Health / 14 hours ago

Police are charging parents with felonies for not placing infants who died in sleep on their backs

Business

Beef is becoming a luxury item in Canada

Published on June 7, 2025

Todayville

This article supplied by Troy Media.

By Sylvain Charlebois

Canadian beef prices have surged due to a shrinking cattle herd, high transportation costs, and potential market collusion

With summer weather settling in, Canadians are returning to a familiar ritual—ring up the barbecue. But as they approach the meat counter, many are faced with shockingly high prices. This year, the meat aisle has become a case study in supply-side economics and market dysfunction, leaving
consumers to wonder how this all came to be.

Since January, according to Statistics Canada, beef prices have surged dramatically. Striploin is up 34.2 per cent, top sirloin 33.7 per cent, and rib cuts nearly 12 per cent. Pork rib cuts and chicken breasts have each risen 5.9 per cent, while even meatless burger patties are 6.8 per cent more
expensive. Beef has led the way in these increases, and its dominance in the price hikes is striking. What’s particularly concerning is that it’s not just one cut of beef—virtually every option has seen a dramatic jump, putting pressure on Canadian consumers who were already grappling with rising food costs.

The cause behind these increases lies in Canada’s shrinking beef cow inventory, now at just 3.38 million head—the lowest since 1989. This represents a 1.2 per cent drop from last year, but it signals much more than a cyclical decline. Many cattle producers, facing an increasingly volatile market, are choosing to exit the industry while prices are favourable. Others are opting to reinvest in less risky sectors or even shift entirely to crop production, leaving the beef industry in a precarious state. In short, Canada’s beef industry is retreating, and with that retreat comes rising prices, fewer available cattle, and growing uncertainty.

South of the border, the U.S. is seeing a similar trend, but far less severe. According to the United States Department of Agriculture, the
American beef cow herd declined by just 0.5 per cent to 27.9 million head. This relatively modest drop, coupled with less disruption in their production practices, has resulted in more stable prices.

Over the past year, U.S. boneless sirloin steak rose 5.7 per cent, compared to a staggering 22 per cent in Canada. Ground beef saw a 10.8 per cent increase in the U.S., but 23 per cent in Canada. The price difference between the two countries is stark, and Canadians are feeling the inflationary pressure much more acutely.

There are several factors contributing to the price hikes: Canada’s vast geography, high transportation costs, a limited number of federally licensed beef processors, carbon pricing, and higher labour costs. Carbon pricing, in particular, has added a burden to sectors like beef production, where transportation costs are high. Regulations and logistical inefficiencies add to the costs, driving up prices for retailers and, ultimately, consumers.

This combination of factors is having a compounding effect on the price of beef, making it increasingly out of reach for many.

But there’s another possibility we can’t ignore: potential collusion within the industry. In Canada, a small number of large processors control much of the beef supply, which gives them significant influence over prices. The U.S. government has taken strong action against price-fixing among major meat packers like JBS, Tyson Foods, Cargill, and National Beef, leading to multimillion-dollar settlements. In Canada, however, the Competition Bureau has remained largely silent on similar concerns, allowing the possibility of price-fixing to persist unchecked. Perhaps it’s time for Canada to follow the U.S. lead and ensure the beef industry is held accountable for its actions.

The consequences of these rising costs are already evident. According to IBISWorld, Canadian per capita beef consumption fell by 7.1 per cent in 2023 and is expected to drop another 2.1 per cent in 2024. This isn’t merely a shift in dietary preferences—this is a structural change in consumer behaviour. Beef is becoming increasingly viewed as a luxury item, with many budget-conscious households turning to ground beef as a more affordable option. For many Canadians, beef is no longer a staple food but rather an occasional indulgence, reserved for special occasions or holiday meals.

This shift is unfortunate. Beef remains one of the most natural, sustainable sources of protein available to Canadians. Ranchers and processors have made significant strides in improving environmental stewardship, animal welfare, and food safety, often without recognition. Beef is not only nutritionally dense but also supports rural economies and provides a level of traceability few other protein sources can offer.

For many Canadian families, a summer steak on the grill is becoming more of a splurge than a staple. While Canadians will continue to enjoy beef, the frequency and volume of consumption will likely diminish.

Barbecue season hasn’t disappeared, but for many, it’s starting to look a little different: more sausages, more chicken, and fewer striploins. A shame, really, for a product that offers so much more than just taste.

Dr. Sylvain Charlebois is a Canadian professor and researcher in food distribution and policy. He is senior director of the Agri-Food Analytics Lab at Dalhousie University and co-host of The Food Professor Podcast. He is frequently cited in the media for his insights on food prices, agricultural trends, and the global food supply chain.

Troy Media empowers Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in helping Canadians stay informed and engaged by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections and deepens understanding across the country.

Business

Ottawa’s avalanche of spending hasn’t helped First Nations

Published on November 19, 2024

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Tom Flanagan

When Justin Trudeau came to power in 2015, he memorably said that the welfare of Indigenous Canadians was his highest priority. He certainly has delivered on his promise, at least in terms of shovelling out money.

During his 10 years in office, budgeted Indigenous spending has approximately tripled, from about $11 billion to almost $33 billion. Prime Minister Trudeau’s instruction to the Department of Justice to negotiate rather than litigate class actions has resulted in paying tens of billions of dollars to Indigenous claimants over alleged wrongs in education and other social services. And his government has settled specific claims—alleged violations of treaty terms or of the Indian Act—at four times the previous rate, resulting in the award of at least an additional $10 billion to First Nations government.

But has this avalanche of money really helped First Nations people living on reserves, who are the poorest segment of Canadian society?

One indicator suggests the answer is yes. The gap between reserves and other communities—as measured by the Community Well-Being Index (CWB), a composite of income, employment, housing and education—fell from 19 to 16 points from 2016 to 2021. But closer analysis shows that the reduction in the gap, although real, cannot be due to the additional spending described above.

The gain in First Nations CWB is due mainly to an increase in the income component of the CWB. But almost all of the federal spending on First Nations, class-action settlements and specific claims do not provide taxable income to First Nations people. Rather, the increase in income documented by the CWB comes from the greatly increased payments legislated by the Liberals in the form of the Canada Child Benefit (CCB). First Nations people have a higher birth rate than other Canadians, so they have more children and receive more (on average) from the Canada Child Benefit. Also, they have lower income on average than other Canadians, so the value of the CCB is higher than comparable non-Indigenous families. The result? A gain in income relative to other Canadians, and thus a narrowing of the CWB gap between First Nations and other communities.

There’s an important lesson here. Tens of billions in additional budgetary spending and legal settlements did not move the needle. What did lead to a measurable improvement was legislation creating financial benefits for all eligible Canadian families with children regardless of race. Racially inspired policies are terrible for many reasons, especially because they rarely achieve their goals in practise. If we want to improve life for First Nations people, we should increase opportunities for Canadians of all racial backgrounds and not enact racially targeted policies.

Moreover, racial policies are also fraught with unintended consequences. In this case, the flood of federal money has made First Nations more dependent rather than less dependent on government. In fact, from 2018 to 2022, “Own Source Revenue” (business earnings plus property taxes and fees) among First Nations bands increased—but not as much as transfers from government. The result? Greater dependency on government transfers.

This finding is not just a statistical oddity. Previous research has shown that First Nations who are relatively less dependent on government transfers tend to achieve higher living standards (again, as measured by the CWB index). Thus, the increase in dependency presided over by the Trudeau government does not augur well for the future.

One qualification: this finding is not as robust as I would like because the number of band governments filing reports on their finances has drastically declined. Of 630 First Nation governments, only 260 filed audited statements for fiscal 2022. All First Nations are theoretically obliged by the First Nations Financial Transparency Act, 2013, to publish such statements, but the Trudeau government announced there would be no penalties for non-compliance, leading to a precipitous decline in reporting.

This is a shame, because First Nations, as they often insist, are governments, not private organizations. And like other governments, they should make their affairs visible to the public. Also, most of their income comes from Canadian taxpayers. Both band members and other Canadians have a right to know how much money they receive, how it’s being spent and whether it’s achieving its intended goals.