Connect with us

Alberta

Alberta remains largest net contributor to Ottawa’s coffers despite damaging federal policies

Published

4 minute read

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill and Spencer Gudewill

According to a recent poll by the Angus Reid Institute, nearly half of Albertans believe they get a “raw deal”—that is, they give more than they get—being part of Canada. It’s easy to see why Albertans are frustrated. Despite the province’s crucial role in the federation, the federal government continues to inflict restrictive and damaging policies on the Albertan economy.

The Trudeau government’s list of policies includes Bill C-69 (which imposes complex, uncertain and onerous review requirements on major energy projects), Bill C-48, (which bans large oil tankers off British Columbia’s northern coast and limits access to Asian markets), the oil and gas emission cap, the “clean fuel standard,” numerous “net-zero” targets that disproportionately impact Alberta, and so on. Not surprisingly, the same poll found that 65 per cent of Albertans believe federal government policies have hurt their province’s economy.

What’s less clear is why the federal government wants to thwart Alberta’s economic engine, considering how much the province contributes to the federation financially. In our current system of federalism, Ottawa collects various taxes then redistributes money to Canadians in other provinces for federal programs including equalization, the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) and employment insurance.

According to a new study published by the Fraser Institute, from 2007 to 2022 (the latest period of available data), Albertans contributed $244.6 billion more in taxes and other payments to the federal government than they received in federal spending—more than five times as much as British Columbians or Ontarians. The other seven provinces received more federal dollars than they contributed to federal revenues. In other words, Alberta is by far the largest net contributor to Ottawa’s coffers.

Alberta’s large net contribution reflects its comparatively young population (fewer retirees), higher rates of employment, higher average incomes and relatively strong economy. Alberta has a history of punching above its weight economically. For perspective, from 1981 to 2022, the province had the highest annual average economic growth rate in Canada. And despite dips in growth due to the 2014 oil-price collapse and COVID, in 2022 Alberta accounted for 17.9 per cent of Canada’s total economic growth despite being home to just 11.6 per cent of the country’s population.

It’s a similar story for business investment per private-sector worker (in 2022, Alberta’s level more than doubled the non-Alberta average among provinces) and private-sector job growth with Alberta contributing nearly one in every five private-sector jobs created in Canada in 2022.

Alberta’s prosperity, which helps fuel federation, may help explain why in 2022 56,245 more Canadian residents moved to Alberta than left it—a much higher net inflow than in any other province. For decades, Alberta has provided economic opportunities for Canadians from other provinces willing to relocate.

Finally, without Alberta’s large net contribution to the federal government’s bottom line, Ottawa would have significantly larger budget deficits. In 2022, for instance, without Alberta the Trudeau government’s $25.7 billion budget deficit would have ballooned to $39.9 billion. The larger the deficit (all else equal) the greater the debt accumulation, which Canadians must ultimately finance through their taxes.

When Alberta’s economy is strong and prosperous, it benefits all of Canada. And due to Alberta’s economic success, Albertans continue to contribute relatively more to the federation than Canadians in other provinces. That’s something the federal government should encourage, not discourage.

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

Alberta

Carney’s pipeline deal hits a wall in B.C.

Published on

This article supplied by Troy Media.

Troy MediaBy Rashid Husain Syed

Carney’s attempt to ease Canada’s dependence on the U.S. stirs a backlash in B.C., raises Indigenous concerns and rattles his own party

The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Prime Minister Mark Carney and Alberta Premier Danielle Smith has opened a political hornet’s nest, exposing deep divisions within the Liberal Party and forcing a national debate that has been avoided for years.

Carney was under mounting pressure to respond to U.S. tariffs that threaten to carve billions out of Canada’s economy. The United States buys more than 95 per cent of Canada’s oil exports, leaving the country highly exposed to U.S. policy decisions. That pressure is now driving his push for a route to the Pacific, a project that could change Canada’s economic future but also destabilize his already fragile minority government.

Carney knows the political risk. His government could fall at any time, which only raises the stakes. Even so, he has pressed ahead. The agreement with Alberta lays early groundwork for a new pipeline to the Pacific. It would expand the oil sands, ease some environmental obligations and revive a proposal industry leaders have pushed for years.

The route is far from settled, but it is expected to run to B.C.’s northern coast and open access to Asian buyers. A Pacific route would finally give Canada a direct path into Asian energy markets, where demand remains strong and prices are often higher than in the United States.

If Carney expected broad support, he did not get it, especially in British Columbia. Because B.C. is the only province with a deep-water port capable of handling large crude carriers, it is the only path a west-coast pipeline can take. The province is now the central battleground, and whether the project succeeds will depend on what happens there.

B.C. Premier David Eby criticized the lack of consultation. “It would have been good for B.C. to be at the table,” he said, warning that the project risks undermining Indigenous support for the province’s liquefied natural gas plans. He also noted that the pipeline has no private backer and no commitments from First Nations, two obstacles that have tripped up projects before.

The backlash quickly spread to Ottawa. Steven Guilbeault, the former environment minister and the most prominent environmentalist ever to serve in a federal cabinet, resigned from cabinet in direct response to the MOU. He said the proposed pipeline “would have major environmental impacts”. Green Party Leader Elizabeth May said his departure “dashes the last hope that Mark Carney is going to have a good climate record ever.”

Several B.C. Liberal MPs echoed concerns about the political cost. CBC News reported anger inside the caucus, with some MPs “seething” over the agreement and worried about losing climate-focused voters.

The voters those MPs fear may not be as opposed as they think. An October Angus Reid Institute survey found that a solid majority of Canadians support a pipeline from northern Alberta to the northwest B.C. coast. In British Columbia, support outweighs opposition by a wide margin. That challenges Eby’s claim that the project lacks public backing. Carney may have more room to manoeuvre than his critics admit.

The most significant challenge, however, comes from Indigenous leaders. British Columbia is the only province that has formally adopted the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) into law, giving First Nations a stronger legal position in major project decisions. Court rulings over the past two decades have affirmed a duty to consult and, in some cases, accommodate Indigenous communities, giving them major influence over large projects.

A group representing Coastal First Nations in B.C. said the pipeline “will never happen”. The Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs said it is “loudly objecting” to the MOU, arguing it was drafted without involvement from coastal First Nations and does not meet consultation standards outlined in UNDRIP. “The answer is still no and always will be,” said UBCIC Grand Chief Stewart Phillip. He also said lifting the crude oil tanker ban would amount to bulldozing First Nation rights. Without Indigenous consent, the project cannot proceed, and Carney knows this is the single largest barrier he faces.

Carney’s reasoning is straightforward. The long-term danger of relying on one market outweighs the short-term turbulence created by the pipeline fight. The MOU suggests Ottawa is prepared to reconsider projects once thought politically impossible in order to protect Canada’s economic future. He is betting that doing nothing is the bigger risk.

Whether this pipeline moves forward is uncertain, and the obstacles are real. One fact, however, remains clear. Canada cannot keep betting its stability on a single market.

Toronto-based Rashid Husain Syed is a highly regarded analyst specializing in energy and politics, particularly in the Middle East. In addition to his contributions to local and international newspapers, Rashid frequently lends his expertise as a speaker at global conferences. Organizations such as the Department of Energy in Washington and the International Energy Agency in Paris have sought his insights on global energy matters.

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.

Continue Reading

Alberta

This new Canada–Alberta pipeline agreement will cost you more than you think

Published on

CAE Logo
By Natalia Bankert

Canada and Alberta’s new net-zero energy deal is being promoted as progress, but it also brings rising costs. In this video, I break down the increase to Alberta’s industrial carbon price, how those costs can raise fuel, heating, and grocery prices, and why taxpayer-funded carbon-capture projects and potential pipeline delays could add even more. Here’s what this agreement could mean for Canadians.

Watch Nataliya Bankert’s latest video.

Continue Reading

Trending

X