Output has been stagnant for five years now. Canada is ‘as idle as a painted ship upon a painted ocean’
One of my favourite poems is Samuel Coleridge’s “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner.” It describes a ship driven by storms towards the South Pole. An albatross saves the ship and crew but the Ancient Mariner kills it, an act of cruelty for which he is later punished, including by having to repeat the story to strangers for the rest of his life.
It is the verse “Day after day, day after day,/ We stuck, nor breath nor motion;/ As idle as a painted ship/ Upon a painted ocean” that became one of my favourites. It comes back to me periodically when life seems stalled.
Which is the case with Canada these days. Our economy is at a standstill. Interest rates are up and inflation, though trending down, remains stubbornly high. Real GDP growth these past four quarters (August 2022 to August 2023) was a feeble 0.9 per cent. Any growth we do have is from a policy-driven population expansion of close to three per cent. But per capita GDP actually fell 2.1 per cent over that period, which means Canadians are poorer today than they were a year ago.
And it’s not just this year. Canada has been a “painted ship on a painted ocean” for some time. From January 2018 to June of this year, our GDP per capita was flat, according to OECD data released this week. Add in July and August and Canada’s per capita real GDP has declined slightly — from $52,300 in January 2018 to $51,900 in August (in 2012 dollars).
With the pandemic and surging inflation after 2020, you might think other countries’ economies are also becalmed. But they aren’t. U.S. per capita real GDP is up 2.4 per cent over the past year and up 9.3 per cent since January 2018, from US$61,500 to US$67,200 (again in 2012 dollars). At today’s exchange rate, Canada’s per capita GDP is now just 56 per cent of America’s — ouch!
Nor is it just the U.S. we’re slipping behind. Compared to our own slight decline in real per capita GDP since 2018, the OECD average is up 5.6 per cent, though there’s considerable variation across countries. For example, resource-rich Australia’s real per capita GDP was up only 4.8 per cent — which was still better than here — but superstar Ireland’s was up fully 31.0 per cent.
Let’s face it: Sir Wilfrid Laurier’s famous 1904 prediction that “For the next 100 years, Canada shall be the star towards which all men who love progress and freedom shall come” seems hollow these days. It is not that we don’t have the potential to shine; it’s that we so often fail to. We do still attract immigrants, but they often leave — as much as 20 per cent of a cohort over 25 years according to the Conference Board. And if salaries here keep falling behind those in the U.S., will we still be able to attract the best and brightest?
Canada has always been a trading nation but exports as a share of GDP have been relatively flat this past decade. The oil and gas sector has been our most important source of export earnings, surpassing even motor vehicles and parts, but since 2015 the Trudeau government has actively discouraged its growth.
We have had our share of innovations over the years but R&D spending has slipped back to the same share of GDP as it was in 1998. It seems the only way for Canada to develop new things is to subsidize them to the hilt with multi-billion grants like the ones given this past year to three different battery manufacturers.
Our health-care system is a shambles, with long waiting lines and not enough doctors and health professionals. One index ranks Canada’s health system as only 32nd best among 166 countries (with Singapore, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Israel ranking highest). We know what the problems are, but we seemingly don’t have the will to fix them.
Our tax system is a mess, with high rates and far too many ineffective incentives. Canada now has one of the highest top personal income tax rates in the world but applies it at much lower incomes than elsewhere, beginning at only twice the average wage. One important driver of U.S. growth was the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, which bolstered investment by 20 per cent, as shown in important research released last month.
We are a free rider in defence and security spending, at only 1.29 per cent of GDP, well below the minimum two per cent needed to fulfil our NATO obligations. Our financial contribution to modernize NORAD is lacking despite the growing importance of the Arctic to Russia and China. We have contributed little in the way of advanced weaponry or tanks to our allies in Eastern Europe or the Middle East. Europe is desperate for natural gas but instead of buying it from us it is having to import it from Qatar.
While regional tensions have always been a major part of Canadian history, we seem to have lost all sight of nation-building. National infrastructure projects are absent. Provincial trade barriers undermine internal growth but are hard to remove. Alberta, angry with a federal government intent on shackling its energy industry, is ready to pull out of the national social security system. Quebec is drastically hiking tuition fees on students from the rest of Canada who attend its anglophone universities.
To fulfill its remarkable potential, this country cannot remain a painted ship upon a painted ocean. Someone needs to move the ship forward.
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.
“So we’re going to have an order on that pretty soon – we can’t do that to our farmers and leisure too, hotels, we’re going to have to use a lot of common sense on that.”
President Donald Trump said Thursday that changes are coming to his aggressive immigration policies after complaints from farmers and business owners.
“Our great Farmers and people in the Hotel and Leisure business have been stating that our very aggressive policy on immigration is taking very good, long time workers away from them, with those jobs being almost impossible to replace,” Trump wrote in a social media post Thursday morning. “In many cases the Criminals allowed into our Country by the VERY Stupid Biden Open Borders Policy are applying for those jobs. This is not good. We must protect our Farmers, but get the CRIMINALS OUT OF THE USA. Changes are coming!”
Later Thursday, Trump made it clear that businesses need workers.
“Our farmers are being hurt badly. They have very good workers – they’re not citizens, but they’ve turned out to be great. And we’re going to have to do something about that,” the president said.
He added: “We can’t take farmers and take all their people and send them back because they don’t have, maybe, what they’re supposed to have.”
Just how Trump may change his approach to immigration enforcement remains unclear, but he said he wants to help farmers and business owners.
“You go into a farm and you look and people, they’ve been there for 20 or 25 years and they work great and the owner of the farm loves them and you’re supposed to throw them out. You know what happens? They end up hiring the criminals that have come in, the murderers from prisons and everything else,” Trump said.
Trump said changes would be coming soon, but gave little detail on how policies could change.
“So we’re going to have an order on that pretty soon – we can’t do that to our farmers and leisure too, hotels, we’re going to have to use a lot of common sense on that.”
In a later post on Truth Social, Trump said illegal immigration had destroyed American institutions.
“Biden let 21 Million Unvetted, Illegal Aliens flood into the Country from some of the most dangerous and dysfunctional Nations on Earth — Many of them Rapists, Murderers, and Terrorists. This tsunami of Illegals has destroyed Americans’ Public Schools, Hospitals, Parks, Community Resources, and Living Conditions,” the president wrote. “They have stolen American Jobs, consumed BILLIONS OF DOLLARS in Free Welfare, and turned once idyllic Communities, like Springfield, Ohio, into Third World Nightmares.”
He added that deportations would continue: “I campaigned on, and received a Historic Mandate for, the largest Mass Deportation Program in American History. Polling shows overwhelming Public Support for getting the Illegals out, and that is exactly what we will do. As Commander-in-Chief, I will always protect and defend the Heroes of ICE and Border Patrol, whose work has already resulted in the Most Secure Border in American History. Anyone who assaults or attacks an ICE or Border Agent will do hard time in jail. Those who are here illegally should either self deport using the CBP Home App or, ICE will find you and remove you. Saving America is not negotiable!”
For years, Canada’s political class sold us on the idea that carbon taxes were clever policy. Not just a tool to cut emissions, but a fair one – tax the polluters, then cycle the money back to regular folks, especially those with thinner wallets.
It wasn’t a perfect system. The focus-group-tested line embraced for years by the Trudeau Liberals made no sense at all: we’re taxing you so we can put more money back in your pocketbooks. What the hell? If you care so much about my taxes being low, just cut them already. Somehow, it took years and years of this line being repeated for its internal contradiction to become evident to all.
Yet, even many strategic conservative minds could see the thinking had internal logic. You could sell it at a town hall. As an editorial team member at an influential news organization when B.C. got its carbon tax in 2008, I bought into the concept too.
And now? That whole model has been thrown overboard, by the very parties had long defended it with a straight face and an arch tone. In both Ottawa and Victoria in 2025, progressive governments facing political survival abandoned the idea of climate policy as a matter of fairness, opting instead for tactical concessions meant to blunt the momentum of their foes.
The result: lower-income Canadians who had grown accustomed to carbon tax rebates as a dependable backstop are waking up to find the support gone. And higher earners? They just got a tidy little gift from the state.
The betrayal is worse in B.C.
This new chart from economist Ken Peacock tells the story. He shared it last week at the B.C. Chamber of Commerce annual gathering in Nanaimo.
Ken-Peacock- B.C. Chamber of Commerce annual gathering in Nanaimo.
What is shows is that scrapping the carbon tax means the poor are poorer. The treasury is emptier.
What about the rich?
Yup, you guessed it: richer.
Scrubbing the B.C. consumer carbon tax leaves the lowest earning 20 percent of households $830 per year poorer, while the top one-fifth gain $959.
“Climate leader” British Columbia’s approach was supposed to be the gold standard: a revenue-neutral carbon tax, accepted by industry, supported by voters, and engineered to send the right price signal without growing the size of government.
That pact broke somewhere along the way.
Instead of returning the money, the provincial government slowly transformed the tax into a $2 billion annual cash cow. And when Mark Carney won the federal election, B.C. Premier David Eby, boxed in by his own pledge, scrapped the tax like a man dropping ballast from a sinking balloon. Gone. No replacement. No protections for those who need them most.
Filling the gas tank, on the other hand, is noticeably cheaper. Of course, if you can’t afford a car that might not be apparent.
Spare a thought for the climate activists who spent 15 years flogging this policy, only to watch it get tossed aside like a stack of briefing notes on a Friday afternoon.
Who could not conclude that the environmental left has been played. For a political movement that prides itself on idealism, it’s a brutal lesson in realpolitik: when power’s on the line, principles are negotiable.
But here’s the thing: maybe the carbon tax model deserved a rethink. Maybe it’s time for a grown-up look at what actually works
With B.C. now reviewing its CleanBC policies, here’s a basic question: what’s working, and what’s not?
A lot of emission reductions in this province didn’t come from government fiat. They were the result of business-led innovation: more efficient technology, cleaner fuels, and capital discipline.
That, plus a hefty dose of offshoring. We’ve pushed our industrial emissions onto other jurisdictions, then shipped the finished goods back without attaching any climate cost. This contradiction particularly helped to fuel the push to dump carbon pricing as a failed solution.
The progressives’ choice was made once the anti-tax arguments could no longer be refuted: to limit losses it would be necessary to deep six an unpopular strand of the overall carbon strategy. This, to save the rest. That’s why policies like the federal emissions cap haven’t also been abandoned.
To give another example, it’s also why British Columbia’s aviation sector is in a flap over the issue of sustainable aviation fuel. Despite years of aspirational policy, low emissions jet fuel blends remain more scarce than a long-haul cabin upgrade. The policy’s designers correctly anticipated that refiners would never be able to meet the imposed demand, and so as an alternative they provided a complex carbon credit trading scheme that will make the cost of flying more expensive. For those with a choice, nearby airport hubs in the United States where these policies do not apply will become an attractive alternative, while remote communities that have no choice in the matter will simply have to eat the cost. (Needless to say, if emissions reduction is your goal this policy isn’t needed anyways, since the decisions that matter in reducing global aviation emissions aren’t made in B.C. and never will be.)
I’m not showing up to bash those who have been genuinely trying to figure things out, and found themselves in a world of policy that is more complicated and unpredictable than they realized. Simply put, the chapter is closing on an era of energy policy naïveté.
The brutally honest action by Eby and Carney to eject carbon taxes for their own political survival could be read as a signal that it’s now okay to have an honest public conversation. Let’s insist on that. For years now, debate has been constrained in part by a particular form of linguistic tyranny, awash in terminology designed to cow the questioner into silence. “So you have an issue with clean policies, do you? What kind of dirty reprobate are you?” “Only a monster doesn’t want their aviation fuel to be sustainable.” Etc. Now is the moment to move on from that, and widen the field of discourse.
Ditching bad policy is also a signal that just maybe a better approach is to start by embracing a robust sense of the possibilities for energy to improve lives and empower all of the solutions needed for tomorrow’s problems. Because that’s the only way the conversation will ever get real.
Slogans, wildly aspirational goal setting and the habit of refusing to acknowledge how the world really works have been getting us nowhere. Petroleum products will continue to obey Yergin’s Law: oil always gets to market. China and India will grow their economies using reliable energy they can afford, having recently approved the construction of the most new coal power plants in a decade amid energy security concerns. Japan, which has practically worn itself out pleading for natural gas from Canada, isn’t waiting for the help of last-finishing nice guys to guarantee energy security: today, they are buying 8% of their LNG imports from the evil Putin regime.
Meanwhile, we’re in the worst of both worlds: our courageous carbon tax policy that was positioned as trailblazing not just for B.C. residents but for the world as a whole – climate leadership! – is gone, the poorest are puzzling over why things feel even more expensive, and nobody knows what comes next.
Ken-Peacock- B.C. Chamber of Commerce annual gathering in Nanaimo.
