I remember an editor at The Gazette who would have saved me from publishing this sentence: "I asked my favourite prof, Robert A. Young, who was doing interesting work in Montreal, where I’d be working." There are at least three different ways to read that sentence. It offers no clue which way is the one I intended. Pretty sure Bob Young would have pointed that out too.
Mr Dion seems like a nice guy; sincere and positive. But like many central Canadian Liberals, it is difficult to believe they really understand this country. They seem to think that the Canada of Pierre Trudeau is still the Canada we live in today. It isn't. The parts of the country that are growing, both financially and in population are the provinces of Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia. I note that this year, the fiscal imbalance again heavily favours the East. Every province from east of Saskatchewan (including Ontario) is receiving equalization payments. Of course, Quebec receives the lion's share. This can't go on continually. We need a change in our political system which treats all of the regions fairly.
Average $ 2,244 . So Quebec in fact receives 69 % of the average payout. It looks like the three Marime provinces and Manitoba receive the lion's share:
PEI 165 %
NB 161 %
NS 145 %
MB 138 %
I just love it when , of course, people use skewed statistics to claim Quebec abuses the system when clearly four other provinces receive twice as much per capita. Quebec with 20 % of Canada's GDP contributes 20% of the federal income tax used to pay equilization. Alberta contributes 15 % due to its mile high GDP. AL GDP per capita : $96,544 vs QC 68,565$.
Boohoo, how unfair . AL has a GDP pc 41 % higher than QC . That twisted logic claims that AL, by far the richest province in Canada, is getting ripped off by Canada, and by implication by QC. Lets change the system so AL can reap even benefits .
QC has a carve-out for its hydro exports to the US outside of the equalization payments calculations. Alberta does not. The vast majority of federal departments and jobs reside in QC. Billions of dollars are generated from those offices and the provincial income tax of those employees. Quebec refuses to develop its own resources and become a 'have province'. Melany Joely is the head of a federally funded Ministry with a mandate to focus specifically on Quebec's Economic Development. This and a number of other programs outside of the formal equalization program tip the scales in QC's favour. Year after year. Decade after decade. To say they are not getting one of, if not the best deals in the federation, and that no one should question this type of relationship to the country, is intellectually bankrupt.
QC electricity exports to the US currently hover around $ 2.3 billion p.a. QC GDP $616 billion, so what you describe as a carveout represents 0.37 % of QC GDP.
Alberta, on the other hand exports $131 billion worth of oil and gas to the US. AB GDP $ 474 billion , roughly 28 % of its GDP.
Basically you are comparing watermelons with peas. Boohoo QC gets a 0.37% of GDP carveout, AB should be entitled to a 28 % GDP carveout. That is what you call fair.
Besides, QC does not decide the formula.
Your claim that '' the vast majority of federal departments and jobs reside in QC'' is, to put it politely, not factual.:
National Capital Region (NCR): ~42.3% (highest concentration)
Ontario (outside NCR): ~13.7% (second largest)
British Columbia (BC): ~8.2%
Quebec (outside NCR): ~8.2%
Alberta: ~5.4%
Manitoba: ~3.9%
Nova Scotia: ~3.7%
Prince Edward Island (PEI): ~3.5%
New Brunswick: ~3.4%
Saskatchewan: ~2.8%
Newfoundland & Labrador: ~1.9%
Intellectual bankrupcy often confuses firmly held beliefs with the facts. All of the numbers I quoted above are easily fact-checked.
$2.3 billion is equivalent to 17% of QC's equalization payments. The comment wasn't a comparison of total export value (which, as mentioned, QC is in charge of and can increase at will if it develops its resources), it was the effective transfer payment value. Excluding the NCR is ridiculous. That is the bulk of the federal jobs and thus the employment tax, so I'm not clear why you would even mention it.
-28% federal employees with 23% of the pop vs Alberta with 5% with 13% of the population
-13.6billion in equalization payments QC vs $546 million Ont vs $0 Alberta/BC/Sask/all territories
-2.3 billion in unaccounted revenue for hydro (ALL of Alberta/Sask/BC exports accounted in equalization payments equation)
My comparison isn't QC vs Ontario; they are also abusing the equalization program and federal accounts in general. It is about how much better the deal is for BOTH of these provinces relative to the rest of the federation, and how the math clearly states that the total net deal for QC is the best in the federation.
Re: 'Increase resource extraction/make money at will:
Don't ask me. The nine provinces (except QC who didn't sign the document) put it into the constitution. BTW currently 6 of those provinces receive equalization.
Always amazed at how clearly he sees things. Even if one doesn't agree with every viewpoint, he has such a fine mind. I hope he finds a befitting role(s).
Your anecdote about Dion and the driver spinning his wheels in the snow reminded me of this quintessential Jean Chretien quote about the constitution in 1990: "You remember when everybody was trapped in the debate on the distinct society, [I said] 'We're stuck in the snow.... What do we do when we're stuck in the snow? Relax, [move] a little bit forward, a little bit backward, and eventually you're back on the road"
I found this a very interesting conversation. I look forward to hearing more from Dion even though I've never voted Liberal. Re Alberta and Quebec poking the pig re separation and not enough detail coming out re the pros and cons. It reminds me of Brexit. Only after the vote to leave, did British find out how little they had been told about the negative impacts that are still being felt and some issues still not resolved. And that was 9 years ago!!! That's unacceptable IMO.
How can one talk about CETA without noting that France and Italy and Poland and Belgium and Ireland have NOT ratified the trade agreement and likely never will.
Only 17 EU countries have ratified the treaty. 10 have not.
How can one rely and trust Europe where the treaty is still only operating provisionally and will likely never be ratified?
What Canadian company is going to be willing to invest based on a treaty that has not be ratified by over a third of the members of the EU over a decade after its signing?
What is the hold-up indeed? It would be a good question to put to Mr. Dion, after 8 1/2 years over there.
I've always had a soft spot for Stéphane Dion, by the way. Clear in his thinking, no back-slapping silliness from him, ahead of his time with the Green Shift. That was his downfall: Canadians weren't ready for his ideas on climate, still aren't.
Great interview, Paul! I remember when Chretien brought Dion & Pettigrew into the cabinet to try and combat the separatist forces. Dion used to write long letters, which were published in La Presse. It drove the Parti Québécois & Bloc Québécois pundits nuts.
Good interview with a man who obviously loves Canada. So do most of us.
But it must be remembered that we are a confederation of sovereign states under one Crown. . Our provincial governments are still closest to the people, and thus must be properly empowered and funded to serve them.
Perhaps it’s time to renew the 1867 confederacy to empower Ottawa to strongly defend us and manage the currency, while at the same strengthening the ability of provincial governments to deliver services like health, education, and welfare without having to conform to Ottawa’s so-called “national standards” or go cap in hand to beg the federal government for the funds?
I think Mr. Dion is correct in that we should be proactively addressing the separation issue both in Quebec and Alberta. It’s unfortunate that we lost the plot over the past decade with the apologies for everything and the lack of pride in all the good things we have done as a country. Having worked and lived from coast to coast, my belief is we have a wonderful and diverse county full of mostly nice people - something we should focus on and celebrate.
This is a truly lovely sentiment... Yet we are in a Canada that has been badly mismanaged and the weak economy, the astounding
waste of tax dollars, the governance that looks after virtue programs instead of revving up investment and GDP per capita... these must be the priorities before we can take a breather to celebrate our country.
7 minutes in, listening by way of the auto-reader: I LOVE the translation!🤩 Major kudos, PW, for a terrifically engaging rendition that shows us an astute and dedicated Canadian 🍁
It was a good interview. I would hope another one comes, maybe to reassess a year from now. On this interview, I wish there was more depth on the value return of Canada's green expenditures vs the value of reductions achieved, considering our tiny man made global emissions.
Also, Mr Dion compared us to the States where there is not separation issues. Perhaps in the case of Alberta, we are tired of Taxation Without Representation. (Oh wait! Boston Tea Party! The States did deal with it.) and the transfer payments to have provinces who do not claim the many income streams, or possible income streams, so they can claim to be have-not. Fix those issues and we will start to see more unity.
Paul, I am commenting here because comments on your most recent post seem to be absent/unavailable (?) and in the second-most-recent, comments are turned off. I have just signed up for an annual subscription b/c I appreciate your honesty and relatively straight talk even when I disagree with you. And I want to limit my ability to cancel in a huff when I don't! But I must say that I would have liked to comment on one or both. In case you want that feedback. I never really noticed if you have turned off comments before.
Comments have been getting a bit combative in general. I'm giving everyone a chance to cool down. I'll bring back comments soon, along with a reminder to everyone to be nice to one another. This is, if I recall, the second or third time I've imposed a time-out since I launched. I was starting to hear from readers who used to like the comments and have been finding the comment board to be a bit of a swamp lately.
I remember an editor at The Gazette who would have saved me from publishing this sentence: "I asked my favourite prof, Robert A. Young, who was doing interesting work in Montreal, where I’d be working." There are at least three different ways to read that sentence. It offers no clue which way is the one I intended. Pretty sure Bob Young would have pointed that out too.
Those who are doing interesting work tend to know others who are also doing interesting work (certainly applies to the author of this here substack)
Mr Dion seems like a nice guy; sincere and positive. But like many central Canadian Liberals, it is difficult to believe they really understand this country. They seem to think that the Canada of Pierre Trudeau is still the Canada we live in today. It isn't. The parts of the country that are growing, both financially and in population are the provinces of Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia. I note that this year, the fiscal imbalance again heavily favours the East. Every province from east of Saskatchewan (including Ontario) is receiving equalization payments. Of course, Quebec receives the lion's share. This can't go on continually. We need a change in our political system which treats all of the regions fairly.
Per capita equalization payments 2024-25:
PEI $3,718
NB $3,629
NS $3,252
MB $3,109
QC $1,545
NL $ 412
ON $ 38
Average $ 2,244 . So Quebec in fact receives 69 % of the average payout. It looks like the three Marime provinces and Manitoba receive the lion's share:
PEI 165 %
NB 161 %
NS 145 %
MB 138 %
I just love it when , of course, people use skewed statistics to claim Quebec abuses the system when clearly four other provinces receive twice as much per capita. Quebec with 20 % of Canada's GDP contributes 20% of the federal income tax used to pay equilization. Alberta contributes 15 % due to its mile high GDP. AL GDP per capita : $96,544 vs QC 68,565$.
Boohoo, how unfair . AL has a GDP pc 41 % higher than QC . That twisted logic claims that AL, by far the richest province in Canada, is getting ripped off by Canada, and by implication by QC. Lets change the system so AL can reap even benefits .
I used to write pieces like this every few weeks. Thanks for pitching in.
Hi Paul. Happy New Year BTW. My response is above. Cheers.
QC has a carve-out for its hydro exports to the US outside of the equalization payments calculations. Alberta does not. The vast majority of federal departments and jobs reside in QC. Billions of dollars are generated from those offices and the provincial income tax of those employees. Quebec refuses to develop its own resources and become a 'have province'. Melany Joely is the head of a federally funded Ministry with a mandate to focus specifically on Quebec's Economic Development. This and a number of other programs outside of the formal equalization program tip the scales in QC's favour. Year after year. Decade after decade. To say they are not getting one of, if not the best deals in the federation, and that no one should question this type of relationship to the country, is intellectually bankrupt.
QC electricity exports to the US currently hover around $ 2.3 billion p.a. QC GDP $616 billion, so what you describe as a carveout represents 0.37 % of QC GDP.
Alberta, on the other hand exports $131 billion worth of oil and gas to the US. AB GDP $ 474 billion , roughly 28 % of its GDP.
Basically you are comparing watermelons with peas. Boohoo QC gets a 0.37% of GDP carveout, AB should be entitled to a 28 % GDP carveout. That is what you call fair.
Besides, QC does not decide the formula.
Your claim that '' the vast majority of federal departments and jobs reside in QC'' is, to put it politely, not factual.:
National Capital Region (NCR): ~42.3% (highest concentration)
Ontario (outside NCR): ~13.7% (second largest)
British Columbia (BC): ~8.2%
Quebec (outside NCR): ~8.2%
Alberta: ~5.4%
Manitoba: ~3.9%
Nova Scotia: ~3.7%
Prince Edward Island (PEI): ~3.5%
New Brunswick: ~3.4%
Saskatchewan: ~2.8%
Newfoundland & Labrador: ~1.9%
Intellectual bankrupcy often confuses firmly held beliefs with the facts. All of the numbers I quoted above are easily fact-checked.
$2.3 billion is equivalent to 17% of QC's equalization payments. The comment wasn't a comparison of total export value (which, as mentioned, QC is in charge of and can increase at will if it develops its resources), it was the effective transfer payment value. Excluding the NCR is ridiculous. That is the bulk of the federal jobs and thus the employment tax, so I'm not clear why you would even mention it.
The QC share of NCR employees is 30 %, 70 % in ON.
So including NCR, QC goes up to 20.7 % of ALL federal jobs ( QC represents 23 % of total CA population according to 2021 census)
ON goes up to 43 % ( ON represents 39 % of total CA population)
So in FACT ON is over represented in federal jobs, while QC is under represented.
So please explain how 20.7% can be skewed to '' the vast majority of departments and jobs reside in QC.''
Yet another urban myth fiercely held on to by those who whine about QC abusing the system.
Nice to know QC can ''increase at will'' its resources ! Too bad they haven't thought about it before .
In summary:
-28% federal employees with 23% of the pop vs Alberta with 5% with 13% of the population
-13.6billion in equalization payments QC vs $546 million Ont vs $0 Alberta/BC/Sask/all territories
-2.3 billion in unaccounted revenue for hydro (ALL of Alberta/Sask/BC exports accounted in equalization payments equation)
My comparison isn't QC vs Ontario; they are also abusing the equalization program and federal accounts in general. It is about how much better the deal is for BOTH of these provinces relative to the rest of the federation, and how the math clearly states that the total net deal for QC is the best in the federation.
Re: 'Increase resource extraction/make money at will:
https://www.publicationsduquebec.gouv.qc.ca/fileadmin/Fichiers_client/lois_et_reglements/LoisAnnuelles/en/2022/2022C10A.PDF
Why should the so-called "have not" provinces receive anything?
Don't ask me. The nine provinces (except QC who didn't sign the document) put it into the constitution. BTW currently 6 of those provinces receive equalization.
Always amazed at how clearly he sees things. Even if one doesn't agree with every viewpoint, he has such a fine mind. I hope he finds a befitting role(s).
Your anecdote about Dion and the driver spinning his wheels in the snow reminded me of this quintessential Jean Chretien quote about the constitution in 1990: "You remember when everybody was trapped in the debate on the distinct society, [I said] 'We're stuck in the snow.... What do we do when we're stuck in the snow? Relax, [move] a little bit forward, a little bit backward, and eventually you're back on the road"
"https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/chr%C3%A9tien-predicts-common-sense-will-prevail-in-quebec-debate-over-religious-symbols-1.4850386
Smart man. Good to have him back.
I found this a very interesting conversation. I look forward to hearing more from Dion even though I've never voted Liberal. Re Alberta and Quebec poking the pig re separation and not enough detail coming out re the pros and cons. It reminds me of Brexit. Only after the vote to leave, did British find out how little they had been told about the negative impacts that are still being felt and some issues still not resolved. And that was 9 years ago!!! That's unacceptable IMO.
How can one talk about CETA without noting that France and Italy and Poland and Belgium and Ireland have NOT ratified the trade agreement and likely never will.
Only 17 EU countries have ratified the treaty. 10 have not.
How can one rely and trust Europe where the treaty is still only operating provisionally and will likely never be ratified?
What Canadian company is going to be willing to invest based on a treaty that has not be ratified by over a third of the members of the EU over a decade after its signing?
What’s the hold up? Is it protectionist sentiment with respect to particularly favoured sectors?
What is the hold-up indeed? It would be a good question to put to Mr. Dion, after 8 1/2 years over there.
I've always had a soft spot for Stéphane Dion, by the way. Clear in his thinking, no back-slapping silliness from him, ahead of his time with the Green Shift. That was his downfall: Canadians weren't ready for his ideas on climate, still aren't.
Best intergovernmental affairs minister ever (Clarity Act, etc).
Not so great as Liberal leader, though.
I totally remember Detlef from my time at GAC. Legendary LES.
Still a very sharp guy. I was pleased to hear him express the climate realist position beautifully.
Great interview, Paul! I remember when Chretien brought Dion & Pettigrew into the cabinet to try and combat the separatist forces. Dion used to write long letters, which were published in La Presse. It drove the Parti Québécois & Bloc Québécois pundits nuts.
Good interview with a man who obviously loves Canada. So do most of us.
But it must be remembered that we are a confederation of sovereign states under one Crown. . Our provincial governments are still closest to the people, and thus must be properly empowered and funded to serve them.
Perhaps it’s time to renew the 1867 confederacy to empower Ottawa to strongly defend us and manage the currency, while at the same strengthening the ability of provincial governments to deliver services like health, education, and welfare without having to conform to Ottawa’s so-called “national standards” or go cap in hand to beg the federal government for the funds?
I think Mr. Dion is correct in that we should be proactively addressing the separation issue both in Quebec and Alberta. It’s unfortunate that we lost the plot over the past decade with the apologies for everything and the lack of pride in all the good things we have done as a country. Having worked and lived from coast to coast, my belief is we have a wonderful and diverse county full of mostly nice people - something we should focus on and celebrate.
This is a truly lovely sentiment... Yet we are in a Canada that has been badly mismanaged and the weak economy, the astounding
waste of tax dollars, the governance that looks after virtue programs instead of revving up investment and GDP per capita... these must be the priorities before we can take a breather to celebrate our country.
All true.
7 minutes in, listening by way of the auto-reader: I LOVE the translation!🤩 Major kudos, PW, for a terrifically engaging rendition that shows us an astute and dedicated Canadian 🍁
It was a good interview. I would hope another one comes, maybe to reassess a year from now. On this interview, I wish there was more depth on the value return of Canada's green expenditures vs the value of reductions achieved, considering our tiny man made global emissions.
Also, Mr Dion compared us to the States where there is not separation issues. Perhaps in the case of Alberta, we are tired of Taxation Without Representation. (Oh wait! Boston Tea Party! The States did deal with it.) and the transfer payments to have provinces who do not claim the many income streams, or possible income streams, so they can claim to be have-not. Fix those issues and we will start to see more unity.
Paul, I am commenting here because comments on your most recent post seem to be absent/unavailable (?) and in the second-most-recent, comments are turned off. I have just signed up for an annual subscription b/c I appreciate your honesty and relatively straight talk even when I disagree with you. And I want to limit my ability to cancel in a huff when I don't! But I must say that I would have liked to comment on one or both. In case you want that feedback. I never really noticed if you have turned off comments before.
Comments have been getting a bit combative in general. I'm giving everyone a chance to cool down. I'll bring back comments soon, along with a reminder to everyone to be nice to one another. This is, if I recall, the second or third time I've imposed a time-out since I launched. I was starting to hear from readers who used to like the comments and have been finding the comment board to be a bit of a swamp lately.
I see, thank you!