Has Canadian goverance kept up with the time?

In 1867, the Fathers of our Confederation created a separation of governing responsibilities between the federal government and the provincial governments. (There were only four provinces at the time.)

The responsibilities, boiled down, are: the federal government was entrusted with the welfare of the country (banking, shipping, international trade, etc.) and the provinces were made responsible for the welfare of people (health, education, municipalities, local works, etc.).

The Feds looked after Canada and the Provinces looked after Canadians.

Since the end of the Second World War there has been a tendency for the lines to blur between the levels of government. This blur, in general, has been due to four changes in the demographics of Canada.

First, in 1867, Canada was essentially a rural society with less that 10% of people living in cities. Toronto, at the time Canada’s second largest city, had a population of 56,000 in a country of 3.5 million or approximately 1.6% of the whole population. In 2006, Toronto’s population is 4.5 million in a country of 33 million. We are now a mostly urban society.

Second, with the growth in services to Canadians, including, but not limited to, welfare, healthcare and education, the fiscal pressures on provincial governments have increased exponentially when compared to the federal government’s costs.

Third, there has been a tendency toward regional politics, including the growth of Quebec separation and western alienation, which has seen the provinces push for powers that were in the domain of the federal government, including trade consulates abroad, seats on international bodies and others.

Finally, there has been a deliberate effort by provincial governments to download their responsibilities to municipalities without regard to the cost to be incurred at the municipal level to deliver these services. Compound that with the archaic way municipalities have to raise funds and the fact that they are effectively controlled by the provinces, which precludes them from making any changes to the way that they raise funds.

We have here a recipe for disaster. There are too many levels of government chasing a finite level of funding.

In 2006, who looks after Canada and who looks after Canadians?

In a 2000 study done for the Canadian Federation of Municipalities by McGill University, it was identified that almost 70% of our municipal infrastructure is in need of repair. This includes roads, bridges, sewage collection and treatment, and water distribution and treatment. The study also estimates that it will take over $20 billion to rehabilitate these facilities to year 2000 standards. Who is going to pay for this?

The taxpayers, you and me, pay all the bills in Canada!

Between 2001 and 2003, according to their own reports, Infrastructure Canada, a federal department that you would think would address the crumbling infrastructure in Canada, paid out over $4 billion in grants. Of that $4 billion, not a single cent was allocated to fixing existing infrastructure. Of the funds, according to the report, 43% went to new public transit, 7% went to new urban roads, 12% went to tourism, 4% to expansion of broadband Internet, 22% for new highways, 11% for new water projects and 1% to new housing.

So while the country’s existing bridges crumble, existing roads grow potholes big enough to swallow a Volkswagen, people die from poor water quality and sewers release untreated crap into our rivers, Infrastructure Canada invested $456 million in tourism and $160 million on broadband Internet.

At this rate where will we get the billions required to fix the current crumbling infrastructure?

Our governments waste inordinate amounts of time and energy fighting over who does what, who pays for what, who owns what, who owes whom and on and on, ad infinitum and ad nauseum.

We talk about rebalancing federalism, rebalancing funding, rebalancing everything except what needs to be rebalanced. We need to rebalance our levels of government.

It made sense in 1867 that the two major levels of government were federal and provincial. But in 2006, with 80% of the population in or around cities, we need to ask ourselves if we have not outgrown the need for provinces. Maybe we should elevate city-states, regional municipalities and other more granular levels of government instead of paying the freight for provincial governments plus these lower levels.

In my 2002 book, updates and republished in 2006, The Provinces Must Go, An Idea to Cure the Malaise of Canada, I argued that by eliminating the overhead of provincial government and distributing provincial responsibilities to the federal and municipal governments, we could rebalance our confederation, eliminate (or at least reduce) waste and save in excess of $30 billion PER YEAR.

What could we do with $30 billion?

We could rehabilitate our crumbling infrastructure, with a resultant creation of construction jobs and collecting more income taxes. We could also rebuild our military. We could also invest in better healthcare for our citizens.

That takes care of the $30 billion saving in year one, but we save that same $30 billion every year!

We could improve services to Canadians and reduce taxes without running any deficits at all, at any level of government, or increasing taxes.

Could a plan to eliminate provincial government ever succeed in Canada? Not without a concerted effort of grassroots Canadians. To make a change to the Constitution Act of 1982 requires agreement between the Provinces and with the federal government. Can you visualize the Provinces agreeing to put themselves out of business – even it is for the good of the country and Canadians?

But it needs to happen… for Canada’s sake.