Skip to main content
The Globe and Mail
Get full access to globeandmail.com
Support quality journalism
Just $1.99 per week for the first 24weeks
Just $1.99 per week for the first 24weeks
The Globe and Mail
Support quality journalism
Get full access to globeandmail.com
Globe and Mail website displayed on various devices
Just$1.99
per week
for the first 24weeks

var select={root:".js-sub-pencil",control:".js-sub-pencil-control",open:"o-sub-pencil--open",closed:"o-sub-pencil--closed"},dom={},allowExpand=!0;function pencilInit(o){var e=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1];select.root=o,dom.root=document.querySelector(select.root),dom.root&&(dom.control=document.querySelector(select.control),dom.control.addEventListener("click",onToggleClicked),setPanelState(e),window.addEventListener("scroll",onWindowScroll),dom.root.removeAttribute("hidden"))}function isPanelOpen(){return dom.root.classList.contains(select.open)}function setPanelState(o){dom.root.classList[o?"add":"remove"](select.open),dom.root.classList[o?"remove":"add"](select.closed),dom.control.setAttribute("aria-expanded",o)}function onToggleClicked(){var l=!isPanelOpen();setPanelState(l)}function onWindowScroll(){console.log("scroll");var l=isPanelOpen(),n=0===(document.body.scrollTop||document.documentElement.scrollTop);n||l||!allowExpand?n&&l&&(allowExpand=!0,setPanelState(!1)):(allowExpand=!1,setPanelState(!0))}pencilInit(".js-sub-pencil",!1);

The Harper government claim to be paragons of fiscal virtue. They have pledged to balance the federal budget this year, notwithstanding a slowing economy, and are likely set to announce details of the balanced budget legislation promised in the 2013 Speech from the Throne.

The promised legislation will disallow annual deficits in "normal economic times" (whatever they are) and "set concrete targets for returning to balance in the event of an economic crisis."

Balanced budget legislation is a bad idea since it would remove the flexibility that is needed to set fiscal policy in a changing economy, particularly an economy such as Canada's with an exaggerated boom-bust cycle linked to resource prices.

Story continues below advertisement

When it comes to balancing the books, the Harper government is seemingly more Catholic than the Pope. Even the International Monetary Fund (IMF), hardly big fans of high government spending, argue in their latest Country Report released in January that the federal government should ease up on fiscal restraint in the near term to the tune of 0.3 per cent of gross domestic product. They say this should fund "targeted measures to support growth."

In effect, the IMF said there is no need to quickly balance the federal budget given that growth will be hit hard by the slump in oil prices. They have not said, as has Prime Minister Harper, that we must fall into a recession before we should run a deficit.

The IMF also argues that Canada would be better off to adopt a medium-term fiscal target of debt relative to GDP, rather than a rule to balance the budget in each and every non-recession year.

For its part, the Parliamentary Budget Office noted that the federal government has a very low level of public debt that is shrinking as a share of the economy and stands to be eliminated entirely over the next thirty years.

There is a strong case for deficits to fund public investments that boost future growth and thus help achieve a debt-to-GDP target by growing the economy rather than by cutting spending on social programs and public services. This is especially true with interest rates now at near record lows, and at a time when monetary policy is not the best instrument to boost spending given already sky-high levels of household debt.

And deficits are friendly to future generations since they will enjoy the long-term benefits of investments in areas such as education, skills, innovation and infrastructure.

While the Conservative goal is ostensibly to balance the books, this is, at best, a secondary goal. Their real priority has to been to cut spending so as to cut taxes, not reduce debt.

Story continues below advertisement

When the Harper government was elected back in 2006, the federal books were in surplus. While spending more in 2008 and 2009 to counter the impacts of the recession was amply justified, the real Conservative priority has been to cut taxes. Witness the two-percentage-point cut to the GST rate, deep corporate tax cuts, and a host of boutique tax cuts for the government's electoral targets such as high-income single paycheque families.

When the government took office, federal taxes consumed 16.0 per cent of GDP, which has fallen to a forecast 14.5 per cent of GDP this fiscal year. That seemingly small difference translates into $29.8-billion of forgone revenues, enough to have financed any social activist's dream agenda.

We have thus ended up in a very strange situation. The government made deep and damaging cuts where none needed to be made in order to to finance its tax cut agenda. Now further cuts will be made to eliminate the deficit, even though debt is falling, and even though the IMF is counselling spending more to boost a sagging economy.

And somehow this government has gained the reputation of being good economic managers.

Andrew Jackson is an adjunct research professor in the Institute of Political Economy at Carleton University and senior policy adviser to the Broadbent Institute.

Related topics

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies