SUN NEWS COLUMN: People rely on natural resources for a good life

As Canadians grapple with the result of the federal election and the naming of the new cabinet, when it comes to natural resource policy, it’s important to separate whimsical wishes from reality.

Natural resources such as the minerals that help make our cars and bicycles, the petroleum products that make our cell phones and the forestry products that produce our newspapers and the frames for our homes are a fundamental element of our modern existence. Canada is excellent at extracting these resources, and we would all be better off if we could accept and celebrate this.

From the moment we wake up in our machine-woven sheets (polymers) that are stretched over our foam (petroleum) and (metal) spring-filled mattresses, and we reach for our smartphones (aluminum, gold, plastic) and we walk on our laminate (wood, plastic) or stone (quarries) tiled or carpeted (petroleum) floors to the kitchen to start our coffee pots, (plastic, metal) we have depended upon at least a dozen different natural resources while we are still in our pajamas. Plus shipping.

Producing the raw materials for those goods also directly benefits thousands of Canadian workers. More than 420,000 people work in mining in Canada, with the average pay exceeding $117,000 per year.

Take Trevor for example. Trevor is an Albertan who has worked in natural resources for his entire adult life.

When he was in his 20s, he worked as a logger on northern Vancouver Island. Trevor recently shared an amusing anecdote with me about having to weave his truck around protesters waving paper “Don’t Cut Trees” signs, held aloft with wooden stakes. One can safely assume the protesters also lived in wood framed homes and used paper in their daily lives.

Now that he’s in his 50s, Trevor works in engineering, and his craft has taken him from the energy patch in Alberta to a hydro dam in Newfoundland to potash mines in the prairies. All natural resources, all being protested every step of the way by those who live comfortable lives thanks to those same natural resources they claim to loathe.

Trevor’s income has been slashed in half over the past few years because of these misguided misinformation campaigns waged by protesters. It has affected his family, eaten away at his savings and he has seen his friends and neighbours lose their homes, their vehicles and their marriages.

Trevor told me about some highly paid professionals he knows who are experts in finding and responsibly extracting oil from Canada’s natural oil sands. Since Alberta’s recession began, and they were laid off, the situation has been so difficult that they’ve been hiding their skills on their resumes, hoping to get jobs at Dairy Queen.

Meanwhile, as Canadian natural resource projects struggle to get off the ground, the world just buys the resources from another country – often countries with inferior environmental regulations.

Ultimately, Canada’s struggles with approving natural resource projects has cost our nation tens of thousands of jobs and a fortune in lost tax revenue for the government.

Second Street.org tallied up the value of several major projects that were halted or cancelled, at least in part due to government policies between 2014-19. The total of this missed opportunity was roughly the equivalent of building an NHL-sized arena every day for a year – a staggering loss.

While politicians often subsidize the construction of new arenas, and boast about jobs they claim they are “creating,” these natural resource projects don’t require subsidies to get off the ground.

What they do require is for Canadians to take pride in, and appreciate what our natural resource sector provides. Yes, we should strive to do better, but if we don’t sell other nations the resources they want to buy, the world will simply purchase those resources elsewhere and leave Canada behind.

– Kris Sims is a contributor for SecondStreet.org and is the B.C. Director for the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

This column was published in Sun newspapers on November 22, 2019 (Toronto Sun, Ottawa Sun, Winnipeg Sun, Edmonton Sun and Calgary Sun) 

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter

Prevention – reduce demand in the first place

If Canadians lived healthier lives, we could reduce demand for emergency services, orthopaedic surgeries, primary care and more. 

For instance, if you visit the Canadian Cancer Society’s website, you’ll read that “about four in ten” cancer cases are preventable. The Heart and Stroke Foundation notes that “almost 80 percent of premature heart disease and stroke can be prevented through healthy behaviours.” A similar number of Diabetes cases are also preventable. 

Many joint replacements and visits to ERs and walk-in clinics could also be avoided through healthy living. 

To be sure, not all health problems can be avoided through healthy living – everyday the system treats Canadians with genetic conditions, helps those injured in unavoidable accidents and more.  

But there is an opportunity to reduce pressure on the health care system through Canadians shifting to healthier lifestyles – better diets, more exercise, etc. 

To learn more, watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or see this column. 

Partner with non-profits and for-profit clinics

European countries will partner with anyone who can help patients. 

It doesn’t matter if it’s a non-profit, a government entity or a private clinic. What matters is that patients receive quality treatment, in a timely manner and for a competitive price.  

In Canada, governments often delivery services using government-run hospitals instead of seeing if non-profit or private clinics could deliver the services more effectively. 

When governments have partnered with non-profit and private clinics, the results have often been quite good – Saskatchewan, Ontario and British Columbia are just a few examples of where partnerships have worked well. 

Canada should pursue more of these partnerships to reduce wait times and increase the volume of services provided to patients.  

To learn more, watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or see the links above. 

Make cross border care more accessible

In Canada, citizens pay high taxes each year and we’re promised universal health care services in return. The problem is, wait times are often extremely long in our health system – sometimes patients have to wait years to see a specialist or receive surgery. 

If patients don’t want to wait long periods, they often have to reach into their own pocket and pay for treatment outside the province or country. 

Throughout the European Union, we also find universal health care systems. But a key difference is that EU patients have the right to go to other EU countries, pay for surgery and then be reimbursed by their home government. Reimbursements cover up to what the patient’s home government would have spent to provide the treatment locally. 

If Canada copied this approach, a patient waiting a year to get their hip operation could instead receive treatment next week in one of thousands of surgical clinics throughout the developed world. 

Governments benefit too as the patient is now back on their feet and avoiding complications that sometimes come with long wait times – meaning the government doesn’t have to treat those complications on top of the initial health problem. 

To learn more, watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or this shorter video. 

Legalize access to non-government providers

Canada is the only country in the world that puts up barriers, or outright bans patients from paying for health services locally. 

For instance, a patient in Toronto cannot pay for a hip operation at a private clinic in Toronto. Their only option is to wait for the government to eventually provide treatment or leave the province and pay elsewhere. 

Countries with better-performing universal health care systems do not have such bans. They allow patients a choice – use the public system or pay privately for treatment. Sweden, France, Australia and more – they all allow choice. 

Why? One reason is that allowing choice means some patients will decide to pay privately. This takes pressure off the public system. For instance, in Sweden, 87% of patients use the public system, but 13% purchase private health insurance. 

Ultimately, more choice improves access for patients. 

To learn more, watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or watch this short clip on this topic. 

Shift to funding services for patients, not bureaucracies

In Canada, most hospitals receive a cheque from the government each year and are then asked to do their best to help patients. This approach is known as “block funding”. 

Under this model, a patient walking in the door represents a drain on the hospital’s budget. Over the course of a year, hospital administrators have to make sure the budget stretches out so services are rationed. This is why you might have to wait until next year or the year after for a hip operation, knee operation, etc. 

In better-performing universal health systems, they take the opposite approach – hospitals receive money from the government each time they help a patient. If a hospital completes a knee operation, it might receive, say, $10,000. If it completes a knee operation on another patient, it receives another $10,000. 

This model incentivizes hospitals to help more patients – to help more patients with knee operations, cataract surgery, etc. This approach also incentivizes hospitals to spend money on expenses that help patients (e.g. more doctors, nurses, equipment, etc.) rather than using the money on expenses that don’t help patients (e.g. more admin staff). 

To learn more about this policy option, please watch our Health Reform Now documentary (scroll up) or see this post by MEI.