ENERGY NOW: Unleashing Jobs With Natural Resource Development

Canada has a high unemployment rate and the federal government intends to “fix” it by borrowing billions of dollars, crossing its fingers and then spending the money with the hope of creating jobs for workers.

However, taxpayers have seen this movie before in Canada. Insiders and friends of the government often receive many of the funds from such spending sprees, the jobs seldom materialize as promised and loans are rarely paid back in full. (anyone from Bombardier reading this?)

But what if there was a better way to create jobs – one that doesn’t involve politicians spending your hard-earned money?

There is.

In fact, SecondStreet.org recently put together a free eBook, Life After COVID, with several other public policy organizations to examine this issue and other challenges Canada faces as we emerge from the pandemic.

In our chapter we discuss how Between 2014 and 2020, governments stalled or cancelled at least $215 billion worth of natural resource projects.

The projects stretched from coast-to-coast and included major mining projects, oil and gas extraction as well as pipeline infrastructure. Whether we’re talking about the enormous Petronas LNG project in B.C., the Matoush Uranium mine in Quebec or the Energy East Pipeline project – Canada’s list of missed opportunities is staggering.

We’ve become a nation of stop signs when it comes to natural resource development while the rest of world continues to display green lights.

To put our missed natural resource opportunities into perspective, the value of these projects is the same as building an NHL-sized arena every single day for a year. If governments merely unshackled our nation’s natural resource sector, it could create thousands of jobs without costing taxpayers a cent.

But these aren’t just any jobs. Natural resource jobs are one of the highest-paying sectors in Canada. For 2020, Statistics Canada data shows natural resource sector jobs paid an average of $40.92 per hour – the second-highest rate in Canada.

If the federal government is worried about losing its “green” reputation by supporting more natural resource development, it could perhaps commit to using the tax revenue from these projects for carbon capture, research and development towards new technology … or perhaps planting some of the 2 billion trees the prime minister promised to plant?

Make no mistake, there are many other ways governments could create jobs by simply getting out of the way, rather than large subsidies.

According to the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, unnecessary red tape costs entrepreneurs $11 billion per year. Identifying and eliminating such obstacles could free up entrepreneurs from needless paper work and compliance costs, allowing them to expand and create new opportunities for workers.

Similarly, a 2016 Senate report on interprovincial trade barriers (rules that make it difficult for businesses to engage in commerce in multiple provinces) noted that these regulatory obstacles cost our nation’s economy upwards of $130 billion each year. An aggressive push to eliminate these barriers could yield significantly more economic activity in Canada and even more jobs.

As you can see, there are plenty of ways governments in Canada could create thousands of jobs by simply getting out of the way and allowing entrepreneurs to do what they do best.

Colin Craig is the President of SecondStreet.org and is a co-author of Life After COVID: What’s next for Canada?

This column was published in Energy Now on May 28th, 2021. To see article click here.

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter

You can help us continue to research and tell stories about this issue by making a donation or sharing this content with your friends. Be sure to sign up for our updates too!

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.