In search of balance
A one-for-all formula on health, education or infrastructure imposes a regime of rigidity on federal-provincial negotiations
Two items of national interest have surfaced during the past six months, entirely different in character and impact, and each in its own way of major consequence to Canada’s social and economic future needs.
The first has been the reconfiguration in costs and modification of Canada’s National Health Plan. Nothing new about this debate which largely originated when the Paul Martin government from 2003 to 2006 created the six per cent formula for progression of health-care funding in future years.
The current Trudeau government has devised a plan to address respective provincial government requests for increased funding and consultation on federal contribution. The famous (infamous) health ministers’ conference forum, as usual, was/is charged with negotiating a nation-wide formula. The ultimate goal has been to negotiate a broad agreement that would meet the requirements of all provinces and would include the federal government.
A recent op-ed in the Cape Breton Post (“Resuscitating health care,” Jan. 6, 2017) took issue with the action of some provincial governments in breaking rank or dissolving the alleged bargaining united front vis-à-vis Ottawa.
Admittedly, it would be hard to disagree with the argument that health-care funding is/ should be the top-priority financing obligation in Canada. Unfortunately, history has demonstrated on numerous occasions that the weight and influence of the ten provinces and three territories varies measurably.
For example, using population as one indicator, according to Stats Canada, the population of Quebec in 2015 was 8,263,600. In the same year the combined population of the four Atlantic provinces was 2.3 million. By whatever measure – population, financial capacity or federal representation – the Atlantic provinces have unique needs.
The premiers and their governments are responsible for determining, balancing and prioritizing their respective provincial requirements. A one-for-all formula on health, education or infrastructure imposes a regime of rigidity on federal-provincial negotiations. The bi-lateral agreements signed by Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Newfoundland & Labrador and Saskatchewan with Ottawa, therefore, make sense.
Another example of finding balance among competing federal, provincial and private sector interests is the future development of Alberta oil sand bitumen. How does the Canadian government honour its commitment to reducing air emissions, imposing a carbon tax, reducing fossil fuel consumption and growing green energy production when the provinces and private sector are pushing to develop natural resources through the operation of free markets?
One incident in particular brings the balancing challenge into focus. Pipeline projects require federal, and often provincial, approval. Recently, a major pipeline operator received approval to increase the volume of oil sand bitumen it can ship to oil refineries in the southern U.S. Interestingly, there were no objections from environmental groups or others to this action. However, the decision to proceed was halted by market economics and poor product quality.
This is a very complex issue in search of a balanced solution, but it is a real life problem with potential negative economic impacts for Canadians. Not infrequently, oil sands bitumen is referred to as a heavy oil, high in chemical compound, or just plain dirty oil. All of which, true or not, has tarnished important Alberta natural resources, delaying future development and market acceptance.
The term “blend” is reference to bitumen mixed or blended with lighter oil to capture scarce pipeline capacity: see “Refineries shun new Canadian crude blend offer from Enbridge line”, Globe and Mail, Jan. 10, 2017. To quote from the article, “Refineries are typically wary of processing new crude blends as their impact on expensive catalysts used to make fuel from crude is untested.”
O. P. Strauss of the Hydrocarbon Research Center, Dept. of Chemistry, University of Alberta, in a report entitled “The Chemistry of the Alberta Oil Sand Bitumen,” offers a solution to the problem and a balanced approach. Though not simple, he maintains that to improve the image of Alberta oil (bitumen), the federal and Alberta governments, industry and universities must make major investments in the research and cleansing of the bitumen.
In other words, if we want to extract maximum economic benefit from our resource, let’s clean up our product so we can peddle it! How’s that for an innovation project?
“By whatever measure – population, financial capacity or federal representation – the Atlantic provinces have unique needs. ”