IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/clh/resear/v11y2018i25.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why Alberta Needs a Fiscal Constitution

Author

Listed:
  • Ted Morton

    (University of Calgary)

Abstract

Alberta will enter the third decade of the 21st century with an accumulated public debt of over $70 billion and the highest per capita deficit of any Canadian province. This is a far cry from 2005, when then-premier Ralph Klein announced that Alberta was “debt free”; made the first deposit of energy revenues in the Heritage Fund in 20 years; and enacted a balanced budget law (BBL) that was intended to prevent future governments from ever running deficits again. This statutory BBL lasted only as long as oil prices remained above $100/barrel. It was amended in 2009 to allow “temporary deficits”. Since then, four premiers from two parties chose to run large budget deficits to fund large spending increases to win their next elections. Alberta’s experience proves that statutory rules are not sufficient to protect a positive fiscal legacy. Alberta’s balanced budget law, flat tax rates and protections of the Heritage Fund were all removed by simple majority votes in the Alberta legislature. Any meaningful re-instatement of these policies will require that they be put beyond the reach of future governments of whatever party – that is, that they be constitutionally entrenched. The next Alberta government could address this problem by adapting a form of the BBLs found in most state constitutions in the United States. Under Sections 43 of the Constitution Act, 1982, Alberta could proceed bilaterally by negotiating with the Federal government to “patriate” the Alberta Act from Ottawa to Alberta; and to include in this act a new super-majority amending formula such as a two-thirds approval vote in the Legislature and/or approval by way of referendum. Once the Alberta Act were “back home,” Alberta could then make further changes per its new amending formula—such as adding a BBL, a taxand-expenditure limitation (TEL) or rules to protect the Heritage Fund. Alternatively, Alberta could proceed unilaterally under section 45 of the Constitution Act by legislating similar protections. However such unilateral action would require “symmetrical entrenchment,” meaning that any policy restrictions placed on a future government would have to be enacted under the same super-majority procedures that would be needed to repeal them in the future. Both options carry the risk that under the constitutional status quo, final interpretation and enforcement of an Alberta constitution would rest with the Supreme Court of Canada, a court with either one or no judges from Alberta. In the short term, this “made in Ottawa” risk of mis-interpretation could be minimized by ensuring that any new constitutional rules are clear, explicit and have broadly agreed-upon, objective meanings. In the medium term, Alberta could begin to recruit other provinces that have an interest in their own provincial constitutions. If such a coalition were built, it could lobby Ottawa to give provincial courts of appeal the final interpretive authority over provincial constitutions and to return the power to appoint provincial superior court judges to the provinces. This reform would remove an outdated relic of 19th century British imperial rule and give Canada what is already the norm other mature federal states. Any Quebec government would immediately support such amendments. Presumably the current conservative governments in Ontario (Ford) and Saskatchwan (Moe) would as well. A coalition with this membership would be difficult for any federal political party to ignore.

Suggested Citation

  • Ted Morton, 2018. "Why Alberta Needs a Fiscal Constitution," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 11(25), September.
  • Handle: RePEc:clh:resear:v:11:y:2018:i:25
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.policyschool.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Fiscal-Constitution-Morton-final.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Janice MacKinnon & Jack M. Mintz, 2017. "Putting the Alberta Budget on a New Trajectory," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 10(26), October.
    2. Ted Morton & Meredith McDonald, 2015. "The Siren Song of Economic Diversification: Alberta's Legacy of Loss," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 8(13), March.
    3. International Monetary Fund, 2017. "Norway: 2017 Article IV Consultation-Press Release; and Staff Report," IMF Staff Country Reports 2017/182, International Monetary Fund.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Craig Scott & Hubert Eng & Alexander Dubyk & Jennifer Zwicker, 2020. "Impediments to Health Innovation in Canada: Identifying Policy Barriers in Alberta’s Precision Health Innovation and Commercialization Ecosystem," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 13(5), March.
    2. Bev Dahlby & Mukesh Khanal, 2018. "Alberta’s Changing Industrial Structure: Implications for Output and Income Volatility," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 11(3), January.
    3. Sara Hastings-Simon, 2019. "Industrial Policy in Alberta: Lessons from AOSTRA and the oil sands," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 12(37), November.
    4. Grant Bishop, 2019. "Decision Time: The Alberta Shadow Budget 2019," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 554, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:clh:resear:v:11:y:2018:i:25. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Bev Dahlby (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/spcalca.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.