DOCSLIB.ORG

The Evolution of Canadian Defence Policy Through the Pragmatic Control Theory of Civil-Military Relations

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Evolution of Canadian Defence Policy Through the Pragmatic Control Theory of Civil-Military Relations Government of Canada Government Canada’s 2005 Defence Policy Statement. The Evolution of Canadian Defence Policy through the Pragmatic Control Theory of Civil-Military Relations by Brian Frei Colonel (ret’d) Brian Frei, until his recent retirement, was a subsequent implementation. By examining each of these policy Military Police Officer in the Royal Canadian Air Force, serving development processes through the lens of pragmatic control as the Force Protection Advisor to the Commander of Canadian theory, it will illustrate the negative impacts upon military Joint Operations Command in Ottawa. Colonel Frei is a recent effectiveness that resulted from unbalanced relations in 2005 and graduate of the National Security Programme at the Canadian 2008, and postulates that, barring significant changes in global Forces College in Toronto, Ontario. He is also a graduate of the or domestic context, the more balanced relationship that led to Royal Military College of Canada and he holds Masters Degrees the development of Strong, Secure, Engaged in 2017 signals a in Astrophysics and Defence Studies. He is currently President more effective implementation process for the coming years. of Presidia Security Consulting, a private company that is part of the ADGA Group. Studies of civil-military relations focus upon the application of civilian control over the military. At their root, civil-military Introduction relations theories seek to understand how state political sys- tems are best protected from the power of military forces, while ince 2005, Canadian Defence Policy has undergone simultaneously empowering military leaders to protect the state.4 three separate periods of renewal by successive Within modern democratic societies, the risk of a military coup, governments, resulting in three distinct defence the ultimate breakdown of civil-military relations, is minimal. policies: the 2005 Defence Policy Statement,1 the However, the study of civil-military relations often examines the 2008 Canada First Defence Strategy, 2 and the 2017 balance of influence between military and civilian leaders on vari- SStrong, Secure, Engaged: Canada’s Defence Policy.3 Given the ous issues, such as policies, procurement, and strategy, in what the changing political and global contexts throughout this period distinguished American political scientist Elliot Cohen, Dean of of time, shifts in the balance of influence in the civil-military the Paul A. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, refers relationship can be seen in the three defence policy renewal to as an unequal dialogue: “…unequal in that the final authority processes. This article will explore the role that civil-military of the civilian leader [is] unambiguous and unquestioned.”5 relations plays in shaping Canadian Defence Policy and its 16 Canadian Military Journal • Vol. 19, No. 4, Autumn 2019 harmonious relations can contribute positively to military effectiveness.9 But what does military effectiveness mean? A variety of authorities have proposed definitions that relate to the ability of a military to achieve assigned objectives while others base their definitions on measures of professionalism and power. Nielsen’s recognition that military activi- ties span the spectrum of the tactical, operational, strategic and political levels leads her to the conclusion that military effectiveness should likewise be judged at each level.10 To that end, senior Slovenian military officer and distinguished scholar Branimir Furlan’s definition of an effective military as one that “…understands its role and mission and is capable of trans- forming political guidance into effective military action and responses” provides DND Photo/CFJIC CX2004-0074-007 DND Photo/CFJIC a foundation from which to study the implementation of defence policy.11 Prime Minister Paul Martin arriving at CFB Comox in 2004. While some authorities, such as Dr. Peter Feaver, Professor of Political Science and Public Policy at Duke University, choose to focus upon the interactions of individuals MILITARY PROFESSIONAL THOUGHT as principals and agents to under- stand the dynamics of civil-military relations,6 others examine this relation- ship through a variety of structural approaches. Objective civilian con- trol theory postulates that military and civilian leaders occupy discreet structural roles, with military lead- ers abstaining from any political involvement, and civilian leaders exercising a directive control over military policies, but not upon operations.7 In contrast, pragmatic civilian control theory argues that military leaders must be politically sensitive, but not ideological, as they AR2006-G016-0006 DND photo/CFJIC interact collaboratively with civilian leaders to achieve national goals, General Rick Hillier (L), in Kandahar, Afghanistan, 29 September 2006. which are political by definition. As a result, pragmatic control theory suggests that Taken together, these theories suggest civil-military relations exist as a delicate balance that context plays an important role in shap- of influence that may shift “…based on a threat, “As the political, ing the civil control construct at any particular crisis, or mission, instead of position, profession, security or social period of time. As the political, security or 8 or institution.” environments change, social environments change, so too does the delicate balance of civil-military relations. While each of these theories provides a so too does the Pragmatic control theory therefore provides framework to understand the role and balance delicate balance of a particularly useful lens through which to of civilian control over military forces, Colonel civil-military relations.” examine Canadian civil-military relations in Suzanne Nielsen, a Professor of Political Science light of the dual civilian-military leadership and Head of the Department of Social Services at structure of Canada’s Department of National West Point, examines the more practical impacts Defence. Thereafter, military effectiveness can of civil-military relations on military effectiveness. In particular, be examined through the policy implementation process in the Nielsen notes that “…conflict-laden relations between political context of the existing civil-military relations. and military leaders will harm a country’s national security,” while Canadian Military Journal • Vol. 19, No. 4, Autumn 2019 17 In order to evaluate the effectiveness of Canada’s successive When Paul Martin assumed the leadership of the Liberal Party defence policies through a pragmatic control lens, it is necessary of Canada, and the position of Prime Minister from Jean Chrétien to first understand the context in which each policy was developed. in December 2003, he sought to establish a policy position that With each of these three defence policies having been crafted would distinguish his leadership from Jean Chrétien’s. With the under different governments, and in differing global and domestic global war on terrorism and rising public support for defence, Paul settings, the contexts that defined the civil-military relationship Martin turned to his Minister of National Defence (MND), Bill during those periods clearly resulted in shifts in the balance of Graham, to “produce bold, innovative policies.”20 It seems that legitimate military influence.12 With the benefit of hindsight, it Paul Martin was looking to promote integrated foreign and defence is possible to examine the policy commitments in the 2005 and policies that would reassert Canada’s role on the global stage. In 2008 statements against the outcomes that were realized in the keeping with traditional Canadian civil-military relations, Minister intervening years. Thereafter, a comparison of the civil-military Graham first tasked senior bureaucrats within the Department of relations environment of 2005 and 2008 with that of 2017 pro- National Defence (DND) to craft the new defence policy. However, vides a perspective upon the challenges facing implementation after two drafts failed to meet the Prime Minister’s intent, an of Strong, Secure, Engaged. unprecedented decision in recent history was taken. Contrary The 2005 Defence Policy Statement lthough successive Canadian Agovernments have had a long history of exercising a “…strict form of con- trol over the Canadian military,”13 in the year leading up to the publication of the 2005 defence policy statement, Defence: A Role of Pride and Influence in the World, General Rick Hillier, then-Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) of the Canadian Forces,14 was granted exceptional influence over Prime Minister Paul Martin’s defence policy.15 Several authors have examined the civil- military relationship that existed during this period in Canadian military history through Feaver’s principal – agent theory, par- ticularly given the unique relationship that existed between General Hillier and Prime Minister Martin.16 However, for the pur- pose of a comparative study of successive defence policies over a period of thirteen years, pragmatic control theory suggests HSO95-132-23 DND photo/CFJIC that context, and not relationships, plays Prime Minister Jean Chrétien (L), at the G-7 Summit in Halifax, NS. a central role in determining the degree of influence granted to military leaders. With global events shaping domestic policies, Canada had embraced the peace dividend ideal presented by the end of the Cold War, resulting in significant cuts to Canadian Forces budgets and personnel. Coupled with the Somalia Affair, pub- lic opinions about defence and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Rt. Honourable Paul Martin by Tahreem Fatima
    Rt. Honourable Paul Martin By Tahreem Fatima Former Prime Minister Paul Martin is optimistic about the role of indigenous youth in the future but says there is much work still to do on the indigenous file. Although 82 and retired from politics, Martin continues to play a significant role designed to provide indigenous people with opportunities and resources to succeed. "I created a foundation when I stepped down from government. The purpose of the (foundation) is to work with Canada's indigenous people in terms of the various matters that they face, primarily education but also, economic issues with the indigenous people." Martin played various political roles: he was a member of Parliament for 20 years, finance minister for a decade and was the 21st prime minister of Canada from 2003- 2006. After retiring from a full political career spread over nearly three decades, he is now busy with his foundation, Martin Family Initiative. It is a charity aimed at improving education, health and well-being outcomes for Indigenous children and youth in Canada. Looking back, Martin points to the Kelowna Accord as his most significant achievement as prime minister. The accord was a series of agreements between the Government of Canada, first ministers of the provinces, territorial leaders, and the leaders of five national Aboriginal organizations in the country. It was a 10-year plan, with a $5-billion agreement to close the social and economic gap within five years between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Canadians. The purpose of the accord was to improve Aboriginal peoples' education, employment, and living conditions with government funding and other programs.
    [Show full text]
  • Canada and the Middle East Today: Electoral Politics and Foreign Policy
    CANADA AND THE MIDDLE EAST TODAY: ELECTORAL POLITICS AND FOREIGN POLICY Donald Barry Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper came to power in 2006 with little experience in foreign affairs but with a well developed plan to transform his minority Conservative administration into a majority government replacing the Liberals as Canada’s “natural governing party.”1 Because his party’s core of Anglo-Protestant supporters was not large enough to achieve this goal, Harper appealed to non- traditional Conservatives, including Jews, on the basis of shared social values. His efforts were matched by those of Jewish leaders and the government of Israel to win the backing of the government and its followers in the face of declining domestic support for Israel and the rise of militant Islamic fundamentalism. These factors accelerated a change in Canada’s Middle East policy that began under Prime Minister Paul Martin, from a carefully balanced stance to one that overwhelm- ingly favors Israel. Harper’s “pro-Israel politics,” Michelle Collins observes, has “won the respect—and support—of a large segment of Canada’s organized Jewish community.”2 However, it has isolated Canada from significant shifts in Middle East diplomacy and marginalized its ability to play a constructive role in the region. Harper and the Jewish Vote When he became leader of the Canadian Alliance party, which merged with the Progressive Conservatives to form the Conservative Party of Canada in 2004, Tom Flanagan says that Harper realized “The traditional Conservative base of Anglophone Protestants [was] too narrow to win modern Canadian elections.”3 In a speech to the conservative organization Civitas, in 2003, Harper argued that the only way to achieve power was to focus not on the tired wish list of economic conservatives or “neo-cons,” as they’d become known, but on what he called “theo-cons”—those social conservatives who care passionately about hot-button issues that turn on family, crime, and defense.
    [Show full text]
  • The Liberals: a House Divided Introduction
    The Liberals: A House Divided Introduction “I will fulfill my mandate and focus entirely on governing from now until February Focus 2004. At which time my work will be done and at which time my successor will be In an unprec- chosen. And then, at the age of 70, I will look back with great satisfaction as I take edented move against a sitting my rest with Aline, secure in the knowledge that the future of Canada is unlim- Canadian prime ited.” — Prime Minister Jean Chrétien, August 21, 2002 minister, a signifi- cant number of Struggle for Power media and political organizers, the buzz Liberal Party mem- The summer of 2002 will be remem- about his future grew louder and louder. bers appeared The Martin camp was particularly ready to vote bered for both the hot weather and the against Jean equally hot political battle waged within active in promoting their man for the Chrétien in a the ranks of the Liberal Party of next leadership campaign. They built a planned leadership Canada. Open political warfare raged powerful organization and raised sub- review next year. inside the heart of Canada’s most stantial funds. Incensed by this pressure The split in the to leave, Chrétien and Martin had a Liberal camp was successful political machine. A party highlighted this that traditionally rallied around its falling out, and Martin left cabinet. spring when Paul leader appeared ready to tear itself apart Liberals were increasingly divided Martin, one of the over the question of leadership. and feared an open battle at a planned main contenders to After the Liberal victory of 2000, convention to review Chrétien’s leader- replace the PM, attention was drawn to the question of ship in February 2003.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Ombudsman Would Reduce Democratic Deficit
    FEDERAL OMBUDSMAN WOULD REDUCE DEMOCRATIC DEFICIT Donald C. Rowat Paul Martin has long been an advocate of reducing the democratic deficit, but one of the most effective means of doing so would be the appointment of a federal ombudsman as an independent officer of Parliament. A national ombudsman is now in place in some 65 democratic countries, including Australia, as well as in the Canadian provinces, but not as yet in Ottawa. It is now five years since provincial ombudsmen urged Ottawa to create such a position, “so far to no avail,” writes a longtime Canadian ombudsman scholar. “Why the federal government has so far failed to adopt a scheme to match the provincial ones is somewhat of a mystery,” writes Donald Rowat. “Now that he is leading the government, Prime Minister Martin has a golden opportunity to reduce the democratic deficit and to leave a permanent legacy by instituting this important democratic reform.” Paul Martin affirme depuis longtemps vouloir combler le déficit démocratique, et l’un des meilleurs moyens d’y parvenir serait de nommer un ombudsman fédéral agissant au Parlement comme fonctionnaire indépendant. Ce poste existe aujourd’hui dans quelques 65 pays, dont l’Australie, ainsi que dans plusieurs provinces canadiennes. Mais Ottawa fait toujours la sourde oreille cinq ans après que les ombudsmen provinciaux l’eurent exhorté à créer un tel poste. Pourquoi le gouvernement fédéral tarde-t-il tant à répondre à leur demande ? Le mystère reste entier, selon Donald Rowat, spécialiste de la question. Maintenant qu’il tient les rênes du pouvoir, Paul Martin dispose pourtant d’une occasion en or de tenir son engagement et de laisser un héritage politique signifiant en instituant cette fonction.
    [Show full text]
  • What Has He Really Done Wrong?
    The Chrétien legacy Canada was in such a state that it WHAT HAS HE REALLY elected Brian Mulroney. By this stan- dard, William Lyon Mackenzie King DONE WRONG? easily turned out to be our best prime minister. In 1921, he inherited a Desmond Morton deeply divided country, a treasury near ruin because of over-expansion of rail- ways, and an economy gripped by a brutal depression. By 1948, Canada had emerged unscathed, enriched and almost undivided from the war into spent last summer’s dismal August Canadian Pension Commission. In a the durable prosperity that bred our revising a book called A Short few days of nimble invention, Bennett Baby Boom generation. Who cared if I History of Canada and staring rescued veterans’ benefits from 15 King had halitosis and a professorial across Lake Memphrémagog at the years of political logrolling and talent for boring audiences? astonishing architecture of the Abbaye launched a half century of relatively St-Benoît. Brief as it is, the Short History just and generous dealing. Did anyone ll of which is a lengthy prelude to tries to cover the whole 12,000 years of notice? Do similar achievements lie to A passing premature and imperfect Canadian history but, since most buy- the credit of Jean Chrétien or, for that judgement on Jean Chrétien. Using ers prefer their own life’s history to a matter, Brian Mulroney or Pierre Elliott the same criteria that put King first more extensive past, Jean Chrétien’s Trudeau? Dependent on the media, and Trudeau deep in the pack, where last seven years will get about as much the Opposition and government prop- does Chrétien stand? In 1993, most space as the First Nations’ first dozen aganda, what do I know? Do I refuse to Canadians were still caught in the millennia.
    [Show full text]
  • Favorability – USA 2000
    Catching the Big Wave: Public Opinion Polls and Bandwagons in US and Canadian Elections Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Delton T. Daigle, M.A. Graduate Program in Political Science The Ohio State University 2010 Dissertation Committee: Professor Herbert Weisberg, Advisor Professor Janet M. Box-Steffensmeier Professor Paul Allen Beck Professor Randall B. Ripley i Copyright by Delton T. Daigle 2010 i Abstract For as long as public opinions have generally thought to be known there have been claims made that knowledge of where people stand can impact both the attitudes and behaviors of others. Previous research has had mixed results in identifying and measuring the effects of ―bandwagons‖. This research uses better data and derives tests from contemporary theories of public opinion to show that not only do bandwagons definitively exist, but also that they exist most often among the groups of people we would expect to be influenced by ambient information: those adequately prepared to receive a message but not so sophisticated as to not be influenced by it. This research examines and finds bandwagon effects in four elections total in two different countries (Canada in 2004 and 2006 and the United States in 2000 and 2004) and as such, contributes to the larger scientific endeavor of generalization through comparison. ii Dedication For my patient and loving wife Carolina iii Acknowledgements It only seems natural to begin acknowledgements with recognizing my advisor Herb Weisberg and my committee Jan Box-Steffensmeier, Randall Ripley and Paul Beck, whose patience with how long it took me to defend this project cannot be appreciated more.
    [Show full text]
  • Letter from Canadian Scientists to Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin
    Open Letter to the Right Honorable Paul Martin, Prime Minister of Canada and the Honourable Geoff Regan, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans Canada The Right Honourable Paul Martin Prime Minister’s Office Langevin Block 80 Wellington Street Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A2 613-995-0101 [email protected] The Honourable Geoff Regan Minister of Fisheries and Oceans Canada Minister’s Office, Centennial Tower 200 Kent Street Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0E6 Fax: 613-990-7292 [email protected] October 17th, 2005 Dear Prime Minister Martin and Minister Regan, We urge you to take advantage of a historical opportunity to secure significant protection for the world’s deep-ocean ecosystems on the high seas – the two-thirds of the world’s oceans that lie beyond the jurisdiction of any nation. We are calling on you to exercise Canadian leadership in the negotiation of a moratorium on deep-sea bottom trawl fishing on the high seas at the United Nations General Assembly this year. Supporting a moratorium would address the effects of foreign overfishing of straddling stocks that cross Canada’s EEZ on the Grand Banks of Newfoundland. In addition, such an action would be in keeping with Canada’s national and international commitments to biodiversity protection. We further urge you to take action in Canadian waters, by recognizing the effects of trawling and implementing habitat protection measures, gear restrictions and supporting the use of alternative and less destructive gear types. Both actions would be strongly supported by the Canadian public and Canada would truly be seen as a leader in the global movement to restore, conserve and protect the marine environment.
    [Show full text]
  • The Democratic Deficit: Should This Be Paul Martin's
    THE DEMOCRATIC DEFICIT: SHOULD THIS BE PAUL MARTIN’S NEXT BIG IDEA? Thomas S. Axworthy After successfully erasing Canada’s fiscal deficit as finance minister, Paul Martin has identified “the democratic deficit” as one of the most urgent issues as he becomes prime minister. Thomas Axworthy, Chairman of the Centre for the Study of Democracy at Queen’s University, agrees that Martin has identified three critical issues — low election turnouts by a disengaged public, a lack of accountability in government and relevance of Parliament, and the need for international governance in a globalized economy. Axworthy, himself a former principal secretary to a prime minister, offers some pertinent suggestions on how Martin might flesh out his ideas for eliminating the democratic deficit. Après avoir épongé le déficit public à titre de ministre des Finances, Paul Martin a fait du « déficit démocratique » l’une des questions à régler d’urgence au poste de premier ministre. Avec raison, estime Thomas Axworthy, président du Centre for the Study of Democracy de Queen’s University, pour qui M. Martin a judicieusement identifié trois domaines critiques en la matière : faible participation électorale d’une population désengagée ; imputabilité du gouvernement et pertinence du Parlement ; gouvernance internationale dans une économie mondialisée. Ayant lui-même été premier secrétaire d’un chef de gouvernement, l’auteur y va d’intéressantes suggestions sur les moyens d’étoffer les idées de Paul Martin sur l’élimination de ce déficit démocratique. n an important
    [Show full text]
  • Prime Ministers and Government Spending: a Retrospective by Jason Clemens and Milagros Palacios
    FRASER RESEARCH BULLETIN May 2017 Prime Ministers and Government Spending: A Retrospective by Jason Clemens and Milagros Palacios Summary however, is largely explained by the rapid drop in expenditures following World War I. This essay measures the level of per-person Among post-World War II prime ministers, program spending undertaken annually by each Louis St. Laurent oversaw the largest annual prime minister, adjusting for inflation, since average increase in per-person spending (7.0%), 1870. 1867 to 1869 were excluded due to a lack though this spending was partly influenced by of inflation data. the Korean War. Per-person spending spiked during World Our current prime minister, Justin Trudeau, War I (under Prime Minister Sir Robert Borden) has the third-highest average annual per-per- but essentially returned to pre-war levels once son spending increases (5.2%). This is almost the war ended. The same is not true of World a full percentage point higher than his father, War II (William Lyon Mackenzie King). Per- Pierre E. Trudeau, who recorded average an- person spending stabilized at a permanently nual increases of 4.5%. higher level after the end of that war. Prime Minister Joe Clark holds the record The highest single year of per-person spend- for the largest average annual post-World ing ($8,375) between 1870 and 2017 was in the War II decline in per-person spending (4.8%), 2009 recession under Prime Minister Harper. though his tenure was less than a year. Prime Minister Arthur Meighen (1920 – 1921) Both Prime Ministers Brian Mulroney and recorded the largest average annual decline Jean Chretien recorded average annual per- in per-person spending (-23.1%).
    [Show full text]
  • Paul Martin: Mr
    PAUL MARTIN: MR. PRIME MINISTER Introduction On November 14, 2003, Paul Martin animosity and past political rivalries, Focus finally achieved his long-sought politi- there were also significant political This News in Re- cal goal, winning the leadership of the differences between the Prime Minister view story focuses on Paul Martin, federal Liberal Party. Martin’s cam- and his former finance minister. Canada’s 21st paign to replace retiring Jean Chrétien Chrétien liked to portray himself as “the prime minister, resulted in a very strong finish, as he little guy from Shawinigan,” the popu- who replaced Jean won over 90 per cent of the voting list who represented the Liberal Party’s Chrétien December delegates at the party’s Toronto conven- left, or progressive, wing. Martin was 12, 2003. It exam- tion. Heritage Minister Sheila Copps, widely perceived as a “Bay Street ines Martin’s political back- his one rival for the top job after John Liberal,” closely connected with big ground, his leader- Manley quit the race in July 2003, was business and leaning toward “small-c” ship campaign, his only able to gain a handful of votes. In conservative positions on social and stormy relationship his acceptance speech to the delegates, economic policies. As an example of with Chrétien, and Martin pledged himself to ensuring a this, Martin’s proudest boast during his what his rise to power will mean fourth consecutive Liberal victory in the successful leadership campaign was for Canadian next federal election, widely expected that he had almost single-handedly politics in the early in the spring of 2004.
    [Show full text]
  • LOUIS ST-LAURENT When Governments Got Things Done
    MARCH 2021 The Legacy of LOUIS ST-LAURENT When governments got things done Also INSIDE: An Israel-Iran Canada’s lacklustre Crisis in academic Solving the Maritime peace deal? COVID response freedom fishery dispute 1 PublishedPublished by by the the Macdonald-Laurier Macdonald-Laurier Institute Institute PublishedBrianBrian Lee LeeBrianby Crowley, Crowley,the Lee Macdonald-Laurier Crowley,Managing Managing Managing Director, Director, Director [email protected] [email protected] Institute David Watson,JamesJames DeputyAnderson, Anderson, Managing Managing Managing Director, Editor, Editor, Editorial Inside Inside Policy and Policy Operations Brian Lee Crowley, Managing Director, [email protected] David McDonough, Deputy Editor James Anderson,ContributingContributing Managing writers:Editor, writers: Inside Policy Contributing writers: ThomasThomas S. S.Axworthy Axworthy PastAndrewAndrew contributors Griffith Griffith BenjaminBenjamin Perrin Perrin Thomas S. Axworthy Andrew Griffith Benjamin Perrin Mary-Jane BennettDonaldDonald Barry Barry Jeremy DepowStanleyStanley H. H. Hartt HarttMarcus Kolga MikeMike J.Priaro Berkshire Priaro Miller Massimo BergaminiDonald Barry Peter DeVries Stanley H. HarttAudrey Laporte Mike Priaro Jack Mintz Derek BurneyKenKen Coates Coates Brian Dijkema PaulPaul Kennedy KennedyBrad Lavigne ColinColin RobertsonRobert Robertson P. Murphy Ken Coates Paul Kennedy Colin Robertson Charles Burton Ujjal Dosanjh Ian Lee Dwight Newman BrianBrian Lee Lee Crowley Crowley AudreyAudrey Laporte Laporte RogerRoger Robinson Robinson Catherine
    [Show full text]
  • Working Paper
    No. 10-52 September 2010 WORKING PAPER CANADA’S BUDGET TRIUMPH By David R. Henderson The ideas presented in this research are the author’s and do not represent official positions of the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. 1 Canada’s Budget Triumph David R. Henderson* Introduction A federal government runs a large deficit. Deficits are so large that the ratio of federal debt to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) approaches 70 percent. A constituency of voters have gotten used to large federal spending programs. Does that sound like the United States? Well, yes. But it also describes Canada in 1993. Yet, just 16 years later, Canada’s federal debt had fallen from 67 percent to only 29 percent of GDP. Moreover, in every year between 1997 and 2008, Canada’s federal government had a budget surplus. In one fiscal year, 2000–2001, its surplus was a whopping 1.8 percent of GDP. If the U.S. government had such a surplus today, that would amount to a cool $263 billion rather than the current deficit of more than $1.5 trillion. We often think of Canada as a more-socialist and higher-tax country than the United States, and for good reason: to some extent it’s true. For instance, Canada has a single-payer health care system, no private universities, and a five-percent federal tax on goods and services. So, what happened? How did the Canadian government do it? You might think that the Canadian government achieved the budget surplus by 2000–2001 with major increases in taxes, but it didn’t.
    [Show full text]