Canada's Federal budget: anchors aweigh

Justin Trudeau became Prime Minister of Canada in October 2015 partly on a promise to run small fiscal deficits for just a few years in order to boost the economy.  There was always supposed to be a plan to move the budget back into balance, and in the meantime the debt/GDP ratio would serve as a backstop fiscal anchor to keep deficits and debt from getting out of hand. It became clear quite quickly that the deficits would be bigger and more persistent than Trudeau had intimated -- and then came the COVID crisis, to which the government quite correctly responded by hugely boosting spending and the deficit. 

As the threat from COVID eased, the budget deficit began to fall quite rapidly, but in the last couple of years Trudeau and his Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland have made it clear that they have no intention of reining in the government's finances. The 2024 Federal budget, unveiled by Freeland on Wednesday, indicates that all of the fiscal checks and balances promised back in 2015 have been abandoned.

You can read a summary of the government's proposals here. As promised in Trudeau's pre-budget cross-Canada tour, there is heavy emphasis on measures to boost housing availability and affordability  -- in effect, attempting to solve problems that have in large measure been created by the government's own out of control immigration policies.  There are a few revenue-raising measures, of which the most significant is a boost in capital gains taxes. This is supposed to raise something like C$ 20 billion, even though it is targeted only at the wealthiest 0.13 percent (really!) of taxpayers.

The end result of this is a string of deficits stretching out over the usual five-year planning horizon. The deficit for the just completed fiscal year 2023/24 was C$ 40.0 billion. It is projected to be remarkably sticky this year and next, at C$ 39.8 billion in FY 2024/25 and C$ 38.9 billion in FY 2025/26.  After that, the deficit magically starts to fall much faster, but even by the end of the planning period, FY 2028/29, it is still projected to be C$ 20.0 billion. Every single one of these numbers is higher than was projected in the Fall Economic Statement back in November. And the fact that the deficits seem to fall faster in the "out years" is of course completely bogus, with an election due by October 2025 at the latest. We seem to be back to the kind of budgetary forecasting that got Canada into a fiscal mess under Tory governments back in the 1990s.

There is nothing wrong with deficit financing in principle. The idea that deficits always cause inflation is wrong; so is the idea that government financing needs "crowd out" private sector borrowers. And anyone who followed the ill-fated austerity approach followed by the UK government after the global financial crisis surely knows that you can never correct a budget deficit by squeezing the economy. The only true constraint on the economy is the availability of real resources, be they labour, capital goods or raw materials. As Keynes famously put it, "anything we can do, we can afford".

That's precisely the issue here. The Bank of Canada has had to keep interest rates uncomfortably high for a long time because the economy has been running very close to full capacity, or full resource utilization if you prefer. Bank Governor Tiff Macklem has subtly suggested more than once that high  government spending has made the task of reducing inflation much harder than it needed to be. 

It's arguable that the recent uptick in the unemployment rate has eased some of those concerns, something the Bank has acknowledged in its policy pronouncements.  However, it is not clear that the pool of available workers, which largely consists of new arrivals and job-seeking college graduates, matches the current needs of the economy. To take just one example, the budget's commitment to build over 3 million homes by 2031 is going to require an awful lot of skilled construction workers. It is not at all clear where those people will be found. 

Announcing its most recent monetary policy decision, the Bank of Canada projected that the economy would start to move out of its recent mini-slump after mid-year. As a result, the small amount of excess supply that has emerged over the past several months will quickly be eliminated, which would serve to put a floor under just how low the Bank can lower interest rates without reviving inflationary pressures. This Federal budget, which has been roundly condemned by such worthies as former Finance Minister Bill Morneau and former Bank of Canada Governor David Dodge, looks certain to continue to make the Bank's job more difficult in the coming years.

What a choice Canadians face when the election finally rolls around. The abrasive Tory leader Pierre Poilievre and his seriously inexperienced team, or the experienced but reckless Trudeau/Freeland combo. Polls say the election is Poilievre's to lose, and there does not seem to be much in the budget to change that. 

Canada CPI: could have been worse

The sharp snap-back in US CPI for March that was reported last week led to concerns that Canada might see a similar unwelcome development when its own data were released. Today Statistics Canada reported that inflation did indeed tick higher in March, but much less sharply than in the US. Headline CPI rose 2.9 percent from a year ago, up from the 2.8 percent recorded in February, thus staying just below the upper limit of the Bank of Canada's target range.   

The data have led to a sigh of relief in financial markets, on the basis that a rate cut in June remains "within the realm of possibility", as Bank of Canada Governor Tiff Macklem put it last week. But before we look at the details of today's report, it is worth noting that the month-to-month changes tell a less hopeful story than the year-on-year figures do.  Before seasonal adjustment, CPI rose 0.6 percent from February to March, while the seasonally adjusted index rose 0.3 percent. If the Bank is looking for evidence that the deceleration in CPI is being sustained, these numbers do not provide it. 

In terms of the main contributors to the rise in CPI, we are yet again looking at the usual suspects: shelter costs and gasoline prices. Shelter costs are up 6.5 percent from a year ago, with rents 8.5 percent higher and mortgage interest costs up 25.4 percent. That last number is within the direct ambit of the Bank of Canada, but the overall increase in shelter costs is also heavily influenced by the very rapid, largely immigration-driven increase in Canada's population. 

Gasoline prices rose 4.5 percent in March, mainly in response to international developments, to stand 4.9 percent higher than a year ago. With international tensions ratcheting yet higher, gas prices are set to boost headline CPI again in April. On top of that there is also the increase in the Federal carbon tax, which took effect on April 1, to be reckoned with, though it is noticeable at least in my local area that that increase does not seem to have had much impact on prices at the pumps.

Turning to the widely-followed special aggregates, we find that almost all core measures -- ex food, ex energy, ex gasoline, ex food and energy -- have all slipped just below 3 percent. Goods prices are up just 1.1 percent from a year ago, but services prices have risen 4.5 percent, which will be a concern for the Bank of Canada.  The Bank's own preferred gauges of core inflation all edged lower in March, with their mean level now standing just below 3 percent. These numbers all seem to support the notion that a rate cut could some as soon as June 5. 

With the inflation numbers out of the way, attention now turns to the Federal budget, set to be tabled later this afternoon. We await this with less than bated breath, since PM Trudeau has spent the last several weeks gallivanting about the country making extravagant spending promises, mostly relating to housing. The only surprise left for Finance Minister Freeland to unveil is whether she will be raising taxes in order to avoid ballooning the deficit. (Spoiler alert: probably).

The Bank of Canada will be watching the budget closely, of course.  Governor Macklem has hinted several times that public spending is serving to boost the economy, which obviously makes it harder for the Bank to get inflation down and start cutting interest rates. With the government clearly gearing up for an election, Macklem's message seems likely to fall on deaf ears.

Bank of Canada: we're getting there

As expected, the Bank of Canada kept its overnight rate target unchanged at 5.0 percent today. The media release was rather longer than usual, reflecting the fact that the Bank also issued an updated Monetary Policy Report. Based on the media release and Governor Macklem's subsequent comments, most analysts believe that a rate cut in June is still probable, but the latest inflation developments in the US may yet delay things. 

Key quotes from the media release include:

• The Bank has revised up its forecast for global GDP growth to 2¾% in 2024 and about 3% in 2025 and 2026. Inflation continues to slow across most advanced economies, although progress will likely be bumpy. Inflation rates are projected to reach central bank targets in 2025. 
• In Canada, economic growth stalled in the second half of last year and the economy moved into excess supply.....the unemployment rate has risen gradually, reaching 6.1% in March. There are some recent signs that wage pressures are moderating.
• Economic growth is forecast to pick up in 2024. This largely reflects both strong population growth and a recovery in spending by households.......Overall, the Bank forecasts GDP growth of 1.5% in 2024, 2.2% in 2025, and 1.9% in 2026. The strengthening economy will gradually absorb excess supply through 2025 and into 2026.
• CPI inflation slowed to 2.8% in February.....However, shelter price inflation is still very elevated, driven by growth in rent and mortgage interest costs. Core measures of inflation....slowed to just over 3% in February, and 3-month annualized rates are suggesting downward momentum. The Bank expects CPI inflation to be close to 3% during the first half of this year, move below 2½% in the second half, and reach the 2% inflation target in 2025.

All in all, this sounds very much like the soft landing that the Bank and its peers around the world have been striving to achieve.  Even so, the Bank is not quite ready to commit to a rate-cutting cycle just yet. As the media release puts it, and as Governor Macklem repeated in his comments after the rate announcement, "While inflation is still too high and risks remain, CPI and core inflation have eased further in recent months. The Council will be looking for evidence that this downward momentum is sustained".  Analysts' interpretation of this is generally that the Bank just needs to see "more of the same" before it starts cutting rates. It will have two more months of CPI and employment data to hand by the next rate announcement date on June 5, and that data will be crucial to its decision.

The importance of ensuring that progress against inflation is "sustained" is underscored by the US CPI data for March, released just ahead of the Bank of Canada's announcement this morning. Headline CPI jumped to 3.5 percent year-on-year from February's 3.2 percent reading, driven by shelter and gasoline costs, while core CPI stands at 3.8 percent year-on-year.  The data drove US markets sharply lower and led many analysts to all but rule out any possibility of a Fed rate cut in June.

There is no direct link between US and Canadian inflation, but gasoline and shelter costs are a big part of the index in both countries. A similar nasty shock in Canada's CPI in the next month or two, most likely due to gasoline prices, cannot be ruled out.  There is no doubt that the Bank of Canada would like to get started on an easing cycle, with the Canadian economy notably underperforming the US in recent months, but the data could yet derail expectations for a June rate cut. 

Disturbing data divergence

Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics show that US employment rose by 303,000 in March, far surpassing economists' expectations. (Details here).  This has triggered the usual debate among media pundits about why US voters still seem to have such a negative view of the economy. The answer this month, as it has been for the last year and more, is inflation. In a low unemployment economy, almost no-one is concerned about losing their job, but everyone sees that prices are much higher than they were before the "transitory" inflation spike began.  We can but live in hope that the media will figure this out eventually.

Meanwhile in Canada, the March data tell a very different story. According to Statistics Canada, the economy actually lost a little over 2000 jobs in March. This is well within the standard error of the estimate -- remember, this is a survey, not a complete count -- but it comes at a time when the labour force is still growing at an extraordinary pace. Canada's population grew by 90,000 in March, to stand more than 1,040,000 higher than a year earlier.  The labour force grew by 57,000 in March and is now 570,000 larger than a year ago.

Looking at these numbers in percentage terms, we find that even with the marginal decline in March, employment has grown by 1.6 percent in the past year, by no means a bad number.  However, this is far outpaced by the growth in population -- up 3.2 percent from a year ago -- and the labour force, up 2.7 percent in the same time period. It is thus no surprise to find that the employment rate has been going down -- it now stands at 61.4 percent, down 0.9  percentage points from a year ago -- and the unemployment rate has been steadily rising. That rate jumped 0.3 percentage points in March to hit 6.1 percent, a full percentage point higher than it was a year ago.

The Bank of Canada will not want to react too much to a single data point, especially given the notorious volatility of Canadian job statistics. However, today's data will certainly add to the growing calls for the Bank to make an early start on the much-anticipated rate cutting cycle. One problem there: wage growth actually ticked slightly higher in March, to 5.1 percent year-on-year, an uncomfortably high number given Canada's very poor productivity performance. The first rate cut is still not likely to materialize before June, but it looks likely that the Bank will have to cut more aggressively than the Fed, which will probably put pressure on the exchange rate.

The rising unemployment rate is not good news for Justin Trudeau, who has been whirling around Canada like a dervish, announcing major new spending ahead of the April 16 budget. This week he directly addressed the impact of high immigration levels, telling an audience in Nova Scotia that the growth in "temporary" immigration has been "far beyond what Canada has been able to absorb". Wow!  If only there was someone out there in a position to see that coming and do something about it -- you know, a Prime Minister or something such. 

Epoch-eclipse now

Just five days to go for the arrival of the solar eclipse, which will be visible from western Mexico to eastern Canada on April 8. Weather permitting, it really should be a once-in-a-lifetime show, and the hype machines are gearing up accordingly.

My little town will be in the area of totality for just over three minutes near mid-afternoon. So will Niagara Falls, twenty minutes drive from us (though probably not on April 8), and in keeping with its over-the-top money-grabbing ethos, that little city is pulling out all the stops. The chief carnival barker, Mayor Jim Diodati, is telling everyone who will listen that he is expecting one million people to show up.

I'm not sure why Diodati or anyone else would imagine that watching it in Niagara Falls will somehow make the eclipse more exciting.  Plenty of other less glitzy towns in the area -- Buffalo, NY or Hamilton, ON for example -- will get exactly the same celestial show. It's also not clear how Diodati figures his city can accommodate anything like a million people. Have you ever been? Its permanent population is less than 90,000 and the tourist area, which is presumably where all the visitors will try to go, is really quite small -- basically it's a kilometre or two along the edge of the Niagara River, plus the incomparably tacky Clifton Hill, which makes the Las Vegas strip look like the Uffizi gallery. 

There are going to be extra trains to bring people down from Toronto, but this being Canada, there will only be three of them, and a quick back-of-the envelope calculation suggests they will be able to accommodate fewer than 10,000 people even with crush loads. So most of Diodati's million will be coming by car. At four persons per car, that suggests there will be 250,000 vehicles converging on the city. 

There's only one expressway to Niagara Falls, and it's busy at the best of times. Even for those who do make it into town, there is nowhere to park that many cars. And even if you do find parking, there is no way the tourist area can accommodate the people.  Total visitor numbers to the Canadian side of the Falls were about 13 million in 2022. That was a COVID year so the numbers may be higher now, but that equates to about 40,000 per day -- and as anyone who has ever visited can attest, the tourist area is always packed. 

Has Mayor Diodati though this through? What's your guess?  However, the very strong likelihood is that potential visitors have thought it through, and that many of them will think better of it, resulting in crowds that are just a fraction of the numbers Diodati is counting on.  That said, it's still going to be a zoo, and I won't be going any further than my south-facing driveway that day. 

UPDATE, 9 April: The first official estimate is that a total of 200,000 visitors took in the eclipse in the Niagara region, which is about 30 miles long. That's a far cry from Diodati's one million in Niagara Falls alone. There were maybe 100,000 in that city.  How many people were put off by Diodati's insane prediction?  Not that they missed much -- overcast skies across the area throughout the eclipse. And since I haven't stooped to this before, allow me to point out that an anagram of Diodati is "da idiot".

Canada's economy starts the year strong

Canada's economy has started 2024 on a remarkably strong note. Data released today by Statistics Canada show that real GDP grew 0.6 percent in January, the fastest monthly reading since January 2023.  The December GDP  data, originally reported as flat, were revised to a 0.1 percent decline, largely reflecting the impact of public sector strikes in Quebec, and January's strength partly reflects the end of those strikes. However, that was not the only important factor; growth in January was very broad-based, with eighteen of the twenty sub-sectors tracked by StatsCan recording higher output. 

Evidence that the strong report for January is not just a rebound effect is provided by the preliminary estimate for GDP growth for February. StatsCan estimates that real GDP grew a further 0.4 percent in the month, and once again the expansion appears to have been broad-based, with gains in extraction industries, manufacturing and finance. 

In short, although the economy only barely avoided a technical recession in the second half of 2023, prospects for the current year appear to be rather brighter than either both policymakers and business economists had been predicting. The Federal budget is set for April 16, and it will be interesting to see whether Finance Minister Freeland's fiscal projections are amended at all in light of the rise in revenues that faster GDP growth is likely to produce.  The stronger GDP data are also welcome news in the context of the falling per capita GDP that has resulted from high immigration rates.  Lastly, today's data arguably give the Bank of Canada more time to decide on when to start cutting interest rates, but a first move in June still seems the likeliest outcome. 

Bank of Canada goes political

It's customary for central banks to stay away from political issues as much as they possibly can, and the Bank of Canada is generally scrupulous about this.  However, there have been signs in recent times that the Bank is somewhat frustrated at the fact that its efforts to reduce inflation are being offset by the fiscal incontinence of PM Trudeau and Finance Minister Freeland.

Now, with the Federal budget a month away and an election likely in the next year or so, the Bank seems to be going quite a bit further. In a remarkable speech in Halifax NS today, Senior Deputy Governor Carolyn Rogers addressed "The Productivity Problem".  It has been well-known for many years that Canada's productivity performance is much worse than that of most other developed countries, with Italy the sole exception. Ms Rogers sees the solution in more focused education, better integration of skilled immigrants into the workforce, heightened competition and much higher business investment -- "In fact, investment levels have decreased over the past decade".

Objectively speaking, all of this is almost indisputable, but it is hard to argue that any of it falls within the remit of the Bank as it is generally understood.  It is almost inevitable that opposition leader Pierre Poilievre will seize on the Bank's analysis to further his pre-election campaigning, and it is hard to deny him the right to do so, given that he has already been making many of the same points himself. 

So what is the Bank up to?  It is unlikely that Trudeau and Freeland will be pleased at what Ms Rogers said. It is easy to pin the blame on a Government that has been in power for the better part of a decade -- note again the above quote about falling investment, and keep in mind that the government has seen fit to boost immigration to an extraordinary degree without even the semblance of a plan to help the newcomers to integrate and contribute. As for Poilievre, he has been a regular critic of the Bank, but it hardly seems likely that the Bank is now trying to ingratiate itself with him in case he gets elected.

All in all, it's a worthwhile speech that will justifiably trigger plenty of debate. The mystery is why it came from the Bank of Canada rather than one of the private-sector think tanks.