Our Advocacy
We have been the voice of business in Grande Prairie & District for more than a hundred years!
2023 National Policy Resolution
The Grande Prairie & District Chamber of Commerce has submitted the following policy resolution to the Canadian Chamber of Commerce:
"Flexible Solutions to Address the Gap in Immigration Biometric Services"
The Issue
Strong rural economies mean a stronger Canada. Immigration plays a crucial role in growing Canada’s economy and is especially vital for rural communities to grow populations and fill labour shortages. Yet current policy regarding immigration biometric services, a requirement of the immigration process, places undue hardship on applicants in some rural or northern areas in Canada, requiring them to travel long distances and bear the associated travel costs to access this service. Such policy is neither aligned with the federal government’s commitment to address systemic inequities in core institutions and policy development nor its concerted efforts to remove barriers to newcomer attraction and retention in rural Canada.
Our Recommendation
That the Government of Canada:
1. Amend Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) policy to expand the list of eligible providers of immigration biometric services for applicants within Canada, taking into consideration those organizations outside the public sector that are fully accredited organizations through the RCMP's Canadian Criminal Real Time identification Services (CCRTIS), to fill this gap in service across Canada.
This submission will be debated and voted on by Chambers from across the country during the Canadian Chamber of Commerce 2023 AGM & Convention: Energizing Canada's Future on October 13-14 in Calgary.
Sponsor: Grande Prairie & District Chamber of Commerce
Flexible Solutions to Address the Gap in Immigration Biometric Services
Issue
Strong rural economies mean a stronger Canada. Immigration plays a crucial role in growing Canada’s economy and is especially vital for rural communities to grow populations and fill labour shortages. Yet current policy regarding immigration biometric services, a requirement of the immigration process, places undue hardship on applicants in some rural or northern areas in Canada, requiring them to travel long distances and bear the associated travel costs to access this service. Such policy is neither aligned with the federal government’s commitment to address systemic inequities in core institutions and policy development [i] nor its concerted efforts to remove barriers to newcomer attraction and retention in rural Canada.
Background
Many applicants for immigration to Canada, or for a work permit, study permit or visitor status (including extensions), are required by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) to provide biometrics. Data collected includes electronic fingerprints, digital photograph and biographical data (note: this is not a criminal record check). As of June 14, 2023, updated IRCC policy now requires that anyone applying for permanent residence (PR) must submit biometrics, regardless of if they have previously submitted them (during the pandemic, PR applicants did not have resubmit biometrics if they had submitted biometrics with a temporary resident application within the past decade).
As per IRCC policy, applicants who are applying from within Canada must attend their pre-booked appointment in-person at a designated Service Canada location. The issue is that not all Service Canada offices are authorized to offer immigration biometrics to in-Canada applicants, and those offices not providing this service are predominantly in rural and/or northern Canada. Further compounding the issue is that current IRCC policy does not allow biometric services for in-Canada immigration applicants to be provided outside of Service Canada.[ii]
As a result, some applicants are required to travel, in some cases great distances over multiple days, to access immigration biometric services. They (or an employer willing to absorb the cost) must expend additional funds for travel costs such as hotels, food, gas and time off work. Limited access to public transportation in many rural communities restricts travel options.
Existing literature cites a number of barriers experienced by newcomers in rural areas, including difficulty accessing settlement services due to lack of services, as well as lack of transportation.[iii] These barriers contribute to the economic and social marginalization of newcomers. They also create challenges for the many rural communities and businesses relying on immigration for unmet labour needs, population growth and long-term resilience.
According to the 2022 IRCC annual report, immigration accounts for as much as 90% of labour force growth in Canada and approximately 75% of population growth.[iv] As the large majority of immigrants to Canada settle in urban areas, the Government of Canada is offering several economic initiatives to attract talent to small and medium sized communities and rural areas to help local businesses fill labour shortages. However, Action Canada research found that while these programs have shown success in attracting growing numbers of immigrants, newcomer retention in these communities remains a challenge due to the unique barriers to immigration settlement in rural communities.[v]
The following are two examples of regions in Canada without biometric services for immigration. As key contributors to their provincial and national economies, both regions are actively targeting global markets to grow their workforce:
1) The Grande Prairie region, including the City of Grande Prairie (pop. 70,000), with its abundance of natural resources and growing economy, is actively recruiting an international workforce to fill labour shortages. The City’s Service Canada, however, does not offer immigration biometric services; applicants must make an approximately 1000 km, two-day round trip to Service Canada in Edmonton to access this service, which currently costs $85 per individual. 2) In northern British Columbia, the busiest area of the province due to major construction projects, a global workforce is critical to help fill acute labour shortages. Yet in the City of Fort St. John, for example, to give immigration biometrics, applicants must make a nearly 900 km round trip to Service Canada in Prince George.
The Ministry (IRCC) states “factors involved in selecting biometric service sites include the physical capacity of a given Service Canada location to take on a new service line; the volume of IRCC clients in a geographic area; driving distances between Service Canada locations offering biometric enrolment; and, distances that IRCC clients need to travel to get to the Service Canada location offering biometric enrolments closest to them.” Further, with respect to one of the above examples, the Ministry states that the Edmonton [Service Canada] office was chosen to serve the Grande Prairie region to “minimize the distance to the nearest location for clients.” The excessive travel requirements for the growing number of clients requiring this service do not align with the rationale provided by IRCC regarding how they chose their immigration biometric sites.
Realizing new opportunities in the private sector
As the Government of Canada seeks “to further adapt and develop more agile and effective ways to service Canadians,”[vi] Canada’s private sector offers an opportunity to help fill this gap in biometric services without creating an extra burden for taxpayers. Within the private sector, companies that are accredited through the RCMP's Canadian Criminal Real Time identification Services (CCRTIS) are providing biometric services for civil purposes. (Note: There are no private fingerprinting companies accredited by the RCMP outside of Canada.)
The CCRTIS Program assesses the security and administrative operations of companies that intend to take fingerprints for non criminal purposes. Upon completion of the accreditation process, companies are certified to operate as an affiliate of The Canadian Corps of Commissionaires and authorized to submit electronic fingerprint transactions (non criminal purposes) to CCRTIS via The Canadian Corps of Commissionaires' server. The accreditation process is robust and periodic audits are in place to ensure the integrity of the Program. A company’s accreditation, however, does not authorize it to provide immigration biometrics.
Flexible, innovative, affordable and inclusive solutions
The June 2019 House of Commons report on improving settlement services across Canada, by the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, highlights the need to remove barriers to settlement services and programs in rural communities across Canada. [vii] The report cites the requirement for flexible and innovative solutions to help attract and retain immigrants in rural communities.
Amending and adapting immigration biometrics policy with consideration to the unique immigration challenges facing rural and more remote communities and to the opportunity that currently exists within the private sector to address service gaps, promotes more equitable and accessible services for all, regardless of location. As Canada’s population ages and birthrates decline, innovative, inclusive and affordable policy solutions supporting the long term integration and retention needs of immigrants in rural and northern communities are critical to helping businesses meet labour needs and ensuring a more productive and resilient economy for Canada.
Recommendation:
That the Government of Canada:
Amend Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) policy to expand the list of eligible providers of immigration biometric services for applicants within Canada, taking into consideration those organizations outside the public sector that are fully accredited organizations through the RCMP's Canadian Criminal Real Time identification Services (CCRTIS), to fill this gap in service across Canada.
[ii] A few exemptions apply. https://www.cic.gc.ca/english/information/where-to-give-biometrics.asp
[iii] https://www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Committee/421/CIMM/Reports/RP10577155/cimmrp26/cimmrp26-e.pdf
[iv] https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/publications-manuals/annual-report-parliament-immigration-2022.html#highlights
[v] https://actioncanada.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Settling-Unsettled-ENG-FINAL-WEB.pdf
Email, June 15, 2023 from S. Charbonneau, IRCC Ministerial Enquiries Division to A. Reimer
[vi] https://pm.gc.ca/en/mandate-letters/2021/12/16/minister-veterans-affairs-and-associate-minister-national-defence?fbclid=IwAR2I1LOAXtRCqOGxOOenZZ9olJJghFVrFC3E5gAUTq1pYKzNhSxDYA55j3Y
[vii] https://www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Committee/421/CIMM/Reports/RP10577155/cimmrp26/cimmrp26-e.pdf
2023 Provincial Policy Resolutions
Our Chamber sponsored or co-sponsored the following policy resolutions which were approved by the Alberta Chambers of Commerce (ACC) network at the 2023 ACC Annual General Meeting and Policy Session in Fort McMurray.
Policies are shared with government officials for follow up and discussion with the goal of eventual implementation based on the recommendations of our network. Policy development is based on feedback from our member businesses.
Investment Attraction for Industrial Zones
Issue
In order for Alberta to compete on the global stage, we need to address issues such as regulatory uncertainty and cost competitiveness so that industry has the tools it needs to maintain a competitive advantage and so that the province and regions can attract new investment opportunities.
Background
The concept of cluster development was introduced in Michael E. Porter’s paper, The Competitive Advantage of Nations published in the Harvard Business Review in the March-April 1990 edition.130 This paper references a study that aimed to determine the differentiating factors in what makes a country successfully competitive on the global scale. It consisted of a detailed, four-year analysis of 10 different countries with different cultures, strategies, and success in various industries. The paper discusses four Determinants of National Competitive Advantage: Firm Strategy, Structure, and Rivalry; Demand Conditions; Factor conditions; and Related and Supporting Industries (p.77). The last determinant references, in essence, cluster development.
Since the time of Porter’s paper, there have been numerous other studies and papers written on the subject. Ultimately, there has been a general consensus on the definition of cluster development as:
“...clusters are widely acknowledged as a type of activity-specific system, situated within broader regional innovation systems, where interaction between actors supports quicker diffusion and absorption of knowledge, more effective innovation and efficient solutions to a range of other localized drivers of competitiveness”. (Wilson et al., 2022).131
This discussion has spurred many local and regionalized innovation hubs and is the underlying basis of the Designated Industrial Zone (DIZ) concept. If there are related businesses located in close proximity to one another with the benefits of regulatory streamlining, there is an increased likelihood of those businesses experiencing a successful outcome.
In 2022, the Alberta Government announced that it would move forward with a Designated Industrial Zone pilot in Alberta’s Industrial Heartland. This project was contingent on six critical factors: formal agreement, coordinated zoning, target size and scale, cluster infrastructure, harmonized permitting, and environmental management. The Industrial Heartland is located in Central Alberta, spread across five municipalities covering a total area of 592km2, and is primarily focused on the petrochemical industry.
Given that Alberta’s Industrial Heartland is the first government partnership of its kind, it can be referred to as a model for future zones. The petrochemical industry was an obvious starting place for the province’s first DIZ as the region had already been identified as a priority for the province132 and industrial development in the region was already taking place. The petrochemical sector accounts for approximately one-third of Alberta's total manufacturing exports, producing 27% of Canada’s chemical output. Contributing $6.8 Billion to the provincial GDP and $6 Billion in exports, Alberta has modern, world-scale plants with access to abundant resource feedstock and efficient transportation systems. There is significant potential for investors who are interested in taking advantage of Alberta’s vast energy resources and new government development programs to build new petrochemical plants in the province.
In addition, industrial manufacturing is a foundational industry that supports infrastructure development as well as energy and natural resource production in Alberta. With world-class expertise and access to global supply chains, Alberta’s industrial manufacturing sector delivers high-value products and services across Canada and around the world. Alberta’s industrial manufacturing industry has key strengths that make the industry competitive and positioned for growth with $2.6 Billion in GDP and $1.3 B in exports, there is opportunity to expand this sector.133
There are environmental considerations that must be noted with such a large area focused on the development of these two important industries. The provincial government has committed to responsible energy development and a sensible approach to environmental protection. In an effort to achieve balance, the Alberta government is actively updating its environmental strategy to address topsoil management guidelines, air emissions requirements, water quality management, environmental assessments, and financial or human resources for implementing environmental management programs134 within the DIZ.
In terms of economic development for the region and the province, EY completed an Economic Impact Study on Alberta’s Industrial Heartland, released in July of 2019135. In terms of the provincial direct, indirect, and induced economic impacts, the combined operational expenditures in the region resulted in $4.476 billion in output, meaning the “total economic activity of new goods and services because of activities occurring within a particular area”. Furthermore, there was more than $1.756 billion in GDP, $1.594 billion in wages, and the equivalent of 23,213 FTEs (p.35) in one year. The capital expenditures over the period of 2017-2020 resulted in $17.243 in output, $10.500 in GDP, and 7,935 FTEs resulting in $1.581 in wages. With a provincial and regional collaboration, there is an expectation that the additional resources put toward streamlining regulation and shared infrastructure while mitigating environmental impacts will contribute to an increase in the measurable economic impact for the region and the province.
While Alberta’s Industrial Heartland is primarily comprised of petrochemical operations, there should be a focus on developing DIZs supporting the development of other industries across the province. The streamlining of provincial regulations is a critical piece to the success of a DIZ and the organizations located within it, and therefore any provincial policy should reflect the niche organizations within the specific DIZ. As referenced by Porter (1998) “The aim of cluster policy is to reinforce the development of all clusters.” "Governments should not choose among clusters, because each one offers opportunities to improve productivity and support rising wages.”136
Given both the studied success of cluster developments in addition to the demonstrated benefit within the Province of Alberta, it is apparent that there is an advantage to cluster development with streamlined regulations within a designated region. Therefore, it should be a goal of the government to facilitate the development of additional designated industrial zones in the province.
The Alberta Chambers of Commerce recommends the Government of Alberta:
- Work with municipalities to clarify the process of obtaining an industrial zone designation in support of expanding the number of industrial zones across our province;
- Assist and facilitate qualifying municipalities to better understand the requirements associated with streamlining regulatory approvals;
- Create a "concierge service" for large industrial projects to remove barriers and guide them through the permitting and regulatory processes while requiring high standards for safety and environmental performance;
- Provide investment attraction support programs with fair and equitable opportunity to any company that meets the eligibility criteria in alignment with existing economic development partners.
130 Porter, M. E. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/1990/03/thecompetitive-advantage-of-nations
131 Wilson, J., Wise, E. & Smith, M. (2022). Evidencing the benefits of cluster policies: towards a generalised framework of effects. Policy Sciences, 55, 369-391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-022-09460-8
132 https://investalberta.ca/industry-profiles/petrochemicals/
133 https://investalberta.ca/industry-profiles/industrial-manufacturing/
134 https://www.alberta.ca/industrial-heartland-designated-industrial-zone.aspx
135 https://industrialheartland.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/EYLLP_AIH_EconomicImpactStudy.pdf
136 Porter, M. E. (1998). Clusters and the new economics of competition. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/1998/11/clusters- and-the-new-economics-of-competition
Progressive Regulations to Promote Clean Technology and District Energy
The Issue
Alberta regulations are lagging in making renewable energy and clean technology feasible for consumers. Specifically, the Province’s micro-generation regulations restrict Alberta businesses from aggregating sites owned by customers, in turn restricting their ability to generate and distribute any excess energy directly to other buildings or compound residence (district energy). Adapting provincial regulations to promote self-generation with clean technology and district energy sources is an important climate change strategy for Alberta, and an opportunity to reduce costs and improve competitiveness for Alberta businesses.
Background
Rising demand for electricity in Alberta
Locally and globally, there is an increasing need for electricity, due to a growing demand for air conditioning, electric heating, and electrified transportation, for example. Growing electricity demand will result in higher delivery and electricity prices: upgrades to infrastructure and construction of generation will be necessary, resulting in costs being passed on to consumers.
In Canada, communities account for 60 percent of total energy consumption and half of Canada’s emissions – making them key players in our country’s goal to reduce emissions. And while carbon based fuels will likely remain an important part of our energy system for decades, Alberta has an opportunity to better utilize our fossil fuels by improving the way we use our existing energy sources while transitioning to low and zero emission solutions that are available right now, such as district energy systems.
What is district energy (DE)
District energy systems (DES) use a central energy plant to provide efficient heating, cooling, hot water and power to a group of buildings. Modern systems (climate-resilient and low-carbon) are one of the least-cost and most efficient solutions in reducing emissions and primary energy demand.148 These systems use alternative energy sources, such as wood waste, sewer heat or waste heat, captured from other processes. Typically, DE is almost fully consumed by consumers within that compound, building or subdivision; excess electricity is sold to the grid.
Benefits
DES have a number of benefits that support communities and business:
More cost effective.
Serving many customers from one location, DES have lower operations and maintenance costs than buildings with in-building heating systems. Buildings connected to DES have lower capital costs and smaller footprints and, as such, fewer associated costs (insurance, maintenance, upgrade, etc.).
Reduced carbon footprint.
DES use alternative energy sources and have greater efficiency, producing fewer greenhouse gas emissions than fossil fuel-based systems.
Viable, reliable and readily available technology.
DES are proven technologies, and are already in place in other parts of Canada and around the world.149
Reliable access to energy.
Increasingly faced with electricity brownouts or blackouts from ice, snow and wind storms, floods and fires, low carbon technologies like DES can add to Albertans’ energy security.150
Fundamental to more resilient communities.
Quest Canada, a national non-profit actively working to accelerate the adoption of efficient and integrated community-scale energy systems in Canada, promotes the value of DE technology in building more resilient communities, citing its environmental, economic and reliability benefits. 151
Barriers in Alberta
Current Alberta regulations do not allow a property owner to install generation and sell electricity to the occupants of buildings, compounds or subdivisions. The energy must be sold to the grid through electric distribution system-connected generation (DCG), and then bought back to customers at market rates. Further, while building owners have the option of installing micro- generation, they cannot produce more than what they can consume through their own metering points.
Alberta regulations for small, medium and large business have misaligned incentives for self- generation options. 1). Bulk metering for landlords of commercial retail units and office towers, apartments or large condominium residence is not allowed; 2). There is no incentive for developers of these facilities to install, partner or adapt district energy sources; 3). Micro- generation regulations are restrictive on aggregating sites owned by customers and the distribution of energy is limited at this time; and, 4). Utilities will not allow for building owners to manage the costs of energy for their facilities as rates do not allow such a transaction.
As early as 2017, the Alberta Electric Distribution System-Connected Generation Inquiry identified the need for regulatory change to accommodate growth in the district energy sector in Alberta.152 However, current regulations in the province continue to hamper DES, despite their proven benefits and viability. Furthermore, incentive programs available through Emissions Reduction Alberta, the Municipal Climate Change Action Centre, and other sources do not support funding programs that could benefit DES’ implementations.
As part of its climate change plan, the Government of Alberta has set a target of 30 percent of electrical energy produced in Alberta to be generated from renewable sources by 2030. Progressive policies and strategies in Alberta that promote self-generation with clean technology, such as DES, support an affordable, flexible, reliable and environmentally responsible alternative to energy delivery for Alberta consumers. Such an approach creates an environment of resiliency and competitiveness for Alberta businesses and communities.
The Alberta Chambers of Commerce Recommends that the Government of Alberta:
- Implement an industrial, commercial and residential regulatory framework that allows customers to install district energy systems for the sharing of electricity and heat between tenants and neighboring buildings. Such a framework would include checks and balances to ensure cost controls are in place to protect end use customers.
- Include, support and promote district energy systems in programs and policies aimed at helping drive Alberta and Canada’s climate change aspirations, more resilient communities and a more competitive economy.
148 https://www.districtenergy.org/topics/district-energy-cities
149 http://www.auc.ab.ca/regulatory_documents/Consultations/DistributionGenerationReport.pdf
150 https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=youtube+atco+microgen- renewables&view=detail&mid=8200969BCACD8C2BCEE18200969BCACD8C2BCEE1&FORM=VIRE
151 https://questcanada.org/
152 http://www.auc.ab.ca/regulatory_documents/Consultations/DistributionGenerationReport.pdf
Efficiencies at the Alberta Land Titles Office
Issue
The Alberta Land Titles Office is currently delayed four months in processing documents submitted for registration. The delay affects individuals buying and selling properties; lenders registering a mortgage; creditors enforcing civil claims judgments; individuals applying for building and development permits; municipal tax departments issuing tax notices; and industries involved in finalizing real estate transactions. This is an urgent issue, and it must be resolved as soon as possible.
Background
As of January 21, 2023, the current delay at the Alberta Land Titles Office for processing registrations is over 4 months.396 The delay in processing documents has been an issue for stakeholders since 2021.
The processing delay has had a negative impact for all home buyers. The current delay in processing registrations means that buyers of recently purchased properties do not receive a certificate of title confirming ownership for over 4 months after closing of the transaction. In addition, new homeowners are experiencing delays in applying for building and development permits as a direct result of the processing delay at the Alberta Land Titles Office.
The delay has had negative effects on both municipalities as well as homeowners. Property Tax Assessments are not being sent out in a timely manner and are often sent to the previous owner of a property which was recently sold.
The delay has also had a negative impact on business. Law firms must wait until registration has been completed prior to finalizing their report and account. This has caused cash flow issues for some as a result. In addition, certain lenders have pulled out of real estate transactions because of the long delay.
Other jurisdictions in Canada have a streamlined process which enables registration to occur in a timely manner. Saskatchewan and British Columbia currently register documents submitted in less than two weeks.
Whilst we applaud Service Alberta for its attempts to rectify this issue over the past 18 months, more needs to be done, as the unacceptable delays in processing registrations still exist.
We recommend the Alberta Government commit to rectifying the current delays at the Alberta Land Titles Office. Efficiency is particularly important to business and individuals, and it is imperative that the Alberta Land Titles Office return to timely processing speeds.
The Alberta Chambers of Commerce recommends that the Government of Alberta work with industry and stakeholders to address the lengthy processing delays by:
1. Increasing staffing to adequately deal with current processing volumes;
2. Develop an action plan to quickly and effectively remove current system delays and modernize the Alberta land titles system, creating a reliable, responsive, timely, secure and sustainable system able to meet market demands into the future, including:
- Legislation and investment that supports modern technology and best practices;
- An innovative and digitized platform that facilitates online business transactions, potentially applying solutions which have been successfully implemented in other Provinces;
- Streamlined operations and overall business practices to ensure documents submitted to the Alberta Land Titles Office are processed efficiently and effectively, with a goal that documents will be processed no later than 30 days after submission.
396 SpinIIHost (gov.ab.ca)
Modernization of Alberta Registry Agents
Issue
The Government of Alberta regulates the Alberta Registry Agents’ (ARAs) Regulation by capping the fee amounts for most of the services they provide. In addition, Registry Agents are eager to develop a modernization plan to enhance services, including online registry services to Albertans in conjunction with Service Alberta and other stakeholders. The Government of Alberta should support these modernization efforts and review regulations to ensure Alberta Registry Agents can continue their vital work effectively.
Background
Alberta’s Authorized Registry Agents form a network that collectively employs over 1,500 Albertans. There are 217 Agents located in 150 Alberta communities (58 or 27% are in Calgary and Edmonton, 48 or 22% are in small municipalities, and 111 or 51% are in rural municipalities). Registries are a vital part of Albertan communities in providing economic growth, stable jobs, important community links, and essential services.
Albertans value registry services and continue to take advantage of the ease of access offered by local registry agents. In survey findings, 74% of respondents have visited a registry agent in the last year. Furthermore, over 90% of respondents expressed the importance of having access to registry services located in their communities and felt that it would have a negative impact on their communities if their local Registry Agent were to close.397
As registry services modernize to meet the needs of our society, Albertans must continue to have equal access to quality in-person registry services, regardless of where they live in the province. A healthy industry ensures ongoing service to Albertans throughout the province at an affordable price. Eight registry offices have closed in the last two and a half years and many more communities are at risk of losing their local registry. An independent third-party audit found that registry agents who have an annual volume of 10,000 transactions or less are operating at a loss, which represents sixty- four registries.
Unlike other similar provincially regulated industries, there is no regular mechanism to review government capped registry service fees. In order for the registry agent network to position itself to serve the diverse needs of all Albertans, it is essential for a fee review model be put in place that includes regular and predictable reviews of capped service charges that provides financial stability and long-term assurance of sustainability. Between 2005 and 2020, registry agents received no increases to capped service fees despite increased cost pressures. A static capped fee restricts registry agents from keeping pace with natural operational increases and limits the amount of capital that can be reinvested into businesses in order to expand and modernize their delivery models in a variety of settings.
A combination of rural, urban, online, and in-person delivery models offered by Registry Agents are needed to provide Albertans services for over 200 products on behalf of five government departments. In order to ensure that registry agents are equipped and can work effectively and efficiently, having the support of the government is crucial. A modern and viable business model needs to be developed to guarantee the levels of service and access is not only maintained but also expanded to reflect the dynamic nature of the industry. Additionally, the Government of Alberta is still in direct competition with Registry Agents for some online services, like traffic fines.
Other organizations also see the value in a new fee review model and the modernization of the industry to ensure the continuance of the high level of service which Albertans have come to expect from their Registry Agents. In 2016, the Alberta Urban Municipalities Association (AUMA) passed a resolution recognizing the “vital role and positive impact that ARAs have in Alberta communities” and recommended the Government of Alberta negotiate a new fee structure and protect ARAs revenue streams.398
The Government of Alberta responded on January 1, 2020399 by increasing capped fees only on certain services for the first time in 14 years. However, these changes alone without a long-term sustainability plan do not ensure both a sustainable business model and expansion of services for Registry agents, nor do they provide the support necessary to aid in the modernization of the Registry Agent Industry. The Government of Alberta should recognize the vital role of Registry Agents in the delivery of essential government services to all Albertans, particularly their positive impact in rural Alberta communities, and work to strengthen their partnership with the Association of Alberta Registry Agents and local municipalities.
The Alberta Chambers of Commerce recommends the Government of Alberta:
- Support further modernization of the Registry Agent Industry and red tape reduction.
- Continue to partner with Registry Agents to provide online services and allow registry services to expand online offering; and
- Ensure the long-term sustainability of Registry Agents, including those serving rural communities, with a fair and equitable service charge model.
397 Couillard, C. (2019, April 16). Opinion: Registry-agent services under threat by rising costs. Edmonton Journal. https://edmontonjournal.com/opinion/columnists/opinion-registry-agent-services-under-threat-by-rising-costs
398 Alberta Municipalities (2016). Sustainable Support for Local Registry Agents. https://www.abmunis.ca/resolution/sustainable-support-local-registry-agents
399 Government of Alberta. (2019). Fiscal Plan: A plan for jobs and the economy 2019-23. https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/3d732c88-68b0-4328-9e52-5d3273527204/resource/2b82a075-f8c2-4586- a2d83ce8528a24e1/download/budget-2019-fiscal-plan-2019-23.pdf
Streamline Size of Government
Issue
While government spending is needed to ensure the health and safety of its constituents, there are studies that have shown that when government grows beyond a certain size it can hinder economic growth and lead to an overall lowering of living standards.
Background
There are a variety of methods by which the size of a government can be measured. One method is based on per capita spending, and another is to consider government spending as a percentage of GDP. Both methods can also factor in measures for tax expenditures and regulation1. Following the inevitable major increase in fiscal year 2020 as a result of the COVID- 19 pandemic, there has not been a decrease in the size of our federal or provincial governments back to pre-pandemic levels234.
The spending as a percentage of GDP of our federal government is among the highest it’s ever been5. A study released by the Fraser Institute in 2013 found that the optimal level for government spending as a percentage of GDP is 26%, after which the economic and societal benefits decline for each additional dollar spent6. Since 1870, the Canadian government has had expenditures as a percentage of GDP over 26% for 65 years. During World War II for the years of 1942-1945 government spending averaged 44.62% which is typical for wartime expenditures. This was followed by a 15-year period during which expenditures ranged from 14.03% to 22.16% with an average of 15.77%. Since 1961, the government has not had a single year with expenditures below 29% (lowest was 29.66% in 1964) and has even spent as much as 53.34% in 1992. This has resulted in an average yearly expenditure of 41.31% for the years between 1961 and 2021. Furthermore, the percentage spent has been trending upward for this same period.
On a provincial level, the data demonstrates a similar trend. There have been consistent increases in spending per capita since 2007, with increases ranging from just 0.65% in 2013 to 9.76% in 200778 with an average increase of 2.76% between 2007 and 2021. A report released by the Financial Accountability Office of Ontario in April of 2022 shows that, comparatively, Alberta has the lowest per capita revenue in 2020, yet was consistently above the average in regard to program spending9.
The consistent growth in government expenditures per capita and relative to GDP, if left unchecked, can result in deficit budgets, and increases in debt and associated debt repayment costs. The Parliamentary Budget Officer released its Economic and Fiscal Outlook in October of 2022 projecting a year-over-year decrease in budget deficit, but a significant increase in debt servicing charges. In fact, there is an anticipated doubling of public debt charges from their 2020-2021 levels to $47.6 billion in 2027-202810. Despite being debt free in the early 2000’s, the Alberta government has run deficits since 2008-2009 which has resulted in steadily increasing debt11. Furthermore, the associated debt servicing costs are expected to continue increasing beyond $2.7 billion in fiscal year 2022-202312.
While the growth of the size of government and associated debt can at times seem inevitable, there is a solution in Canada’s not-so-recent past. Canada has successfully navigated out of a position where the growth of the economy was seriously impeded and Canadian’s prosperity was at risk as a result of the size of government and its related spending. Steps to put Canada back on a road of fiscal sovereignty were taken by successive governments starting in the mid 80’s and culminating in the Government of Canada initiating a Program Review in 1994. This program review, implemented over five years, rejected the concept of across-the-board cuts and the idea that a sizable deficit could be eliminated through increased productivity. Instead, it focused on the roles and importance of government programs and services within the overall fiscal framework. The program review was not about “what to cut” but instead used methods of fiscal constraint while considering “what to preserve” to put the country on a footing that would allow it to prosper in the future.
The foundation for this review used a series of six questions when looking at the services and programs administered by the government.
1. Does the program or activity continue to serve the public interest?
2. Is there a legitimate and necessary role for government in this program area or activity?
3. Is the current role of the government appropriate or is the program a candidate for realignment with the provinces?
4. What activities or programs should, or could, be transferred in whole or in part to the private or voluntary sector?
5. If the program or activity continues, how could its efficiency be improved?
6. Is the resultant package of programs and activities affordable within the fiscal restraint? If not, what programs or activities should be abandoned?
The result of this ongoing process looped back on itself if the overall proposal did not generate significant savings13. In addition, this process ensured that the federal government used only the resources it needed to deliver services strictly within the government's purview. As a result of this program review, Canada's total government spending as a share of GDP fell from a peak of 53 percent in 1992 to 39 percent in 2007, and despite this more than one-quarter decline in the size of government, the economy grew, the job market expanded, and poverty rates fell dramatically14.
The rationale behind having a government that is scaled properly to deliver essential services is not just one borne from a budgetary standpoint. When a government functions efficiently and uses its resources to their maximum potential it could be argued that it is on a much better footing when the economy or market forces pose challenges. Ensuring that government has the ability to adapt, maneuver, and respond to weather economic headwinds is dependent on how its resources are allocated.
This is not to be confused with across-the-board cuts and freezes that affect programs and services or by strictly asking departments and agencies to do more with less. What is needed is a repositioning of the role of government within the collective means of citizens using the criteria above. An essential component of this course of action would be a comprehensive review of the regulatory environment, using the recommendations set forth by the Canadian Chamber of Commerce in the Regulate Smarter report, Death by 130,000 Cuts: Improving Canada’s Regulatory Competitiveness15. The recommendations laid out in this report mirror the reasoning behind a comprehensive full program review. By modernizing Canada’s regulatory systems and reducing duplication and misalignment within regulations, competitiveness and a well-functioning regulatory regime will ensure a government ready and able to meet the challenges and respond to opportunities that present themselves in a more integrated global economy. This would ensure that protective measures would be balanced with a regime that is navigable and preserves economic growth and competitiveness.
However, the longer the process of streamlining government is delayed the harder it is to reset. External factors beyond the government’s control can take precedence and make needed changes that much more difficult. An immediate first step is to aim for government, both federal and provincial budgets that are balanced. This will then set a solid foundation allowing for a re-visioning of size of government. Canada and Alberta need to ensure we are set on a firm fiscal footing in order to allow for flexibility should market forces create downward economic pressure resulting in the continued need for stimulus spending. It is not only good fiscal policy but responsible governing to create a safe cushion for the province and country.
As in the past this exercise will be one that requires a long-term vision that spans government administrations and political parties. Good government is not a question of ideology, right or left, but rather a commitment to a government structure that is more accessible, navigable, competitive and streamlined so that all Canadians benefit and prosper.
The Alberta Chambers of Commerce recommends the Government of Alberta and Government of Canada
- Initiate a review of all ministries that evaluates the ministry focus and alignment, to be consistent with other provinces, territories and federal government ministries, as well as alignment with service delivery and focus areas based on private and voluntary sectors;
- Work towards consistency in government ministries to avoid regular changes to ministry titles, related costs to implement changes to ministry titles and unnecessary uncertainty associated with regular changes within the Ministry and department staffing requirements;
- Commit to comprehensive regulatory reform based on cost-benefit analysis and rooted in economic competitiveness and efficient service and program delivery.
1 Macdonald-Laurier Institute – Estimating the True Size of Government in Canada: https://www.macdonaldlaurier.ca/size-of-government-in-canada/
2 Statistics Canada. (2022). Canadian classification of functions of government, by general government component (x 1,000,000). https://doi.org/10.25318/1010002401-eng
3 World Bank. (n.d.). GDP (current US$) - Canada. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD?end=2021&locations=CA&most_recent_year_ desc=true& start=1960&view=chart
4 Government of Alberta. (2022). Gross Domestic Product. In Regional Economic Dashboard. https://economicdashboard.alberta.ca/grossdomesticproduct
5 International Monetary Fund. (n.d.). Government expenditure, percent of GDP. https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/exp@FPP/CAN
6 Di Matteo, L. (2013). Measuring Government in the Twenty-first Century: An International Overview of the Size and Efficiency of Public Spending. The Fraser Institute. https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/measuring-government-in-the-21st-century.pdf
7 Statistics Canada. Table 17-10-0005-01 Population estimates on July 1st, by age and sex. https://doi.org/10.25318/1710000501-eng
8 Statistics Canada. Table 36-10-0450-01 Revenue, expenditure and budgetary balance - General governments, provincial and territorial economic accounts (x 1,000,000). https://doi.org/10.25318/3610045001-eng
9 Financial Accountability Office of Ontario. (2022). 2020-21 Interprovincial Comparison: Comparing Ontario’s fiscal position with other provinces after the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. https://www.fao- on.org/en/Blog/Publications/interprovincial-comparison-2022
10 Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer. (2022). Economic and Fiscal Outlook – October 2022. https://distribution-a617274656661637473.pbo- dpb.ca/258865a69ecf369e99f05a9e799d04136ed8c0b04830967d0ad5aecfd59f90f9
11 Eisen, B. (2022). Alberta taxpayers on the hook (again) for government debt interest. Fraser Institute. https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article/alberta-taxpayers-on-the-hook-again-for-government-debtinterest
12 Government of Alberta. (2022). 2022-23 Mid-year Fiscal Update and Economic Statement. https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/9c81a5a7-cdf1-49ad-a923-d1ecb42944e4/resource/df205b7a-721a486b-b663- 8c1ecef46ae8/download/tbf-2022-23-mid-year-fiscal-update-and-economic-statement.pdf
13 Spear, S. & Lammam, C. (n.d.). Proper Size of Government. Fraser Institute. www.fraserinstitute.org/article/proper-size-government
14 Bourgon, J. (2009). Program Review: The Government of Canada’s experience eliminating the deficit, 1995-99: a Canadian Case Study. Institute for Government. https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/sites/default/files/publications/Program%20Review.pdf
15 Canadian Chamber of Commerce. (2018). Death by 130,000 Cuts: Improving Canada’s regulatory competitiveness. https://chamber.ca/publications/death-by-130000-cuts-improving-canadasregulatory-competitiveness/
The City of Grande Prairie is proud to be a designated community under the Rural Renewal Stream of the Alberta Advantage Immigration Program.
The Rural Renewal Stream offers eligible workers the opportunity to immigrate to Alberta as a Provincial Nominee with the formal support of the municipal government.
With the support of this program, the City of Grande Prairie fills local labour gaps by endorsing employers and job seekers to fast-track immigration for eligible candidates.
The Grande Prairie Rural Renewal Stream Community Partnership is made up of community stakeholders with a shared mandate of supporting employers and newcomers to the community.
The partnership is made up of:
- The City of Grande Prairie
- The Grande Prairie and District Chamber of Commerce
- The Grande Prairie Centre for Newcomers
- The Council for Lifelong Learning
The ‘Community Partnership’ is responsible for supporting the City of Grande Prairie in identifying eligible employers and endorsing candidates who are a good fit for the community and are interested in applying for permanent residency through the Alberta Advantage Immigration Program – Rural Renewal Stream.
For more information, visit https://cityofgp.com/culture-community/about-grande-prairie/moving-grande-prairie/immigration-rural-renewal-stream
Highway 40X Connector: Driving Growth and Prosperity
Highway 40X Connector: Driving Growth and Prosperity
Local governments and organizations from across the region, including the County of Grande Prairie, are urging the Provincial Government to move forward with constructing the Highway 40X Connector.
Highway 40X will be a vital addition to the region’s existing transportation network, connecting Highways 40 and 43.
This project supports significant economic development opportunities for the region and entire province. It provides critical access through increased transportation network efficiency and major improvements to traffic safety.
The Grande Prairie Region plays an important role in the provincial economy by serving as a trade area for more than 280,000 people. Construction of the Highway 40X Connector will help propel the region forward to achieve its full potential.
Prioritizing this project maximizes its benefits – including job creation – as we all work to build a more sustainable and resilient Alberta.
The Benefits
· Critical Transportation Link
Highways 40 and 43 support significant existing industrial and commercial activity in the region while providing critical transportation links to other areas of Alberta and into British Columbia. Highway 43 is part of the CANAMEX/North-South Trade Corridor, linking Canada to Mexico through the United States.
· Economic Development
More than $16 billion in new private investment is expected in the region, serviced by the Highway 43 and Highway 40 network.
Two unconnected major highways is a rarity in our province, and a potential barrier to investment attraction in the region. Connecting these highways will foster even greater economic development opportunities for our Province by creating improved, more efficient transportation infrastructure.
· Public safety
Increased high volumes of heavy truck traffic and congestion raise the probability of accidents and serious incidents.
Every day, about 28,000 vehicles move through Grande Prairie, including 3,000 heavy trucks navigating residential areas, parks, school zones and pedestrian trails. The negative impact of industrial traffic on local populations will only escalate with increased industrial activity.
The Ask
Functional planning was completed in 2010, meaning the highway corridor is defined and the next steps of acquiring land and engineering design work could move forward immediately.
We are asking the Province to fund the project and prioritize it in their capital plan to be completed as soon as possible.
2022 National Policy Resolution
Our Chamber's policy resolution was passed with 98% approval by delegates at the 2022 Canadian Chamber of Commerce Annual General Meeting and Convention in Ottawa. The full document can be seen below.
Sponsor: Grande Prairie & District Chamber of Commerce
Reducing the Cost of Working through Reform to GIS Thresholds
Issue
Labour shortages, already a pressing issue for Canadian businesses before the COVID-19 pandemic, are growing and new ones emerging. Yet Canada’s Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) program clawbacks are creating barriers to labour market participation for many employable older adults by discouraging the pursuit of income exceeding set values to qualify for GIS. This is increasing labour market pressures, negatively impacting quality of life and limiting Canada’s potential economic output.
Background
Canada’s Retirement Income System (RIS),(1) which includes GIS, functions on many of the assumptions that we had decades ago. Though some reforms recently have been introduced, innovation to Canada’s RIS programs has been slow, especially in light of the evolving economic, demographic, social and labour market context. Research posits that a lack of integrated political decision-making, regulation and research is restricting RIS innovation.(2)
When Canada’s public pension programs were designed over 50 years ago, the average age of the population was under 30. We’re now on average over 40-years-old and living longer. About 23% of the working age population will be 65 years or older by 2024. Between 2021-2024, Canada will lose about
600,000 workers as people age and exceed 65-years-old, lowering the share of the population participating in labour markets.(3)
Further, many Canadians now face personal financial uncertainty.
(4) Forty years ago, almost half of working Canadians had some form of pension coverage. Today, only about one-third do. Faced with living longer and fewer savings, worries about “inadequate savings for retirement, outliving their money, and affording health services that are not universally guaranteed (such as long-term care)”(5) are more prevalent.
What is concerning is that while Canada is experiencing a declining labour force and Canadians are facing increasing costs of living and inadequate savings for retirement, research(6) shows features of Canada’s public retirement income system have significant work and income earning disincentives for older workers. The greatest impact is on recipients of Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS), a government program intended to support low income seniors.
Basic Old Age Security (OAS) is a monthly payment available to all Canadian residents aged 65 and over. GIS is based on income and is available to low income OAS recipients. A single senior qualifies for GIS if their income is below $19,464; couples qualify if their combined income is below $46,656.
These thresholds are meant to provide “floors” to keep people out poverty. To provide greater context for GIS thresholds, in Alberta, for example, the thresholds to meet “low income status” for Alberta’s Community Housing Program are much higher: $25,500 to $43,000 (bachelor, 2021), depending on where you live.(7) This represents the minimum income required to meet basic needs in different municipalities throughout Alberta.
What is discouraging low earning seniors from saving for retirement and taking employment is that GIS benefits are reduced or clawed back for other income earned, including employment and self-employment income, above $5,000 per year. For earnings between $5,000 and $15,000, GIS will be reduced by 50 cents for every dollar of income received.(8)
Further, because GIS is based on previous year’s income, the effect of earning additional income can be experienced for up to two years. For example, if an individual receiving GIS earns other income over $5,000 in 2020, the GIS for that year is clawed back after they file their 2020 taxes and they will continue to lose the monthly benefit amount until they file their 2021 tax return showing no additional income. Although GIS is paid retroactively for qualifying years, the loss of GIS income for an entire year can have significant impact on quality of life during that time period.
In addition, other provincial income supplements, and health and basic needs programs are also restricted if the individual earns income. Although these individuals are in need of additional income to meet basic living expenses, the risk of losing benefits creates a major disincentive for earning additional income through part-time employment.
Reform of GIS clawback mechanisms to incentivize older workers to participate in the labour force aligns with recommendations from the Melbourne-Mercer Global Pension Index (MMGPI), which benchmarks and ranks retirement income systems across the world. In 2019, MMGI made three recommendations for
improvement to Canada’s RIS. One of those is: “Increase labour force participation rates at older ages as life expectancy increases.”(9)
When Canadians work longer there are numerous benefits to the economy and workplaces:(10)
- Modeling shows that the impact to Canada could be substantial in terms of extra labour supply and real output and would result in a substantial increase in living standards.
- Studies show that 1) older workers’ accumulated knowledge, leadership skills and high job match quality contribute to high productivity; and, 2) since experience is a key element in the commercialization aspects of innovation, an older workforce may increase this dimension of innovative capacity.
- More seniors working drives economic growth and generates tax revenue for government.
Recommendations
That the federal government:
1. Work with provincial and territory governments, industry and academia to create a modern framework for RIS that includes undertaking a comprehensive review of the GIS income thresholds and clawback rates to allow for higher earnings exemptions and income thresholds, which will incentivize older
Canadians to voluntarily delay receiving RIS, delay retirement or enter the labour force after retirement.
2. Ensure reform encourages and allows as much participation as possible in the workforce for GIS recipients, helps these individuals stay out of poverty, and allows them to maintain or improve their standard of living.
Notes
1 Canada’s retirement income system is federally-administered publicly funded, and contains three pillars: 1) Old Age Security (OAS) and the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS); 2) the Canada and Quebec Pension Plans (C/QPP); and, 3) tax-deferred and other private savings and workplace pensions.
2 https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5c2fa7b03917eed9b5a436d8/t/5e41c25873b8a7233f398b72/1581367901417/Improving-Canada-sRetirement-Income-System-Setting-Priorities_final.pdf
3 https://thoughtleadership.rbc.com/squeeze-play-higher-wages-alone-wont-solve-canadas-labour-shortage-problem/
4 https://www.cpacanada.ca/en/news/features/2021-11-04-labour-shortage
5 https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5c2fa7b03917eed9b5a436d8/t/5e41c25873b8a7233f398b72/1581367901417/Improving-Canada-sRetirement-Income-System-Setting-Priorities_final.pdf
6 Ibid.
7 https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/423df5de-6562-4b06-9ccb-596e9d130bb5/resource/1128ae16-d050-4a98-860c2e503d84a677/download/sh-2021-income-threshold.pdf
8 https://www.canada.ca/en/services/benefits/publicpensions/cpp/old-age-security/guaranteed-income-supplement/apply.html#h2.2-3.1
9 https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5c2fa7b03917eed9b5a436d8/t/5e41c25873b8a7233f398b72/1581367901417/Improving-Canada-sRetirement-Income-System-Setting-Priorities_final.pdf
10 https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/eas-aes.nsf/vwapj/SRIsr02.pdf/$FILE/SRIsr02.pdf
2022 Provincial Policy Resolutions
Our Chamber had the following policy resolutions approved by the Alberta Chambers of Commerce network at the 2022 ACC Annual General Meeting in Lethbridge.
Sponsored by: Grande Prairie
Co-sponsor(s):
ISSUE
Labour shortages, already a pressing issue for Canadian businesses before the COVID-19 pandemic, are growing and new ones emerging. Yet Canada’s Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) and the Alberta Income for the Severely Handicapped (AISH) program claw backs are creating barriers to labour market participation for many employable older adults and for persons with disabilities. This is increasing labour market pressures, negatively impacting these citizens’ quality of life, and limiting Canada and Alberta’s potential economic output.
RECOMMENDATION(S)
The Alberta Chambers of Commerce recommends the Government of Alberta:
1. Work with federal, provincial and territory governments, industry and academia to create a modern framework for RIS that includes undertaking a comprehensive review of the GIS income thresholds and claw back rates to allow for higher earnings exemptions and income thresholds, which will incentivize older Canadians to voluntarily delay receiving RIS, delay retirement or enter the labour force after retirement;
2. Undertake a comprehensive review of the AISH claw backs, striving for a model that allows for higher earnings exemptions and income thresholds before claw backs to incentivize AISH recipients to enter or remain in the labour force; and
3. Ensure reform encourages and allows as much participation as possible in the workforce for GIS and AISH recipients, helps these individuals stay out of poverty, and allows them to maintain or improve their standard of living.
BACKGROUND
Retirement Income System (RIS) and Barriers to Employment
Canada’s RIS (which includes GIS) functions on many of the assumptions that we had decades ago. Though some reforms recently have been introduced, innovation to Canada’s RIS programs has been slow, especially in light of the evolving economic, demographic, social and labour market context. Research posits that a lack of integrated political decision-making, regulation and research is restricting RIS innovation.
When Canada’s public pension programs were designed over 50 years ago, the average age of the population was under 30. We’re now on average over 40-years-old and living longer. About 23% of the working age population will be 65 years or older by 2024. Between 2021-2024, Canada will lose about 600,000 workers as people age and exceed 65-years-old, lowering the share of the population participating in labour markets.
Further, many Canadians now face personal ¬financial uncertainty. Forty years ago, almost half of working Canadians had some form of pension coverage. Today, only about one-third do. Faced with living longer and fewer savings, worries about “inadequate savings for retirement, outliving their money, and affording health services that are not universally guaranteed (such as long-term care)” are more prevalent.
What is concerning is that while Canada is experiencing a declining labour force and Canadians are facing increasing costs of living and inadequate savings for retirement, research shows features of Canada’s public retirement income system have significant work and income earning disincentives for older workers. The greatest impact is on recipients of Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS), a government program intended to support low-income seniors.
Basic Old Age Security (OAS) is a monthly payment available to all Canadian residents aged 65 and over. GIS is based on income and is available to low-income OAS recipients. A single senior qualifies for GIS if their income is below $19,464; couples qualify if their combined income is below $46,656.
These thresholds are meant to provide “floors” to keep people out poverty. To provide greater context for GIS thresholds, the thresholds to meet “low-income status” for Alberta’s Community Housing Program are much higher: $25,500 to $43,000 (bachelor, 2021), depending on where you live. This represents the minimum income required to meet basic needs in different municipalities throughout Alberta.
What is discouraging low earning seniors from saving for retirement and taking employment is that GIS benefits are reduced or clawed back for other income earned, including employment and self-employment income, above $5,000 per year. For earnings between $5,000 and $15,000, GIS will be reduced by 50 cents for every dollar of income received.
Further, because GIS is based on previous year’s income, the effect of earning additional income can be experienced for up to two years. For example, if an individual receiving GIS earns other income over $5,000 in 2020, the GIS for that year is clawed back after they file their 2020 taxes and they will continue to lose the monthly benefit amount until they file their 2021 tax return showing no additional income. Although GIS is paid retroactively for qualifying years, the loss of GIS income for an entire year can have significant impact on quality of life during that time period.
In addition, other provincial income supplements, and health and basic needs programs are also restricted if the individual earns income. Although these individuals are in need of additional income to meet basic living expenses, the risk of losing benefits creates a major disincentive for earning additional income through part-time employment.
Reform of GIS claw back mechanisms to incentivize older workers to participate in the labour force aligns with recommendations from the Melbourne-Mercer Global Pension Index (MMGPI), which benchmarks and ranks retirement income systems across the world. In 2019, MMGI made three recommendations for improvement to Canada’s RIS. One of those is: “Increase labour force participation rates at older ages as life expectancy increases.”
When Canadians work longer there are numerous benefits to the economy and workplaces:
• Modeling shows that the impact to Canada could be substantial in terms of extra labour supply and real output and would result in a substantial increase in living standards.
• Studies show that 1) older workers’ accumulated knowledge, leadership skills and high job match quality contribute to high productivity; and, 2) since experience is a key element in the commercialization aspects of innovation, an older workforce may increase this dimension of innovative capacity.
• More seniors working drives economic growth and generates tax revenue for government.
Alberta Income for the Severely Handicapped (AISH)
AISH was established to support Albertans with a disability who are unable to solely support themselves through work. Yet while many Albertans with disabilities wish to be employed, the existing claw back mechanism on AISH funding, similar to those claw backs for low-income seniors discussed above, is making it difficult for Albertans with disabilities who may be willing and able to integrate into the workforce to do so. Many AISH recipients have to keep earnings low enough to stay on AISH, in order to receive their maximum eligible amounts and to continue to be eligible for the medical services they need.
Albertans with disabilities not working and receiving AISH receive $19,056.47 annually, which does not provide enough money for basic necessities. A University of Calgary study, for example, found that the cost of support required by many individuals diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is “well beyond what the individuals with ASD and their families could pay for out of annual income, giving many no choice but to stay on AISH.” As a result, rather than integrating into the workforce, these Albertans remain in a cycle of dependency on the government. So despite having high levels of education and an availability of workers, data shows that persons with disabilities are highly underrepresented in the workforce.
Social assistance programs can contribute not only to a healthier and more productive population but to a healthier labour market. Key to achieving these goals is reform to the low-income amounts provided to AISH recipients and to the claw back rates to facilitate entry into the workforce for Albertans with disabilities.
A more modern framework to reduce the cost of participating in the workforce
It is in the best interest for individuals, communities, the government and the economy to ensure all productive and capable individuals have access to the labour market. Policy to eliminate current barriers for GIS and AISH recipients to remain in or enter the labour market is critical. Such reform will reduce the cost of working, and encourage and allow as much participation as possible in the workforce for those who are able – helping drive a healthy and diverse labour market. It will also generate long-term cost savings to the government as recipients leave the programs or rely less on them.
Sponsored by: Grande Prairie
Co-sponsor(s):Drumheller
ISSUE
The cost of transmission and distribution of electricity to customers has created disparity in pricing across Alberta. Extremely high power bills in some parts of the province are mainly driven by higher distribution charges. Distribution costs are higher in rural and northern service areas, with consumers in these areas paying up to 400% more for distribution services compared to consumers in urban service areas. Moreover, with customers in Saskatchewan and British Columbia paying significantly lower electricity rates than customers in most of Alberta, Alberta’s overall competitiveness and ability to attract business is further impeded.
RECOMMENDATION(S)
The Alberta Chambers of Commerce recommends the Government of Alberta:
1. Create a tax incentive for utility distribution companies operating outside of Alberta’s two metropolitan areas with the mandate to pass the savings along to customers through reduced distribution delivery rates.
BACKGROUND
Electricity industry structure in Alberta
In Alberta, electrical generation and retailing make up the de-regulated sectors of the market while transmission and distribution are government regulated sectors. Because electricity delivery is a fully regulated service, the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) reviews and approves the rates to ensure they are fair and reasonable for Alberta customers. According to its mandate, the AUC considers and protects the social, economic and environmental interests of Alberta where competitive forces do not.
However, depending on where you live or operate a business in Alberta, there is disparity in these charges: residential, farm and commercial customers in rural and northern areas pay significantly higher electricity costs than those in more urban areas. Charges for distribution are higher in rural and northern areas because of the low population density and longer distances between consumer sites. A distribution system that serves rural areas costs more than those serving urban areas because there are longer distances between customers; the utility must build, operate and maintain more poles, wires and facilities to serve each customer; and there are fewer customers on systems in rural areas sharing the costs.
As shown in figures A and B, distribution and transmission charges are highest in ATCO’s service area, followed by FortisAlberta’s service area. ATCO primarily serves northern Alberta and parts of eastern Alberta. FortisAlberta serves the south and western more rural areas of Alberta. (A recent analysis shows that electricity prices in Alberta in 2021 were more than double the Alberta power pool price seen in 2020, and costs will remain elevated in 2022.)
Breaking down the charges: Transmission and Distribution
Energy delivery charges in Alberta include two components: transmission and distribution (in addition to rate riders). Transmission charges cover the cost of moving electric energy from generating facilities through high-voltage transmission lines to the distribution system. Charges are based on the electricity used by the consumer, and make up between 14% to 20% of a customer’s total bill. In 2020, monthly transmission charges paid by the average residential customer with 600kWh of consumption ranged from $20.88 (EPCOR’s service area) to $28.19 (ATCO’s service area).
Distribution charges cover the cost of moving electric energy from substation transformers through local, lower-voltage lines that carry electricity to a customer’s meter. These charges make up between 22% and 47% of a customer’s total bill. In 2020, monthly distribution charges paid by the average residential consumer with 600kWh consumption ranged from $22.55 (ENMAX’s service area) to $81.11 (ATCO’s service area). Consumers in the ATCO zone can pay twice as much for distribution compared to rural consumers in the ForisAlberta zone, and nearly 400% more than residential consumers in Calgary.
Figure A - Average monthly transmission charges for residential RRO customers, by service area
Figure B – Average monthly distribution charges for residential RRO customers, by service area
Alberta’s current electrical system creates further economic penalties for Alberta ratepayers
While disparities in electricity rates exist within Alberta, much lower electrical transmission and distribution rates in both Saskatchewan and British Columbia are also impacting Alberta’s ability to attract and retain business. Alberta business owners with property in the two neighbouring provinces report paying much lower rates in Saskatchewan and BC. While this impedes economic growth and development in rural communities along provincial borders, it also puts Alberta at a competitive disadvantage.
In addition, as electricity costs increase, consumers are exploring other alternatives. According to a recent AUC study, an increasing number of industrial facilities have been installing their own generation sources and individual Albertans and small businesses are doing the same. With fewer customers to share costs of the electrical system, remaining electricity customers, particularly those in areas of low customer density, may be further penalized by the even higher rates. Further, as Alberta moves towards electrifying the grid, and as demand for electricity puts even greater pressure on the electricity system, the result will mean even greater disparities in pricing.
Conclusion
Higher electricity rates in certain areas of the province don’t just threaten industry and businesses in that region but impact all of Alberta. Alberta’s North, for example, has an abundance of resources with high global demand. Its economic contributions to the whole of Alberta and Canada are significant: the area contains much of Alberta’s natural resources, specifically, 100% of the oil sands deposits, 86% of forests, both conventional oil and natural gas production, about 28% of Alberta’s total farm area, as well as the associated opportunities in value-added and emerging technologies. The ripple effect of economic impacts from higher electricity costs faced by these northern industrial operations cannot be ignored.
An electrical system that creates a fair playing field for the delivery of affordable electricity to Alberta homes, farms, businesses and industry is critical not only for all Albertans’ well-being but for the strength of Alberta’s economy and overall competitiveness. Further consideration must be taken to developing such a system that does not penalize communities and business owners based on their geographic location – one that protects the social, economic and environmental interests of all Albertans.
Sponsored by: Grande Prairie
Co-sponsor(s): Drumheller
ISSUE
Alberta’ electricity sector is rapidly undergoing transformation, most notably influenced by the drive toward net-zero emissions and the demands of the increased electrification of other sectors of the economy. Alberta’s future depends on the successful restructuring of the province’s electricity system, not only to support the massive ramp-up of clean electricity required, but to ensure Albertans are not faced with soaring electricity costs that would threaten industry and business and citizen well-being. A clear, transparent and phased plan for a path forward is urgently needed – one that strikes a balance between the addition of renewable energy sources while encouraging investment and economic growth.
RECOMMENDATION(S)
The Alberta Chambers of Commerce recommends the Government of Alberta:
1. Develop and openly share a comprehensive plan to transform Alberta’s electrical system into the future. The plan should:
a. Be informed by industry, stakeholders, energy transition research centres and the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) working collaboratively to understand the potential pathways and implications to a net-zero grid of the future;
b. Be informed by analysis of the costs of implementing renewable energy;
c. Ensure Albertans have access to a reliable supply of power at affordable rates;
d. Ensure Alberta’s price of electricity enhances, not detracts from, our ability to compete globally and attract investment;
e. Support working with other provinces, the federal government, and the United States to grow, better integrate and optimize the electricity grid;
f. Support a phased approach that does not place rapid significant increases in rates on end-use customers;
g. Have the flexibility to mitigate potential adverse impacts and respond to changing market conditions;
h. Be transparent, engaging and informing Alberta businesses and industries at all stages of its development and implementation to ensure they can be prepared and operationally ready for change; and
i. Include a strategy to retrain employees working in the current energy industry to the renewables sector.
BACKGROUND
As the world – including Alberta – aims for a net-zero future, Alberta’s power sector is undergoing significant change. Alberta has set possible targets of 40-50% fewer total emissions than in 2005 by 2035 and net-zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 2050. Already it has made great strides in nearing its 2035 target, primarily through the implementation of renewable technology and coal generation conversions to natural gas.
Research shows clean electrification of the economy (substituting fossil fuels with increasingly clean, zero-carbon electricity) is the cheapest and most efficient way to reach net-zero GHG targets. Technology like electric vehicles, advancements in hydrogen and carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS), for example, is rapidly transforming all sectors of the electricity industry, including Alberta’s electricity system.
The shift to net-zero has immense implications for Alberta and Alberta businesses: it creates opportunities such as job creation, new infrastructure development and capital investment. A 2021 study found that “pursuing net-zero in Alberta could create nearly 170,000 new clean technology jobs and contribute $61 billion in GDP to the province’s economy by 2050.” In late 2021, the province announced Alberta’s Hydrogen Roadmap, aiming to integrate hydrogen into its electricity and heating systems, use it to power the transportation and industrial sectors, and export it as a source of low-emission energy. In addition, Alberta is showing leadership in CCUS development, an emissions-reducing storage technology that will help ensure a reliable supply of electricity.
While the opportunities for Alberta are promising, there is much work to do if we are to transition towards net-zero with an equal commitment to sustainable economic growth. Canada’s electricity systems are largely isolated from one another and there has been little progress made to break down those silos. The Business Council of Alberta recommends better integration of provincial grids across the country to create more resilient, efficient and stable systems. The Council also recommends expanding cross-border infrastructure so as to strengthen the North American partnership to accelerate cross-border clean electricity transmission.
Just as critical for Alberta is the need for a provincial roadmap for grid decarbonization. Currently, Alberta lacks such a plan. Without a comprehensive plan to move forward, Albertans face tremendous uncertainty and Alberta is at risk of experiencing the adverse impacts seen in some other jurisdictions.
Pursuing net-zero: Lessons to be learned
As Alberta seeks to chart a path on energy transition, lessons can be drawn from Ontario and Germany. The Province of Ontario invested billions, moving quickly in the pursuit of renewable energy without sound analysis of the costs of implementing green technologies into the grid. Its Green Energy Act, introduced in 2009, and repealed in 2019, contributed to a doubling of electricity prices in a decade, and according to an Ontario Chamber of Commerce report, resulted in the province having one of the highest electricity rates in North America, undermined Chamber members’ capacity to grow and hire new workers, and increased the cost of doing business in Ontario.
Overseas, Germany is steeped in controversy for its renewable energy deployment. The country had ambitious climate goals; when it went on its path of pursuing renewable energy for its electric generation, rates skyrocketed. Germans now pay some of the highest rates in the world for electricity. Further, the country’s per capita emissions are higher than many other European nations: the decision to phase out nuclear power by 2022 may have prolonged the use of coal, whose phase-out is not set to occur until 2033. And the country’s heavy reliance on weather dependent renewables is requiring rethinking to avoid volatility in the system.
More demand, more generation, more investment required
Adopting renewable technologies is expensive. And Alberta in the future will need more power than today to meet growing demand from more electric vehicles on the road, electrified heating, etc. For example, in Canada, in just under three decades, we will need about twice as much non-emitting electricity as we do today to connect our vehicles, heating systems and industry to a clean electricity grid. In Alberta, calculations using data from the Canadian Energy Regulators suggest that a shift from gas to electricity for residential and small commercial businesses alone (which make up just 13% of the province’s current natural gas load) will require 66,000 megawatts of power. As Alberta currently peaks out at 12,000 megawatts, that means about 5 times more electricity than is now being generated will be required for just those two sectors alone.
Increasing clean generation requires more investment into clean and emerging technologies. This investment will impact government and end-use consumers, as some of these costs will be passed on to Albertans. According to an October 2021 Alberta Chambers poll of Alberta businesses, about two-thirds of all respondents are worried about rising power costs, 43% reported increases of more than 15% of monthly operating costs, and 35% reported their power costs had increased by 20% compared to just 7% in 2020.
A transition to renewable energy is important for our planet and necessary for our province. As Alberta transforms the electricity grid, it is pertinent that clean and reliable energy should be affordable for and accessible to everyone. Detailed analysis of the costs and implications of electrifying Alberta’s grid, followed by a comprehensive plan forward is critical to a net-zero future – and the future growth and competitiveness of Alberta and Alberta businesses.
Sponsored by: Grande Prairie
Co-sponsor(s):
ISSUE
In 2015, Statistics Canada combined two Alberta economic regions (ER): Banff-Jasper-Rocky Mountain House and Athabasca-Grande Prairie-Peace River to make improvements to Labour Force Survey data. The new economic region, however, encompasses nearly all of the western half of Alberta and links together economies that are vastly different. This has resulted in data that are neither useful nor reliable. The data neither reflect the realities of the vastly different economies within the combined ER, nor highlight the dynamics within Alberta’s economy. In the absence of data that do not identify the real strengths and challenges of these varied economies, communities/regions within this combined ER face an economic disadvantage, and policy-makers/decision-makers are unable to take meaningful actions to foster growth and address challenges. This has implications for Alberta and Canada as the economies in this region are a vital source of economic activity provincially and nationally.
RECOMMENDATION(S)
The Alberta Chambers of Commerce recommends the Government of Alberta:
1. Through the Alberta Office of Statistical Information, work with Statistics Canada to develop a model of decision-making to define the boundaries of Alberta’s economic regions (ERs) that ensure ERs produce robust and reliable Labour Force Survey data that best reflect the economic landscapes and labour forces across Alberta.
BACKGROUND
Economic Regions: Their Purpose
In Canada, an economic region (ER) is a grouping of complete census divisions (CDs) created for the analysis of regional economic activity. According to Statistics Canada, “such a unit is small enough to permit regional analysis, yet large enough to include enough respondents that, after data are screened for confidentiality, a broad range of statistics can still be released.”
Over the years, the boundaries of the regions have been redrawn, most recently “adjusted to accommodate changes in census division boundaries and to satisfy provincial needs.” In 2015, ER 4840 (Banff-Jasper-Rocky Mountain House) was combined with ER 4870 (Athabasca-Grande Prairie-Peace River) for the purpose of obtaining better data. ER 4840 was identified as small by population, making it difficult to achieve variance (quality) targets. Statistics Canada (in consultation with the Alberta Government) made the decision to combine ER 4840 with 4870 “because both [ERs] are rural and have similar economies.”
Labour Force Survey (LFS): Measuring Economic Performance
The LFS is a household survey carried out monthly by Statistics Canada and “is among the most timely and important measures of the overall performance of the Canadian economy... It is the only source of monthly estimates of total employment, including self-employment, full- and part-time employment, and unemployment. It publishes monthly standard labour market indicators such as the unemployment rate, employment rate and participation rate. In addition, the LFS provides information on the personal characteristics of the working-age population including age, sex, marital status, educational attainment, and family characteristics. Employment estimates include detailed breakdowns by demographic characteristics, industry and occupation, job tenure, and usual and actual hours worked.” LFS data estimates are produced for Canada, the provinces, the territories and a large number of sub-provincial regions.
Data drive decisions
LFS data are a crucial tool. Data inform local and global investors and entrepreneurs considering businesses opportunities in communities and regions; can create incentive or hindrance that impact behaviour (i.e., investment) and decision-making; and help inform governments (federal, provincial, local) so they are able to develop meaningful policies and strategies to foster growth where it is flourishing, and help ignite it where it is languishing.
One data set, vastly different economies
While LFS data are designed to provide key labour market estimates for ERs and must be sufficiently reliable to support the various uses of the data, some data for this newly combined ER region (4840 and 4870) present an inaccurate picture of this ER’s economies. Not only does the ER encompass almost all of the western half of Alberta, but there are significant differences in the economies and labour forces between some areas in ER 4840 (which includes two national parks and is tourism-based) and ER 4870 (which includes economies based on a foundation of world-class natural resources including oil, natural gas, forestry and agriculture). Building in other factors has in some cases resulted in an economic analysis that is not representative of the true nature of the different economies and labour forces within the combined ER; as such, some data is neither reliable nor useful, and in some cases, is detrimental to economic development.
In the Grande Prairie region, for example, the ER’s unemployment rate (derived from the LFS) is typically 1-2 percent higher than the reality in the region’s economic landscape (estimates based on previous years’ data when labour force data for Grande Prairie (CA) were available, combined with current data on local spending figures, hotel stays, rental vacancies, etc.). Economic Development Officers in the region report that this elevated Statistics Canada unemployment rate is deterring potential investors from investing in the region , as unemployment data is an important indicator of the economic potential of an area. In turn, this presents barriers and additional challenges for northwestern Alberta and its ability to compete on a provincial, national and global scale. This also has implications beyond regional borders, as the Grande Prairie region is noted for its economic contributions to the provincial and national economies due to its proximity to the prolific world-class Montney-Duvernay shale gas play, its global reputation for agricultural and forest products, and its trade area of over 280,000 people.
To the south of the combined ER, the Towns of Jasper and Banff, located in the Canadian Rockies and in national parks, as well as Canmore, have an economic landscape, and unique labour force and labour force challenges distinctly different from the Grande Prairie region and the rest of Alberta. Recent research has highlighted that these municipalities, which rely on tourism, face unique pressures in their efforts to provide effective and sustainable service delivery and quality infrastructure to large numbers of domestic and international visitors. Combining economic data for this region with areas that have distinctly different economic drivers does not reflect the economic realities in these mountain park communities, and as such, is not an effective tool for understanding and addressing the challenges associated with being major international tourist destinations. This, too, has important implications beyond this region, as the ability of these communities to attract and serve visitors benefits Alberta as a whole, other Alberta communities, and Canada.
Reliable data to effectively inform
While the economic regions (4840 & 4870) were combined to capture a more reliable figure about its labour markets, this change has produced LFS data that, in some cases, are neither useful nor reliable, and have even been detrimental to economic development. Ensuring the boundaries of Alberta’s economic regions allow for reliable LFS results that reflect the dynamics and differences in the economic landscape is necessary to foster resilient communities and robust local economies, and drive vitality and competitiveness within Alberta’s economy.
In 2021, Our Chamber submitted a policy resolution regarding "Safer workplaces for all vulnerable highway workers" as seen below, followed by the recent media release from the Government of Alberta touting "Improving safety for roadside workers".
We are pleased to see the positive response to our proposed recommendations.
Safer Workplaces for All Vulnerable Highway Workers Sponsor: Grande Prairie & District Chamber of Commerce
Issue
Every day, thousands of roadside workers face risks while at work on Alberta highways and roads. Emergency vehicles1 and tow trucks with flashing lights are protected by Alberta’s slow down move over law; 2 yet the law excludes vulnerable very short duration roadside workers. Traffic legally passes directly beside these roadside workers without reducing speed or moving over. Further, in Alberta, this law applies only to the lane immediately beside the stopped vehicle, not all lanes travelling in the same direction, creating motorist confusion and increasing risks to all on the road. Amendments to provincial legislation are required to make roads safer for all Alberta roadside workers.
Background
Safe and well-maintained transportation networks across Alberta are vital to driving economic activity, and connecting people and communities. Ensuring the safety and well-being of those roadside workers who keep our highways/roads safe and well-maintained is critical. The road is their workplace and their jobs sometimes require that they park vehicles/equipment on or along the side of the road. Alberta roadside workers, supported by other stakeholders, have been lobbying for change to provincial traffic laws to better protect them in this high-risk environment.
Slow down move over: equal protection for all roadside workers In 2005, Alberta established legislation to create safer conditions for roadside workers. This slow down move over law requires drivers in the adjacent lane to slow to 60 km/hr or slower when passing emergency vehicles with flashing lights, including tow trucks. (Current legislation also requires motorists to observe the posted speed limit in construction zones.) The slow down move over law, however, does not include all vulnerable roadside workers. It excludes those stationery workers conducting “very short duration work”3 (projects up to 30 minutes, as defined by Alberta Transportation). This includes highway maintenance workers, sign installers, line locaters, surveyors, survey crews, etc.
What this means is that when these individuals are stationery and working on the shoulder of the road, vehicles can legally pass in the lane directly beside them without moving over or slowing down – in some cases travelling at speeds as high as 110 km/hr (or higher if exceeding the speed limit). Left completely unprotected by a buffer and slower speed, these workers are at heightened risk of being hit or killed. In addition, these roadside workers are also required to work in emergency situations, in low light, at night or in inclement weather when visibility is poor. Many cite examples of near misses and collisions while on the job. For example, in an eight-month period, one Grande Prairie area line locating company reported vehicle damage on three occasions from passing traffic. In 2015, British Columbia modified its slow down move over rule in response to safety concerns voiced by roadside workers who had been excluded from the law. The law today now includes all roadside workers displaying a flashing light on their vehicle.4
Slow down and move over: align with other provinces for better protection Lobby efforts are also underway for further change to this law to create a safer workplace for roadside workers protected under this law. The change proposes that vehicles in all lanes moving in the same direction, not just the adjacent one, slow down and move over when a designated roadside vehicle is present. On a single-lane, undivided highway, oncoming traffic would also slow down.
In every other province in Canada with slow down move over legislation, the rule applies to all traffic lanes in the same direction of travel. According to the Alberta Motor Association (AMA), the problem with Alberta’s law is that many drivers are unclear whether or not they are to slow down, resulting in scattered behaviour and massive speed variations. As well, hazards arise when vehicles slowing down attempt to merge into a lane with fast-moving vehicles.5
Amending legislation and aligning it with the rest of Canada would reduce motorist confusion. It is important to note, however, that while such a change will create a safer environment for workers currently protected under slow down move over, very short duration roadside workers will only benefit from this change if included under the law.
Conclusion
All roadside workers in Alberta have the right to a safe workplace. In December 2020, the Government of Alberta expressed its commitment to the safety of all roadside workers by “actively looking at ways to improve safety on Alberta roads.”6 These amendments to Alberta’s traffic legislation support that commitment by creating a safer working environment for this workforce and the motorists sharing the road with them.
The Alberta Chambers of Commerce Recommends that the Government of Alberta:
1. Amend Alberta’s Traffic Safety Act (section 115) so stationery very short duration workers conducting roadside work have the same protection as other highway workers already included under the Act.
2. Amend Alberta’s Traffic Safety Act requiring that vehicles in all traffic lanes in the same direction of travel slow down and move over, not just the adjacent lane. Consideration should also be given to include opposite direction traffic on two-lane, undivided highways.
Improving safety for roadside workers
March 16, 2022
Bill 5 will toughen rules to protect all roadside workers and make Alberta’s highways safer.
The Traffic Safety Amendment Act will require all motorists traveling in the same direction to slow down to at least 60 km/h when passing a stopped roadside worker vehicle with its lights flashing.
The proposed changes will also require motorists traveling in the opposite direction on single lane highways to slow down to 60 km/h when passing.
“Roadside workers work in a high-risk environment and deserve the best protection so that they can go home safely to their families at the end of their shift. That’s why, following consultations with the public and stakeholders, Alberta’s government is proposing these changes to protect all those working along our highways.”
Rajan Sawhney, Minister of Transportation
Proposed changes under Bill 5 will give similar protection to roadside maintenance workers and snowplow operators that first responders and tow truck operators currently have under the Traffic Safety Act.
“Near misses and collisions are a regular occurrence for Alberta’s tow truck operators, emergency responders and other roadside workers. We applaud these changes as an important first step in improving the safety of these essential workers and look forward to our continued work in further improving their visibility and safety. We ask all Albertans to take care when passing a roadside scene. Those few extra seconds can make all the difference in keeping someone’s loved on safe.”
Michelle Chimko, president and CEO, Alberta Motor Association
“Alberta’s road construction and maintenance industry puts worker safety first. This legislation is greatly appreciated because we need drivers to slow down and do their part to make their highways – our worksites – safe and efficient for all.”
Ron Glen, CEO, Alberta Roadbuilders and Heavy Construction Association
“Highway maintenance crews throughout our industry provide critical services to our province’s expansive highway and road network, for the benefit of all Albertans. It is gratifying to see our government taking deliberate and proactive measures to improve safety for all highway maintenance and roadside personnel.”
Kelly McManus, president, Transportation and Highway Operations, LaPrairie Group of Companies
“Road safety and the safety of personnel is a high priority across Alberta. Bill 5 considers the concerns that were raised by Albertans and is intended to protect road users and workers, create safety programs that encompass best practices, as well as a province with the highest quality road infrastructure for the transportation of people, goods, and services.”
Amber Link, reeve, Wheatland County
Quick facts
- Alberta’s Government will conduct an educational campaign for all drivers prior to the anticipated enforcement date of spring 2023.
- About 15,000 Albertans responded to an online survey from March 16 to April 6, 2021:
- 92 per cent supported requiring all vehicles to provide one lane of space when passing a roadside worker vehicle when its lights are flashing.
- 60 felt that the current passing laws were inadequate.
- Current fines for passing an emergency vehicle on the side of the road can range from $136 to $826, depending on the speed.
- Between March 2018 and March 2021, there were 128 collisions involving snowplows contracted by Alberta Transportation.
- The Alberta Motor Association reported that since December 2019, there have been 36 near misses and at least 13 serious roadside incidents involving Alberta tow trucks and passing vehicles - collisions resulting in injury, hospitalization and even death.
Keeping all Albertans – workers and drivers – safe on the road is a priority. Alberta has been one of only two provinces without move over legislation, but Alberta’s government has changed that.
To increase safety for all roadside workers, starting Sept. 1, drivers in the lane closest to any roadside worker vehicle stopped at the side of the road with its lights flashing must slow down to 60 km/h or the posted speed limit, whichever is lower. Drivers must also move over to the far lane if it’s safe to do so and take reasonable steps to allow other drivers to move over as well.
Currently, only tow truck drivers and first responders are protected under the Traffic Safety Act, but now all roadside workers stopped on the side of the road, with their flashing lights activated, will be covered by these protections.
“This is a common-sense rule change. If you see any flashing lights and people working on the side of the road, slow down to 60 km/h or move over to make an open lane beside them. We want to protect our police, paramedics, maintenance workers and tow truck drivers so they can get home safely at the end of the day. These people proudly serve Alberta, and we want to make sure we look out for them.”
The new roadside worker safety rules will apply to all roadside workers, including first responders, tow truck operators, highway maintenance workers and snowplow operators.
“Worker safety is the top priority of our highway maintenance contractor member companies. While we provide training to employees so they can work safely around traffic, we rely on drivers to do their part to slow and make space for workers and machinery. ARHCA thanks all members of the legislature who supported Bill 5 for their concern for our employees’ lives.”
Slowing down and moving over for all roadside workers will keep everyone safe and ensure traffic continues to flow efficiently. To help enforce these changes, fines and demerits will be applied for unsafe behaviours when passing roadside workers and snowplows.
“The Alberta Association of Chiefs of Police (AACP) is committed to road safety for all Albertans. This initiative of Transportation and Economic Corridors is another step towards enhancing these goals. We look forward to working with the ministry and other partners to further the work of keeping Albertans safe on our roadways.”
“These new measures will undoubtedly protect our highway maintenance and snowplow crews. Slowing down when passing roadside workers will be a minor impact on drivers that has a tremendous effect on the safety of our workforce. No matter the season, our crews strive to get the travelling public home safely, and these changes ensure our crews will get home safely too.”
Quick facts
- According to Alberta’s Workers’ Compensation Board (WCB), there were 2,229 injuries involving workers being struck by a vehicle between 2014 and 2018.
- Between March 2018 and March 2021, there were approximately 130 collisions involving snowplows contracted by Transportation and Economic Corridors.
- During the winter of 2022-23, there were 37 collisions involving a government-contracted snowplow.
- Failure to comply with these rules can result in a fine and three demerit points:
- $243 and three demerit points for failing to slow down to the maximum speed limit when passing stopped roadside workers.
- $243 fine and three demerit points for failing to allow other drivers to move into a traffic lane farther from a stopped emergency vehicle, tow truck or roadside work vehicle.
- A fine of $324 and three demerit points for unsafe passing of snowplows.
Current Policies Flagged for Follow Up by our Chamber
Issue
The agriculture industry significantly contributes to Alberta’s economy and enhancing the strength of the sector is an important priority. It is particularly important for Alberta’s agri-food industry to market their products in a way that reflects the link between ‘Grown-in-Canada’ product and a supply chain, environment, standard, and identity that is uniquely and 100% Canadian.
Background
Country of Origin (COO) labelling is regulated by the Government of Canada and labelling standards must comply with the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade Rules16 and Codex standards which serves to prevent protectionist agendas and technical barriers to trade. Within this regulatory framework, it is particularly important for Alberta’s agri-food industry to champion a voluntary ‘Made in Canada’ brand in order to increase value and to provide a marketing link between grown-in-Canada product and the strong Canadian standards for food safety and environmental stewardship.
COO labelling is viewed as a critical mechanism to help ensure consumers can correctly connect with products, enable producers to adapt production to meet consumer demands and expectations and promote social or political-economic objectives (e.g. health outcomes, growth in desirable sectors, increased exports).17 Informing consumers of the origin of food products via labelling is motivated by the recognition that geography is often correlated with a product’s overall quality, or, in the stronger case, geography may even be a determinant of a product’s ultimate realized quality.18
The What We Heard Report (2021) released as a result of the consultation held on the Next Agricultural Policy Framework stated Public Trust as a current and emerging challenge facing the sector (p.9). "Respondents conveyed that educating the public and promoting the great work that occurs across the value chain is very important for the success of the industry, now and for years to come.”19 A unified campaign focused on marketing the agri-food industry both domestically and internationally is required to educate the public and promote Alberta and Canada’s agri-food industry.
The agri-food industry includes value-added agriculture and agri-food processing which are often forgotten as a vital part of the industry. The same What We Heard Report noted “Value-Added Growth and Attracting Business to Alberta” (p.8) as a significant growth opportunity for the industry. With the agri-food industry target set to increase by over 27% to $225 billion dollars in 2025,20 all sectors must be given the opportunity to reach their full potential through a unified COO brand.
Given the size of the agriculture industry in Alberta, the provincial government should be partnering to promote locally grown and processed agriculture products to position the Alberta agriculture industry as a leading force in Canada. The Next Agricultural Policy Framework (NAPF) also includes the Agri- Marketing program, a federal-only program, which provides funding for market development and promotion activities.21 In 2019, the Federal government unveiled the ‘Canada Brand’ which is currently undergoing a brand refresh. This branding toolbox has included a suite of graphics, images and messaging that can help brand products and leverage consumers' positive perceptions of Canada.
However, the qualifications for the brand include even more lax qualifications than “Made in Canada” and “Product of Canada” labels.22 While this is a step in the right direction, products that are ‘grown in Canada’ signify a supply chain, environment, standard, and identity that is uniquely and 100% Canadian.
The Alberta government has a responsibility to market Alberta’s agriculture, particularly when there is a very clear mandate from the agriculture industry in Alberta to promote locally grown, sourced, and produced food and demand for easily identified Canadian products. However, while there are various opportunities for marketing the agri-food industry, there is no distinct, recognizable, and unified brand. Products with a regulated COO can command between 21% - 39% higher price premiums compared with non-regulated regional labels.23 This serves to reinforce the importance of a distinct, recognizable, and unified ‘Grown in Canada Brand’. Therefore, because of the prominence of the agri-food industry in Alberta, Alberta is uniquely positioned to take the lead on creating a ‘Grown in Canada brand’ that reflects the safe, sustainable, and high-quality agri-food products.
Not only will an Alberta led ‘Grown in Canada’ brand advocate for a prominent industry in Alberta, it provides the opportunity to expand the domestic market, increase awareness among the public of the high standards in the agri-food industry, and signify products that are 100% Canadian.
The Alberta Chambers of Commerce recommends the Government of Alberta:
- Work with the Government of Canada to expand on “Canada Brand” to create a voluntary, “Grown-in-Canada” label that would identify with 100% Canadian-grown product that would include a single unified label, logo, image, and theme.
- Work with the Government of Canada to develop a unified public education strategy showcasing the agri-food industry’s practice of environmental stewardship resulting in reliable, sustainable and high-quality agri-food and value-added products.
16 https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/tbt_e.htm
17 Consumers’ Preferences for Geographical Origin Labels: Evidence from the Canadian Olive Oil Market
18 Barham E. (2003) “Translating Terroir: The Global Challenge of French AOC Labelling,” Journal of Rural Studies Josling T. (2006) “The War on Terroir: Geographical Indications as a Transatlantic Trade Conflict” Journal of Agricultural Economics
19 Government of Alberta. 2021. What We Heard Report. https://www.alberta.ca/assets/documents/afred-what- weheard-report-next-policy-framework.pdf
20 Canada’s Economic Strategy Table: Agri-food’: 3 https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/098.nsf/vwapj/ISEDC_Agri- Food_E.pdf/$file/ISEDC_Agri-Food_E.pdf
21 NAPF report https://www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Committee/421/AGRI/Reports/RP8717216/agrirp05/agrirp05e.pdf
22 https://marquecanadabrand.agr.gc.ca/intro/index-eng.html
23 A Meta-Analysis of Geographical Indication Food Valuation Studies - 214
Issue
Serious challenges persist within Alberta's natural gas system which negatively impacts natural gas supply chain reliability, industry operations, and investor confidence. These challenges can and should be addressed to better manage the current system demand and industry operations and to further position Alberta as an industrial investment location of choice. With an abundance of natural resources, developing world-class infrastructure would provide investor confidence in the competitive advantage Alberta has for attracting new investment.
Given the essential role hydrogen has in achieving net-zero goals it will be essential to improve the natural gas system reliability to ensure enhanced reliability of the production of this vital clean fuel of the future and enable the hydrogen economy to develop in a safe, reliable, and sustainable manner.
Background
Natural gas is an important economic driver in Alberta, with over 60% of Canadian marketable natural gas being produced within Alberta.117 According to the Government of Alberta, "83% of natural gas consumed in Alberta is used by the industrial, electrical generation, transportation and other sectors. Natural gas is also an important raw material for the province’s oil sands and electric power-generation industries."118 Natural gas is also the main raw input for hydrogen production, a key material used for producing transportation fuels, hydrogen peroxide, nickel, cobalt, ethane, and propane for Alberta, Canada, and the world.
Natural gas is supplied by federally regulated monopolies, similar to rail transportation. Currently, there are no quality specifications for natural gas at the delivery point for consumers in Alberta and this can adversely impact downstream users. Quality excursions have been experienced in Alberta and such events can have significant downstream impacts on industrial facilities and subsequently on consumer markets. Low-quality natural gas can cause production delays, damage to facilities, and quality impacts on derivative products of natural gas.
Another significant cause of concern is firm supply reliability. Natural gas customers pay a premium for "firm supply", which by definition means this supply will not be interrupted, however; Alberta companies have experienced interruptions in firm supply and continue to see risk to firm capacity supply reliability. Firm supply interruptions are the fault of the natural gas provider, typically due to a system failure. For example, a provider will experience a compressor failure, and it will be discovered a single component failure in the system results in supply interruptions. Why aren't there built-in system redundancies? Additionally, extreme cold ambient temperatures should not be a factor in firm capacity supply reliability as these temperatures are custom for Alberta to experience annually.
Maintenance coordination is also a challenge as it is not happening appropriately between natural gas providers and receivers to minimize the effects of supply interruptions. There are regular occurrences when natural gas supplier maintenance activities are scheduled during periods of high system demand. Implications of both issues include operational concerns, downtime-related costs, and decreased confidence in the supplier, supply chain and potential investors.
There are also serious concerns for timelines to secure natural gas volumes in Alberta (for existing or new facilities). Currently, firm supply is available with a 4+ year lead time, while new facilities can be built within a two- to three-year window. This misalignment of natural gas infrastructure expansion (or new build) and project development timelines will discourage new investment in Alberta.
Lastly, the advancement of hydrogen blending into the existing natural gas system, if not done carefully, risks exacerbating these chronic system reliability issues. Introduction of hydrogen into legacy natural gas systems of varying age and specification can result in leaks or equipment performance issues due to its different properties and its interaction with piping and component materials. If sections of piping require replacement to ensure safe operation, this could worsen the maintenance coordination issues discussed above. Gas consumers may also need to retrofit equipment to use blends of hydrogen and natural gas due to the lower heating value of hydrogen and the propensity for higher NOx emissions when combusted.
The Alberta Chambers of Commerce recommends the Government of Alberta work with natural gas suppliers and infrastructure suppliers and, where applicable, the federal government to:
- Set quality standards for natural gas specifically at the delivery point and create provisions for losses related to the delivery of off-spec natural gas;
- Ensure timely development of new, and expansion of existing, natural gas supply infrastructure to support growing natural gas demand, attract new projects, and secure further investment in Alberta;
- Streamline regulation and approval process for critical infrastructure builds, such as pipelines, and;
- Advance recommendations for hydrogen blending in existing natural gas systems only after multi-year pilot studies have been completed to ensure that the blending levels proposed can be managed safely, without adverse reliability impacts, and at a reasonable cost to consumers.
Issue
Government needs to strike a balance between achieving its emission reduction goals and preserving the competitiveness of the economy using pragmatic, flexible and innovative solutions.
Background
We recognize that Alberta’s emissions are challenging to reduce for three primary reasons. First, our population and economic growth rates, as well as our incomes, have grown faster than other provinces,200 and emissions are found to positively correlate with economic growth.201 Second, our large, anchor industries are emissions-intensive and consist of long-lived assets (oil sands plants, gas plants, chemical production, refineries, etc.) which can improve performance over time, but not as rapidly as other sectors with shorter asset lives.202 According to Canada’s Ecofiscal Commission, 18% of Alberta’s economy would qualify, under internationally recognized standards, as being both emissions-intensive and trade-exposed (compared to 2% in B.C. and Ontario and 1% in Quebec).203 Finally, the choice of fuels for electricity generation drives emissions.
The Technology Innovation and Emissions Reduction (TIER) program replaced the Carbon Competitiveness Incentive Regulation (CCIR) for large industrial emitters on January 1, 2020 and was updated following consultations in December of 2022.204
Since Alberta’s economy is particularly sensitive, there is concern that unduly aggressive actions taken to reduce emissions in Alberta may not lead to real emissions reductions. Instead, investment may shift to other jurisdictions without stringent GHG policies, negatively affecting Alberta’s economy and not ultimately impacting global greenhouse gas emissions due to carbon leakage. Ensuring that our economy and small businesses remain vibrant and competitive is imperative as small businesses make up 87% of all businesses in the province.205 Government needs to strike a balance between achieving its emissions goals and preserving the competitiveness of a critical part of the economy.
There are many businesses, industries and municipalities that are looking to reduce their carbon footprint by converting to natural gas as an alternate energy source. While still a source of GHG emissions, in comparison with other fuel sources natural gas is less carbon intensive, relatively cleanburning, abundant, safe, reliable and efficient. Burning natural gas gives off much fewer toxic emissions than coal or oil and for the same amount of energy produced; gas emits 30% less carbon dioxide when burned than oil, and as much as 45% less than coal.206 Despite this known benefit, natural gas still has significant carbon pricing applied.
An additional consideration should be measuring the total net contribution of GHG and rewarding those companies and industries who aim to mitigate their output. For example, the greenhouse industry, while consuming large amounts of natural gas, also grows plants that absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Compound the carbon absorption with innovations like green carbon capture and the environmental impact in the form of GHG is very low. Taking the final net carbon footprint as a benchmark will serve the dual purpose of keeping industries competitive and innovative while also promoting tangible and measurable emissions reductions.
Furthermore, consideration of organizations that aim to have a positive environmental impact by taking specific action to clean the environment. An example of which could be a reclamation company or a hydrovac company. Both examples would have to pay the carbon tax, however neither would get additional credits for the clean-up work they do.
Earmarking a portion of the funds collected through the TIER program to create educational tools that highlight the high ethical, environmental, and sustainable standards of the natural resource sector in Alberta will lay the groundwork for the education of Albertans. The goal of any climate policy is to change behavior and drive businesses and consumers to make choices that support low or zero carbon products. The provincial government must allow for the most effective way to encourage these new patterns of behaviour. Government should continue to provide incentives through tax credits to emerging alternative energy innovations which may provide wider spread and supportable long-term cooperation towards a low carbon economy.
Incentives enable businesses to mitigate the threat of climate change with a focus on new emerging industries and opportunities to innovate. Climate change can offer an opportunity to harness Alberta’s expertise and availability of technical workers and concentrate on emerging prospects such as artificial intelligence (AI) and cleantech. The expected economic gain of over $1 trillion dollars, Canada wide, in climate change innovation should be headquartered in Alberta as part of modernization, growth, and expansion to ensure that Alberta is ahead of the curve.
Flexibility to allow businesses to use innovative market driven solutions to fill the gaps between conventional and renewable forms of energy must be encouraged. Offering equal tax incentives between emerging technologies and those alternative energy sources already established, like solar and wind, will ensure that the government is not dictating “winners and losers”. Alternatives and solutions must be driven by consumers and businesses and not dictated by government to ensure the best overall result. For example, the UK offers an accelerated depreciation allowance for energy efficiency equipment and technology, so that companies can replace old, energy consuming equipment with better models, which allows them to cut their operational costs.
The balance between preserving the economy while converting to low carbon emissions requires policies that are effective while also politically palatable. If policies and programs are applied ineffectively or seem to be incomplete and unduly punitive their chances of being successful and leading the charge to change behaviour will be unsustainable. There are numerous opportunities available that Alberta must seize in order to demonstrate its adaptability, resiliency and reinforce its long-held tradition of being pioneers in spirit and action. Capitalizing on the opportunities that arise from adapting to a low emissions economy is a path to economic sustainability which Alberta is uniquely positioned to undertake.
Climate change is not possible in a single political cycle and needs buy in from society and government as a whole. Any policy implemented needs to be meaningful, pragmatic, sensible and flexible in order to achieve the final goal of emissions reductions and environmental preservation.
Additionally, when measuring the success of any climate change effort all costs (direct and indirect) need to be considered so that the real impact on business and the economy can be assessed and policy adjusted to strike the balance between a healthy economy and reduction of emissions.
The Alberta Chambers of Commerce recommends the Government of Alberta:
- Ensure carbon policies maintain competitiveness with like jurisdictions in Canada and the United States that have similar investment interests.
- Communicate the goals and the timelines of climate policies and amendments or modification plans if the goals and timelines are not met.
- Ensure there is cost neutrality within the business sector and that revenue from carbon pricing is available and cycled back to the business community through other tax incentives and capital cost allowances.
- Provide pathways for market driven solutions through tax incentives to all emerging technologies for carbon reductions to allow consumers and businesses the freedom to drive the choices towards preferred lower carbon options.
- Only implement a levy on natural gas when a less carbon intensive and cost effective solution is available.
- Implement options to measure net carbon impact and only apply levies to the net amount, taking into account the measures used to mitigate the total carbon footprint, including absorption of carbon dioxide and technologies such as green carbon capture.
- Allocate a portion of levies collected for the purpose of creating and providing educational programming tools related to natural resource development including both energy and agriculture.
- Measure both the direct and indirect cost impacts of climate policies.
200 Frew, N. (2022). Growth rate slows, but Alberta population still up nearly 200,000 over 2016: census. CBC News. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/alberta-population-dwelling-2021-census-1.6344858
201 Onofrei M., Vatamanu A.F., and Cigu E. (2022). The Relationship Between Economic Growth and CO2 Emissions in EU Countries: A Cointegration Analysis. Frontiers in Environmental Science. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2022.934885
202 Climate Leadership Report to the Minister: https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/212a6266-b8d3-4822-b208- 9221da2a0966/resource/9f52cd8e-5477-45a6-a337-f2d64d091cf9/download/2015-climate-leadership-report-tominister.pdf
203 https://ecofiscal.ca/reports/provincial-carbon-pricing-competitiveness-pressures
204 APPENDIX: Emissions Management and Climate Resilience Act. Technology Innovation and Emissions Reduction Amendment Regulation. https://kings-printer.alberta.ca/documents/Orders/Orders_in_Council/2022/2022_403.html
205 Holden, M. (2022). Jobs and job growth in Alberta by business size. Business Council of Alberta. https://businesscouncilab.com/work/jobs-and-job-growth-in-alberta-by-business- size/#:~:text=It%20is%20well%2Destablished%20that,are%20almost%20identical%20nation%2Dwide.
206 http://naturalgas.org/environment/naturalgas/
Issue
Current federal legislation does not allow for meat, poultry, eggs, dairy products, fruits and vegetables to cross provincial/territorial borders, or to be exported out of Canada unless these products are processed in a federally licensed facility. The new Safe Food for Canadians Act will expand this to include all foods shipped out of province/territory. The Canadian government claims that this is required to ensure that Canada fulfils its commitments under current world trade agreements.
Background
Currently, implementation of Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) regulations and licensing requirements is cost prohibitive to many small to mid-sized processors and constitute a major barrier to interprovincial and international trade. The processor’s share of these costs is excessive when compared to costs incurred by their competitors for similar services in other jurisdictions, notably in the USA. This places Canadian processors at a disadvantage to many competitors.
SMEs advise that current CFIA food safety regulations are outdated and need to be revised to remove unnecessary regulations that lack adequate scientific validation of enhancing food safety outcomes while creating a significant impediment to business interests. There is also a need to minimize duplication of administration costs between provincial/territorial and federal regulators.
Facility construction requirements, along with steep inspection, licensing and testing fees all constitute major obstacles for processors that want to trade interprovincially or internationally. Unified provincial/territorial standards and regulations, with increased accessibility to federal licensing would be of significant financial benefit to small and medium sized processors that want to increase their business through interprovincial or international trade. Easy to implement, cost competitive, and uniform food safety standards and regulations, for both interprovincial and export markets, are required, without compromising food safety standards.
With the current CFIA modernization in progress, it is important to the competitiveness of Canadian businesses to reduce barriers to trade and enhance business growth opportunities. This is especially important with the impending impact of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA).
Canadian processors trading interprovincially or internationally operate at a disadvantage to international competitors. For example, the United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service (USDA FSIS) does not levy licensing and inspection fees on their food processing plants (up to the first 40 hours per week). As a comparison, the Province of Alberta charges $4 per hour for the first 7.25 hours per day. CFIA inspection stations cost from $9,855 per year for one red meat station to $16,218 per year for a poultry station. If an abattoir is processing more than 25 cattle/hogs per hour or 28 birds per minute, they must purchase an additional table. There is also the requirement to pay for inspection fees and various tests for Listeria, Salmonella, and E. coli.
Before food products are imported into Canada, the CFIA conducts an initial inspection of the processing plant from which these products originated, and then conducts random inspections of the imported products. This same oversight and outcome-based approach should be applied to all interprovincial and international trade.
Interprovincial trade of agriculture and food products comprises a major portion of the Canadian agri-food business. “From 2000 to 2005, interprovincial exports of agricultural and food products were higher than Canada’s agri-food exports to the United States. Interprovincial exports of agrifood products rose by 20% during this period, increasing from $21 billion to $25 billion in value. During this period, the value of agri-food exports to the United States was between $16 billion and $20 billion.”
While the exact cost of interprovincial trade barriers caused by differing food regulations is not known, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce estimates that internal barriers to trade cost the Canadian economy up to $14 billion each year. While much of this loss can be attributed to the limited potential customer base, there is also a 55% overlap of administrative and regulatory service between Canada and Alberta.
Despite numerous efforts to reduce interprovincial trade barriers such as the Agreement on Internal Trade (AIT) and regional trade agreements such as the New West Partnership Trade Agreement (NWPTA), the Atlantic Procurement Agreement (APA), the British Columbia – Alberta Trade, Investment, and Labour Mobility Agreement (TILMA), and the Agreement on the Opening of Public Procurement for Ontario and Quebec (AOPPOQ), the problems persist and are an obstacle to the growth and profitability of Canadian businesses.
The Alberta Chambers of Commerce recommends the Government of Canada:
- Works collaboratively with provincial/territorial and federal inspection agencies to effect positive changes to food safety outcome inspections, enabling processors to compete more efficiently in both domestic and international markets: a) To support a single industry outcome that can be implemented with consistency and cost- effectiveness across Canada by the provinces/territories, with each provincial/territorial regulator subject to Canadian Food Inspection Agency oversight; b) The food safety regulations need to be reviewed for relevancy and modified/broadened if current criteria are unnecessarily restrictive and insensitive to sound business interests; and c) The implementation must be consistent and cost-effective throughout the food distribution chain, without compromising Canada’s reputation for high food safety standards; and
- Reassess inspection and regulatory costs and how they are allocated, to enable processors to trade across provincial or national borders, without being at a competitive disadvantage.
Issue
Literature has long suggested that Alberta has the natural assets and technical feasibility to support further renewable energy development.161 That being said, Alberta’s renewable energy generation is low compared to the other provinces.162,163 Despite the importance and potential of renewable energy as part of a low carbon future, Alberta generated 11% of its electricity in 2017 from renewable sources,164 which is significantly less than the national rate of 66% renewable generation.165 Alberta’s largest source of renewable energy is wind power, generated from turbines often built together at wind farms on rural land, producing roughly 5% of total electricity in the province.
Background
Alberta’s electricity market is deregulated, allowing private generators to participate in a competitive power pool. Subject to the approval of the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC), any generator can connect to the grid, where the transmission network allows buyers to purchase the energy with Power Purchase Agreements.166 Independent Power Producers make competitive offers to sell their energy to the grid and receive a price at the intersection of electricity supply and demand on an hourly basis.167 Smaller energy producers (under 5 MW) can develop projects under the MicroGeneration Regulation, allowing energy generation from renewable or alternative sources to offset the generator’s use, as well as sell back excess power to the grid.168
As the third largest producer of energy in Canada, Alberta trades electricity with British Columbia, Saskatchewan and Montana.169 In 2017, Alberta was an electricity importer.170 The bulk of Alberta’s energy comes from fossil fuel sources, with roughly 45% of electricity generated coming from coal and another 45% from natural gas in 2018.171 Despite having a number of legacy hydroelectric dams built in the 1900s, renewable electricity generation was quickly outpaced by fossil fuel energy development.
The Government of Alberta established a goal of generating 30% of electric energy from renewable sources by 2030 within the Renewable Electricity Act, passed in 2016.172 To facilitate the development of renewable projects to meet this target, the AESO developed and implemented the Renewable Electricity Program (REP). This program provides an Indexed Renewable Energy Credit, where the government pays or is paid the difference between the pool price for wholesale electricity sale and a bid price that represents the lowest acceptable cost for the renewable project.173 This program was designed to attract the most bidders by allocating the market price risk and opportunity to the Government of Alberta, providing revenue certainty for the renewable project owner174. In the first three rounds of the REP, 12 projects were selected to receive this funding, totaling 1,359.3 MW of renewable capacity to be operational by 2021. The program was able to procure the lowest renewable electricity prices in Canada.175
In anticipation of introducing more renewable energy, the AESO recommended a transition from an energy-only market structure to a capacity market structure.176 Under a capacity market, generators would be compensated for both producing energy and for providing capacity to produce energy.177 This transition was recommended to ensure the system was reliable, provided stable revenue, drove innovation and cost discipline, and was adaptable to policy decisions.178 The AESO determined that this transition would be required to accommodate the greater number of renewable generators being introduced by providing greater price stability and to incentivize investors to develop more renewable and natural gas projects because of the revenue sustainability.179 However, critics of the program cited concerns about oversupply and higher prices.
However, following the 2019 election, the current government, passed a bill terminating both the next round of REP and the Alberta Carbon Tax.180 These policy changes are one reason the AESO has forecast that Alberta will not reach 30% renewable capacity by 2030.181 There are several shovel ready projects in Alberta. AESO reports that 49 solar and wind generation projects from international and provincial players already received regulatory approval for construction. These projects have a combined generation capacity of 3,805 megawatts, including 300 MW wind project developed by EDP Renewables and several 200 MW wind projects developed by ENMAX, BluEarth Renewables and Suncor. Combined, these projects could create over $8 billion of investment in Alberta and more than 10,400 jobs by 2024.
In the wake of COVID-19, it only makes sense to hedge our public bets by diversifying into the smallscale renewable energy market, particularly in Alberta where there is significant economic activity to be unlocked by enabling renewables at a faster pace. Leveraging stimulus spending to reduce barriers for renewable energy will help Alberta tap into the potential of its vast renewable energy resources, which will mean more jobs, more investment coming to the province and affordable electricity.
The Alberta Chambers of Commerce recommends the Government of Alberta:
- Set clear targets and make commensurate investments in energy storage projects to ensure Alberta can leverage its opportunities in renewable energy;
- Develop outreach programs to attract students to relevant academic programs – with the aim of producing a diverse, highly skilled work force of post-secondary graduates and/or tradespersons;
- Continue to invest in pilot projects across Alberta and neighboring provinces, to further level the playing field for renewables on the provincial grid; and 4. Engage in a united action with other levels of government, electricity employers, and academic institutions to support education and training or retraining to optimize the labour potential of current workers.
161https://www.cangea.ca/uploads/3/0/9/7/30973335/2288_deep_dive_analysis_of_best_geothermal_reservoirs_fo r_commercial_development_in_alberta_-_final_report_20170404.pdf
162 http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/eccc/En4-294-2016-eng.pdf
163 https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/2bf1b608-8e3b-4bc9-854e-23d19bbecbdc/resource/a238daa7-1513-4ac0-841ed512d73a9c16/download/energy.pdf
164 National Energy Board (2019). Provincial and Territorial Energy Profiles – Alberta.
165 https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/en/data-analysis/canada-energy-future/2020/canada-energy-futures-2020.pdf
166 https://www.pembina.org/reports/plugging-in-2018.pdf
167 Ibid.
168 https://www.alberta.ca/micro-generation.aspx
169 https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/en/data-analysis/energy-markets/provincial-territorial-energy-profiles/provincialterritorial-energy-profiles-alberta.html
170 https://www.alberta.ca/micro-generation.aspx
171 National Energy Board (2019). Provincial and Territorial Energy Profiles – Alberta.
172 https://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Acts/r16p5.pdf
173 https://www.aeso.ca/market/renewable-electricity-program/about-the-program/
174 https://www.aeso.ca/assets/Uploads/AESO-RenewableElectricityProgramRecommendations-Report.pdf
175 https://www.aeso.ca/assets/Uploads/2019-Transmission-Capability-Assessment-Final-18Apr2019.pdf
176 AESO (2016). Alberta’s Wholesale Electricity Market Transition Recommendation.
177 Ibid. 178 Ibid. 179 Ibid.
180 https://globalnews.ca/news/5334599/alberta-carbon-tax-ucp-bill-kenney/
181 https://calgaryherald.com/business/local-business/renewable-electricity-target-downgraded-by-albertas-electricsystem-operator
Issue
Some businesses whose operations use licensed vehicles off public roads pay fuel taxes intended for the maintenance of infrastructure they don’t use. A rebate for these inappropriate taxes would support the growth of industries such as oil and gas, mining, and logging.
Background
In 2011, Alberta eliminated rebates for fuel purchased for off-road purposes in licensed vehicles. This rebate provided relief for businesses who drove their vehicles predominantly off public roads during exploration or on private roads. Extraction industries, particularly mining and logging were particularly impacted by the change. In addition, businesses operating in non-urban and northern areas of the province are disproportionately affected, given that non-maintained roads vastly outnumber maintained roads and highways in those regions.
By allowing businesses to claim back a portion of the taxes paid at the pump, the Alberta government had demonstrated a long-term commitment to ensuring fairness, by rebating the portion of taxes collected on fuel that is not expended on the roads these taxes are meant to maintain. When the province announced its elimination of former rebate programs, it cited abuses by subscribers who drove their licensed vehicles on publicly maintained roads and highways. While most licensed vehicles are operated in part on public roads, an effective rebate could account for this by requiring applicants to account for the extent of their off-road use in applications. This proportion would ensure that appropriate and fair taxation is extracted from all users. Similar accounting and rebating methods are already implemented for many businesses regarding the use of vehicles used for both personal and business purposes.
Four other jurisdictions in Canada – British Columbia, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Yukon – currently offer rebate programs for licensed vehicles used in off-highway industry operations. With businesses located in other Canadian jurisdictions eligible to claim rebates on clear diesel and gasoline, Alberta businesses are at a significant disadvantage.
If Alberta is to maintain and strengthen its position as a global energy leader, it must restore the competitiveness of and fairness for its businesses by developing a rebate that directly impacts their operations.
The Alberta Chambers of Commerce recommends the Government of Alberta:
- Implement a rebate on fuel taxes for licensed vehicles to the extent they are used for business purposes off publicly maintained roads.
Issue
The size and scope of equipment and machinery being used for industrial and agricultural purposes has changed dramatically over the past number of years. Transportation laws need to strike the delicate balance between maintaining public roadways and facilitating business operations.
Background
Municipalities, on behalf of the province, are responsible for the maintenance and upgrading of the majority of roads that farmers and industry access. Many of the aging roads were built poorly relative to today’s standard. For example, trees and black dirt were used as fill, and are not constructed to be able to weight-bear today’s large equipment, and are especially vulnerable to road damage during the spring and wet conditions. Unfortunately, most agricultural and many industrial operations are time and weather sensitive, requiring heavy equipment to be moved at times that are not always harmonious with current road conditions. Many of these roads service the rural area and are not a high priority for upgrades.
The permitting and exemption system is a complicated mix of legislation and application processes. Many municipalities have developed over-weight permits to exempt vehicles from road bans by using a bond system where the bond will only be forfeited if damage occurs. Transportation Routing and Vehicle Information System (TRAVIS) is a Government of Alberta system designed to easily achieve necessary permits, but does not function with all vehicle types.
Total axle load, number of axles, distance between axles, number of tires, tire size, tire pressure, steering axles, all affect pressure between the tire and surface. Historically, as equipment weight increased, so has tire size. Larger tires, tires filled with less air (lower pounds per square inch (psi), and more axles spread further apart all reduce the pressure of the tire on the road surface. The tire industry has recently designed radial tires to replace bias ply tires for larger equipment. This has helped reduce tire pressures to almost half the inflation rate of bias tires. The current legislative framework, permitting, and subsequently fining system, does not take fully take technologies that reduce psi transferred to the roadways into account. The table below illustrates the load index depending on tire inflation and the number of axles.
Load index by axle and tire inflation[1] [2]
| Tire | Inflation | |||||||||
| Size | (psi) | 6 | 10 | 12 | 14 | 16 | 18 | 20 | 22 | 24 |
| 18.4
R30 |
Load Index | |||||||||
| SINGLE (LBS.) | NR | 3520 | 3960 | 4300 | 4680 | 4940 | 5360 | 5680 | 5840 | |
| DUAL (LBS.) | 2290 | 3100 | 3480 | 3780 | 4120 | 4350 | 4720 | 5000 | 5140 | |
| TRIPLE (LBS.) | 2130 | 2890 | 3250 | 3530 | 3840 | 4050 | 4400 | 4660 | 4790 | |
Source: www.goodyear.com1
It is important that legislation governing the transportation of equipment reflect the technological realities of the equipment used while protecting roadways from damage and allowing business activities to be completed.
The Alberta Chambers of Commerce recommends the Government of Alberta:
- Identify and publish the standards to which roads and bridges have been built and their weight bearing capacity, ensuring that information is used to set weight restrictions. Ensure a legislative mechanism exists for municipalities and the provincial government to waive weight bearing restrictions on a case-by-case analysis for roads that are a low priority for upgrading where the need is time sensitive;
- Identify roads and bridges in need of upgrading to allow for a more efficient heavy load system and provide budgeting based on economic reliance on a particular road;
- Undertake and continue in ongoing research to identify and ensure changes in vehicle and tire technologies reflect pressure transferred through to the roadway and update the legislative, permitting, and enforcement framework accordingly;
- Take into account appropriate exemptions for agricultural and other necessary time sensitive uses for public roadways;
- Improve communication and education about how to obtain the proper permits; and,
- Ensure permit providers obtain the correct and necessary information to make the process standard with minimal red tape.
Issue
Allowing Canadian-controlled private corporations (CCPC’s) to split income would create consistency within the treatment of income taxes. It would also support the success and enhance the growth of small businesses, especially family-based businesses.
Background
Historically, owners of Canadian-controlled private corporations (CCPC’s) have been able to split income with family members by paying dividends on CCPC shares owned directly, or indirectly through a Family Trust, to family members including spouses and children. Up until 2000, this strategy was available to small business owners with respect to the payment of dividends to all family members including minor children1, most often via the use of a Family Trust. The objective, and result, was the mitigation of the overall tax burden of the small business owner by being able to utilize the low marginal rates of tax for all family members by having these dividends taxed in the hands of family members rather than all in the hands of the small business owner.
In 2000, the Department of Finance introduced legislation to ensure that any dividends paid to a minor child (either directly or indirectly) would be taxed in the hands of the minor at the highest marginal rate, thus frustrating access to the child’s low marginal tax rates. These changes were colloquially referred to as the “kiddie tax” but specifically represented the first efforts of the Department of Finance with respect to introducing a “tax on split income” (TOSI). In the Budget releases following the 2000 introduction of the “kiddie tax” the government expanded the reach and application of TOSI by including not only dividends received by a minor from a related private corporation, but also capital gains realized on the sale of shares of a CCPC to a non-arm’s length purchaser, rents realized on real property owned by a non-arm’s length party as well as interest on debt issued to related parties. At the time, adult children and spouses were not subject to the reach of the “kiddie tax” rules as these were specific to minor children.
On July 18, 2017, the reach of the TOSI rules changed dramatically with the release of the Liberal government’s White Paper on the Taxation of CCPC’s. This White Paper formed the basis for legislation announced in the 2018 Budget that sought to treat certain adult children and spouses in the same manner as minor children with respect to the receipt of dividends and other sources of income received from a CCPC. The TOSI rules are very complex and problematic for business owners and their advisors in that they specifically eliminate any opportunity for a CCPC to remunerate spouses of “principal” shareholders of certain businesses with dividends or other sources of income. Because of their complexity and the selective nature of their application, it has become clear that, not only do the rules place certain industries (in particular service-based businesses) at a distinct disadvantage when it comes to tax planning opportunities, it also reflects a distinct gender bias as the vast majority of female spouses who have previously been provided with a source of independently reported income are now viewed as wholly-dependent upon their male principal-shareholder spouses.
The application of the new TOSI rules to spouses also reflects an inconsistency in the income tax treatment of the individual taxpayer versus the family and, in particular, spouses. The “family unit” has generally been viewed as the appropriate unit of taxation as opposed to the individual. Generally, spouses are considered together as a couple for many income-tested benefits, pension income-splitting and spousal RRSP’s which highlights the inconsistent approach to enabling principal shareholders to share income with their spouses. Beyond the pure income tax considerations, family law legislation in all provinces generally will recognize that both spouses make equal contributions in a marriage notwithstanding there may not be direct measurable capital contributions to a business. Family assets may be at risk for the purposes of financing CCPC debt, may be used indirectly in the execution of business operations or may form the quantum of funds contributed for business start-up.
In addition to the shared-asset argument, spouses of principal shareholders are a critical informal source of support for business operations. A non-active spouse will often act as a sounding board and provide valuable perspective and advice to the active spouse.
The Alberta Chambers of Commerce recommends the Government of Canada:
- Department of Finance immediately amend the Income Tax Act to exempt spouses from the application of the tax on split income legislation.
Issue
Current legislation restricts the ability to attract international students and creates barriers for those who have been trained in Alberta to obtain permanent residency. Adjustments to provincial and federal immigration programs can improve the retention of domestically trained international students which will help to overcome the gaps in labour and skills availability to meet Alberta’s labour needs.
Background
Businesses across Canada are struggling to find skilled employees to meet their labour needs, and it is costing the economy billions.311 In Q3 of 2022, Alberta alone had a job vacancy rate of 5%, or 103,380 positions.312 International students represent a significant and currently underutilized opportunity for meeting the needs of the Albertan economy as they are proficient in at least one Canadian official language, have Canadian credentials, and have in-demand labour skills. They also contribute an estimated $21 billion to the Canadian economy each year.313 There are currently 24,636 international students studying in Alberta that could join the labour force after graduation.314
Attracting and retaining international graduates can be a successful strategy to help face the consequences of aging baby boomers and severe labour force shortages that Alberta is currently facing. The problem is current legislation restricts the ability to attract international students and creates barriers for those who have been trained domestically to obtain permanent residency at each stage of the process.
Study Permits
Applications for study permits from outside of Canada require proof of acceptance at a Designated Learning Institution (DLI) and take over 13 weeks to process. According to the 2021 CBIE International Student Survey, 49.2% of international students experience issues with obtaining a student permit pre- arrival.315 Many post-secondary institutions continue to advocate to IRCC regarding the struggles of international students to receive their study permits in time to begin classes.316
While in Canada on a study permit, students often struggle with feelings of isolation as they are experiencing an entirely new culture.317 On a study permit, they are required to study full-time, meaning that they are taking three to five courses. If a student breaks the term of their study permit, they are at risk of being deported. Study permits are valid until 90 days after graduation.
Employment During Schooling
While attending a post-secondary institution in Canada, students often work either because their program requires it or to earn money to pay living expenses. In fact, 32.7% rely on off-campus work income, 10.6% on on-campus work income, and 3.4% on work-integrated learning income for financial support during their studies.318 48.5% of international students indicated that they were working and of those, 43% indicated difficulty finding work, lack of experience being the largest barrier.319
While in full-time studies, an international student can work an unlimited number of hours on campus. Until December 2023, this applies off-campus as well. After this period, international students will be limited to 20 hours of work per week as many jurisdictions in Europe do.
To work a coop or work-integrated learning term, international students require a coop or intern work permit. This is temporarily on hold until December 2023. If this permit is not obtained prior to arriving in Canada, the student may not be able to continue in their program and would be at risk of breaking the terms of their study permit.
Employment Following Graduation
After graduating from a Designated Learning Institution (DLI), international students must obtain a work permit if they wish to stay in Canada. The most common option is a Post-Graduation Work Permit (PGWP) which 72.6% of international students plan to apply for.320 A PGWP is valid for 8 months to 3 years depending on the length of program. Other work permits exist as well, and they require a job offer to obtain.
Permanent Residency
60% of international students plan to apply for permanent residence in Canada and 77.3% of students in Alberta intend to stay here after receiving PR.321 There are a few streams through which can become a permanent resident in Alberta. Each of these require job experience and most require a valid job offer:
Canadian Experience Class requires:
- A certain language level.
- At least 1 year of skilled work experience in Canada in the last 3 years before application.
- There is no education requirement, although accreditation from a Canadian institution gives the applicant more points.
Federal Skilled Workers Program requires:
- 1,560 hours of skilled work experience in certain National Occupational Classification (NOC) job groups within the last 10 years. Work must be paid, volunteer work and unpaid internships do not apply.
- Work experience gained while studying may count towards minimum requirements if the work:
- Was paid by wages or commissions
- Was continuous (no gaps in employment), and
- Meets all the other requirements of the Program
- Proof that the applicant performed the duties set out in the lead statement of the occupational description in the NOC.
- Proof of Funds.
Alberta Advantage Immigration Program requires:
- A valid work permit.
- Full-time work in an eligible occupation in Alberta for either:
- A minimum of 12 months full-time work experience in your current occupation in Alberta within the last 18 months, or
- A minimum of 24 months of full-time work experience in your current occupation in Canada or abroad within the last 30 months or both – this work experience can be a combination of experience gained in Alberta, in Canada (outside Alberta) or abroad.
- Post-Graduation Work Permit holders require a minimum of 6 months full-time work experience in your current occupation in Alberta within the last 18 months.
- Note: Work gained while studying does not qualify unless it was paid, fulltime, completed in Alberta, and directly related to the applicant’s current occupation.
- The appropriate license to do said work.
Barriers exist for international students to join the labour force in Alberta at each stage of the path to permanent residency. Should these be addressed, international students have the potential to help meet the labour needs of Alberta’s businesses.
The Alberta Chambers of Commerce recommends;
That the Government of Alberta:
- Change the employment requirement under the Alberta Advantage Immigration Program from six months of full-time work to allow for a one-year offer of employment.
- Reduce the barriers for graduates applying to the Alberta Advantage Immigration Program.
That the Government of Canada:
- Expedite processing times for potential international students to receive study visas to mitigate the issue of not receiving them in time for fall semester.
- Allowing work-integrated learning under a study permit without application for a work permit to allow access to the labour market without requiring that work-integrated learning opportunities be a mandatory program requirement.
- Expand eligibility requirements of federal work-integrated learning programs to allow international student access so they have increased opportunities to work while studying.
- Cease limits on the number of hours that an international student can work so they may support themselves through school and be eligible for immigration following their schooling. International students should be subject to the same employment standards as Canadians in each jurisdiction.
- Change the length of time for which a post-graduation work permit can be valid, from the current status of valid for no longer than three years, to five years regardless of the program of study, so long as obtained from a recognized Canadian institution.
That the Government of Alberta and the Government of Canada:
- Work together with post-secondary institutions to strengthen Canada’s global brand as a study destination to attract international students to Alberta’s post-secondary system, especially in the fields that particularly suffer from the insufficiency of qualified labour force.
- Prioritize applications for permanent residency based on in-demand occupations to get much needed roles filled more quickly.
- When considering applications for permanent residency, consider the experience that an international student gains through entrepreneurship, working off campus, working on campus, co-op and internship programs, and volunteer opportunities.
- Work with post-secondary institutions and the business community to support programming that helps international students integrate into their new communities and set them up for long-term career success.
317 https://cbie.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/CBIE-2021-International-Student-Survey-National-Report- FINAL.pdf
318 https://cbie.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/CBIE-2021-International-Student-Survey-National-Report- FINAL.pdf
319 Ibid. 320 https://cbie.ca/infographic/
Our Advocacy History
Grande Prairie Chamber Regional Economic Development Group
Economic Impact & Gap Analysis of the Grande Prairie Regional Hospital
Executive Summary: GPRH-EIS and Gaps-ExecSumm-14Nov2016