Dubious government investments are stunting our standard of living

While government policies can benefit societies and economies, they often produce the opposite results.

Recent concerns highlight Canada’s worrying trend of dismal productivity growth and growth prospects, with several international bodies predicting minimal growth in Canadians’ real (adjusted for inflation) personal income over the next 30 years (an entire generation).

To address this productivity slump, governmental strategies have varied.

One strategy has emphasized workers’ skills, with authorities advocating for youth to pursue marketable technical trades rather than conventional university degrees.

Another strategy has been to foster a more extensive, intensive, and robust innovation ‘ecosystem’ coupled with venture capital and institutional investor funding. Addressing permitting obstacles and other regulatory impediments are another approach.

Yet, despite the potential of these strategies, the persistent actions of both federal and provincial governments challenge productivity growth. Notably, these governments often allocate extensive taxpayer funds towards projects with minimal returns on investment.

Over the years, provincial utilities like BC Hydro, Manitoba Hydro, and Nalcor (an umbrella company for Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro) have seen significant overruns. The financial commitment to these projects, such as the Site C dam, Keeyask, Bipole III, and Muskrat Falls, far surpassed initial projections.

A staggering $43.2 billion was spent, compared to initial expectations of $23.9 billion, to produce just a couple of gigawatts of ‘cheap’ power – just enough for a million households. For perspective, the same funds could have been channelled into nuclear energy, producing more power and less environmental harm.

In addition to these massive provincial governmental blunders, the federal government lavished $35 billion in tax relief subsidies for just three electric vehicle (EV) battery plants. According to the federal Parliamentary Budget Officer, two of these plants ‘might’ be paid off in ‘as soon as’ 20 years.

Topping it off is Ottawa’s purchase and expansion of the Trans Mountain Pipeline, where government-induced regulatory obstacles continue to explode costs. Ottawa has now spent a staggering $30.9 billion to expand the pipeline, almost six times the original estimate of $5.3 billion. It will be impossible to recoup anything near what is being spent. For more than eighty percent of its route, the new, parallel Trans Mountain line follows the existing line: an additional enormous expense accrued from massive mismanagement.

A common thread weaving through these projects is the government’s willingness to finance ventures that initially seemed economically questionable. State-owned enterprises often prioritize political motives over profitability – a theme evident in the electric vehicle and Trans Mountain decisions. Perhaps the renowned work “How Big Things Get Done” would be more aptly named “How Big Things Get Botched” in Canada.

Ultimately, a nation’s economic vitality hinges on the collective performance of its businesses and people. Investments in underperforming projects yield minimal returns. The consequence of such political spending is reduced productivity and diminished wealth per individual.

Unfortunately, our kids will bear the brunt of these decisions, likely facing a compromised standard of living.

By Ian Madsen

Ian Madsen is the Senior Policy Analyst at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

Troy Media

Read More

With the increasing push to return to the office, employers and developers, together, are tasked with sweetening the deal for current and future employees in the office and industrial markets. Makeshift home offices and kitchen counters became the new office during the pandemic, and working from home came with its own set of perks, such as no commute and more flexibility of time. Promises of increased collaboration with the return to in-person work aren’t enough of an incentive. Now, workers across industries expect more when physically in the office.

At NAIOP’s CRE.Converge conference this week, experts explored the range of amenities that developers can consider for emerging building plans or incorporate into already-existing office and industrial spaces. Dawn Riegel, principal, Ware Malcomb, moderated the panel featuring Michael Longo, senior vice president, CBRE; Stacey Mosley, director of research, Brandywine Realty Trust; and Jinger Tapia, vice president, design, Ware Malcomb. 

“We have a labor and employment problem, not a work-from-home problem,” Longo said, citing the ongoing actors’ strike in Hollywood and the U.S.’s ongoing low employment rates. Until the issues of labor and employment are better addressed, Longo said, we should expect to see challenges in the return-to-office movement, but this does not mean developers can’t try to make it as enticing as possible. 

The relationship between attraction and retention, coupled with adopting a holistic view of amenities, was a common theme of the conversation. Developers should consider how well placed and well-positioned their buildings are in a given area, whether in a city or a suburb, and have a good understanding of a company’s culture to know what its employees’ needs are. Data has been collected on workers’ preferred amenities – natural lighting, green spaces, access to parking – but sometimes that data isn’t one-size-fits-all, Riegel said.

We’re in the early days of a massive transition of ownership and assets, Longo believes, noting that capital is tough to access and developers have to be careful about positioning. Financial solvency is key. Building spaces need to be able to take on a new life if a new tenant were to arrive. 

The aesthetics of office styles have rapidly changed over the past three years, Longo said. Office aesthetics have shifted from dropped ceilings and cubicle workspaces to open-concept spaces focused on collaboration. Developers and employers are still figuring out the latest iteration now that workers are returning to the office post-pandemic. 

The low-hanging fruit, as Mosley says, is paying attention to trends in food and furniture. Food delivery service became normalized during the pandemic, and employees want a similar luxury in the office. Mosley offered up some suggestions: coffee carts that swap out employees’ at-home drip coffee for a premium espresso or vending machines with fresh foods like salads. An office space’s furniture should speak to how employees interact with each other and how they work, collaboratively or solo. 

Later, Mosley mentioned enhancing the audiovisual experience for in-person employees to connect with others remotely and on conference calls, and Tapia noted the design transition from giant conference rooms to specially designated “Zoom rooms.” 

The panelists went on to discuss exterior amenities and how cities look at this issue. Mosley noted that exterior improvements can often become amenities for not only those coming into the office but for those in the surrounding community as well. It’s important to leverage the immediate area around your building, whether that be local restaurants or dry cleaners. 

Both Mosley and Tapia stressed the importance of integrating green spaces, such as parks, walking paths, patios and balconies, and sports courts. 

In the past, “amenities were a landscape island in the middle of a parking lot with a concrete bench that the smokers could go to,” Tapia joked. But now, workers of all kinds want connectivity between indoor and outdoor spaces. 

“For the industrial user, it’s about stepping away from the work and providing that connection to nature and a respite from what’s going on in the facility… from a noise standpoint,” Tapia said. As these outdoor amenities are added, requirements from the respective cities must also be taken into account. Tapia said she is taking cues from Mexico’s contained industrial parks to naturally build sustainable initiatives into the design process. This also reflects attention to the evolution of environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues and the need – and demand – for more green spaces.

From the investment perspective, Longo, who specializes in properties across the West Coast, says his current strategy is to assess the land use first and then consider the design and cost because of all the changing attitudes from cities toward new developments and the current declining value of buildings. 

Mosley, whose work is primarily based in Philadelphia, says the growing population in cities has contributed to the success of office and industrial outdoor spaces. She said these spaces should combine both the social and environmental factors. “Let the communities take ownership to catalyze the creativity of the space,” Mosley said, highlighting live concerts, sporting events, and even weddings that have found a venue in these spaces.  

This post is brought to you by JLL, the social media and conference blog sponsor of NAIOP’s CRE.Converge 2023. Learn more about JLL at www.us.jll.com or www.jll.ca.

Read More

The cosmetics industry is turning towards natural alternatives to chemical agents used in products to pave way towards a more sustainable future. Researchers are searching for nature-derived active ingredients for skincare products through extensive bioprospecting research. In this regard, cyanobacteria, with their remarkable metabolic capacity, are a promising source of such agents. Having existed on Earth for nearly 3.5 billion years, these photosynthetic organisms have adapted to various environmental conditions, including extreme environments. Aphanothece sacrum, a cyanobacterium endemic to Japan and cultivated as a food source on farms in Fukuoka Prefecture, is already being studied for the capacity to produce active ingredients like sacran, a water retaining polysaccharide.

Credit: Hakuto Kageyama

Read More