IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cdh/commen/425.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Simplifying the Rule Book: a Proposal to Reform and Clarify Canada’s Policy on Inward Foreign Direct Investment

Author

Listed:
  • A. E. Safarian

    (University of Toronto)

Abstract

Control over public money is fundamental to democratic government, and presents huge challenges to legislators and taxpayers. Getting the information needed to answer simple questions such as how planned spending in the upcoming year compares to actual results in the prior year can be hard, and ensuring that governments treat their budget targets seriously is an never-ending task. This latest edition of the C.D. Howe Institute’s annual report on the fiscal accountability of Canada’s federal, provincial and territorial governments assesses the quality of financial information these governments present, and looks at their success or failure in achieving their budgetary goals over the past decade. Its survey of the financial reports reveals some good news: more governments now prepare their budgets on the same basis as their end-of-year public accounts, making comparisons over time easier for their citizens. While these improvements mean that more governments earn high marks for their reporting, some jurisdictions still present numbers in which such key figures as total spending and total revenue are obscure. Inconsistent presentation of numbers to legislators, late reporting, and qualified audits are too common. A major aim of this report is to celebrate the relatively transparent reporting found in New Brunswick and Saskatchewan, and in Ontario and Ottawa, and encourage other jurisdictions to raise their game. When it comes to the degree to which results match intentions, the survey also finds some good news. In the second half of the past decade, the spending and revenues reported by Canada’s senior governments at the end of each fiscal year have tended to match the projections in the budget at the beginning of the year more closely than in the first half of the decade. That said, federal, provincial and territorial governments tend to overshoot their budget targets by large amounts. Over the decade, Canada’s senior governments overshot their spending targets by some $48 billion in total. They also brought in far more revenue than anticipated in budgets, and while caution in forecasting can explain some of this overshoot, the survey finds a disturbing tendency for revenue and spending surprises, up or down, to occur together – more suggestive of opportunism than good fiscal management. Improving control over public funds in Canada will require two things. Legislators and the public must demand more transparent, timely and accurate reporting of governments’ fiscal plans and results. And legislators must use their powers over appropriation more effectively. Votes on budgets are votes of confidence that determine whether governments stand or fall. Only when legislators ensure that budget plans are meaningful do they hold governments accountable for their use of public funds.

Suggested Citation

  • A. E. Safarian, 2015. "Simplifying the Rule Book: a Proposal to Reform and Clarify Canada’s Policy on Inward Foreign Direct Investment," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 425, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:cdh:commen:425
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cdhowe.org/public-policy-research/simplifying-rule-book-proposal-reform-and-clarify-canada%E2%80%99s-policy-inward-foreign-direct-investment
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Takeshi Koyama & Stephen S. Golub, 2006. "OECD's FDI Regulatory Restrictiveness Index: Revision and Extension to more Economies," OECD Working Papers on International Investment 2006/4, OECD Publishing.
    2. Edward M. Graham & David Marchick, 2006. "US National Security and Foreign Direct Investment," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 3917, October.
    3. Lorraine Eden & Wendy Dobson (ed.), 2005. "Governance, Multinationals and Growth," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3503.
    4. Philippe Bergevin & Daniel Schwanen, 2011. "Reforming the Investment Canada Act: Walk More Softly, Carry a Bigger Stick," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 337, December.
    5. Sauvant, Karl P. & Sachs, Lisa E. & Jongbloed, Wouter P.F. Schmit, 2012. "Sovereign Investment: Concerns and Policy Reactions," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199937929, Decembrie.
    6. Baldwin, John R. Gu, Wulong, 2005. "Global Links: Multinationals, Foreign Ownership and Productivity Growth in Canadian Manufacturing," The Canadian Economy in Transition 2005009e, Statistics Canada, Economic Analysis Division.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. William B.P. Robson & Alex Laurin, 2016. "Where the Bucks Stop: A Shadow Federal Budget for 2016," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 447, March.
    2. Daniel Schwanen, 2016. "At the Global Crossroads: Canada’s Trade Priorities for 2016," e-briefs 231, C.D. Howe Institute.
    3. Daniel Schwanen, 2017. "Innovation Policy in Canada: A Holistic Approach," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 497, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. A. Edward Safarian, 2011. "International Mergers and Acquisitions," Chapters, in: Miroslav N. Jovanović (ed.), International Handbook on the Economics of Integration, Volume III, chapter 6, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Mallick, Jagannath, 2017. "Structural Change and Productivity Growth in India and the People’s Republic of China," ADBI Working Papers 656, Asian Development Bank Institute.
    3. Ingo Borchert & Batshur Gootiiz & Aaditya Mattoo, 2014. "Policy Barriers to International Trade in Services: Evidence from a New Database," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 28(1), pages 162-188.
    4. Birgitte Grøgaard & Asmund Rygh & Gabriel R. G. Benito, 2019. "Bringing corporate governance into internalization theory: State ownership and foreign entry strategies," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 50(8), pages 1310-1337, October.
    5. Patrick Messerlin & Jinghui Wang, 2008. "Redesigning the European Union’s trade policy strategy towards China," Sciences Po publications 04/2008, Sciences Po.
    6. Adewale Samuel Hassan, 2022. "Does Country Risk Influence Foreign Direct Investment Inflows? A Case of the Visegrád Four," Economies, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-22, September.
    7. Dong-Hun Kim, 2013. "Coercive Assets? Foreign Direct Investment and the Use of Economic Sanctions," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 99-117, January.
    8. Waldkirch Andreas & Tekin-Koru Ayça, 2010. "North American Integration and Canadian Foreign Direct Investment," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-40, August.
    9. Karingi, Stephen N. & Leyaro, Vincent, 2010. "Surmounting Africa's Trade Capacity Contraints: An Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Aid for Trade," Conference papers 331966, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    10. Anna Vlasiuk Nibe, 2023. "Legitimisation of Foreign Direct Investment Screening Among Business Actors: The Danish Case," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(4), pages 140-153.
    11. Johannes Van Biesebroeck, 2007. "Complementarities in automobile production," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(7), pages 1315-1345.
    12. Thomas Klier & James M. Rubenstein, 2013. "The evolving geography of the US motor vehicle industry," Chapters, in: Frank Giarratani & Geoffrey J.D. Hewings & Philip McCann (ed.), Handbook of Industry Studies and Economic Geography, chapter 2, pages 38-66, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Olivier Bertrand & Katariina Nilsson Hakkala & Pehr‐Johan Norbäck & Lars Persson, 2012. "Should countries block foreign takeovers of R&D champions and promote greenfield entry?," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(3), pages 1083-1124, August.
    14. Eric Rugraff, 2010. "Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and Supplier-Oriented Upgrading in the Czech Motor Vehicle Industry," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(5), pages 627-638.
    15. Yanling Wang, 2010. "FDI and productivity growth: the role of inter‐industry linkages," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(4), pages 1243-1272, November.
    16. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/8310 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Lewis Davis & Claudia R. Williamson, 2018. "Open Borders for Business? Causes and Consequences of the Regulation of Foreign Entry," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 85(2), pages 508-536, October.
    18. Ellen R. McGrattan & Edward C. Prescott, 2010. "Technology Capital and the US Current Account," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1493-1522, September.
    19. Przemyslaw Kowalski, 2008. "China and India: A Tale of Two Trade Integration Approaches," Working Papers id:1637, eSocialSciences.
    20. Mérette, Marcel & Georges, Patrick & Dissou, Yazid, 2008. "Liberalizing Foreign Direct Investment Restrictions in Canada: A Multi-Country Computable General Equilibrium Analysis," Conference papers 331743, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    21. Fernando Mistura & Caroline Roulet, 2019. "The determinants of Foreign Direct Investment: Do statutory restrictions matter?," OECD Working Papers on International Investment 2019/01, OECD Publishing.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Trade and International Policy;

    JEL classification:

    • F21 - International Economics - - International Factor Movements and International Business - - - International Investment; Long-Term Capital Movements
    • F52 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - National Security; Economic Nationalism

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cdh:commen:425. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

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

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

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

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

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

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