IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cdh/commen/476.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Numbers You can Trust? The Fiscal Accountability of Canada’s Senior Governments, 2017

Author

Listed:
  • William B.P. Robson

    (C.D. Howe Institute)

  • Colin Busby

    (C.D. Howe Institute)

Abstract

Canadians entrust their governments with major responsibilities, and pay taxes and underwrite borrowing to fund them. Financial reports are a vital tool for understanding governments’ financial plans and activities. Over the past 15 years, federal, provincial and territorial governments have done much to improve the transparency of their reports, and most of them have come closer to delivering on their budget promises. Yet too many continue to present opaque numbers, fail to satisfy their legislative auditors, take too long to present budgets or report, and spend far more than they budgeted. This latest edition of the C.D. Howe Institute’s annual report on the fiscal accountability of Canada’s senior governments assesses the quality of their financial information, and their success or failure in achieving their budgetary goals over the past 15 years. In looking at the quality of governments’ financial reporting, it asks whether an intelligent and motivated non-expert – a citizen, taxpayer or legislator – can get valid, timely and readily understood figures for total revenue and spending in the budget each government presents at the beginning of the year, and in the financial statements released with its public accounts at the end of the year. Alberta and New Brunswick earn the top scores for the quality and timeliness of their budgets and public accounts, with the federal government and British Columbia also doing well. Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia, though not in the top tier, have improved markedly. Quebec and Prince Edward Island do relatively poorly among the provinces, and Northwest Territories and Nunavut also present figures that our idealized reader would struggle to find and interpret. On the question of accuracy in hitting budget targets, the overall record is one of significant overshoots of both spending and revenue. On average, over all governments and all 15 years, governments spent 2.3 percent more than budgeted, which cumulates to a remarkable $69 billion. The Prairie provinces and the territories recorded the worst overruns; Ontario and Quebec did much better. Over the same period, revenues also overshot projections by 2.3 percent annually, cumulating to $95 billion more than budgeted. Although the overshoots tended to get smaller over the 15 years, a suspicious pattern of in-year spending “surprises” coinciding with in-year revenue “surprises” suggests less than prudent management of public funds. Legislators and Canadians generally should push senior governments to produce timelier, more transparent and reliable financial information, and should use that information to hold governments to account – at budget time, and throughout the fiscal year.

Suggested Citation

  • William B.P. Robson & Colin Busby, 2017. "Numbers You can Trust? The Fiscal Accountability of Canada’s Senior Governments, 2017," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 476, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:cdh:commen:476
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cdhowe.org/sites/default/files/attachments/research_papers/mixed/Commentary_476.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benjamin Dachis & William B.P. Robson, 2011. "Holding Canada's Cities to Account: an Assessment of Municipal Fiscal Management," C.D. Howe Institute Backgrounder, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 145, November.
    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 & Benjamin Dachis & Farah Omran, 2017. "Fuzzy Finances: Grading the Financial Reports of Canada’s Municipalities," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 496, November.

    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. Andrew Feltenstein & Nour Abdul-Razzak & Jeffrey Condon & Biplab Kumar Datta, 2015. "Tax Evasion, the Provision of Public Infrastructure and Growth: A General Equilibrium Approach to Two Very Different Countries, Egypt and Mauritius," Journal of African Economies, Centre for the Study of African Economies, vol. 24(suppl_2), pages 43-72.
    2. Christopher Ragan, 2012. "Financial Stability: The Next Frontier for Canadian Monetary Policy," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 338, January.
    3. Joseph Doucet, 2012. "Unclogging the Pipes: Pipeline Reviews and Energy Policy," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 342, February.
    4. William B.P. Robson & Colin Busby, 2015. "By the Numbers: The Fiscal Accountability of Canada's Senior Governments, 2015," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 424, April.
    5. Adam Aptowitzer & Benjamin Dachis, 2012. "At the Crossroads: New Ideas for Charity Finance in Canada," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 343, March.
    6. Colin Busby & William Robson, 2013. "Canada's 2012 Fiscal Accountability Rankings," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 373, February.
    7. David R. Percy, 2012. "Resolving Water-use Conflicts: Insights from the Prairie Experience for the MacKenzie River Basin," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 341, February.
    8. Benjamin Dachis & William B.P. Robson, 2014. "Baffling Budgets: The Sorry State of Municipal Fiscal Accountability in Canada," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 397, January.
    9. William B.P. Robson & Colin Busby, 2016. "Controlling the Public Purse: The Fiscal Accountability of Canada’s Senior Governments," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 448, April.
    10. Ake Blomqvist & Colin Busby, 2012. "Better Value for Money in Healthcare: European Lessons for Canada," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 339, January.
    11. William B.P. Robson & Benjamin Dachis & Farah Omran, 2017. "Fuzzy Finances: Grading the Financial Reports of Canada’s Municipalities," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 496, November.
    12. William Robson & Colin Busby, 2014. "Credibility on the (Bottom) Line: The Fiscal Accountability of Canada's Senior Governments, 2013," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 404, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Fiscal and Tax Policy;

    JEL classification:

    • H30 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents - - - General
    • H50 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - General

    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:476. 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.