JL-001

57
Québec/Ontario Québec/Ontario A Fresh Look A Fresh Look (or: Objects in mirror (or: Objects in mirror may be closer than they may be closer than they appear) appear) présentation by Jean-François Lisée CERIUM.ca at the Chair of Quebec studies, Glendon College, February 2005 JL-001

description

Québec/Ontario A Fresh Look (or: Objects in mirror may be closer than they appear) présentation by Jean-François Lisée CERIUM.ca at the Chair of Quebec studies, Glendon College, February 2005. JL-001. Question # 1 Is Québec closing the gap ?. JL-002. A decade of growth. JL-004. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of JL-001

Page 1: JL-001

Québec/OntarioQuébec/OntarioA Fresh LookA Fresh Look(or: Objects in mirror may be (or: Objects in mirror may be closer than they appear)closer than they appear)

présentation by

Jean-François Lisée CERIUM.ca

at the Chair of Quebec studies, Glendon College, February 2005

JL-001

Page 2: JL-001

Question # 1

Is Québec closing the gap ?

JL-002

Page 3: JL-001

A decade of growth

Québec in the OECD / 1992

17e

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

GDP/pcap/PPP, 000 $US 95

JL-004

Page 4: JL-001

A decade of growth

Québec in the OECD / 2002

10e

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

GDP/pcap/PPP, 000 $US 95

JL-004

Page 5: JL-001

Déchiffrer le modèle québécois

A significant leap:

In the OECD, only Ireland did better

In North-America

Québec is historically poorer

But is closing the gap

JL-002

Page 6: JL-001

A full cycle Québec/Ontario Growth (1989-2000)

5852

37

43

18

16

6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

GDP GDP per cap Real DispIncome Pcap

Population

Ontario

Québec

Prosperity in principle or per person?

JL-003

Page 7: JL-001

Is the trend holding ?Québec/Ontario (2000-2003)

12,212,8

7

11

-0,3

5,6 5

2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

GDP GDP per cap Real DispIncome Pcap

Population

Ontario

Québec

JL-003

Page 8: JL-001

Will the trend hold ?Québec/Ontario (2004-2005) (ConfB. estimates)

8,69,5

6,4

8,1

4,85,9

3

1,2

0

2

4

6

8

10

GDP GDP per cap Real DispIncome Pcap

Population

Ontario

Québec

JL-003

Page 9: JL-001

Closing the wealth gap Québec/Canada 1992-2002

JL-004

11% 11% 9% 8%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% P

IB/h

ab e

n P

PA

et $

US

95

1992 1998 2000 2002

Page 10: JL-001

Closing the wealth gap Québec/Ontario 1960-2004

JL-004

24% 20% 20% 18,5% 17,5% 15%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% P

IB/h

ab a

ux p

rix d

u m

arch

é

60s 70s 80s 90s 2002 2004

Page 11: JL-001

Closing the wealth gap Québec/United States 1992-2004

JL-004

26% 29% 26% 21%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% P

IB/h

ab e

n P

PA

et $

US

95

1992 1998 2000 2002

This is an average

Page 12: JL-001

Trying not to keep up with these Johneses..

JL-005

Indice Gini, ménages 1980-2001

0,32

0,37

0,42

0,47

Source: Statistiques Canada, US Census

(Gin

i)

USA

Canada

Ontario

Québec

Page 13: JL-001

Revenue concentration at the top US 1% - 1973-2003

JL-004

8% 14% 20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1973 1998 2002

So, one has to beware of averages

Page 14: JL-001

At the low end of the ladder

Family poverty rate, 1997

18% USA12% European Union10% Canada

9% Québec

1997, PPA

JL-005

Page 15: JL-001

Middle class

Median disposable work income, 1997Per cap, PPP, $US de 1995

Canada 20 300 $

Québec 20 500 $

Ontario 21 600 $

USA 21 700 $

Source: Pierre Fortin, UQAMJL-005

Page 16: JL-001

Cost of living, after taxes, Toronto/Montréal

JL-005

2001, KPMG/Alberta Study

Household TorontoMontréal

Same revenue

40 000 $

Single 10060 000 $ couple, no kids 10080 000 $ couple,

2 kids 100100 000 $ couple,

2 kids 100150 000 $ couple,

2 kids 100

Page 17: JL-001

Cost of living, after taxes, Toronto/Montréal

JL-005

2001, KPMG/Alberta Study

Household TorontoMontréal

Equal revenue

40 000 $

Single 100 - 9%60 000 $ couple, no kid 100 - 11%80 000 $ couple,

2 kids 100 - 10%100 000 $ couple,

2 kids 100 - 12%150 000 $ couple,

2 kids 100 - 8%

Page 18: JL-001

Cost of living, after taxes, Toronto/Montréal

JL-005

2001, KPMG/Alberta Study

Household TorontoMontréal

Equal revenue But revenue is

not equal. Quebeckers

earn, on average, 14%

less than Ontarians.

40 000 $

Single 100 - 9%60 000 $ couple, no kid 100 - 11%80 000 $ couple,

2 kids 100 - 10%100 000 $ couple,

2 kids 100 - 12%150 000 $ couple,

2 kids 100 - 8%

Page 19: JL-001

Cost of living, after taxes, Toronto/Montréal

JL-005

2001, KPMG/Alberta Study

Household TorontoMontréal

Equal revenue

Montréal Revenue -

14%

40 000 $

Single 100 - 9% Idem60 000 $ couple, no kid 100 - 11% - 2%80 000 $ couple,

2 kids 100 - 10% - 1%100 000 $ couple,

2 kids 100 - 12% - 4%150 000 $ couple,

2 kids 100 - 8% - 1%

Page 20: JL-001

Cost of living, after taxes, Toronto/Montréal

JL-005

2001, KPMG/Alberta Study

Household TorontoMontréal

Equal revenue

Montréal Revenue -

14%

But part of this drop is

due to the # of

working hours and

days - -– -

Often taken by choice

40 000 $

Single 100 - 9% Idem60 000 $ couple, no kid 100 - 11% - 2%80 000 $ couple,

2 kids 100 - 10% - 1%100 000 $ couple,

2 kids 100 - 12% - 4%150 000 $ couple,

2 kids 100 - 8% - 1%

Page 21: JL-001

Cost of living, after taxes, Toronto/Montréal

JL-005

2001, KPMG/Alberta Study

Household TorontoMontréal

Equal revenue

Montréal Revenue -

14%

Montréal Revenue -

9%

40 000 $

Single 100 - 9% Idem - 4%60 000 $ couple, no kid 100 - 11% - 2% - 5%80 000 $ couple,

2 kids 100 - 10% - 1% - 5%100 000 $ couple,

2 kids 100 - 12% - 4% - 7%150 000 $ couple,

2 kids 100 - 8% - 1% - 4%

Page 22: JL-001

To sum up…

Québec’s wealth is growing rapidly. The 25% of Quebeckers at the bottom of the

revenue scale have a higher standard of living than their counterparts in Canada and the US.

The standard of living of the Quebec middle class is close to that of Ontario and the US (-5%) and higher than that of Canada.

The very rich are richer in Ontario and much, much richer in the US.

JL-005

Page 23: JL-001

Question # 2

Are immigrants afraid of Québec ?

JL-002

Page 24: JL-001

Attracting int’l immigrants: Québec / Ontario

Immigration par 1000 habitants / 2002, Nord-Est

0,00

2,00

4,00

6,00

8,00

10,00

12,00

Ont

ario

Qué

bec

JL-004

Page 25: JL-001

Attracting int’l immigrants: Québec / Ontario

Immigration par 1000 habitants / 2002, Nord-Est

0,00

2,00

4,00

6,00

8,00

10,00

12,00

Ont

ario

New

Yor

k

Qué

bec

Mas

sach

uset

ts

Moy

enne

Con

nect

icut

New

Ham

pshi

re

Ver

mon

t

Pen

nsyl

vani

a

Mai

ne

Nou

veau

-B

JL-004

Page 26: JL-001

Total migratory balance: Québec / North-East

Solde par 1000 habitants / 2002, Nord-Est

New

Yo

rk

-4,0

-2,0

0,0

2,0

4,0

6,0

8,0

10,0

12,0

On

tari

o

NH

am

p

Ma

ine

Mo

ye

nn

e

Ve

rmo

nt

Qu

éb

ec

Co

nn

Pe

nn

N-B

run

Ma

ss

JL-004

Page 27: JL-001

Attracting int’l immigrants: Québec Canada USA

Immigrants par 1000 habitants, 2002, 60 États et provinces

CB

E-U

Alb

erta

Ont

ario

Can

ada

Qu

ébec

, 7e

N-B

0,0

2,0

4,0

6,0

8,0

10,0

12,0

Ontario

N Y

Alberta

Texas

Oregon

Colorado

Michigan

Sask

NC

arolina

Okla

Tennessee

T-N

euve

Montana

JL-004

Page 28: JL-001

Total migratory balance : Québec Canada USA

Solde par 1000 habitants, 2002, 60 États et provinces

-8,0

-3,0

2,0

7,0

12,0

17,0

22,0

27,0

32,0

Nevada

NH

amps

Texas

Rhode

Haw

aii

E-U

NM

exico

WV

irgini

Montana

Illinois

T-N

euve

JL-004

Page 29: JL-001

Déchiffrer le modèle québécois

So…

A significant ability to attract international immigrants.

A steadily growing retention rate (now 83% vs 86% in ROC) or these immigrants

Against a negative (but improving) interprovincial anglophone migratory balance

On an anglophone continent, not a bad performance.

JL-002

Page 30: JL-001

Question # 3

The bureaucrat- heavy-province ?

JL-002

Page 31: JL-001

« The bureaucratic empire » Québec/Ontario

JL-005

Public servants in Québec and Ontarioper 1000 habitants in 2002

Ontario Québec Gap

Public servants/province

Source : Conseil du trésor du Québec, 2003

Page 32: JL-001

« The bureaucratic empire » Québec/Ontario

JL-005

Public servants in Québec and Ontarioper 1000 habitants in 2002

Ontario Québec Gap

Public servants/province 8 12 + 50%

Source : Conseil du trésor du Québec, 2003

Page 33: JL-001

« The bureaucratic empire » Québec/Ontario

JL-005

Public servants in Québec and Ontarioper 1000 habitants in 2002

Ontario Québec Gap

Public servants/province 8 12 + 50%

Province + cities (Ontario’s local level assumes some of Quebe’s provincial tasks)

20 22 + 10%

Source : Conseil du trésor du Québec, 2003

Page 34: JL-001

« The bureaucratic empire » Québec/Ontario

JL-005

Public servants in Québec and Ontarioper 1000 habitants in 2002

Ontario Québec Gap

Public servants/province 8 12 + 50%

Province + cities (Ontario’s local level assumes some of Quebe’s provincial tasks)

20 22 + 10%

Ottawa assumes for Ontario some of Quebec’s provincial tasks (GST, manpower training, immigration selection, Quebec’s pension plan); and Quebec has other tasks (Car insurance, language)

Source : Conseil du trésor du Québec, 2003

Page 35: JL-001

« The bureaucratic empire » Québec/Ontario

JL-005

Public servants in Québec and Ontarioper 1000 habitants in 2002

Ontario Québec Gap

Public servants/province 8 12 + 50%

Province + cities (Ontario’s local level assumes some of Quebe’s provincial tasks)

20 22 + 10%

Ottawa assumes for Ontario some of Quebec’s provincial tasks (GST, manpower training, immigration selection, Quebec’s pension plan); and Quebec has other tasks (Car insurance, language)

20 20,3 + 1,5%

Source : Conseil du trésor du Québec, 2003

Page 36: JL-001

Question # 4

Québec’s fiscal hell

JL-002

Page 37: JL-001

« The fiscal hell » Québec vs Ontario

JL-005

Total fiscal cost, for all Quebec taxpayers, of not living in Ontario

2001-2002

(in millions)

Total fiscal gain, for all Quebec

businesses, of not being in Ontario

Balance

4 200 2 800

1 400

Page 38: JL-001

« The fiscal hell » Québec vs Ontario

JL-005

2 800 Supplementary fiscal revenues

Use of the supplementary fiscal revenues

(balance)

Sum

(in millions)

Québec expenses and services not offered by Ontario, 2001-2002

(partial list)

Page 39: JL-001

« The fiscal hell » Québec vs Ontario

JL-005

1 780 1 020 5$ (now 7$) a day daycare

2 800 Supplementary fiscal revenues

Use of the supplementary fiscal revenues

(balance)

Sum

(in millions)

Québec expenses and services not offered by Ontario, 2001-2002

(partial list)

Page 40: JL-001

« The fiscal hell » Québec vs Ontario

JL-005

1 215565 Supplementary child benefit

1 780 1 020 5$ (now 7$) a day daycare

2 800 Supplementary fiscal revenues

Use of the supplementary fiscal revenues

(balance)

Sum

(in millions)

Québec expenses and services not offered by Ontario, 2001-2002

(partial list)

Page 41: JL-001

« The fiscal hell » Québec vs Ontario

JL-005

-471 1 686 Pharmacare

1 215565 Supplementary child benefit

1 780 1 020 5$ (now 7$) a day daycare

2 800 Supplementary fiscal revenues

Use of the supplementary fiscal revenues

(balance)

Sum

(in millions)

Québec expenses and services not offered by Ontario, 2001-2002

(partial list)

Page 42: JL-001

« The fiscal hell » Québec vs Ontario

JL-005

-648 177 Student grants

-471 1 686 Pharmacare

1 215565 Supplementary child benefit

1 780 1 020 5$ (now 7$) a day daycare

2 800 Supplementary fiscal revenues

Use of the supplementary fiscal revenues

(balance)

Sum

(in millions)

Québec expenses and services not offered by Ontario, 2001-2002

(partial list)

Page 43: JL-001

« The fiscal hell » Québec vs Ontario

JL-005

-955 307 Private schools grants

-648 177 Student grants

-471 1 686 Pharmacare

1 215565 Supplementary child benefit

1 780 1 020 5$ (now 7$) a day daycare

2 800 Supplementary fiscal revenues

Use of the supplementary fiscal revenues

(balance)

Sum

(in millions)

Québec expenses and services not offered by Ontario, 2001-2002

(partial list)

Page 44: JL-001

« The fiscal hell » Québec vs Ontario

JL-005

-1 174 219 Local developement budgets

-955 307 Private schools grants

-648 177 Student grants

-471 1 686 Pharmacare

1 215565 Supplementary child benefit

1 780 1 020 5$ (now 7$) a day daycare

2 800 Supplementary fiscal revenues

Use of the supplementary fiscal revenues

(balance)

Sum

(in millions)

Québec expenses and services not offered by Ontario, 2001-2002

(partial list)

Page 45: JL-001

« The fiscal hell » Québec vs Ontario

JL-005

-1 329 155 Culture (supplementary effort)

-1 174 219 Local developement budgets

-955 307 Private schools grants

-648 177 Student grants

-471 1 686 Pharmacare

1 215565 Supplementary child benefit

1 780 1 020 5$ (now 7$) a day daycare

2 800 Supplementary fiscal revenues

Use of the supplementary fiscal revenues

(balance)

Sum

(in millions)

Québec expenses and services not offered by Ontario, 2001-2002

(partial list)

Page 46: JL-001

« The fiscal hell » Québec vs Ontario

JL-005

4 129 Total

-1 329 155 Culture (supplementary effort)

-1 174 219 Local developement budgets

-955 307 Private schools grants

-648 177 Student grants

-471 1 686 Pharmacare

1 215565 Supplementary child benefit

1 780 1 020 5$ (now 7$) a day daycare

2 800 Supplementary fiscal revenues

Use of the supplementary fiscal revenues

(balance)

Sum

(in millions)

Québec expenses and services not offered by Ontario, 2001-2002

(partial list)

Page 47: JL-001

To sum up…

For every tax dollar, Quebeckers have more services than Ontarians.

Furthermore, Torontonians pay their electricity at rates 64% higher than Quebeckers.

JL-002

Page 48: JL-001

Tax Freedom day : The Fraser Institute Test

Our taxpayer is 47, male, married and has

two kids

Net revenue (all FI available data Feb 05):

If his Ontario Tax Freedom day is 0

Our Quebecker’s Tax freedom day

comes( - sooner) or later

25 000 0

35 000 0

45 000 0

55 000 0

65 000 0

75 000 0

85 000 0

95 000 0

105 000 0

115 000 0

Page 49: JL-001

Tax Freedom day : The Fraser Institute Test

Our taxpayer is 47, male, married and has

two kids

Net revenue (all FI available data Feb 05):

If his Ontario Tax Freedom day is 0

Our Quebecker’s Tax freedom day

comes( - sooner) or later

25 000 0 ( - 37)

35 000 0 ( - 19)

45 000 0 ( - 10)

55 000 0 ( - 4)

65 000 0 0

75 000 0

85 000 0

95 000 0

105 000 0

115 000 0

Page 50: JL-001

Tax Freedom day : The Fraser Institute Test

Our taxpayer is 47, male, married and has

two kids

Net revenue (all FI available data Feb 05):

If his Ontario Tax Freedom day is 0

Our Quebecker’s Tax freedom day

comes( - sooner) or later

25 000 0 ( - 37)

35 000 0 ( - 19)

45 000 0 ( - 10)

55 000 0 ( - 4)

65 000 0 0

75 000 0 + 4

85 000 0 + 6

95 000 0 + 9

105 000 0 + 10

115 000 0 + 11

Page 51: JL-001

Déchiffrer le modèle québécois

Question # 5

How inward-looking is

Québec ?

JL-002

Page 52: JL-001

Level of economic openness Québec / Ontario/ OCDE

% des exportations/PIB, 199891%

80%75%

70%

57% 55%

44% 43%

29% 27% 26%

11% 11%

1.L

uxe

mb

.

2.Ir

lan

de

3.B

elg

iqu

e

4. O

nta

rio

5.Q

uéb

ec

6.P

ays-

B.

7.A

utr

ich

e

8.C

anad

a

17.A

ll.

21.R

-U

23.F

ran

ce

28.E

-U

29.J

apo

n

JL-004

Page 53: JL-001

Level of (all) bilinguism : Québec / Ontario / G7

Pourcentage de personnes bilingues, 2001

53% 51%47% 47% 46%

35%29% 27% 26%

0,00

0,10

0,20

0,30

0,40

0,50

Allem

agne

Qué

bec

France

Europe

Italie

Ont

ario

ROC

Royaum

e-Uni

Etats

-Uni

s

StatsCan et Eurobaromètre

JL-004

Page 54: JL-001

Bilingualisme (all languages):

Toronto: 46 %

Montréal: 67%

JL-002

Page 55: JL-001

The arts: Ontario and Quebec’s absolute international success

Quebeckers (a fair proportion) are willing to trade:

Ours for yours

Page 56: JL-001

Objects Objects in mirror are in mirror are closer than they appear…closer than they appear…

Data available at: Data available at: www.jflisee.netwww.jflisee.net

JL-001

Page 57: JL-001

15 years of Québec/Ontario Growth (1988-2003)

9380

55

64

3,1

1825

10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

GDP GDP per cap Real DispIncome Pcap

Population

Ontario

Québec

Prosperity in principle or per person?

JL-003