The authors of this book have worked independently and opinions expressed by them are, therefore, their own, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the supporters or the trustees of The Fraser Institute. [...] She is co-author of the An Empir- ical Comparison of Labour Relations Laws in Canada and the United States (2006), Union Disclosure in Canada and the United States (2006), Fiscal Per- formance Index (2006), Tax Freedom Day (2006), Canadian Provincial In- vestment Climate Report (2006), Transparency of Labour Relations Boards in Canada and the United States (2005), and the State of the Urban Air in [...] We would like to acknowledge all of the scholars who provided peer review of this study: Professor Ron Knee- bone of the University of Calgary, Professor Richard Bird of the University of Toronto, Professor Barry Cooper of the University of Calgary, Gordon Gibson who is a Senior Fellow of the Fraser Institute, Professor Bev Dahlby of the University of Alberta and a member of the Fraser Institute's [...] In addition, we would like to thank Nadeem Esmail, the Director of Health Performance Studies at the Fraser Institute and Fred McMahon the Director of Globalization and Trade at the Fraser Institute and the author of 2 books on the topic of fiscal balance and equalization for their review of a number of working drafts. [...] Figure 1.2 illustrates the nominal net fiscal balance (surplus or deficit) for the federal government and all of the provincial and territorial governments (consolidated) between 1990/91 and 2005/06. The federal government begins the period with an enormous deficit of $32.4 billion while the provinces had a much lower, collective deficit of $7.6 billion.

Canada: State of the Federation, 1999–2000 identifies and explains major threads in Canadian fiscal federalism. Set against the cacophony over domineering and arrogant centralization from supporters of Quebec sovereignty/session on the one hand, and fears that excessive decentralization is fuelling an obsessively neo-liberal agenda on the other, these essays replace much of this heat with new light. The authors begin with an examination of recent developments in the theoretical literature surrounding fiscal federalism. They then examine some of the major issues facing the federation – Is there a vertical imbalance between federal and provincial governments? Does Ottawa collect more revenues than are needed relative to its spending responsibilities while the provinces are under-funded? How do federal-provincial struggles over money and jurisdictional power affect local government or the para-public sector, emerging aboriginal governments, and citizens? Federal government actions in 1999 suggest that Ottawa has not lost all of its interest in social outcomes. It is, however, seeking to influence the well-being of citizens by transferring money to them directly rather than through transfers to provinces. The authors suggest that if this trend continues the approach to the millennium will be seen as a watershed in public policy, given that current trends in Canadian fiscal federalism are as much about re-balancing the federation as they are about decentralization.

"Fiscal Federalism and Equalization Policy in Canada is a concise book that aims to increase public understanding of equalization and fiscal federalism by providing a comparative and multidisciplinary perspective on the history, politics, and economics of equalization policy in Canada. The authors provide a brief history of the equalization program, a discussion of key economic debates concerning the role of that program and its effects, an analysis of the politics of equalization as witnessed over the last decade, and an exploration of the relationship between equalization and other components of fiscal federalism, particularly the Canada Health Transfer and the Canada Social Transfer. The result is an analysis of equalization that draws from the best scholarship available in the fields of economics, economic history, political science, public policy, and political sociology."--

Assessing the evolution and influence of public policy institutes.

It is often assumed that think tanks carry enormous weight with lawmakers. In Do Think Tanks Matter? Donald Abelson argues that the basic question of how think tanks have evolved and under what conditions they can and do have an effect is consistently ignored. Think tank directors often credit their institutes with influencing major policy debates and government legislation and many journalists and scholars believe the explosion of think tanks in the latter part of the twentieth century indicates their growing importance in the policy-making process. Abelson goes beyond assumptions, identifying the influence and relevance of public policy institutes in today's political arena in the United States, where they've become an integral feature of the political landscape, and in Canada, where, despite recent growth in numbers, they enjoy less prominence than their US counterparts. By focusing on the policy cycle, issue articulation, policy formation, and implementation, Abelson argues that individual think tanks have sometimes played an important role in shaping the political dialogue and the policy preferences and choices of decision-makers but often in different ways and at different stages of the policy cycle. This revised and updated edition of the book includes up-to-date data (2000-08) on the growing visibility and policy relevance of think tanks in Canada and the United States.