The economy and jobs have always been the priority election issues for most Canadians. Today, with the possibility that the economy could be in a technical recession (two quarters of negative growth), that’s especially true.

Canadians have every right to be concerned. The economy has been seriously underperforming for the past seven years and there’s little to suggest this will change over the next five.

Business fixed investment, as a share of GDP, is virtually unchanged since 2008. The unemployment rate remains stuck around 7 per cent, and both the labour force participation rate and the employment rate are below 2008 levels. These trends are dragging down the growth potential of the Canadian economy, which is estimated at around 2 per cent a year, down from 3 per cent.

The policy challenge, and the debate we should be having, is how to halt and even reverse this decline in our growth potential. Addressing this issue now is fundamental to determining the well-being of future generations.

It’s a shame, then, that so far in this campaign all parties seem to be assuming the inevitability of an economic recovery.

Both the Liberals and NDP have made promises that would cost billions of dollars, but have not proposed ways to generate enough revenue to cover them. And yet the reality is a recovery hasn’t been happening and, with the IMF warning that the global economy is at risk of economic stagnation, it doesn’t look like one is on its way.

For years, the IMF, OECD and the World Bank have been reducing their forecasts of global economic growth.

Clearly we can’t continue to blame our economic circumstances on a “fragile” global economy and do nothing. Nor can we simply hope for a recovery of oil prices. Nor yet can we rely on new free trade agreements, no matter how important they may be in the long run. We need the sort of “built-in-Canada” long-term economic growth strategy that no party is talking about.

Instead, our parties offer piecemeal, nickel-and-dime strategies: cutting small business taxes (not helpful); providing renovation tax credits in the future (definitely not helpful); extending accelerated depreciation on business investment (hasn’t helped so far); and new incentives for research and innovation (very expensive incentives already exist).

The Conservatives’ growth strategy has always been clear — cut taxes, cut spending, balance the budget, cut the size of government, hope the U.S economy recovers, and pray for higher oil prices. The entire April budget is based on this failed strategy and on projections that are pure fantasy.

What is strange is that the Liberals and NDP are twisting themselves into knots to put together growth strategies that are supposed to be different from that of the Conservatives, while at the same time adopting the Tory orthodoxy that all deficits are bad, all debt is bad, and small government is good.

A credible long-term growth strategy should focus on strengthening the economic efficiency of the economy. This would require renewed federal-provincial trust and co-operation, with strong federal leadership — something that has been painfully lacking for years.

It would require, too, an acknowledgement that the tax system has become a serious impediment to economic growth and must be simplified. But it will take real political courage to remove inefficient and unjustifiable tax entitlements.

If we can negotiate international free trade agreements, then why is it so difficult to create a real economic union in Canada, with free movement of goods and services among provinces? Our infrastructure at all levels of government (especially municipal) is collapsing and a national financing strategy is needed to begin rebuilding it. We need a national environmental and energy strategy that includes developing new energy-saving technologies.

A growth strategy is, by definition, a public investment strategy in the future. In 2014, the IMF recommended to G20 leaders that governments with sustainable fiscal situations should take advantage of historically low interest rates to borrow and invest in “efficient” infrastructure. The federal government clearly has a strong sustainable fiscal structure. It should follow the IMF’s advice.

Is any of this likely to happen? Probably not. Except for a lot of empty rhetoric from all three parties, this kind of growth strategy does not appear to be on the agenda for this election.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

It is young Canadians who will suffer the consequences.