Leading economists advocate for fewer comments and more numbers from the federal budget watchdog, emphasizing the need for enhanced objectivity and error identification in politically charged environments. They propose increased use of peer review for reports and suggest that the office's leader should focus on delivering data rather than commentary.
The call for change comes after interim Parliamentary Budget Officer Jason Jacques' controversial comments during a parliamentary committee appearance, where he described Canada's federal finances as 'stupefying', 'shocking', and 'unsustainable'. This sparked a passionate reaction from Canada's first PBO, Kevin Page, who criticized Jacques' language as 'just wrong' and inconsistent with the numbers. Economists, including former chief economist Don Drummond, support Jacques' assessment of the country's finances but question the use of strong adjectives.
The OECD's review of the PBO's office has received positive feedback, and the organization's head, Jon Blondal, praises Canada's luck in having a respected body. However, economists argue that the office's reputation alone doesn't guarantee improvement. They advocate for more data and less commentary, suggesting that the PBO's leader should prioritize delivering numbers over policy analysis.
The PBO's carbon pricing analysis has faced criticism for its methodology and lack of peer review. Economists, including Christopher Ragan, argue that the analysis omitted benefits of climate change mitigation and didn't compare the carbon pricing system to alternatives. The PBO's use of peer review is limited, and Jacques acknowledges the potential for controversy in politically charged topics, emphasizing the need for ongoing dialogue and improvement in the office's operations.
