Alberta's Budget is ageist

Published in The Hub on March 12, 2025

Political interference in medical contracts isn’t the biggest health scandal embroiling Alberta Premier Smith. It’s far more scandalous that her 2025 budget plans deficits to pour money into a medical system that already spent more per person than in B.C. and Ontario, without consistently achieving better health outcomes.

This wasteful deficit-spending is made worse by an income tax cut, which constrains investment in younger residents, including for housing and protecting the planet’s health. The overall fiscal pattern in Alberta reveals a startling degree of ageism toward younger residents.

Smith’s big spending on medical care gets Alberta the best-paid doctors in the country. But not the most doctors. The latest data show there are 243 physicians for every 100,000 Canadians. Alberta has only 240, placing it far behind B.C., the national leader, which has 272.

Investments in wellbeing, especially for younger residents, are collateral damage from this wasteful spending on medical care. The budget spends relatively little on what decades of health science have identified as the building blocks for a healthy society—affordable homes, quality child care, poverty reduction, and a stable planet.

According to Schedule 25 in Alberta’s budget, annual spending on medical care will grow by $2.3 billion as of 2027.

The increase for K-12 education is modest by comparison, up $1.2 billion. So are increases for postsecondary (up $0.2 billion), child care (no increase), and other social services (up $0.3 billion).

By sinking more money into the province’s already inefficient medical system, the Alberta budget entrenches structural ageism against younger people in its fiscal policy. Since Canadians use more medical care after age 65 than in their first six and a half decades, Smith is adding new funding for retirees nearly three times as fast as for residents under age 45.

As a result, Alberta is less balanced in delivering investments that promote well-being for younger and older residents alike by comparison with B.C. and Ontario.

This structural ageism is exacerbated by Smith’s decision to incur over $9.7 billion in deficits over the next three years—adding over $2,000 in public debt for every Albertan.

Much of this could have been avoided if Alberta’s brand of conservatism wasn’t “tax less and spend more.” But alas, Smith lived up to this Alberta mantra, doubling down on deficit spending by cutting the rate of tax on income under $60,000 from 10 percent to 8. By the government’s own estimates, this latest tax cut will cost $1.2 billion a year.

Ageism toward younger Albertans runs deeper still because the fiscal plan also fails to engage adequately with provincial housing challenges.

Describing the housing market as “a bright spot in the economy” (p. 23), the Alberta budget ignores the fact that the province experienced the worst erosion in housing affordability of any province in Canada last year. Custom data from the Canadian Real Estate Association shows average home prices in Alberta increased by 10 percent in 2024, whereas prices were flat in B.C. and Ontario.