Breadcrumb Trail Links
Published May 27, 2026 • Last updated 2 hours ago • 3 minute read
You can save this article by registering for free here. Or sign-in if you have an account.
Asking taxpayers to subsidize tourism in other parts of the country has some shaking their heads. Getty Images/iStockphotoArticle content
As the weather warms, you may be surprised to learn the federal government has already planned your summer vacation for you. To be fair, if you don’t like what the government has planned, you don’t have to go. But you still must pay some of the expenses for those who do. In fact, you must pay whether anyone goes or not, because Ottawa spends taxpayer money on subsidies for tourism and vacation sites.
Advertisement 2
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY
Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada.
Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account and fewer ads.Get exclusive access to the Calgary Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on.Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists.Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists.Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword.
SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES
Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada.
Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account.Get exclusive access to the Calgary Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on.Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists.Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists.Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword.
REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES
Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.
Access articles from across Canada with one account.Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments.Enjoy additional articles per month.Get email updates from your favourite authors.
THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK.
Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.
Access articles from across Canada with one accountShare your thoughts and join the conversation in the commentsEnjoy additional articles per monthGet email updates from your favourite authorsSign In or Create an Account
or
Article content
For example, the federal government recently announced $1.6 million for tourism initiatives in northeastern Ontario, including money for a ski club to buy a large trail groomer, a canoe and kayak rental service to upgrade facilities and buy equipment, a municipality to build a new wharf to dock cruise vessels, a First Nation to construct a boardwalk to improve access to 32 boat slips, and so on. Of course, federal subsidies spread far beyond Ontario. For example, there’s the recent $353,000 in federal funding for the Atlantic Canada Cruise Association “to implement a three-year strategic plan to enhance cruise tourism in the region.” All Canadian taxpayers must chip in whether they go on an Atlantic Canadian cruise or not. And don’t confuse this $353,000 handout with a separate $350,000 for the Charlottetown Harbour Authority to support cruise tourism in Prince Edward Island.
Article content
Recommended Videos
Article content
Little justification
Aside from the issue of fairness, these subsidies make no sense. From an economic perspective, there are two standard justifications for government subsidies. One is to fight poverty by subsidizing necessities for the poor. Six-figure handouts for cruise tourism clearly do not fall into this category.
Calgary Sun Headline News
Thanks for signing up!
Article content
Advertisement 3
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
The second possible justification is what economists call a “positive externality,” which means the economic transaction generates benefits for third parties uninvolved in that transaction. An activity that cleans the environment can be said to have positive externalities; people going on cruises cannot.
More examples. The federal government recently announced nearly $2 million for eight projects across Alberta: $249,999 for a secluded mountain lodge, $349,629 for Indigenous art galleries, $250,000 for a ranch retreat, $250,000 for a cultural heritage village, $341,184 for outdoor spa amenities and outer facilities at a lodge, $200,000 for Indigenous tourism experiences on a reserve, $184,469 for another Indigenous tourism facility, and $115,000 for a canoe and kayak rental company.
The $2 million for eight projects was part of the federal government’s much larger Tourism Growth Program launched in 2023, which earmarked $108 million over three years to support tourism. This $108 million was in turn part of a larger Federal Tourism Growth Strategy and on top of various other federal, provincial and territorial programs, which hand out taxpayer cash to various corporations and non-profits.
Advertisement 4
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
A final example. The federal government’s “Indigenous Tourism Fund’s Signature Indigenous Tourism Experiences Stream” recently gave a total of $6 million to: an Indigenous cultural centre in Nova Scotia, an Indigenous restaurant in the Quebec City airport, an Indigenous tourism centre in Ontario, an Indigenous thermal spa in Alberta, an Indigenous cultural centre’s café and expanded gift shop in British Columbia, and an Indigenous resort in B.C.
Read More
HILL: Here’s how Carney can meaningfully address legitimate frustrations of Albertans
HAUBRICH, SIMS: Finish the job, Smith. Cancel Alberta’s industrial carbon tax
These federal government subsidies are a waste of money. Tourists, not taxpayers, should pay for tourism. Canadians who are uninterested in visiting these tourist locations — and Canadians who cannot afford to go on trips at all — should not be made to pay for them.
Matthew Lau is an adjunct scholar at the Fraser Institute.
Article content
Share this article in your social network