We'll try this again.
I think that everyone across the political spectrum can unite around the goal of lowering youth unemployment, which stands at the historically high level of 14.5%. In practice, that translates into pessimism and resentment, lost opportunities to build skills and networks, dependence on other family members and economic hardship. It represents a failure to launch.
Although I expect that many in your study will have ideas on programs and training to make youth more employable, at a fundamental level the problem is that the economy is weak. There aren't enough firms hiring workers. The challenge of youth unemployment won't be solved without a hotter jobs market.
Many times, the energy and natural resources sectors have driven employment growth in Canada. This is especially true when commodity cycles are swinging up and there is lots of new construction. Right now, those sectors, unfortunately, are experiencing investment weakness in Canada. Shareholders do not see Canada as a growth economy, and are rewarding share buybacks and dividends rather than reallocating capital here. They think they can get higher returns in other jurisdictions and in other sectors.
Prime Minister Carney has said that Canada needs to build here at home “at speeds not seen in generations”. We would all like that, but the policy and regulatory environment of the last 10 years is still very much in place and is dissuading the private capital needed to build new mines, pipelines, railroads, power generation and transmission in Canada, and the jobs it would take to build those things. To many in industry, it feels as though the recent rhetoric has been positive, but actual regulatory changes have not manifested. A more welcoming investment environment could unleash tens of billions in new capital spending and create hundreds of thousands of good jobs. Many of those jobs would be in rural and remote areas, meaning that northern and indigenous youth would be able to stay home and build their lives and careers near their communities. I think catalyzing our resource sector is an important way to alleviate youth unemployment.
There is another side of the equation we need to deal with, and that is the lack of skilled labour to develop all those projects. In particular, we need more skilled trades. I live outside Calgary, which is Canada's fastest-growing city. We need to build more houses, schools, hospitals, roads and services to keep up with population growth. My own nephew is in his third year of carpentry here. His cohort could handle 16 students, but only 10 have registered. His experience is borne out in the statistics. Across North America, for every seven tradespeople who retire or leave the space, they're replaced with just one. I don’t know where we will get enough journeymen carpenters, electricians, linemen or plumbers to build things at speeds not seen before.
I think we have spent a decade and more devaluing the building trades. It is seen as a lesser career path than something that requires a university degree. I thought the market would solve this problem, as the trades tend to offer high-paying jobs out of school, but they still face a lack of status.
This is my point. Our youth have been told that working in resource-extractive industries and heavy industry is bad, and that it has no future. They have often been discouraged from entering blue-collar careers. There should be no surprise that we are now facing a labour crunch in those sectors even as we have high unemployment. To help address youth employment in Canada, we not only have to create a more welcoming regulatory and investment environment for the resource sector; we also have to value the people who work in those sectors so that our youth feel comfortable choosing that career path.
Thank you for your attention. I look forward to your questions.