Printer icon Print Page

Top Story

The Bucks Stop Here: Trends in Income Inequality Between Generations

Younger workers are making less money relative to their elders. That is true for men and women, individuals and couples, and both before and after taxes. While it’s normal for older workers to make more money than those with less experience, our research shows a growing earnings gap between younger and older workers. In the mid-1980s, the average after-tax income of Canadians between the ages of 50 and 54 was 47 per cent higher than that of 25- to 29-year-olds. In recent years, that gap has jumped to 64 per cent.


City Magnets III: Benchmarking the Attractiveness of 50 Canadian Cities

An aging population means that immigrants are critical to Canada’s future. Cities that fail to attract new people will struggle to stay prosperous, which is why we ranked 50 Canadian cities based on the features that make them attractive to newcomer populations. Six—Waterloo, Calgary, Ottawa, Richmond Hill, Vancouver, and St. John’s—distinguished themselves as grade “A” cities in our rankings.

2014 Honorary Associate

The Honorary Associate award is the Conference Board’s highest honour and is conferred annually upon individuals who have served both their organization and their country with distinction. This year, The Conference Board of Canada has named Michael H. McCain, President and Chief Executive Officer, Maple Leaf Foods Inc., as its Honorary Associate. Join us on Monday, November 3, 2014, at the Fairmont Royal York in Toronto to celebrate Michael McCain’s many achievements.

Workplace Preferences of Millennials and Gen X: Attracting and Retaining the 2020 Workforce

Although the damage done to savings by the 2008 recession has delayed the mass retirement of baby boomers, organizations will soon be facing a labour shortage and will need to rely on Millennials to fill the gaps. How, where, and with whom this future workforce wants to work will impact attraction and retention levels. Organizations that separate the true work styles and preferences of Millennials and Gen Xers from the stereotypes will improve their ability to attract and retain employees in both groups.

Health Summit: Aging, Chronic Disease, and Wellness

We all know that as we get older we become more vulnerable and tend to make more demands on the health care system. Our Health Summit 2014: Aging, Chronic Disease, and Wellness will focus on the long-term challenges facing our health care system when it comes to seniors and chronic care. These two interrelated issues represent a complex challenge to system sustainability—a challenge that will affect the health of all Canadians, now and in the future.

The Case for Coaching

Coaching is one of the fastest-growing areas within the field of leadership and organizational development. It is already recognized as an effective development tool. And in the future, we expect coaching will be used more broadly, have a wider range of applications, and be linked to the strategic goals of the organization.

CBoC Highlights

Check out our latest infographic—Toronto: Canada’s Leader for Financial Services Headquarters.

Satyamoorthy Kabilan discusses how terrorist groups, such as ISIS, use social media to spread their message.


On CBC’s “The Exchange With Amanda Lang,” David Stewart-Patterson examined the potential impact of young people making less money than the previous generation.

Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi shares his experiences of crisis communication and leadership during the 2013 Calgary flood.

In This Issue

  • The Bucks Stop Here: Trends in Income Inequality Between Generations
  • City Magnets III: Benchmarking the Attractiveness of 50 Canadian Cities
  • 2014 Honorary Associate
  • Workplace Preferences of Millennials and Gen X: Attracting and Retaining the 2020 Workforce
  • Health Summit: Aging, Chronic Disease, and Wellness
  • The Case for Coaching

Previous Issues

Recent Op-Eds

How to Ease Ontario’s Fiscal Squeeze
The Globe and Mail, September 24, 2014

Young, Underpaid, and Angry: The Coming Clash Over the Income Gap, September 23, 2014

If I Had $100 billion ... How to Restore Ottawa’s Fiscal Health
The Globe and Mail, September 10, 2014

To Beat Terrorists Online, Let’s Raise Our Social Media Game
The Globe and Mail, September 08, 2014

A Call to Recalibrate Corporate Values
The Globe and Mail, September 02, 2014

Latest Blogs

No More “Jurisdictional Wasteland” for Métis and Non-Status Indians

May 18, 2016
Kala Pendakur Kala Pendakur
Research Associate
Northern and Aboriginal Policy

Canada is moving through some significant changes in its relationship with Aboriginal people. And as we approach Aboriginal Awareness Week (May 24 to 27), we wanted to take a moment to place a spotlight on two recent and important decisions.

First, last month, in a 9-0 decision, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the term “Indians” includes non-status Indians and Métis. This came in response to the Daniels v. Canada case, launched in 1999, which sought three declarations1:

  • that Métis and non-status Indians are “Indians” under S.91(24) of the Constitution Act;
  • that the federal Crown owes a fiduciary duty to Métis and non-status Indians;
  • that Métis and non-status Indians have the right to be consulted and negotiated with, in good faith, by the federal government on a collective basis through representatives of their choice, respecting all their rights, interests, and needs as Aboriginal peoples.2

Previously, Métis and non-status Indians were stuck in a “jurisdictional wasteland” between the federal and provincial governments. This decision has now extended the federal government’s responsibilities to include approximately 600,000 Métis and non-status Indians in Canada.3 The possible impacts of this decision will need to be studied further; but, as a starting point, it may serve as an opening for Métis and non-status individuals and groups to pursue land claims and seek access to additional government programs and services.4 Moreover, while the case does not impact who in Canada has “status” as a registered Indian, Claire Truesdale of JFK Law Corporation did note that it could be useful in future court cases “as Canada can no longer deny that it also has responsibility for Métis and non-status Indians and may be asked to justify why those groups are excluded from the benefits of status.”5

Notably, Supreme Court Justice Rosalie Abella stated that, as we look further into Canada’s history with Indigenous peoples, inequities are being increasingly revealed, but that “this case represents another chapter in the pursuit of reconciliation and redress in that relationship.”6

The second major decision involves the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), which was adopted by the UN in 2007. Now, nearly 10 years later, Canada has officially decided to adopt the Declaration. Twenty-five years in the making, the declaration is an important instrument that asserts the collective rights of Indigenous peoples around the globe. Moreover, Canada’s Indigenous Affairs Minister, Carolyn Bennett, noted during her statement to the UN on May 10 that adoption is an important step toward reconciliation.7

UNDRIP, as it stands, is not a legally binding document, and how Canada works to implement it—as either an aspirational or a legal document—could have significant impacts on Canadian law.8 For instance, before UNDRIP was officially adopted, lawyers across Canada debated what the principle of “free, prior, and informed consent” (FPIC) would really mean. The principle, which refers to the rights of Indigenous peoples to provide or withhold their consent in decision-making processes that affect them and their lands—including in such areas as education, natural resource management, economic development, and health care—is mentioned in six articles of UNDRIP. The legal implications associated with the word “consent” in FPIC could have significant implications, as illustrated by statements from experts.9 Others pointed out that the current government has the opportunity to make it clear that FPIC can be integrated in our domestic laws in a fashion that works with our federal framework and constitution.10

These two decisions will have a significant impact on the future of Canada and its relationships with Aboriginal people from coast to coast to coast. How UNDRIP and the Daniels case will affect policy for industry and government is still to be seen. However, moving forward, all parties will need to pay close attention and take thoughtful and prudent approaches. Perhaps even more importantly, open dialogues among all parties (e.g., Indigenous individuals, government, industry) will be vital to ensuring progress.

If you would like to learn more about the possible implications of UNDRIP in Canada, watch our webinar “Understanding the Implications of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in Canada,” presented by Tom Isaac, a nationally recognized authority in the area of Aboriginal law.


1     Daniels v. Canada (Indian Affairs and Northern Development, 2016 SCC 12 (Supreme Court of Canada, May 10, 2016). (accessed May 11, 2016).

2     The court declined to grant the second and third declarations, arguing that they would be restating existing laws.

3     Tim Fontaine, “Unanimous Ruling Says Ottawa Has Jurisdiction Over All Indigenous People.” CBC News, April 14, 2016.

4     Ibid.

5     Claire Truesdale, Supreme Court of Canada Releases Daniels Decision. April 14, 2016. (accessed May 12, 2016).

6     Daniels v. Canada.

7     Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada, Canada Becomes a Full Supporter of the United Nations Declation on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, news release, May 10, 2016. (accessed May 11, 2016).

8     Mackenzie Scrimshaw, “Unpacking UNDRIP: How Trudeau Could Take Crown/First Nations Law Into Uncharted Waters,” iPolitics, January 12, 2016. (accessed May 12, 2016).

9     Ibid.

10     Ibid.


The 2019 Ontario Metropolitan Areas Outlook: Bright Spots Amid Dark Clouds
Aug 13 at 2:00 PM

Supports for Success: Indigenous Entrepreneurs in Canada’s Northern and Remote Communities
Sep 04 at 2:00 PM

Demystifying Risk Appetite
Sep 18 at 1:00 PM