Access to new drugs in Canada has been slower than in other countries for decades. Particular concern has been expressed by cancer patients and their advocates and healthcare providers about slow and inequitable access to new oncology drugs, because these can contribute to a significant extension in life. As a response to these concerns, the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR) was established in late 2010 by the provincial and territorial Ministries of Health, excluding Quebec, to assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness information of new oncology drugs. This report evaluates how successful the pCODR has been in achieving its performance target of 129–149 business days (approximately 185–215 calendar days) to complete reviews, and examines the funding decisions made by the provinces for drugs with pCODR recommendations.Thirty-two submissions to the pCODR relating to 25 oncology drugs were reviewed, of which 26 (81 percent) received a favourable, if conditional, recommendation from the pCODR. However, 50 percent of the submissions took 6–7 months to be reviewed and 50 percent took even more time (total range: 112 to 282 days), which exceeds the 5–8 months to complete reviews claimed by the pCODR. When compared with a reasonable scenario in which the provinces would be required to approve drugs with a favourable pCODR recommendation within 120 days of the recommendation, none of the provinces came close to achieving this target.Little benefit is achieved by having a review process whose stated aim is to bring “consistency and clarity to the assessment of cancer drugs” if many of the provincial and territorial Ministries of Health that established the pCODR delay implementation of or ignore its favourable recommendations. An organization dedicated to reviewing new oncology drugs, which requires resources from the taxpayer and additional effort from pharmaceutical companies, and which duplicates (at least partially) the work performed by other governmental agencies, adds little benefit to the healthcare system or to the quality and duration of the lives of cancer patients if its activities do not lead to improvements in the timeliness and fairness of access to new oncology drugs.

拉维娜·贝恩斯（Ravina Bains）的一项新研究发现，加拿大最高法院最近的裁决授予不列颠哥伦比亚省六个原住民对其保护区外大片土地的所有权，这将对国家产生影响，并可能阻碍加拿大各地的经济发展。这项名为《真正的游戏规则改变者》的研究打破了这项裁决，该裁决将不列颠哥伦比亚省内陆1700多平方公里的土地授予了Tsilqot'in民族。

弗雷泽研究所的年度全球石油调查发现，就其石油储量而言，阿尔伯塔省仍然是加拿大最具吸引力的石油和天然气投资省份。根据石油高管和经理的回答，今年的调查对全球156个司法管辖区的相对投资吸引力进行了排名。

Ross McKitrick和Tom Adams的一项新研究发现，除非安大略省政府改变该省电力系统转型的方向，否则电价将继续飙升。这项研究，What Goes Up。。。安大略省飙升的电价和如何降低电价，为了防止电价进一步上涨，该省可能会停止所有新的水电、风能和太阳能项目。为了降低费率，该省可以（在可能的情况下）终止可再生能源公司与OPA之间的现有合同。

根据485名矿产勘探和开发公司高管的意见，弗雷泽研究所矿业公司年度调查：2014年将芬兰列为世界上最具投资和勘探吸引力的矿业管辖区。加拿大有五个司法管辖区进入全球前十名：萨斯喀彻温省（2个）、曼尼托巴省（4个）、魁北克省（6个）、纽芬兰和拉布拉多省（8个）以及育空地区（9个）。

菲利普·约翰的一项新研究发现，尽管自20世纪80年代以来，全球油轮流量急剧上升，但漏油数量却大幅下降。这项名为《加拿大能源运输和油轮安全》的研究聚焦了全球和加拿大水域的油轮运输。

Kenneth P.Green的一项新研究发现，水力压裂的决策应该基于对风险的现实评估，这样加拿大人就不会不必要地被剥夺其自然资源的好处。这项名为《水力压裂风险管理》的研究考察了加拿大通过水力压裂（有时被称为“水力压裂”）开发能源的经济潜力，以及水力压裂反对者经常重复的说法。

本·艾森（Ben Eisen）和马克·米尔克（Mark Milke）的一项新研究发现，至少有两个省——新斯科舍省（Nova Scotia）和新不伦瑞克省（New Brunswick）——在开发自然资源和为居民创造繁荣方面受到了阻碍。这项针对新斯科舍省、新不伦瑞克省和均衡政策Crutch的研究发现，在广泛的经济指标上，与大多数其他省份相比，新斯科舍和新不伦斯维克省的表现不佳。

补偿支出如何消耗安大略省的省级政府资源计算得出，2005/06年至2013/14年间，安大略省政府的补偿支出——包括工资、福利和养老金——增长了47.1%，快于所有其他项目支出（38.8%），远远超过通货膨胀率和省政府就业增长率的总和（26.0%）。

鉴于最近呼吁扩大加拿大养老金计划和安大略省的省级养老金计划，《强制性政府养老金与私人储蓄：加拿大养老金计划先前扩大的影响》突出了强制退休储蓄增加的一些意外危险。具体而言，该研究发现，加拿大家庭在过去强制性CPP供款增加后，私人自愿储蓄减少。