The Drummond Report

[Boges]

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1131820--drummond-report-higher-hydro-bills-more-user-fees-urged-in-sweeping-report?bn=1

But the lion’s share of the savings he identified came from cutting some of the Liberal government’s most treasured achievements, including:

• scrapping or revamping full-day kindergarten;

• raising the 20-student class-size cap in junior grades to 23 children and increasing the average in junior grades from 24.5 to 26 students and from 22 to 24 in secondary school;

• ending the Ontario “clean air benefit,” the 10 per cent rebate to electricity bills that costs the treasury $1 billion a year;

• cancelling the new 30 per cent Ontario tuition grant for college and university undergraduate students unless the overall post-secondary budget can be kept to a 1.5 per cent rise;

• extending the period municipal social service costs will be uploaded back to Queen’s Park by two years to 2020

• amalgamating some of Ontario’s 151 hospital corporations.

But Drummond urged against “across-the-board cuts,” wage freezes or targets for civil-service job reduction, though he implored the government to be creative.

“Do not hang on to public assets or public service delivery when better options exist. Consider privatizing assets and moving to the private delivery of services wherever feasible,” he said.

Lots of do-able things in there. I wonder who will light their hair on fire on freak out over this report? I heard Union Leader Sid Ryan bitch that it wasn't in Drummond's power to increase corporate tax rates.

[Newfoundlander]

Time for some common sense.

[Smallc]

No kidding. It's clear that Ontario's government is too big for Ontario given economic prospects going forward. Time for the Liberals to swallow their pride and clean house.

[Guest Peeves]

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1131820--drummond-report-higher-hydro-bills-more-user-fees-urged-in-sweeping-report?bn=1

Lots of do-able things in there. I wonder who will light their hair on fire on freak out over this report? I heard Union Leader Sid Ryan bitch that it wasn't in Drummond's power to increase corporate tax rates.

Everyone's calf that is gored will claim they are the most important program and are sacrosanct or should be . Sid should move to Gaza.

[MiddleClassCentrist]

I support much of the document...

I disagree on privatization as a key component though. It doesn't really help our economy...

Privatized services often cost more because the company needs to rake in profit, employ half as many people and simply export money to investors who live outside of Ontario.

(THANK YOU 407 for transporting our money overseas!)

[Moonlight Graham]

No kidding. It's clear that Ontario's government is too big for Ontario given economic prospects going forward. Time for the Liberals to swallow their pride and clean house.

Seems recent events have convinced many citizens and governments that not paying for spending and racking up debt/deficits actually has negative consequences beyond passing the buck to your grandkids. Looks like reality has hit, we have to balance our books, and our current standard of living (both publicly and privately) is beyond our means and unsustainable. We've been living in a la-la land dreamworld. It was fun while it lasted...i guess.

[TheNewTeddy]

This stuff is one reason why I wont support the Liberals provincially.

Imagine if you will that you are Mr. Government, and the head of your family.

You have many children. Little Johnny Healthcare, Little Billy Education, so on and so forth.

Now one of your kids, Tommy Transportation, is starving. Every day you starve him by not giving him enough to eat.

Then one day you lose some wages, and need to make cuts to the family. Are you going to cut back for the whole family? Why? Why tell little Tommy Transportation, who is already starving thanks to cuts from the last time you ran out of money, that he needs to starve even more? If I were leading this family I'd tell the other kids, the non-starving ones like Emily Artfunding, that it's time that she take some of the cuts.

A 1.5% cut to education might mean one more student in each classroom. A 1.5% cut to healthcare might mean you wait an extra 5 mins for the doctor. Neither of these will even be noticed by the average person. A 1.5% cut to public transit funding means you lose a bus. That's a real thing, something noticeable, something that people don't want.

Tommy Transportation is starving. Mr. Rae Government decided to increase portion sizes for all the other kids, but not for Tommy Transportation. Mr. Harris Government decided to cut portion sizes for all the kids, including Tommy Transportation. Now Mr. McGunity Government wants to focus their cuts on Tommy Transportation.

...and people wonder why I vote Green.

[Michael Hardner]

Drummond was on CBC this morning, and he also pointed to the closed nature of financial information. The status of public pensions, and the energy supply plan were two examples of public information that is not published - not due to secrecy but just inertia.

[mentalfloss]

They should do most of the above and raise corporate taxes by 5%.

Take a look at this infographic to see why:

http://nationalpostnews.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/drummondreport3.jpg

Edited February 16, 2012 by mentalfloss

[Topaz]

They should do most of the above and raise corporate taxes by 5%.

Take a look at this infographic to see why:

http://nationalpostnews.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/drummondreport3.jpg

It seems the harmonizing of the GST cost too much, he shouldn't done it. I'm listening the PC leader, and he's not saying much and I wonder if he'll bring down the Libs, my guess is no because he doesn't want to deal with this mess.

[Boges]

It seems the harmonizing of the GST cost too much, he shouldn't done it.

I thought the Feds were on the hook for that.

They lowered income taxes for it but they also started taxing a bunch of new things.

Edited February 16, 2012 by Boges

[TheNewTeddy]

20B sales tax.

Our share is 8%, fed share is 5%.

Sales tax used to total 15%, now it totals 13%

But... what if we raised our share to 10%, and the total back to 15%?

Well if 20 Billion is raised at a 8% share, then, 10B should come from 4%, and, 5B from 2% right? Thus, a 2% increase should get us about 5B extra. There's a third of your shortfall right there.

The remainder should come from cuts to spending.

[fellowtraveller]

Bloated government, declining revenues, industry fleeing the scene with many jobs..... is Ontario already a failed state?

[Guest Peeves]

Again, this is another 'out' for Premier ( I use the term advisedly), McGuinty.

Whatever belt tightening he implements he can pass off as a requirement from Drummond.

Watch for an imitation like a Schultz...."I know nosssing!" I'm following orders!

[TheNewTeddy]

Bloated government, declining revenues, industry fleeing the scene with many jobs..... is Ontario already a failed state?

And yet Ontario pays 42% of all federal revenue (and only receives 35% of all federal spending)

[fellowtraveller]

And yet Ontario pays 42% of all federal revenue (and only receives 35% of all federal spending)

Save my seat while I pop some popcorn. I want a good seat to watch Ontario duke it out with Quebec for the crumbs of Confederation.

It should be no problem for Ontario to federally legislate whatever % of the gravy they need, given the vast numbers of MPs they have.

[TheNewTeddy]

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/11-010-x/00207/9586-eng.htm

These figures are 8 years old, but still generally apply.

In 2004, Ontario had per-capita federal expenditures of 5,822 and revenue of 7,091. Compare to Federal exp at 6,187 and rev of 6,366. The 2004 surplus was therefore 179. Even if we take that out of the Ontario number, AND, round down by 9%, we still have a per-capita mismatch of 1,000, meaning that in 2004, every person in Ontario paid $1,000 more to the federal government than they got back. Lets assume that Ontario's economic slowdown has halved that number to $500. This is a total of $6,500,000,000, again rounded down, or 6.5 billion dollars.

Then, lets take out Equlization, which we did not get at the time. This brings us down to about 4 billion dollars, minimum, that we lose out on from confederation. It might not sound like much, but it would go a very long way to closing this gap.

[Boges]

Save my seat while I pop some popcorn. I want a good seat to watch Ontario duke it out with Quebec for the crumbs of Confederation.

It should be no problem for Ontario to federally legislate whatever % of the gravy they need, given the vast numbers of MPs they have.

Ontario is actually still under represented with their seat-count. Many GTA MPs represent ridings of well over 100,000 people

[TheNewTeddy]

Ontario is actually still under represented with their seat-count. Many GTA MPs represent ridings of well over 100,000 people

This

Ontario has 38% of the population, and only 34.5% of the seats. In addition there are 107 seats east of Ontario ATM, and 95 west of Ontario. Ontario has 106 seats. Despite the fact that West of Ontario now has more people than East of Ontario, and neither as as many as Ontario.

This is all why I'm a Separatist. An Ontario Separatist!

Edited February 16, 2012 by TheNewTeddy

[Boges]

This

Ontario has 38% of the population, and only 34.5% of the seats. In addition there are 107 seats east of Ontario ATM, and 95 west of Ontario. Ontario has 106 seats. Despite the fact that West of Ontario now has more people than East of Ontario, and neither as as many as Ontario.

This is all why I'm a Separatist. An Ontario Separatist!

I remember I started a thread regarding the changing seat-count and how Quebec's share will be diluted. Quebec ended up getting some seats.

A poster here "punked" said that Quebec should maintain 25% of the commons regardless of their population because they represent Francophones all across the country.

[Smallc]

fellowtraveller is quite clearly exaggerating things. Ontario's revenues are now growing again, and Ontario will still contribute far more than it receives. Canada is nothing without a growing Ontario. Ontario will grow into the future, it just won't grow that fast (apparently, Drummond's forecast are quite a bit lower than others when it comes to growth).

2.4% is the expected growth rate going forward. The Drummond report supposes 2%.

[Guest Peeves]

And yet Ontario pays 42% of all federal revenue (and only receives 35% of all federal spending)

Yes an imbalance for sure. Still the present state of fiscal affairs provincially falls directly on the head of the Liberal's chasing their tails moving plants, green policies, eHealth fiasco, Ornge, all day school for 4 year olds (Let's just call it what it is, tax payer funded day care, a perk for teachers), , etc. etc.

Damn impeachment comes to mind, or jail terms for impersonating a government!

[Smallc]

Still, Ontario's debt is relatively low at current. If the level of austerity that Drummond suggests is implemented, then things should be fine (they'll probably be fine with a little less austerity, even) even if services suffer in the medium term.

[TheNewTeddy]

There is certainly room for cuts, and some things need to be cut, but I have no faith in the OLP to make the right cuts.

[fellowtraveller]

fellowtraveller is quite clearly exaggerating things. Ontario's revenues are now growing again, and Ontario will still contribute far more than it receives. Canada is nothing without a growing Ontario. Ontario will grow into the future, it just won't grow that fast (apparently, Drummond's forecast are quite a bit lower than others when it comes to growth).

2.4% is the expected growth rate going forward. The Drummond report supposes 2%.

Your optimism cheers me immensely.

And where is that growth going to come from in Ontario?

Will the rate of growth exceeds the rate of increase in expenditures?

Ontario is actually still under represented with their seat-count. Many GTA MPs represent ridings of well over 100,000 people

It may be their saving grace, Ontario has the clout to ensure they get their share of the pie or more.

[A poster here "punked" said that Quebec should maintain 25% of the commons regardless of their population because they represent Francophones all across the country/quote]That is NDP policy, part of 'asymmetric federalism'. If those words are too long, a more common image can be conjured with 'kissing Quebecs *ss to get some NDP MPs elected'.

These figures are 8 years old, but still generally apply

Not really.