Skip to main content

Attack on free collective bargaining political, not fiscal


In December, it was predicted that outgoing finance minister Dwight Duncan would   reduce his deficit forecast just before his departure (for Bay Street).  Duncan had somehow estimated in his fall economic statement that the 2012-3 deficit would be  $14.4 billion, i.e. higher than the 2011-12 deficit  -- and even higher than the 2010-11 deficit!

Sure enough, Duncan lopped another $2.5 billion off the deficit in January.

In 2010, the McGuinty / Duncan government started its campaign for a wage freeze in the provincial public sector, citing the state of the public books.  At that time they had estimated deficits totaling $74.2 billion from 2009/10-2012/3.

Deficit (in billions of dollars)
2009–10
2010–11
2011–12
2012–13
Total
2010 Budget
21.3
19.7
17.3
15.9
74.2
2013 January
19.3
14
13
11.9
58.2
Reduction in Deficit
2
5.7
4.3
4.0
16.0

However, these proved unrealistic -- the actual deficits are now put at $16 billion less.  (This is a change from $13.5 billion less as of the 2012 fall economic statement.)

Despite the decline in the deficits, by the summer of 2012 the government increased their demands on broader public sector workers.  A wage freeze would no longer do -- now it had to be a wage freeze plus significant financial concessions (e.g. cuts to sick leave and retirement pay-outs).  The government claimed that their plan would save $8.8 billion over three years -- i.e. much less than what they had already paired from the deficits since they started their wage freeze campaign in 2010.

The government was quite prepared to attack free collective bargaining to get the concessions they desired, despite the fact that  major unions opened bargaining with a proposal for a wage freeze -- a freeze which would have accounted for much of the government's savings goal.

So the long and the short of it is this: in the summer of 2012 the government increased their concession demands even though their fiscal situation was much better than they predicted when they started their wage freeze campaign in 2010. Moreover, most of the savings they were aiming for were already conceded by the unions. Worse, despite this, the government moved from free collective bargaining to legislative compulsion to achieve their plans.

It may not have made much fiscal sense, but the attack on free collective bargaining did respond to the heckling from employers and the Progressive Conservatives.

The attack on free collective bargaining by the McGuinty / Duncan government was political, not fiscal.

Nevertheless, as they slink from the public stage, McGunty and Duncan may not think the attack was so opportune now.

Footnote: Part of the year end savings recorded by the Finance Ministry in the January statement was a reduction in health care spending of $308.6 million. 


Photo: Dwight Duncan, Ontario Chamber of Commerce

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Deficit? Public spending ain't the cause. Revenue, however...

With the election over, pressure to cut public programs has become quite intense. In almost all of the corporate owned media someone is barking on about it.

Another option -- increasing revenue from corporations and the wealthy is not mentioned.  However, data clearly indicates that Ontario does not have an overspending problem compared to the other provinces.

Instead, it indicates Ontario has very low revenue. 
Ontario has the lowest public spending of all the provinces on a per capita basis (see the chart from the 2014 Ontario Budget below).  So there is little reason to suspect that we have an over-spending problem.  If anything, this suggests we have an under-spending problem.







The Ontario government has also now reported in the 2014 Budget that Ontario has the lowest revenue per capita of any province.  This is particularly notable as other provinces are quite a bit poorer than Ontario and therefore have a much more limited ability to pay for public spending.  (Also notable in this…

Budget underwhelms on health care. Bait and Switch is such a nasty term

Last year the government promised a 4.64% health care funding increase in 2018/19. Then, earlier this month, they announced they would deficit spend to improve hospitals, mental health, home care, and child care.   Three of the four items cited by the government for improvement were part of health care. 

As it turned out the government did in fact promise in today's Budget to deficit spend $6.7 billion. (Due to a $1 billion fall in expected revenue, the extra spend amounts only to an extra $5.7 billion for 2018/19 programs – but that is still a significant chunk of new found cash for program spending.)  
If health care had gotten even a proportionate share of this new $5.7 billion in program spending, it would have added an additional $2.4 billion to health care  --  in other words about another 4% increase.  

But all health care got -- despite the government’s health care rhetoric -- was an extra $284 million. That may sound like a lot but with a total health care spend of $61 bill…

Ford government promise falls far short of solving hospital hallway medicine problem

Tens of thousands of new Long-Term Care (LTC) beds needed just to offset aging
The new Progressive Conservative government in Ontario has promised 30,000 new long-term care beds over the next ten years, often connecting this to their promise to end hospital hallway medicine.  But how does this promise stack up with growing demand for these facilities?
Most people 85 and older live in collective dwellings (LTC facilities, seniors residences, multiple level of care facilities).  The setting with the largest number of elders 85 and older is LTC facilities, with about 35% of the population 85 to 89  years old and almost 40% of the population 90 to 94 years. Older people are even more likely to be in a LTC facility.
The population 85 and older is the main driver of the need for long-term care beds.
An additional thirty thousand LTC beds by 2028 will only partially offset the rapid growth in the 85+ population.  The ministry of finance projects 42.5% growth in the most relevant population (85 a…