Ontario budget draws mixed reviews

Reaction to Ontario's latest budget has been mixed — some call the cuts too severe, while others say it does not cut deep enough.

Following are some comments, from business, political and health interests, about the budget released Tuesday by Finance Minister Dwight Duncan:

Tim Hudak, leader, Ontario Progressive Conservatives:

“This is the time for tough and responsible fiscal management. Yet today’s budget is a weak and disappointing response to Ontario’s jobs and spending crisis. In fact, it actually puts up roadblocks to the very economic growth its assumptions are pinned on... At just the time we need to be making Ontario more competitive and restoring business confidence to create jobs, [Premier] Dalton McGuinty is taking $1.5 billion out of the economy over the next three years to pay for his overspending."

Andrea Horwath, leader, Ontario New Democrats:

"For families worried about their jobs, their health and the growing cost of living this budget falls short. We’re going to be listening to the everyday people who will be affected by the budget and we’ll be putting their interests first in the days ahead. We’re committed to making this minority government work as long as it provides results for people....The government seems to be finally admitting that no-strings-attached corporate tax giveaways aren’t creating jobs. Unfortunately, the province has already blown billions on these handouts and plans to do more as soon as we have the money.”

Michael Gregory, senior economist, and Robert Kavcic, economist, BMO Capital Markets:

"Finance Minister Duncan said 'for the third year in a row, we have beaten deficit forecasts,' but for the third year in a row, the extended deficit-reduction path has not changed. While the static path to a balanced budget by 2017/2018 is now more credible owing to realistic revenue growth assumptions and a detailed spending restraint plan, serious challenges remain. Among these are push-back from public-sector unions, the political reality of managing a minority government and the always-present demographic pressures on health-care spending. Last year, we said the province was on 'a slow boat to balance.' Today, it’s clear they’re still on the same slow boat, but they now have charts and a compass."

Robert Hogue, senior economist, RBC Economics:

"This was supposed to be the Big One. Ontario’s budget 2012 was built up as one of the toughest budget exercises in the province’s history that would provide the answers to many questions left hanging in the previous two budgets. And, budget 2012 went some way toward addressing the most important question: ‘How will the Ontario government balance its books by 2017/2018?’ But its focus on the next three years stopped it short of offering a complete answer."

Matthew Stewart and Ksenia Bushmeneva, Conference Board of Canada:

"The 2012 Ontario budget sets Ontario’s public sector on a long-term path to frugality. Over the next six years, a program of fiscal austerity will see growth in total program spending average well below one per cent per year. The combination of expenditure and revenue measures places the government on a path to balance its books by 2017–18. But containing costs over such a long-term horizon will be difficult."

Plamen Petkov, Ontario director, Canadian Federation of Independent Business:

"After years of consistent lobbying, the CFIB is pleased that the government has acknowledged the main challenge facing Ontario’s budget is salaries, pensions and the size of the broader public service. The government should be credited with presenting a tough plan to cap program spending increases at one per cent and limit the spiralling costs of public-sector pensions. However, much of this plan depends on public-sector unions putting water in their wine, and accepting restraint in wages, positions and pensions. We’ve seen no evidence that unions will agree to any change regardless of how dire the state of Ontario’s finances.”

Dr. Stewart Kennedy, president, Ontario Medical Association:

"The Ontario Medical Association has reviewed the provincial budget documents and has some serious concerns about the government’s ability to appropriately care for our aging and growing population. The government commits in the budget to improving access to doctors and same-day services, but the budget proposes to put a cap on the budget that pays for those things for the next fiscal year."

Warren (Smokey) Thomas, president, Ontario Public Service Employees Union:

"The 2012 Budget has failed Ontario on several counts. If this Budget passes, it will hurt people, slow our economy, and sharply increase income inequality in this province."

"It is worth noting that Finance Minister Dwight Duncan has overestimated the provincial deficit every year since the recession began… Clearly, the Minister has worked hard to keep deficit estimates frightening so that the final real result is cheerful. What this means, in simple terms, is that the Minister’s numbers can’t be trusted."

View the original article here

Rebranding part of push to streamline environmental reviews

The federal budget catch-phrase of the day will be "responsible resource development."

That's how sources say the government will be branding its moves to streamline environmental assessment, remove bureaucratic barriers to resource extraction, and change the way the Fisheries Act oversees Canada's waterways.

But since the Harper administration places so much emphasis on nomenclature, environmentalists say it's a loaded term that seeks to replace "sustainable development" as the guiding principle for environmental policy.

The phrase is already all over the website of Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver.

"Our government is focused on responsible development of Canada's natural resources to create jobs and economic growth as well as future prosperity," says one recent news release.

"Our government has taken great strides toward making our complex regulatory system more efficient, and we remain focused on our goal: one project, one review, in a clearly defined time period."

The budget is expected to include indications that the government will do just that. It will signal the Conservatives' intentions to eliminate overlap with provincial reviews, impose time limits on environmental hearings, and narrow the government's focus to large projects only.

The budget will also signal changes in the way fisheries officials deal with industry. Mining, oil sands and rural municipal officials have long complained that fisheries regulations are too extreme. Leaked drafts of proposed changes to the Fisheries Act suggest the budget will remove Ottawa's oversight over habitat in order to focus just on fish in large quantities.

And to blunt critics who say the Conservatives are dismantling environmental regulations to give free rein to the oil patch, the budget may also contain funding aimed at improving the safety record of pipelines and preventing spills.

The package, along with the "responsible" branding, amount to a throw-back to the days, decades ago, when government did little to stand in the way of business, says environment lawyer Stephen Hazell.

He said the government is required by law to implement a "sustainable development" strategy.

"'Responsible' development has no accepted legal definition that I know of," Hazell said.

"I suspect that the government is using it because Harper and Oliver fully understand that oil sands development is inherently unsustainable. Full sustainability in the oil sands would mean net zero carbon emissions, for example."

But a spokesman for Environment Minister Peter Kent says the "responsible" wording is simply a branding exercise, and nothing nefarious.

"It's just rebranding," said Rob Taylor. "We're in no way diminishing our adherence to environmental stewardship and sustainable development."

He said there has been no edict or suggestion that ministers should stop using the words "sustainable development." But he said the Conservatives do want to differentiate their approach from governments past.

"It's smarter, easier and better government," Taylor said.

"It's the principle Harper has had since the days of opposition. It doesn't have to be complicated."

The uproar over the federal government's environmental oversight has surged since this winter's hearings on the Northern Gateway pipeline to the West Coast began.

The hearings are expected to drag on and on, as officials hear from more than 4,000 interveners. Oliver has called many of the participants "radicals" who are funded by foreign interests trying to undermine Canada's economic interests.

Environmentalists, however, say the government's rhetoric is trying to cover up its attempts to allow industrial development regardless of the costs to the environment.

View the original article here