LP_468x60
ontario news watch
on-the-record-468x60-white
and-another-thing-468x60

This content is only available to our subscribers!

Become a subscriber today!

Register

Already a subscriber?

Subscriber Login

Ontario Premier Doug Ford just can’t resist a bad deal.

Ford put Ontario taxpayers on the hook for $10 billion in corporate welfare handouts to two of the world’s biggest and most profitable automakers.

He also committed Ontario taxpayers to spending billions to bail out the city of Toronto without conducting an audit of the city’s finances.

And now, Ford has bought into the FIFA World Cup soccer fiscal fiasco.

Ford announced last week he was committing Ontario taxpayers to pay up to $97 million toward the cost of Toronto hosting six World Cup games in 2026.

But do a quick look at the numbers and it’s clear Ford is making a bad investment.

When the city of Toronto was deciding whether to bid to host some World Cup games, city bureaucrats originally calculated it would result in $307 million in economic benefits.

Those benefits will largely go to local Toronto businesses, who could get additional tourism.

At the same time, Toronto bureaucrats initially estimated that hosting six FIFA games in 2026 will cost taxpayers at least $290 million.

That means if the cost of hosting the games goes even seven per cent over budget – which is a near certainty – the net economic benefits will be outweighed by the net economic costs.

The city has trotted out new numbers suggesting economic activity will surpass $307 million, but has yet to release any detailed analysis to explain how more economic activity will be generated than originally thought.

Either way, let’s remember it’s city businesses that will see the economic benefits while taxpayers will be the ones bearing the costs. Taxpayers paying for FIFA is just another form of corporate welfare.

It’s also important to note the increased economic activity will happen in Toronto while taxpayers across the province foot the bill.

The litany of costs placed on taxpayers’ shoulders is unfair when one examines who will benefit financially from FIFA.

Taxpayers are on the hook for paying the full cost of renovating BMO Field to ensure there are enough seats and amenities to reach FIFA’s hosting standards.

No less than 17,750 temporary seats will have to be added.

The city of Toronto signed a deal committing taxpayers to paying for all of the renovations at the Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment owned BMO Field, while promising to share up to 50 per cent of the economic benefits with MLSE.

Toronto also committed to paying MLSE to compensate for any lost profits while BMO Field is closed for renovations.

That means taxpayers will be paying for both the renovations and any lost revenue during construction, but will share any profits from economic activity at BMO Field with MLSE. Profits will be shared 50-50 for the first $10 million and 60 per cent for the city and 40 per cent for MLSE beyond the first $10 million.

That’s a raw deal if there ever was one.

Then there’s FIFA. FIFA is forcing taxpayers to pay for these renovations to BMO Field, but intends to keep all the money from ticket sales. FIFA expects to make $15 billion (CAD) from the World Cup in 2026.

Once again, taxpayers will be forced to pay for most of the costs while another entity – in this case FIFA – keeps a large share of the benefits.

Finally, taxpayers should be concerned about Ford’s decision to commit taxpayer dollars to help finance Toronto’s World Cup bid when taxpayers can’t even see the terms of Toronto’s deal with FIFA.

Toronto signed a deal to host six games with FIFA behind closed doors. Taxpayers are not allowed to see the agreement because of non-disclosure agreements. It even took Mayor Olivia Chow months to get a look at the fine print.

The bottom line is that paying $51 million per game for a soccer tournament in Toronto is a mistake. The risks to taxpayers are too great and our politicians shouldn’t be falling over each other to throw cash at FIFA while leaving taxpayers vulnerable to soaring costs.

Politicians must either rip up the deal with FIFA to save taxpayers from what is sure to be spiraling costs or negotiate a better deal with FIFA and MLSE to limit taxpayers’ risk and get more bang for the taxpayer buck.

Jay Goldberg is the Ontario Director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


This content is restricted to subscribers

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


It’s a dirty little secret Ontario politicians never want to talk about: Ontario taxpayers pay a special health-care tax.

Politicians of all stripes love to boast that Ontario taxpayers simply have to take out their health cards, and not their credit cards, to see their doctor or access emergency services.

But the truth is that Ontario taxpayers pay a special surtax on top of their provincial income taxes called the Ontario Health Premium.

Former premier Dalton McGuinty famously introduced Ontario’s health tax in 2004, claiming the tax was needed to fund the system and improve health outcomes.

Spoiler alert: taxpayers pay more, governments spend more, and outcomes are heading in the wrong direction.

When McGunity introduced Ontario’s health tax in 2004, he designed it to hit virtually every taxpayer.

Anyone in Ontario earning more than $20,000 a year is on the hook for McGuinty’s health tax. The tax is phased in at $20,000 of income and rises to as high as $900 a year for the province’s top income earners.

Given that the median income in Ontario is roughly $54,000, the average Ontario worker is on the hook for $600 in health taxes this year.

The health tax is a sneaky one. It’s taken right off your paycheque along with your income tax, so most taxpayers don’t even realize they’re paying it.

And the tax adds up. The Ford government expects to rake in $4.8 billion this year from the province’s health tax.

Ontarians are also the only taxpayers in Canada on the hook for a special health tax.

Some might argue a health tax makes sense if it improves outcomes for patients. But Ontario’s health-care outcomes have been trending in the wrong direction.

Thirty years ago, the typical Ontarian waited 9.2 weeks to see their family doctor and then get treated by a specialist. Last year, the average wait was 20.3 weeks.

Even though outcomes are worse, taxpayers are paying more. Ontario now spends $2,500 more per person on health care than it did in 1993, after adjusting for inflation.

Back in 1993, Ontarians didn’t have to pay a health tax. Today, taxpayers are on the hook for up to $900.

The long and short of it is the province is spending thousands of dollars more per person to pay for a worsening health-care system.

There’s no reasonable explanation to justify Ontario’s health tax. It hasn’t improved outcomes and only hits family budgets.

The Ford government needs to scrap Ontario’s health tax. A two per cent reduction in government spending would offset eliminating the health tax.

That would save the average Ontario taxpayer hundreds of dollars a year.

Still, Ontario’s health outcomes do remain a cause for concern. Declining outcomes in Ontario reflect a broader trend across Canada. Governments are spending more but patients are getting less.

There are two keys to improving outcomes and costs: fighting bureaucracy and allowing for more choice.

On the bureaucracy front, it’s time to recognize that there are too many bureaucrats on the taxpayer payroll and its eating up too much of the health-care budget.

This year, Ontario will spend $8 billion on health costs not related to front-line services.

Think that’s bad? Consider this: Canada has 10 times as many health-care bureaucrats as Germany, even though Germany has twice Canada’s population.

Ontarians are paying a health tax to fund government bloat and bureaucracy. That needs to end.

Then there’s flexibility. Other countries like the Netherlands have been able to improve outcomes by expanding consumer choice and allowing taxpayers to choose and pay for specific coverage beyond basic taxpayer-funded provisions. Canada could look at doing the same.

The bottom line is that it’s time to scrap Ontario’s health tax. Politicians should instead reform the system through targeting bureaucracy and improving flexibility, not soaking families.

Jay Goldberg is the Ontario Director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


Ontarians are looking for a government that is responsible with taxpayers’ money and leaves more in their wallets. And a lot of the promises that got Premier Doug Ford elected still haven’t materialized.

Enter Mississauga Mayor Bonnie Crombie.

Crombie just won the leadership of the Ontario Liberal Party. She’s been talking a good game about responsibly managing Ontario’s finances. And it appears she recognizes where the Ontario Liberals have gone wrong in the past.

“I think some of the decisions were too costly for Ontarians,” Crombie said in an interview last May. Crombie questioned the Wynne government’s spending choices in areas ranging from health care to child care.

During the Ontario Liberal leadership campaign, Crombie campaigned on policies to attract voters who were disillusioned with the reckless spending last time the Ontario Liberals controlled Queen’s Park.

Crombie also has a decent record as mayor of Mississauga. During her time in office, she’s largely kept property tax increases in check. Next year’s local property tax hike is set to come in under the rate of inflation and will be among the lowest increases in the GTA.

Ford rode a wave of taxpayer discontent straight to the premier’s office. He promised to get the province’s reckless spending under control and lower the tax burden on hardworking Ontarians.

But so far, Ford has failed on both fronts.

Crombie now has an opportunity to win over Ontarians frustrated with the tax-and-spend policies championed by both previous Liberal governments and the Ford Progressive Conservatives.

Here are three things Crombie could do to position herself as the taxpayer fighter Ford once promised to be: commit to balancing the budget, lower the tax burden for hardworking Ontarians and take the provincial debt seriously.

Ford promised Ontarians just months ago that he would balance the books next year. Instead, the government’s fall economic update announced a $5-billion deficit.

Crombie should lay out a vision to immediately balance the budget. There’s a lot of wasteful spending Crombie could go after, ranging from corporate welfare, to the new Ontario Infrastructure Bank, to taxpayer payouts to political parties.

Then there’s taxes. Ford promised a middle-class tax cut in 2018, but he hasn’t delivered. Ford promised to cut the second income tax bracket by 20 per cent, saving Ontario taxpayers up to $786 a year. Taxpayers are still waiting for those savings.

Crombie should promise a tax cut of her own to win the support of millions of Ontarians who are barely making ends meet. Income taxes are too high. The government’s gas tax cut is only temporary. And high sales taxes only make inflation worse. Crombie could pledge to lower any one of those taxes and find positive reception in every part of the province.

Crombie also needs to present a plan to lower the debt.

Ontario now has $400 billion in debt, largely thanks to the province’s last two Liberal premiers, Dalton McGuinty and Kathleen Wynne. The debt spiral they initiated is a major reason why the Liberals have remained a fringe party since 2018.

To stare down the ghosts of the Liberal Party’s past, Crombie should lay out a plan to use future surpluses to get the debt down and add a line item to the provincial budget that goes toward debt repayment. If Ford won’t be fiscally responsible, Crombie should promise to fill the vacuum.

Affordability is the number one priority for taxpayers. And the Ontario government is simply unaffordable. It spends too much and that means tax bills are too high. Crombie needs to make the case that she cares about making life more affordable for taxpayers.

Jay Goldberg is the Ontario Director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation 

 

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


Toronto politicians have been on a spending binge for years. Instead of forcing them to reckon with the massive debt load they’ve racked up, Ontario Premier Doug Ford caved and bailed them out like a parent paying down a reckless teenager’s credit card bill.

The so-called “new deal” announced by Ford and Toronto Mayor Olivia Chow includes $1.2 billion over three years to help the city tackle its budget deficit.

Ford’s Toronto bailout won’t solve all of the city’s problems. Before Kris Kringle from Queen’s Park came along, Toronto was facing a deficit of $1.5 billion. Thanks to Ford’s bailout, that deficit should fall to about $1 billion.

But Chow still has to come up with $1 billion. The city plans to spend much more than it brings in this year, but cities in Ontario aren’t allowed to run operating deficits. They can borrow money, but only for capital projects.

Step two in Chow’s bailout plan appears to be making a pilgrimage to Ottawa to beg for more cash.

But here’s the cold hard truth: neither Queen’s Park nor Ottawa should be bailing Toronto out of this mess. The city created it and the city should have to deal with it.

Both the province and the federal government are currently running budget deficits. They should be getting their own fiscal houses in order and encourage Toronto to do the same.

It’s worth exploring how Toronto actually got itself into this mess.

Let’s take a stroll down memory lane.

In the last budget passed under former mayor Rob Ford in 2014, the city of Toronto had a spending budget of $9.6 billion.

Then along came John Tory.

During Tory’s nine years as mayor, Toronto’s budget increased by $6.5 billion.

If Tory and his allies on city council had simply kept spending growth in line with inflation, Toronto’s budget this year would be $4 billion less than it is.

Instead of facing a deficit of more than $1 billion, Toronto would have a massive surplus.

Even when population growth is added to the mix, Toronto is overspending by billions of dollars this year.

The numbers are clear: Toronto is in this mess because city hall spent away every last dollar it had. No money was ever set aside for a rainy day.

Toronto doesn’t have a revenue problem. It has a spending problem.

That’s why Chow needs to immediately do a top-to-bottom review of every line item in the city’s budget and reduce government spending.

It’s also worth remembering the money Ford is handing over to Chow didn’t just fall from the sky. It comes out of the pockets of taxpayers all across the province.

Ford isn’t giving Windsor a special cash infusion. London isn’t getting an early Christmas present. Sudbury isn’t getting Ford bucks.

Why should taxpayers from everywhere else in Ontario have to bail Toronto out from a mess of its own making?

During his press conference with Chow, Ford tried to justify his bailout by claiming Toronto plays a special role as the economic engine of the province.

That may be true. But Toronto has been the economic engine of the province for decades. It hasn’t needed a special billion-dollar bailout package until now.

Ford is helping Toronto city hall avoid reckoning with its own mistakes.

Every parent eventually learns the lesson Ford will surely face down the line: if you pay down your kid’s credit card bill without any consequences, the situation is bound to occur again.

Chow wants to spend billions of dollars more than the city is spending today. Most of city council seems willing to do just that.

Ford shouldn’t be surprised if he finds himself back in this very same situation a few years down the road.

Bailouts without consequences are sure to bear repeating.

Jay Goldberg is the Ontario Director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

 

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


Government spending and provincial debt have exploded in Ontario over the past two decades. Racking it up has been a bipartisan affair.

Under the leadership of the province’s three latest premiers, Ontario transformed itself from a province with a relatively modest debt load to one crushed by the weight of a massive $400-billion debt burden.

It’s time for Ontario’s politicians to do something about it. Ontario needs a law forcing governments to keep spending increases at or below the rate of inflation to stand in the way of future fiscal recklessness.

But before looking further at the antidote to our problems, it’s important to first look at how we got here.

Dalton McGunity promised to be a responsible steward of the province’s finances when he ran for premier in 2003.

“Ontario deserves a government that will maintain fiscal discipline,” McGuinty told voters on the hustings.

McGuinty’s Liberals promised to abide by the Harris government’s balanced-budget law and work hard to reduce the debt.

“We will not add to the provincial debt,” the Liberal platform said. “We will pay down the debt as conditions allow, with all surpluses going directly to debt payment.”

It turns out the Liberal platform wasn’t worth the paper it was written on.

Government spending stood at $66 billion and the provincial debt was $110 billon when McGunity took over Queen’s Park. Government spending rose to $130 billion and the provincial debt reached $258 billion by the time McGunity presented his final budget 10 years later.

McGunity increased government spending by more than three times the rate of inflation.

Then along came Kathleen Wynne. Wynne jacked up government spending by another $48 billion and ballooned the debt to $308 billion in a span of just five years.

Wynne actually showed more fiscal restraint than McGunity, if one can even call it that. Instead of increasing spending at three times the rate of inflation, she increased spending at two-and-a-half times the rate of inflation.

Ontarians were tired of 15 years of reckless spending, borrowing and taxing by the time the 2018 election came around.

When Doug Ford entered the political scene, he promised to right the wrongs of his Liberal predecessors.

“The party is over with taxpayers’ money,” Ford declared as he crisscrossed the province.

Ford repeatedly pointed out that under the leadership of McGunity and Wynne, Ontario had become “the most indebted region in the entire world.”

A Progressive Conservative government would change all of that, Ford pledged.

But in the five years since Ford first sat down in the premier’s chair, he’s failed to put Ontario back on a sustainable course. He’s broken the most important promise he made to voters: end government waste and mismanagement.

Finance Minister Peter Bethlenfalvy tabled a plan to spend $199 billion and increase the provincial debt to $416 billion in the government’s 2023 fall fiscal update. He called the document a “responsible” plan.

Ontarians should ignore the government’s rhetoric.

The reality is there has been no spending restraint under Ford’s watch. Government spending has increased by $12 billion over and above the rate of inflation in the past five years.

So much for ending the party with taxpayers’ money.

If McGunity, Wynne and Ford had kept government spending increases in line with the rate of inflation, Ontario today would be spending $102 billion. The Ford government is set to spend nearly double that this year.

Ontario would be debt free and would have hundreds of billions of dollars in a rainy-day fund in that very same scenario.

Instead, taxpayers are on the hook for more than $1 billion a month in debt interest payments this year. That’s the equivalent of paying for a brand-new hospital every 30 days.

It’s time to break the cycle of debt and deficits.

Earlier this year, the government of Alberta passed a law mandating spending increases stay at or below the rate of inflation plus population growth.

The best time for Ford to have introduced that kind of legislation was five years ago. The second best time is right now. Ontario taxpayers cannot afford to wait any longer.

Taxpayers are fed up with paying more than $13 billion a year in interest on the debt, money that simply goes into the pockets of Bay Street bondholders.

It’s time for Ford to remember what he promised voters. Five years after he said he would clean up the Liberal mess at Queen’s Park, he’s only made a bad fiscal situation worse.

For the sake of future generations, Ford must balance the books and introduce a spending restraint law to ensure this sorry saga of ballooning deficits and debt finally comes to an end.

Jay Goldberg is the Ontario Director at the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

 

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


This content is restricted to subscribers

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


This content is restricted to subscribers

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


Two reports were released by the PLACE Centre at the Smart Prosperity Institute about the state of housing, both nationally and in Ontario specifically. It’s also the subject of some actual policy ideas within the Ontario Liberal leadership race, which seems to have its participants largely stepping up on a file that has been largely marginalized by Ontario Premier Doug Ford, at least in a substantive way—he has certainly used the rhetoric about the housing crisis as cover for the corrupt dealings that happened as part of the Greenbelt scandal that the province’s Auditor General outlined in no uncertain terms last week. While both reports—one on the rental housing situation in the country, the other about needing a plan to build 1.5 million homes in Ontario over the next decade—do contain a certain level of overlap between them, the key recommendation between both is coordination, not only between all levels of government, but also with industry and labour. And that’s the part that I worry the most about.

“No one actor in the system can ensure that housing completions keep pace with population growth,” the Ontario report recommends about coordination. “All orders of government, the higher education sector, builders, developers, and the non-profit sector all play a vital role.”

“Create a coordinated plan with all three orders of government and create an Industrial Strategy led by a roundtable of public and private builders, the non- profit housing sector, investors and labour,” the rental report states in its coordination recommendation. “The federal plan should include targets and accountability measures. The plan should include enhanced data collection, more robust and frequent population forecasts and better research to understand Canada’s housing system. The plan should also include a blueprint to fund deeply affordable housing, co-operative housing and supportive housing, along with seniors housing and student residences and double the relative share of non-market community housing.”

The housing crisis is one of the most pressing domestic issues the country faces, the notion of a national round-table discussion that involves the federal government, provinces, major municipalities, and representatives of labour, higher-education and developers seems unwieldly. I have no doubt that these conversations need to happen, and that it would probably help if most, if not all, of the players were in the same room together, but we have had a pretty terrible run lately in this country when it comes to calling big meetings to coordinate things. If you add in the Indigenous component that the rental report recommends, that may be an impossible task—not because they shouldn’t be included, but because their housing needs are so much vaster and more specialized in many cases (such as dealing with the challenges associated with remote communities who are only accessible by ice road for a few weeks out of the year) that it may strain the ability to come to any kind of joint resolution for action to its very breaking point.

Trying to salvage our failing public healthcare systems, particularly after the height of the COVID pandemic, has given us a taste of just how able our federal and provincial governments are when it comes to even trying to work together in order to solve what is a particularly existential crisis for one of Canada’s defining intuitions (well, according to public opinion surveys in any case). In that particular instance, you had provincial premiers who were willing to let the system collapse because they thought that it would give them additional leverage with the prime minister, whom they insisted on sitting down with in order to personally demand more money from, with no strings attached. It didn’t help that these same premiers were also in the thrall of a normalcy bias that had them believing that a healthcare collapse wouldn’t be that bad, because after all, the system didn’t collapse at the height of COVID, so why would it now? Suddenly emergency rooms were being force to close in some hospitals, and the premiers found out just what their unwillingness to do anything about the system was costing the public.

In the end, prime minister Justin Trudeau simply dictated terms to the provinces because they had caught themselves out, and he gave them some money—not nearly as much as they were demanding—with some of the tightest strings that have ever been attached to healthcare dollars, because the federal government had been particularly burned at the height of the pandemic when emergency dollars sent to the provinces didn’t go toward testing, tracing, nurses salaries, or shoring up the healthcare system in anyway. Rather, most provinces simply put the money directly onto their bottom lines in order to eliminate their deficits as their healthcare systems continued to deteriorate past the point of collapse.

I worry that the housing crisis will be little different—particularly as premiers are already demanding a face-to-face thirteen-on-one meeting with the prime minister on infrastructure and housing, which is transparently an attempt to try to bully him into simply turning over more money to them with no strings attached—the way they like it. Not to mention, the provinces already have a history of taking federal transfers intended for social housing, and much as they have done with healthcare dollars for decades, spent them on other things. And while the PLACE report recommendations do talk about targets and accountability measures, that is unlikely to happen without some pretty powerful incentives from the federal government, which is likely to mean money—a lot of it at a time when the federal government is trying to at least look like they’re interested in fiscal restraint.

None of this is to say that the different levels of government shouldn’t be meeting to try and hammer out some kind of coordinated effort on the housing crisis, because they absolutely should. My biggest worry, however, is that too much expectation is going to be placed on the federal government to do the lion’s share of the heavy lifting, the work, and the financing to do what needs to be done, while premiers can feel content to not hold up their end of the bargain and put all of the blame on the federal government while legacy media says things like “nobody cares about jurisdiction.” We are in a housing crisis. We do need all hands on deck. But we also need to ensure that premiers or mayors can’t shirk their duties without consequences from the public, because that is where the pressure needs to come from.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.