Budget Town Hall2004

Budget Town Hall

Summary ReportMay 2004

l

l

l

l

2004

l

l

Delivering ChangeDelivering Change

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

Town Hall Ontario Box 40 77 Wellesley St. West Toronto, Ontario M7A 1N3 www.townhallontario.gov.on.ca Disponible En Français

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

1

MESSAGE FROM THE PREMIER OF ONTARIO Ontarians chose new and different priorities on Election Day, 2003. They elected a government that would fix their schools and hospitals, while living within our means. The context in which we would address those priorities became much clearer after October 2nd. The services deficit was evident in everything from the state of our schools to our supply of electricity. But the resources to address it are scarce because the fiscal deficit is much larger than anyone anticipated. Given these new realities, we turned to Ontarians for their best advice on how we should proceed. We launched a public consultation that was unprecedented in its scope and approach. We began with a campaign for new ideas within our own public service. We relied on an independent, non-profit organization to provide a forum for citizen dialogues - day-long discussion groups with randomly selected Ontarians from all walks of life. We asked MPPs to host town halls in their communities across Ontario to give more people throughout the province the opportunity to engage in discussion and provide their best advice. And we set up a web site and toll-free phone number to give as many Ontarians as possible a way to have their say on issues of great importance to all of us. In each of these settings, Ontarians were given the straight goods on the state of our finances and the choices facing government. They were given the opportunity to put themselves in the shoes of a Finance Minister, considering the priorities and making difficult decisions. This report on our town halls and other efforts to engage Ontarians represents some of the most important advice we have received. I want to thank the thousands of Ontarians who participated and contributed. We take your advice very seriously. The proof of that will be seen in our budget on May 18th and the initiatives that follow. I often say that none of us is a strong or as smart as all of us, working together. I'm very grateful that our Town Halls were further proof of that fact. While we face some significant challenges, I am confident in the ability of Ontarians to overcome them. Together, we are going to provide Ontarians with a standard of living and a quality of life that are second to none. Yours truly, Dalton McGuinty

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

2

WHY WE ASKED Budget Town Hall 2004 was launched to meet two commitments made by the new government. The first was to gather ideas from Ontarians on how best to deal with difficult fiscal realities while improving our schools, delivering better health care and providing cleaner, safer communities. The second was to provide Ontarians with new ways to participate more directly in their government and the democratic process.

We are living beyond our means

Ontario’s economy is based on a reasonably strong foundation. Inflation remains low and stable, interest rates are low, and employment is increasing. Economists continue to forecast moderate growth in 2004 and 2005. Still, the provincial government’s fiscal situation is weak. Late last fall, a thorough review of Ontario’s finances by former Provincial Auditor Eric Peters revealed that the province had inherited a deficit of $5.6 billion. This deficit was the result of significant tax reductions, spending commitments made over the past three years and a moderate economic slowdown in 2003. The $5.6 billion deficit is not simply due to short-term events like SARS or the power blackout. In fact, the deficit is “structural” – that is, our revenues are growing more slowly than expenditures. Spending has grown more than ten times faster than tax revenue since the year 2000, as detailed in the November 2003 Speech from the Throne. Debt is already so high that the province paid $10 billion for 2003-04 just to cover the interest on the debt. If there is no change in the way the government operates, the budget deficit will still be $4.5 billion three years from now – in 2006-2007. In this projection, net government debt could rise from $139 billion this year to about $150 billion by March 2007. The extra debt will add at least $1 billion to interest costs.

The Structural Deficit

Source: Ontario Ministry of Finance.

00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04Projected

04-05* 05-06*

60

65

70

75

80

85

$Bill

ions

* Without further actions.

Total Revenues

Total Spending

$4.5B gap**

** Includes a $1B reserve in 2004-05 and 2005-06.

Figure 1

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

3

The growing deficit had to be addressed or it would threaten valued public services and the opportunity to improve them in the future. We all need to be part of the solution

The government committed to bringing an open, honest and transparent approach to decision making. It promised to improve partnerships with other levels of government and the public. Delivering an extensive, unprecedented public consultation leading up to the spring 2004 Budget would be the first step. This government believes the best decisions are those that reflect the public’s best interests. Public involvement in making those decisions, and reflecting those interests, is essential. This was the impetus for Budget Town Hall 2004. For Ontarians, Budget Town Hall was the first of many new opportunities to participate in Ontario’s democratic process. It was an important forum to express opinions and values on getting the results that matter most. Ontarians were asked how to achieve the best possible outcomes from the money the province spends and the revenues it collects. This could mean reshaping the way government delivers services to make them more efficient, shifting resources from services that matter least to those that matter most, and in some cases finding new revenue sources. The main issue considered throughout the Budget Town Hall 2004 consultations was how to best meet our priorities while living within our means. Ontarians advice will shape the province’s upcoming budget and its agenda for the next four years.

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

4

WHAT YOU SAID Almost 60 different public sessions were held across the province, with over 2,000 individuals and more than 500 institutions contributing advice to the government. Almost 18,000 people participated through various channels, including the town halls, citizen dialogues, online, and by mail and fax. In addition to the 1,500 surveys submitted through the website, another 2,000 people provided e-mail submissions. Hundreds of others mailed or faxed their comments directly to Queen’s Park. Be accountable, show results

Ontarians want more accountability for the tax dollars they give to government. They do not want further service cuts or asset sales as means to balance the budget. As well as wanting more accountability for how tax dollars are spent, Ontarians are also asking for more openness about the true costs of running government. They want better measurement of results, with more independent audits and improved transparency.

“Let’s make sure that we are getting the best bang for the buck. All waste/redundancy/inefficiency must be removed to ensure that the taxpayer’s dollar is not being wasted. Every dollar not wasted on unnecessary things is another dollar for core priorities without increasing the tax load for workers.”

– Scarborough, ON

Balance the budget this mandate

Ontarians want the government to balance the budget, but not at the expense of essential services. A strong majority believe the budget should be balanced within two to three years, and the government needs to have a rigorous deficit elimination plan in place from year one. They advise government that the budget should be balanced in a way that promotes investment and productivity in the province. Ontarians also see a need for government to change the way it does business. They would prefer to see measured change as opposed to what was often referred to as knee-jerk, short -term fixes.

“Balancing the budget is not the complete solution. It has to be tempered with common sense. Remember, cutting services in certain areas (e.g. health and education) is not a winning recipe.”

– Kingston, ON

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

5

Protect the most vulnerable when looking for revenues

Ontarians have mixed views on how best to generate additional revenues. There was no consensus on raising taxes as a means to deal with the deficit. While the issue came up time and again through the Budget Town Hall process, concern over how this would affect vulnerable Ontarians tempered any demands for increases. The need to protect and provide essential services to low-income families and individuals at risk came up repeatedly. While there is some support for modest, selective tax increases for corporations and those in the highest income bracket, Ontarians insist that any increases be fair and progressive. There was support for charging the full cost for services - pay for what you use – providing that the most vulnerable are not further disadvantaged. Any increases must be linked to greater accountability.

“Taxes at a higher rate are not good for children and low-income families.”

– Etobicoke, ON

Ontarians welcome the opportunity to participate

Participants in all sessions enjoyed the opportunity to contribute to the budget-making process. They felt that their participation was not only critical to the 2004 Budget process, but to the democratic process overall. Many participants commented that they gained a new awareness of the complexity and challenges a government faces when preparing a budget. Despite some initial skepticism about how genuine the consultations would be, participants generally felt pleased with the process and optimistic (albeit cautiously) about the government’s willingness to listen.

“I appreciate the efforts this government is making to enlist the opinions and input of Ontarians.”

– Windsor, ON

“Thank you for allowing citizens to have a voice.” – Niagara Falls, ON

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

6

HOW YOU TOLD US While previous governments have consulted mainly with institutional stakeholders in their pre-budget consultations, this was the first broad-based effort to reach out to individual citizens in advance of a budget. The feedback will not only inform decisions for the 2004 Budget, it will also help define ways to meet priorities over the full four-year mandate.

“This government wants to engage the people of Ontario in a dialogue on public services. We want to consult with them in a way that is open, transparent and meaningful.”

– Premier Dalton McGuinty A number of different forms of citizen engagement were used to get a sense of the values and principles Ontarians hold most closely and how they would influence the difficult choices that will be required to live within our means. Figure 2 highlights the many ways Ontarians could participate – whether by attending a Town Hall held in their region or by their local MPP, logging onto the website, calling the toll-free hotline or meeting with the Ministry of Finance. Ontarians could also have been randomly asked to join one of the citizens’ dialogues. Thousands of Ontarians took advantage of this opportunity to give their government their best advice.

Figure 2

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

7

WHAT YOU TOLD US ABOUT PRIORITIES

Health care and education the top priorities

All Town Halls began by asking what principles should guide budget decisions. Based on its election mandate, the government put five major priorities before the people of Ontario. They were asked to determine, collectively, how the priorities could best be achieved. This included a discussion on several key results that could indicate progress towards achieving these outcomes. Such measurable results could allow Ontarians to judge the performance of the government over the next four years. This is a new approach. In the past, governments focused on the quantity of spending, not on the quality of the results.

“I would hope I join with many Ontarians in supporting a considered and reasonable questioning and validation of public priorities, one which is based on measurable outcomes relevant to the 21st century challenges we all face.”

– Simcoe County Core Priorities Key Results to Measure Progress Better student achievement Higher literacy and math scores.

More kids learning until age 18. Closing the gap between our weakest and strongest learners.

Healthier Ontarians in a healthier Ontario

Reduced waiting times for key services. More families with access to primary health care. Increased rate of physical activity among Ontarians.

Better workers for better jobs in an innovative economy

Higher productivity levels. Sustainable balanced budgets. Increased amount of renewable energy available.

Safe and vital communities that offer Ontarians a higher quality of life

Increased public transit ridership. Increased number of parks/protected areas. Reduced level of street and gun crime.

More active citizens contributing to a stronger democracy.

More people (especially young people) voting. More Ontarians volunteering in their communities. Campaign finance reform.

Figure 3

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

8

To understand the relative value placed on the priorities, Ontarians were asked at the town halls, on the website and via the Budget Town Hall discussion guide to allocate $100 across the five areas. Health care and education were consistently the top priorities for the people of the province. Healthier Ontarians attracted the most dollars, with people indicating 33% of government spending should flow this way. Better Student Achievement came second at 23%. Safe and Vital Communities and Better Workers tied for third at an average of 17%, while More Active Citizens came in at 10%. Figure 4 illustrates the results.

More Active Citizens

10%Better Student

Achivement23%

Better Workers17%

Safe and Vital Communities

17%

Healthier Ontario

33%

There was little variation across the province in the allocations. The results for each of the nine Regional Town Halls are included in the Appendix. Ontarians were also provided with an opportunity to express their views around what results would indicate successful achievement of the core priorities. Through an interactive survey on the Budget Town Hall website, Ontarians rated several options, including the key results highlighted in Figure 3. Healthier Ontarians: Reduce wait times and provide access to primary care

There was significant support for using ‘reduced wait times’ (almost 90%) and ‘more families with access to primary health care’ (85%) as a measurement to show improvements in heath care. Community-based care was also a well-supported option, suggesting a need for more community clinics, nurse practitioners, nursing home regulations and mental health resources. Many participants emphasized the need to educate the public on the cost of individual health care services. Some suggested that individuals pay for non-emergency health concerns treated in the emergency department. There was general agreement on the importance of illness prevention. Three-quarters of those surveyed felt that an increased rate of physical activity among Ontarians is an important component to achieving better results in health care.

Figure 4

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

9

“Healthcare should be about keeping people well. A paradigm shift is required here.”

– Kitchener, ON Better Student Achievement: Decrease class size and improve the education environment

There was strong support for decreased class sizes, elimination of standardized testing, and improved relationships with teachers as measures of success. Almost three-quarters of those surveyed indicated support for more children learning until age 18 as an effective measure of improvement in education, while slightly fewer felt that higher literacy and math scores were good indicators. Just over half saw closing the gap between our strongest and weakest learners as the most effective measure.

“Society and the economy depend on a well-trained, well-educated population. Invest in all levels of education and the rewards will be greater prosperity.”

– Mississauga, ON Innovative Economy: Increase renewable energy supply and balance the budget

Topping out as the best measure for success on the economy (80%) was increasing the supply of renewable energy. In addition, 67% stated that a balanced budget would be a good measure of success on this priority, while two-thirds supported higher productivity. There was strong support for ensuring that industry, especially small business, remains competitive in the province. There was feedback from the North and rural areas on the need to customize programs to address regional differences. Recognizing the qualifications of, and creating opportunities for, new immigrants also emerged as a critical economic issue.

“More focus should be devoted to developing alternative renewable energy resources. Fostering conservation is not enough, we must change the ways in which we get energy. By investing in new alternative technologies in producing Canada’s energy, we can develop a market that may generate revenue for the country.”

– London, ON

Safe and Vital Communities: Reduce crime

Almost 80% of those surveyed felt that reduced levels of street and gun crime are the best measure of progress in creating safe and vital communities. Three-quarters of participants felt that more parks and protected areas would represent improvement. Increasing public transit ridership was a favoured measure among 70% .

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

10

“Communities are not places or buildings, but you do need to build them.”

– Quinte West, ON –

Stronger Democracy: Get more people to vote

Close to three-quarters of those surveyed agreed that more people voting – especially young people – was an important measure of a stronger democracy. Almost two-thirds agreed that increased levels of volunteerism and finance reform are also critical. There was overwhelming support for more consultative decision-making and citizen engagement opportunities in the future.

“I would like to thank you for taking the Ontario government into the 21st century and providing this forum for communal interaction.”

– Toronto, ON

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

11

HOW TO DELIVER ON THE PRIORITIES Ontarians were asked to rank four possible approaches to developing a fiscal plan that would meet shared priorities. These approaches are outlined in Figure 5 below.

Approach 1: Change the Way Government Delivers Services

The first approach is to change the way the government delivers key services in order to produce results in the five priority areas. This approach would require significant transformation and would cost money upfront, but would improve services and make them more sustainable in the long term.

Approach 2: Concentrate on Core Priorities The second approach is for government to focus on its core priorities. Some things government currently does may not meet core priorities – these activities would be eliminated or done by others. This would free up funds to reduce the deficit or invest in new and better ways of delivering public services, as described in the first approach.

Approach 3: Raising Additional Revenue The third approach is to raise additional revenues to reduce the deficit and invest in core priorities. This approach would see the government increase revenue by charging more for services it currently provides, closing tax loopholes and introducing or expanding programs that generate revenue.

Approach 4: Foster Conservation and Sustainability of Resources

The fourth approach is to ensure conservation of scarce resources. Users would pay more of the full cost for these resources in order to encourage conservation and appropriate use. This approach also calls for action to ensure that basic needs are met for all. It would free up money to be used to achieve priorities.

Figure 5

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

12

The majority of those who contributed their advice felt that no single approach would sufficiently address deficit concerns. Instead, their advice to the government was to use a balanced approach, taking the best from each option to deliver results on the priorities. Figure 6 shows how Ontarians would rely on each of the approaches in developing a budget plan. Overall, the most popular approach was Change the Way Government Delivers Services, followed by Concentrate on Core Priorities and Foster Conservation and Sustainability of Resources.

Foster

Conservation and

Sustainability of Resources

24%

Raise Additional Revenue

19%

Change the way

Government Delivers Services

30%

Concentrate on Core Priorities

27%

Change the Way Government Delivers Services

Ontarians were asked to what extent they felt the government should change the way it delivers key services in order to produce results in the five priority areas. This approach would require significant transformation and would likely cost money upfront but would improve services and make them more sustainable over the long term. Examples provided were transforming the health care system to focus on keeping people well, providing services outside of hospitals, and using teams of professionals to care for Ontarians. Modernizing the system by creating electronic health records was put forth as an option for discussion. In education, the example provided was to invest more in early childhood education to build a strong foundation for life-long learning.

Figure 6

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

13

Your Advice:

Streamline services, cooperate with other governments, educate the public about the real costs

Ontarians agreed with the need to change the way government delivers some services, with three-quarters of those surveyed supportive of this approach. Almost 80% stated that the government should encourage less expensive and more effective ways to deliver services to Ontarians. There was a consistent call for more streamlined services and better cooperation with other levels of government. Ontarians also want their government to eliminate duplication and be more accountable for spending.

Many observed that the challenge for government is primarily one of enhancing revenue generation as opposed to reducing levels of spending. Concern was raised about the potential need for big upfront investment to reform these services, and potential job losses as a result of restructuring. Around half of those surveyed agreed that raising revenue from other approaches could in some cases be used to invest in other sectors like health and childcare. However, in the case of environmental contamination or resource consumption, the public felt that any fines or fees levied should go to support that particular sector. The majority felt that government should educate the public on the actual cost of providing services. There was a strong belief that government should promote a culture focused on prevention, particularly on health matters. As well, the government should encourage Ontarians to contribute to the community through such activities as volunteerism.

“We are currently living beyond our means and changes have to be made. It is also clear that drastic changes need to be made and the government needs to fundamentally change the way services are delivered.”

– Sault Ste. Marie, ON

Concentrate on Core Priorities

The second approach required government to focus on core priorities. Under this approach, activities would be eliminated or done by others to free up funds to reduce the deficit or to invest in new and better ways of delivering public services.

This approach takes into account that as the economy evolves and the needs of Ontarians change, it is possible that some government activities can be dropped while others can be delivered by someone else. The examples provided for discussion purposes were to reduce spending on programs that do not contribute to the core priorities, or to sell or lease government businesses such as the LCBO or TVOntario to raise money to transform key services.

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

14

Your Advice: Focus government efforts and keep public assets in public hands Ontarians generally supported the government sticking to its core priorities – in particular health care and education. They asked that government more clearly communicate those priorities and criteria to measure improvements to all Ontarians. Over half of those surveyed suggested that graduated fees (charging more to those who can afford to pay more) would be an acceptable way to generate funds to support the core priorities such as education. A minority of those who completed the survey agreed that the business of alcohol purchase and distribution contributes to the government’s core priorities. However, even though Ontarians do not see the LCBO as contributing to core priorities, a strong majority agreed that the LCBO should remain in government hands. This was reinforced by a strong belief across the Town Halls that critical government assets should not be privatized nor sold to the private sector for what was generally perceived as “short term gain.” This included TVOntario. There were concerns that the cost to regulate new approaches to delivering services might exceed the value of the transfer, and that privatized fees would not protect those at risk in the community.

“Concentrating on core priorities has nothing to do with selling the LCBO. The LCBO is a money making enterprise that supplies the government with much needed money.”

– Picton, ON Raising Additional Revenue

This third approach called for raising additional revenues to reduce the deficit and invest in core priorities. Government could increase revenue by charging more for services it currently provides, closing tax loopholes and introducing or expanding programs that generate revenue. The guiding principle was that government should never charge more for a service than the cost to provide it and that government should introduce or expand programs that generate new revenue only when it is in the public interest to do so. Examples given for the purposes of discussion were driver’s license fees which currently cover only a portion of the cost to deliver the service; tax exemptions such as the exemption on prepared meals under $4, and photo radar.

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

15

Your Advice: Find efficiencies first, look to new revenue sources Just under two-thirds of those surveyed agreed with this approach. However, Ontarians clearly stated that government should focus on finding more efficient ways of doing business first. If the government is faced with the choice of eliminating the deficit either through cuts to services or by raising revenues, Ontarians preferred finding creative ways to raise revenues as the solution. Charging the full cost for services was the most effective approach to doing so. Almost three-quarters of participants felt that paying the full cost of essential services that consume resources will help ensure they are used responsibly, as well as reduce the cost to deliver those services. Examples such as photo radar and toll roads received mixed reviews. Many stated that photo radar should be about safety and not about generating revenue.

“I do not have a problem with paying actual or real costs for essential services such as water, hydro etc... What I do have a problem with is the wasted costs inherent in the actual cost of the services.”

– Toronto, ON

Ontarians preferred that fees collected should be directed to support related services. For example, tolls on roads should be used to build better roads or improve transit. Increased fees for senior’s drug plans met with mixed responses. Many opposed this approach as a matter of principle, while others agreed with the general attitude that there are many who can afford to pay the services they receive, and should pay more. However, there was unqualified support for protecting those who cannot afford to pay more. Several targeted tax measures were discussed. Some of the tax measures raised include a new higher-income tax bracket, increasing “sin” taxes on cigarettes and alcohol consumption, and requiring corporations to pay “their fair share.” In a couple of instances, participants raised the notion of creating a dedicated tax to reduce the deficit.

“I believe it is irresponsible to promote the idea that we can have superior services without paying for them. Quality cost money.”

– Toronto, ON

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

16

Foster Conservation and Sustainability of Resources

The fourth approach focused on ensuring conservation of scarce resources. It called for users to pay more of the actual cost for these resources in order to encourage conservation and appropriate use.

Ontarians discussed the government’s intention to bring electricity pricing in line with the real cost of power. They also considered to what extent the public should pay the full cost of essential services that consume resources such as water and whether road tolls should be used to subsidize other government programs and services.

Your Advice:

Conservation is essential and we should pay more to protect scarce resources

More than half of those surveyed agreed that conservation and sustainability are important approaches to addressing the deficit. Almost three-quarters believed that paying the full cost of services that consume resources will help ensure that they are used responsibly, while reducing the cost to deliver those services. Most believed that fees and fines should be directed back into the environment sector and that industry should be held accountable for the use of resources.

“In rural Northern Ontario, this concept is understood. Those relying on well water do not take 30 minute showers or wash a half empty load.”

– Toronto, ON

If implementing the full cost of services, government must ensure low income families and individuals at risk have affordable access to basic essential resources (water, heat, electricity etc.). This was a strong and consistent message received throughout Budget Town Hall 2004. Levying strict fines for excessive use of resources and environmental violations was supported by participants. They also supported using tax credits, incentives and rebates for those who undertake conservation measures, including the use or development of “green” technology.

An overwhelming majority felt that the government needs to lead by example. This included curbing its own use of resource-rich services, and educating the public on the real costs of services, resource depletion, and ways to conserve energy and reduce consumption in their everyday lives.

“People are only going to conserve if they pay the actual cost of the non- renewable resources and actual costs of essential services and resources. The sooner you start charging the actual cost, the better.”

– Kitchener, ON

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

17

WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? Results from the Town Halls and the internal OPS Ideas Campaign will be reflected in the 2004 Ontario Budget. The Budget Town Hall 2004 served as a critical first step in meeting the government’s commitment to building a more engaged and participatory, democractic culture. This process has not only laid the foundations for more consultations in the future; it has also raised the bar – setting new standards for public access, citizen engagement and democratic renewal in Ontario.

“Each citizen has a duty towards its government – let’s not look at the problems, but focus on solutions ... though the road ahead is long – a journey of a thousand miles starts with a single bold step.”

– Milton, ON

“Our continued challenge is to never lose sight of the end user – whether they be patients in our hospitals, children in our schools, drivers on our highways or families who rely on the quality of water running through our taps. This is our shared responsibility. We are tackling this together. More than anything else we have a responsibility to be hopeful.”

– Premier Dalton McGuinty, Ottawa Town Hall Thank you for helping us deliver change.

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

18

APPENDIX How Ontarians Were Engaged in Budget Town Hall 2004

It started with Government Employees – The Ontario Public Service (OPS) Ideas Campaign

Budget Town Hall started with Ontario’s Public Service. On December 18, 2003, the Premier, together with the Secretary of Cabinet, officially launched the first-ever Ontario Public Service Ideas Campaign. This innovative campaign was based on the belief that the best ideas to improve services and achieve better results often come from the people who know and do the work.

Ideas were encouraged and received from across the OPS - from deputy ministers and senior managers to front-line employees and the employee bargaining agents. To the credit of dedicated OPS staff, the Ideas Campaign was designed, developed, and delivered in a little more than three weeks. Outstanding Response Received

By the end of the campaign, more than 11,000 ideas had been submitted – over 92% of them on-line via a website where all staff could submit, save, view, search and track individual ideas. In addition, groups of cross-ministry, multi-disciplinary staff attended seven regional conferences where ideas and action plans were generated. More than 1,500 employees participated in the conferences held across Ontario in Toronto, London, Thunder Bay, Peterborough, North York, Sudbury and Ottawa.

Some of the ideas included creating a 1-800 line for all provincial government services, integrating federal/provincial and municipal services, expanding E-government to allow the public to provide input into the policy-making process and improve stakeholder consultation, marketing OPS intellectual property and skills to other sectors, and ongoing citizen and staff engagement. This employee consultation was not only about finding savings within government, but also about finding new ways for the government and the public service to work together. It was

Campaign Poster

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

19

about working with other levels of government, the broader public sector and our stakeholders to find thoughtful and creative solutions to address the current challenges. Ontarians Were Engaged In New, Innovative Ways

Citizen Dialogues

A series of six dialogues (plus one pilot) was delivered through an independent third party – Canadian Policy Research Networks. To reflect the population of the province, each of these deliberative dialogues involved a representative group of approximately 40 randomly selected citizens who attended a facilitated all-day session and made recommendations as a group to the provincial government. Their deliberations and consensus advice to the government are captured in the independent report, “Trust and Balance”: Citizens’ Dialogue on the Ontario Budget Strategy 2004 – 2008. A total of 306 citizens participated in this process. This is the first time such a dialogue has been used by a government in a pre-budget consultation process. The report is posted at www.townhallontario.gov.on.ca on the Budget Town Hall site. Dialogues took place in Toronto, Windsor, London, Sudbury, Ottawa and Hawkesbury (French).

“Thank you very much for your efforts. They are incredibly valuable. This report is very impressive. It was very courageously optimistic, a quality very rare today. While we have come to be cynical and untrustworthy of government - in general, those in power in any capacity – I think Ontario is a place where there still lives a strong motivation to build a good society for everyone and that comes through in the report. I hope that the spirit catches on, in government, business and elsewhere.”

– Toronto, ON

CPRN Report

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

20

Regional Town Halls

Nine Regional Town Halls were held with Ontarians throughout the province. These sessions were hosted by elected officials and facilitated by Ontario Public Service volunteer facilitators. Participants registered for the sessions by calling a toll-free hotline and more than 100 people were in attendance at most sessions. With the Discussion Guides and facilitators to focus their discussion, participants spent 2½ hours at their tables reviewing and debating the various approaches put forward to meet the five government priorities and deal with the deficit. Town Halls participants were also invited to offer up their own approaches. Each table was asked to decide how they would allocate $100 across the five priorities. Allocations were tallied and participants were shown on a pie chart, not only their decisions on spending, but also the decisions of town hall participants in other regions. The results were remarkably consistent. See Figure 7. Regional sessions were held in Kingston, Thunder Bay, London, Etobicoke, Hamilton, Kitchener-Waterloo, Strathroy, and Ottawa (one in French and another in English).

“The Budget Town Hall meetings are a way to engage the public in a political discourse as a pre-condition of sound decision-making. We might not agree with all the decisions that are made, but we will have been given an opportunity for input and will have a fuller understanding of the challenges our government is facing.”

– Kingston, ON Over 75% of those who participated in the town halls felt that they were given an adequate opportunity to express their point of view. Over 65% of participants were satisfied with the discussion guide and 80% liked the facilitated table approach used.

Discussion Guide

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

21

Local Town Hall Meetings

Some 1,300 people participated in 21 local Town Hall meetings that were conducted by 25 MPPs. Similar in style to the Regional Town Halls, these MPP-led discussions collected ideas and feedback on immediate concerns facing constituents. These forums also allowed participants to address the government’s priorities and approaches to spending and revenue generation. A New Portal For Online Engagement - www.townhallontario.gov.on.ca

The Town Hall website offered another channel for citizen engagement. By logging on to the website, people could share their views on priorities and approaches, and offer up their own ideas on the budget. This included the opportunity to complete an in-depth survey on priorities, approaches and measures of success.

Website visitors could also participate in a budget-building exercise that asked them to allocate $100 of spending to five key priorities. Upon submitting their responses, participants online could see immediately on a pie chart how their responses compared with what people across the province were saying. Over 20,000 unique visitors accessed the website, and just under 10% of visitors submitted a survey. More than 1,500 surveys were completed, with 90% stating that this online tool was easy to use. More than 95% felt that the Internet was a good

way to seek ideas from the public. This online interaction was supplemented by phone, fax and mail-in options. Ministry of Finance Facilitated Sessions

From early February through mid-March 2004, the Minister of Finance travelled across the province to conduct a series of 14 pre-budget discussions. During these facilitated sessions, the government heard from more than 500 organizations and institutional stakeholders, representing thousands of Ontarians, who offered advice on the strategies that should be pursued to achieve the results that matter to Ontarians. These sessions took place in Stratford, Brampton, Casselman, Hamilton, Ottawa, Sudbury, Thunder Bay, Toronto (5 sessions), Vaughan and Windsor.

Website

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

22

REGIONAL TOWN HALL RESULTS Investing in Government Priorities

Those attending Regional Town Hall sessions were asked if they had to invest $100 for services in each of the government’s five priority areas, knowing that they had to allocate some money for each priority, how would they spend it. The graphs below, from each city, illustrate the spending results.

More Active Citizens $12

Better Student Achivement

$23

Better Workers $17

Safe and Vital Communities

$17

Healthier Ontario $31

More Active Citizens $9

Better Student Achivement

$25Better Workers

$18

Safe and Vital Communities

$13

Healthier Ontario $35

More Active Citizens $11

Better Student Achivement

$23

Better Workers $18

Safe and Vital Communities

$14

Healthier Ontario $34

More Active Citizens $11

Better Student Achivement

$24

Better Workers $18

Safe and Vital Communities

$19

Healthier Ontario $28

Figure 7 Kingston

Thunder Bay

London

Etobicoke

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

23

More Active Citizens $10

Better Student Achivement

$24

Better Workers $18

Safe and Vital Communities

$18

Healthier Ontario $30

More Active Citizens $10

Better Student Achivement

$23

Better Workers $19

Safe and Vital Communities

$17

Healthier Ontario $31

More Active Citizens $13

Better Student Achivement

$24

Better Workers $17

Safe and Vital Communities

$15

Healthier Ontario $31

More Active Citizens $10

Better Student Achivement

$23

Better Workers $18

Safe and Vital Communities

$15

Healthier Ontario $34

More Active Citizens $11

Better Student Achivement

$22

Better Workers $20

Safe and Vital Communities

$18

Healthier Ontario $29

Hamilton

Kitchener/ Waterloo

Strathroy

Ottawa (English)

Ottawa (French) Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.

24

Website Survey

Average of budget allocations

Individuals were asked to indicate how they would invest $100 in the key priorities. This serves as a representation of the ranking of the importance they place on each of the priorities. The chart illustrates the cumulative average spending distribution from all those who responded.

More Active Citizens $11

Better Student Achivement

$22

Better Workers $17

Safe and Vital Communities

$18

Healthier Ontario $31

Average scoring of approaches

In submitting the survey, individuals were asked to rank four possible approaches to developing a fiscal plan that would meet shared priorities. The chart indicates how responders cumulatively ranked the approaches.

Foster Conservation

and Sustainability of Resources

24%

Raise Additional

Revenue 19%

Change the Way

Government Delivers

Services 29%

Concentrate on Core Priorities

26%

Figure 8

Figure 9

Cop

y fo

r arc

hive

pur

pose

s. P

leas

e co

nsul

t orig

inal

pub

lishe

r for

cur

rent

ver

sion

. C

opie

à d

es fi

ns d

’arc

hiva

ge.

Veu

illez

con

sulte

r l’é

dite

ur o

rigin

al p

our l

a ve

rsio

n ac

tuel

le.