Few people talk about debt. It isnâ€™t sexy, and it certainly wonâ€™t win votes. In a little over two decades, from 1990-1991 to today, Ontarioâ€™s debt-to-GDP ratio has tripled. If you believe the governmentâ€™s projections in Thursdayâ€™s budget, between 2009-2010 and 2017-2018, the province will have added about $90-billion in debt. The total debt will be about $280-billion.
It doesnâ€™t matter, under these circumstances, which party forms the next government. The debt will still be there, large and growing, and very vulnerable to a hike in interest rates. Ontario, like other governments, can pile up more debt and get financing at low rates. When, inevitably, those rates rise, the burden of financing the debt will jump.
Thursdayâ€™s budget, in this sense, was like the recent federal one. The media and opposition parties in Ottawa focused on all the changes. Fair enough, but the biggest, silent increase in the federal budget was money for seniorsâ€™ pensions. That didnâ€™t get a whisper of attention, because the costs go up quietly.
So, too, the post-budget coverage and debate in Ontario swirled about new spending in some programs while restraint is exercised in others; whether the Liberals met the NDPâ€™s bargaining positions to get the budget passed and so remain in office; and whether the deficit will be going slightly up or down. But beneath the radar screen will be the buildup of debt, and the very real question about whether the province can manage it.
Ontario could finance its debt more easily if economic growth and accompanying government revenues grew at least as fast as debt-servicing costs. But economic growth is going to be about half the increase in costs of servicing the debt.
As the budget itself notes, Ontarioâ€™s productivity lags behind that of the United States, as does business investment. The provinceâ€™s cost competitiveness has eroded. What the budget didnâ€™t mention is that energy costs are soaring. Programs also are rising for such items as seniorsâ€™ drugs (up 5.4 per cent) and public-sector pensions (most public-sector employees have defined benefit plans, whereas private-sector employees donâ€™t). Then there are provincial arbitrators who pay no attention to a governmentâ€™s ability to pay, thereby driving up costs (see police, for example) by looking only at other settlements.
Premier Kathleen Wynneâ€™s government was in the tightest of spots, not a place from which to talk about difficult stuff such as the buildup of debt. Her Liberal government finds itself between Conservatives, who hound it with demands for an election, and New Democrats, who play an annual game of political extortion with their list of demands.
Itâ€™s a terrible way to run a legislature, let alone a government, but thatâ€™s the way the opposition parties wish to play their hands. So the Liberals seek what they call a â€œbalanced approachâ€ between Conservatives who want bigger cuts in public spending and New Democrats who instinctively want to spend lots more, with the money coming from the business sector and the better off.
With the size of the Ontario economy, when it either goes spiralling into a recession or the painful cuts are made, it is going to impact us all.Â