Skip to main content

Clark Savolaine is a Senior Manager for KPMG in Canada’s Deal Advisory – Infrastructure practice.

Greece has had about 10 finance ministers since the Great Recession in 2008. The story goes that one of them ordered a fresh line-by-line audit to determine how much spending exceeded revenue. When the revised spending figure came back significantly higher than expected, the minister exclaimed, “Why wasn’t all of this spending included in earlier estimates?” Unmoved, the closest civil servant replied, “Well, no one ever asked us to add it all up before.”

So it goes, everywhere – including in Ontario.

Story continues below advertisement

As shown in the recent line-by-line review of Ontario’s public finances, there is opportunity to reduce spending in the province. A key area of focus must be adding up all of the corporate financial aid programs and eliminating the ones that cannot clearly demonstrate value for money.

Whether you call them “business supports” or “stimulus,” these are the programs that transfer public money to individual private-sector companies. Unlike broad-based tax relief or infrastructure investment, business supports often take the form of industry-specific grants, loan guarantees, boutique tax credits, marketing and subsidized training or hiring. They are classic examples of governments creating one-off, narrowly targeted programs and then walking away. Each one on its own isn’t going to break the bank, but, before you know it, you’re spending significant sums and it’s near impossible to evaluate the return on investment from a results-based perspective.

Giving public money to private business is not a partisan issue. We see these programs created across the globe by governments of every political stripe. In some cases, they are legitimate policy responses to crippling market failures, such as during the 2008 recession. However, most of these programs are not. Indeed, these programs persist because they are easy to start, but hard to stop.

For policy-makers in Ontario looking to get a handle on value-for-money audits, below are five action items.

1. Identify program spending

Before you can look across government to understand spending on business supports, much greater clarity on what you’re looking for is essential. These programs show up in several ministries, and there are numerous examples of conflicting policy objectives. Assessing these programs doesn’t take long – but to get started, you need to know what you’re looking for.

2. Measure outcomes, not inputs

Almost always, business support programs measure performance based on how much spending goes out the door as opposed to outcomes-based objectives such as return on investment. Even when “jobs,” “full-time equivalents” and “multipliers” are estimated, they are part of the application process, not the evaluation process. Without this type of cost-benefit analysis, it’s impossible to assess the trade-offs involved in continuing existing programs, ending or reducing programs, or implementing new ones.

3. Consolidate to reduce spending

The more programs that are offered, the more complex the program landscape. Many of these programs are administratively burdensome, both for employers seeking the funding and for public servants administrating them. Consolidating the number of programs and ministries with authority to manage business supports makes it easier for entrepreneurs seeking the funding when they need it. It also improves government oversight and service delivery.

Story continues below advertisement

4. Communicate the bigger picture

Reducing or eliminating existing programs will inevitably affect some stakeholders. Managing this change requires an ability to demonstrate to employers that they will still benefit once other pro-growth policies are in place – such as reducing the corporate income tax rate, eliminating red tape, lowering hydro costs or providing investments in education, health care and transportation infrastructure.

5. Sunlight is the best disinfectant

Ensure that all new business supports include a commitment to transparency and public reporting. Require an auditor-general, financial accountability officer or external stakeholder to conduct the cost-benefit analysis to add credibility to the exercise. Transfers of public money to private businesses require clear sunset clauses to properly inform market expectations and to prompt difficult discussions about continuation.

To spend billions each year on businesses that require support, government must first collect billions in taxes from businesses that do not. It’s an inefficient economic strategy. We’ve all heard the examples of companies promising new jobs but failing to hit their employment guarantees or, worse, closing down entirely shortly after receiving millions. Reducing Ontario’s spending on business supports doesn’t have to be a herculean task. It could help provide a positive boost to the economy when combined with other pro-growth policies, as well as free up public money to further strengthen core front-line services that Ontarians rely on.

Report an error
Comments

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • All comments will be reviewed by one or more moderators before being posted to the site. This should only take a few moments.
  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed. Commenters who repeatedly violate community guidelines may be suspended, causing them to temporarily lose their ability to engage with comments.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.
Cannabis pro newsletter