Buck-a-beer

Friday October 15, 2021

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday October 15, 2021

Ford should rethink outdated minimum wage stand

Doug Ford’s minimum-wage policy is the product of minimal thought.

April 29, 2021

Since becoming Ontario’s premier more than three years ago, Ford has rejected any meaningful increase in the baseline wages that employers must by law pay to their workers. After freezing minimum wages during his first 27 months in office, the premier consented to a 25-cent-an-hour increase one year ago then followed up with a paltry 10-cent-an-hour hike on Oct. 1. That brought the current hourly minimum wage to $14.35.

For many of the province’s 500,000 minimum-wage earners, this month’s change felt like a slap in the face instead of a helpful hand up. Those extra 80 cents they have in their pockets after an eight-hour-day’s efforts wouldn’t even cover the cost of their bus ticket to work. Yet Ford stubbornly insists any significant minimum wage increases would shutter businesses and drive higher unemployment.

The problem with this defence is that real-life evidence and real-live economists prove it’s wrong. And if Ford needs an expert second opinion on the matter from a fellow Ontarian, he should consult David Card, the Berkeley university professor who just won the Nobel Prize in economics. The native of Guelph and graduate of Queen’s University, Card was awarded the prestigious honour this week largely for his groundbreaking work into the economic and human impacts that followed minimum-wage increases.

February 1, 2014

Before his research, many economists would have agreed with Ford that boosting wages for some people can make life worse for more by forcing business closures and job losses. If the cost of labour grows too high, the demand for it would drop as many businesses scramble to adapt and some even go bust. Or so went the reasoning — supported for a time by many studies.

But in 1993, Card and the late Alan Krueger challenged conventional theory by looking at what happened to jobs at several New Jersey fast-food restaurants after the state raised its hourly minimum wage from $4.25 (U.S.) to $5.05 (U.S.). After comparing the situation in New Jersey to what was going on at similar fast-food restaurants in neighbouring east Pennsylvania, they concluded the rise in the minimum wage had no effect on the number of people being employed.

In response to skeptical colleagues, Card launched another study in 2000 using new information. His findings were the same. And over time, he won over most of the doubters to his viewpoint. There are still vigorous debates over how governments should manage minimum-wage legislation. But the prevailing opinion of economists is that moderate and gradually introduced wage increments benefit low-wage employees, do not cost jobs and help reduce poverty.

October 18, 2006

In fact, Premier Ford should already know this. After the previous Liberal government raised the hourly minimum wage from $11.60 to $14 in 2018, he railed against what he called “a failed Liberal policy that is driving jobs and investment out of Ontario. It’s equal to the carbon tax when it comes to job killing.” The Ontario Chamber of Commerce was of the same mind and issued dire warnings of economic devastation to come.

Six months after the Liberal minimum-wage hike, however, Ontario’s unemployment rate had dropped to 5.4 per cent, the lowest it had been since 2000. Meanwhile, business profits in the province had risen while its annual inflation rate was running at a modest 2.2 per cent.

Let’s hope the worldwide publicity surrounding Prof. Card’s Nobel Prize will push Ford and the Progressive Conservatives to rethink a minimum wage policy that has so widely been discredited. In its place should be a minimum wage that rises annually and matches wage growth across the provincial workforce. It’s time for a minimum wage based on maximum wisdom. (Hamilton Spectator Editorial) 

 

Saturday July 27, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Saturday July 27, 2019

Ontario’s health reforms loaded with risk and reward

This week The St. Catharines Standard and The Hamilton Spectator did something uncommon. The sister news organizations published a joint investigative feature on health-care reform in Ontario.

April 6, 2019

We did it together because the issues and challenges involved are shared by citizens of Hamilton and Niagara. The Local Health Integration Network, to be replaced by a new oversight body, covered both regions. It made sense to share our joint expertise, personified by Joanna Frketich of The Spectator and Grant LaFleche of The Standard.

We’re proud of the series, which is the most comprehensive reporting on the most significant reform to Ontario’s health system in recent history. We explained what we could, and were forthright about what we don’t know — which is a lot given the vagueness and lack of detail in the strategy.

March 19, 2019

That’s the worry. There is great potential in the reform plan. While we are not among those who describe the current system as broken, there’s no doubt it is underperforming, and too often failing health-care consumers. So you cannot fault the Ford government for wanting to improve the system, especially at a time when an aging population will increase use of and stress on health care.

There is also great risk, as there would be with any attempt to change something as vast, complex and critical as health care. If it’s not done right, the costs could be very high. Unfortunately, this government’s track record at getting things right is not stellar. The autism debacle. Public health cuts that had to be temporarily reversed. Breaking a beer company contract that will probably cost millions. Killing cap and trade for ideological reasons, forcing Ottawa to implement a carbon tax, and depriving towns and cities in millions from cap-and-trade revenue.

February 16, 2019

Can we trust the Ford government to get health reform right?

The government’s reform blueprint is called the Connecting Care Act. Read it and you’ll be surprised by the lack of detail. We know that an uncertain number of Ontario Health Teams (OHT) will be put in place. They will be made up of health-care stakeholders — hospitals, primary care (family docs and family health teams), community-based and long-term care providers. They will provide the local input on health care across the spectrum. They will report to a new super agency, called Ontario Health.

In and of itself, this structure is puzzling. Part of the province’s rationale is to reduce bureaucracy. But in the future, instead of having LHINs, we’ll have OHTs, reporting to the new super agency, which presumably reports to the ministry of health. This isn’t a smaller bureaucracy, it’s the opposite.

December 15, 2017

The new system also collapses previously independent health agencies, such as Cancer Care Ontario, under one umbrella. But CCO is recognized as a world leader. Does it really make sense to break what isn’t broken in cancer care?

It’s also the same model Alberta has had in place for years. And health-care costs in that province have not gone down under the super agency system, they’ve gone up to a point where Alberta has higher per patient costs than any other province.

It’s not all bad news. Innovative initiatives, liked Bundled Care, which was developed at St. Joseph’s Healthcare in Hamilton, will be rolled out across the province, promising shorter hospital stays with remote support provided to patients at home.

Once it comes back from its extended summer holiday, health reform will be prominent in the news, and we’ll continue to cover and try to explain it. For Ontarians who care, and we all should, this wave of reform demands close scrutiny and robust public discussion. (Hamilton Spectator Editorial) 

 

Thursday May 10, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday May 30, 2019

Ontario to end Beer Store deal, paving way for beer in corner stores

The Progressive Conservative government has tabled legislation that would terminate a contract with The Beer Store.

The previous Liberal government signed a 10-year deal with the brewers that permitted an expansion of beer and wine sales to hundreds of grocery stores.

Premier Doug Ford has indicated he plans to put beer and wine in corner stores, but he has to break that agreement to do so and the industry has warned that could trigger steep financial penalties.

While tabling today’s bill, Finance Minister Vic Fedeli said the current system is a monopoly that is a bad deal for consumers and businesses.

The legislation comes after the province’s special adviser on alcohol delivered a report Friday to Fedeli on ways to improve consumer choice and convenience.

The Tories also announced a number of loosened alcohol restrictions in last month’s budget, including allowing alcohol to be served at 9 a.m., seven days a week, letting people consume booze in parks, and legalizing tailgating parties near sports events.

Meanwhile, there’s been a swift reaction from Labatt Brewing Company Limited and Molson Canada 2005 — two of the three large brewers who predominantly own The Beer Store — to the legislation tabled Monday.

CBC Toronto obtained a copy of a lawyers’ letter from Labatt  and Molson putting the government on notice of a potential legal challenge to the beer legislation. Blake, Cassels and Graydon LLP represent Labatt, while Molson is represented by Gowling WLG.

In the letter, the lawyers note that the 2015 Master Framework Agreement was negotiated with the province to enhance customer convenience, choice and shopping experience, while ensuring that customers in Ontario can purchase beer at prices below the Canadian average, and to enhance the beer retailing system for all brewers selling beer in Ontario.

“The Bill will destroy those benefits, legislate 7,000 Ontario-based The Beer Store employees out of work and cause billions of dollars in damages … and result in higher costs and prices for consumers,” the lawyers wrote. (CBC) 

 

Saturday May 4, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Saturday May 4, 2019

Province’s funding cuts jeopardize 6,166 subsidized child care spaces in Toronto, staff says

Provincial funding cuts and policy changes could result in 6,166 fewer subsidized child care spaces in Toronto and cost the city more than $80-million this year alone, according to city staff.

In a memo to the mayor and council obtained by CBC Toronto on Thursday, City Manager Chris Murray detailed the potential impacts of a reduction in child care funding that was outlined in the province’s recent 2019 budget. The fallout will be compounded by considerable changes to existing child care-related cost-sharing models, the memo says.

“As with recent changes to the provincial/municipal cost-sharing arrangements for public health, the City was not consulted or provided with any advance warning of these changes,” the memo says.

Murray cautions that city staff are still awaiting precise numbers from the province, but they estimate that, cumulatively, the changes will cost Toronto $84.8 million this year. That figure includes a $28.6-million reduction in direct provincial funding and $56.2-million due to cost-sharing changes, the memo explains. 

“This represents a direct pressure on the 2019 Children’s Services Operating Budget, which city council has already approved and for which the municipal levy bylaw has been passed,” it continues.

The result is the potential loss of 6,166 subsidized child care spaces in Toronto, the memo estimates.

The overall number of child care spaces is not expected to change, but a smaller number will be filled by children who have access to the subsidy, the city says. (Source: CBC News) 

 

Saturday January 12, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Saturday January 12, 2019

Paving over Ontario Place for mall, casino would be travesty

A gambling casino. A 1.6-million-square-foot “megamall.” An amusement park, including the world’s largest ferris wheel.

July 30, 2012

These are just some of the things that Premier Doug Ford has mused about locating at the site of Ontario Place, the 62-hectare park on the west side of Toronto’s downtown, adjacent to the CNE grounds.

Much of Ontario Place has been closed since 2012, when then-premier Dalton McGuinty was trying to save money. But in truth, it had been on the decline for years, the victim of outdated thinking and vision. In 2017, his successor Kathleen Wynne unveiled a partial redevelopment plan worth about $30 million, which would have seen a waterfront park be a central attraction.

That plan received strong public support, and much of the money has been spent. But Ford’s government killed it early on after being elected. Nowhere on the list of things Ford is exploring is public parkland.

February 3, 2012

This is more than just a Toronto story. Ontario Place is an important public asset for all Ontarians. Paving it over for a mall, casino or amusement park would be a travesty. But it appears that’s where Ford is headed. He appointed a crony and Conservative fundraiser to oversee the redevelopment. And considering that his environment minister is the former head of the province’s gambling corporation, anything is possible.

Ford and his brother, Rob, brought some of their plans forward while the latter was mayor and the former was a councillor. Their ideas were soundly defeated in the face of public opposition.

Now that he’s premier, Ford probably thinks public opposition doesn’t matter. It’ll be interesting to see if he’s right about that. (Source: Hamilton Spectator Editorial)