Commission on the Reform of Ontario's Public Services

Executive Summary
Generate Cost Efficiencies by Integrating Administrative and Back-Office Functions:
We make a variety of recommendations that we think could save money for PSE institutions.
One involves co-ordinated purchasing. Another deals with pensions. Ontario hospitals,
colleges, municipalities and teachers have multiple employers, but only one pension plan
each. But there are 29 pension plans for 23 universities, a very fragmented arrangement;
they should be consolidated. Other recommendations involve the use of space.
Taken together, these reforms present a holistic approach for the PSE sector. If these
measures are not enough to allow the ministry to live within our cap of 1.5 per cent annual
growth, the government should eliminate the 30% Off Ontario Tuition grant. The government’s
highest priority should be to fully fund the operating grants for colleges and universities,
followed by current capital commitments. This will allow PSE institutions to focus on delivering
quality education, which will benefit students.
Social Programs
Social programs help the province’s most vulnerable citizens. From 2000 to 2010, social
spending grew by an average of 6.0 per cent per year, mainly because of increases in the two
main programs of social assistance — Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) and
Ontario Works (OW). To return the budget to balance by 2017–18, we recommend limiting
social programs to growth of 0.5 per cent per year. Bold policy prescriptions, new partnerships
and a continuing commitment to transformation will be needed to meet this challenge.
There are two types of social programs. Two-thirds of social spending in 2010–11 was carried
out through mandated and entitlement-based programs, in which benefits or service levels are
set by law. These include social assistance and the Ontario Child Benefit. Other programs are
discretionary, so clients are not guaranteed to receive them right away. These include support
for mental health programs for children and youth, developmental services, child care
subsidies and childhood development programs. When caseloads increase for social
assistance, an entitlement-based program, so too does funding; clients are entitled to benefits.
When demand outstrips supply for discretionary programs, the result is a waiting list.
More programs should be integrated across different ministries and different levels of
government, with the client’s perspective put first. Vulnerable people and their families do not
care which level of government or which ministry is responsible for providing support; they just
want help.
37