“Who Does What” in Ontario: The process of provincial‐municipal disentanglement

Abstract

Since the election of the Mike Harris Conservative government in 1995, Ontario has been the site of some of the most turbulent provincial‐local relations ever experienced in a Canadian province. The province's agenda has included restructuring and realigning the responsibilities and resources of municipal governments and asserting control over the financing and governance of Ontario's education system. The sheer size of this agenda and the interconnections between its two main elements have made the quest to simplify or disentangle provincial‐local relations impossible to achieve. This article documents events as the Conservatives moved from their “Common Sense Revolution” election manifesto to develop and implement a plan for disentanglement of provincial and local government services. It also identifies themes and potential lessons that emerge for government agenda setting and intergovernmental relations. Sommaire: Depuis que le gouvernment conservateur de Mike Harris fut élu au pouvoir en 1995, 1'Ontario a été aux prises avec des relations provinciales‐locales qui sont parmi les plus turbulentes qu'une province canadienne n'ait jamais subies. La province a entrepris de restructurer et réaligner les responsabilités et les ressources des gouvernements municipaux et d'établir son contrôle sur le financement et la gérance du système d'éducation de l'Ontario. L'envergure même de cet agenda et les liens qui relient ses deux principaux éléments ont rendu impossible l'idée de simplifier ou de démêler les relations provinciales‐locales. Cet article examine le déroulement des événements, lorsque les Conservateurs, partant de leur déclaration électorale concemant la eAvolution du bon sens, ont élaborté et mis en oeuvre un plan visant à démêler les services gouvemementaux provinciaux et locaux. II définit également des thèmes et des lecons qui pourraient être utiles lorsqu'un gouvernement veut formuler un plan d'action, ou lorsqu'il s'agit de relations intergouvernementales.

The Permeable City: Toronto's Spatial Shift at the Turn of the Millennium

“…This reinvention would require the cooperation and support of the provincial government. 7 Much analysis has been done on how Toronto ended up with the current public policy set implemented by the provincial governing party that has been in power since 1995 (see, for example, Graham and Phillips 1998;Isin 1998;Keil 1998Keil , 2000Todd 1998;Boudreau 1999Boudreau , 2000Donald 1999). There is no question that broader economic and political forces such as dominant fiscal orthodoxy and neoliberal ideology played a role in the transformation.…”

Is local truly better? Some reflections on sharing environmental policy between local governments and the EU

“…In recent years an extensive literature has developed that stresses the importance of negotiation, competition and collaboration between different levels of governance (Kamieniecki and Ferrall, 1991;Scholz, 1991;Freeman, 1997;Wise and O'Leary, 1997;Davis, 1998;Graham and Phillips, 1998;Blom-Hansen, 1999). In recent years an extensive literature has developed that stresses the importance of negotiation, competition and collaboration between different levels of governance (Kamieniecki and Ferrall, 1991;Scholz, 1991;Freeman, 1997;Wise and O'Leary, 1997;Davis, 1998;Graham and Phillips, 1998;Blom-Hansen, 1999).…”

“…This section places the issue of subsidiarity and local governments' roles in EU environmental policy into a broader discussion about intergovernmental relations and 'collaborative government'. In recent years an extensive literature has developed that stresses the importance of negotiation, competition and collaboration between different levels of governance (Kamieniecki and Ferrall, 1991;Scholz, 1991;Freeman, 1997;Wise and O'Leary, 1997;Davis, 1998;Graham and Phillips, 1998;Blom-Hansen, 1999). Arguably this approach marks an important shift away from much of the subsidiarity debate heretofore in that it emphasizes the way in which different tiers of governance interact to improve policy, rather than whether any one should enjoy particular legislative predominance.…”

The Independence of Ontario’s Public Health Units: Does Governing Structure Matter?

“…However, this recommendation was never implemented. Instead, public health and many social services were downloaded to municipalities in 1997, with the province assuming more responsibility for education (see Graham and Phillips 1998). This total download of public health lasted until 1999, when the province moved to a 50/50 funding formula (Campbell 2004).…”