New Public Management and the Ontario “Common Sense Revolution”

Douglas Brown

St Francis Xavier University

Revised March 2009

New Public Management and the Ontario “Common Sense Revolution”

• The International NPM Paradigm

• Canada in Comparative Perspective

• The Common Sense Revolution Platform

• The Harris Government in Office

• Some Tentative Assessments

What is New Public Management ?

• paradigmatic theory

• neoliberal ideology

• managerialist rhetoric: business metaphors

• political program

• international template of “best practice”

Key Objectives (OECD)

1. Improving strategic oversight by elected politicians over the business of government

2. Ensuring greater accountability for outcomes against pre-set objectives

3. Greater contestability and market competition for the provision of goods and services.

The Climate for NPM Ideas in Canada

• Declining economic growth, fiscal crisis

• Declining trust in government, bureaucrat bashing

• Globalization and continental integration

• Limited acceptance of neoliberalism

• Federalism as constraint and opportunity

The Changing Context of Governance in Ontario

• 1992 recession and Ontario’s competitive economic position

• The Rae government dilemma

• Public Service restructuring

• The Voice in the Wilderness (Mike Harris)

The “Common Sense Revolution” Platform

– Tax cuts first, then balanced budget– Expenditure cuts of $6 billion in “non-priority”

areas– 725,000 new jobs – Regulatory review and reduction – Welfare reform – Education reform – Turn-Around management

Common Sense = NPM ?

• Common Themes:– reasserting control– performance standards – spending smarter

• Contradictions:– CSR not a management strategy– risky public finance– distrust of or by the public service ?

Harris Government in Office

1. Reasserting Strategic Control

2. Reinventing Public Finance

3. Accountability for Objectives

4. Introducing Contestability

Reasserting Strategic Control• Controlling the Bureaucracy:

– Top-down Cabinet process– Centralized Communications– Public service cuts – Policy control by political advisors / “create a crisis”

• Centralizing the public sector: – Education reforms– Municipalities– Hospital restructuring – Community boards

Reinventing Public Finance

• Tax Cuts

• Tax Structure– PIT and CIT– Property Tax

• Expenditure Cuts

• Balanced Budget

Accountability for Outcomes

• Ministry Business Plan process

• Partnerships within: accountability conflicts (e.g. Andersen/Comsoc affair)

• Contracting Out (social services, prisons, highways, water quality)

• Delegated Regulatory Authorities (e.g. Technical Standards and Safety Authority)

Contestability

• Hydro markets

• Competition within Education (testing, private schools)

• Mandating competition for service delivery (e.g. Community Care)

The Walkerton Case• May 2003: 7 people die as a result of

contaminated water supply in small town of Walkerton, Ontario

• Inquiry finds failure of overall regulatory system to protect water supply. Points to:– The effect of MOE budget cuts– The effect of anti-red tape culture….Harris government

had cut regulation, privatized water testing– Government ignored expert advice

• Public became highly skeptical of NPM reform rhetoric following the Walkerton episode

Assessment 1: By CSR Blueprint

• Successful in terms of program completion• Good luck / good management in public

finance • Major unforeseen challenges: municipal

restructuring• Unfinished reforms: health and education• Successful in (re)electoral terms?

– Yes in 1999 No in 2003

Assessment 2: By the NPM Paradigm

1. Strategic Control: Effective, but became over-control, especially on implementation matters

2. Accountability for outcomes: Improved within government; but had problems with alternative delivery

3. Contestability: In progress / Incomplete

4. Overall assessment: Not a thorough reform

Assessment 3: By Traditional Public Administration Values

• Fiscal probity and efficiency increased

• Over-centralization of government and the public sector

• Loss of policy capacity

• Low public service morale

• Reduced accountability for some functions

Concluding Thoughts

• NPM ideas have been very influential but not the dominant paradigm in Ontario

• NPM not a passing fad, but will continue to be exercised in tandem with older Public Admin values

• Deep NPM reform in Canada is (so far) the product of neo-conservative leadership

• Uncovering the “secular” merits of NPM requires careful evaluation: by sector, by each specific reform.