The Tories’ greatest legacy

When historians get around to evaluating the nine years of former prime minister Stephen Harper’s Conservative government, the establishment of the Parliamentary Budget Officer ( PBO) may well prove to be among its most substantial accomplishments. If so, it would be an ironic twist, given the grief it came to cause its creators and the way the Tories turned on their invention, trying to strangle it bureaucratically and financially while dismissing its output as “unbelievable, unreliable and incredible.” But members of Parliament, and Canadians as a whole, need a solid, non-partisan source of information on government spending and programs as a tool to evaluate their elected representatives. And the PBO seems to be coming into its own.

Consider its most recent report, i ssued Thursday, on Canada’s ability to meet its promised reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. While achieving those goals is not impossible, it indicates, the cost would be substantial. Canada would have to slash emissions by 208 million tonnes, the equivalent of removing every gas- and diesel-powered car and truck on the road today. The projected average Canadian income could be lower by up to $1,900 by the year 2030 as a result.

The report is believable, reliable and sensible. It provides no particular comfort to the government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, whose approach has been to dangle environmental advances as simple matters of national willpower with limited discomfort to individual Canadians.

Earlier reports have been similarly independent of mind. A study released Tuesday by Parliamentary Budget Officer Jean-Denis Frechette indicated the Liberals’ pledge to keep the eligibility age for Old Age Security at 65, rather than the planned increase to 67, will eventually cost an additional $11.2 billion a year. The figure is far greater than any cost the government had found reason to mention thus far. At the same time, Frechette’s office suggested a $ 6 billion safety valve included in Finance Minister Bill Morneau’s budget was “excessive” and rejected the government’s claim it had been left with a $5.4-billion deficit by the departing Conservatives.

In reality, Ottawa is likely to post a $ 700- million surplus, it said. It also poked holes in other government projections, estimating future deficits will be far less than the Liberals claim, thus validating suspicions the government is deliberately misleading voters so it can claim victory when the final numbers come in below estimate.

This is a valuable and worthwhile service. If such findings seem to be pure common sense, it’s that much more reason to be relieved that an independent-minded voice exists to provide reliable numbers, in a reasonable tone, backed by solid research.

The office of the PBO got off to a rocky start. Kevin Page, Frechette’s predecessor, often ran afoul of the Conservatives during his five years in the position. Page evidently proved far more independent- minded than the government had expected, prompting former finance minister Jim Flaherty to accuse him of “wandering off ” from his mandate, which Flaherty maintained was to act merely as a “testing board” for government budgeting. Before leaving office, the Conservatives did their best to rein in Page, reducing the budget and autonomy of the office in an attempt to reduce its influence.

Fortunately, they appear to have failed. Now a professor at the University of Ottawa, Page has criticized the Liberals as readily as he did the Conservatives, while Frechette has proved adept at unsettling Morneau just as Page did Flaherty.

The PBO is particularly important in Canada because legislators are so starved of resources with which to do independent research. Members of the U.S. Congress have substantial staff support for both administration and research. Committees of Congress have literally dozens of paid expert staff who devote years to gaining expertise in subjects of specialized concern to legislators. Canadian MPs, in contrast, can generally afford just four employees, two in the riding, one for administration in Ottawa and one for every other subject on which we expect them to cast informed and independent votes.

If Canadian legislators were better equipped with independent information they might be more likely to demonstrate their i ndependence on the floor of the House or in caucus and committee, reshaping measures and restraining the presumption of the executive. Having well- informed legislators is not a luxury or an indulgence, but a benefit Canadians should expect as a matter of course.

To fulfil its promise, the PBO will need intelligent and principled management and proper funding. To date, it is performing at an admirable level, and we are better off for it. It may not be the legacy Stephen Harper was looking for, but it is one worth having.