Electricity prices are change May 1st and November 1st in Ontario. In theory they could go down, but obviously lately they have gone up quite rapidly. It is now October 11, so we are getting close to the point that the increases should be announced.
For the last increase, I found a CBC article dated April 20th, so likely around October 20th. Conveniently for the federal Liberals, that's after the October 19th federal poll. sdfds
This blog post of mine describes the Ontario electricity price increases in May 2015:
"For on peak pricing, the price per kWh is increasing on May 1st from 14 cents to 16.1 cents, a 2.1 cent increase or 15%. The on peak increase on November 1st was from 13.5 cents to 14 cents, a 3.7 increase. Thus the year over year increase, from 13.5 cents to 16.1 cents, is 2.6 cents or a 19.2% increase which is obviously significantly more than Ontario's inflation rate.
For mid-peak, prices will increase on May 1st from 11.4 cents to 12.2 cents, a 0.8 cents increase or 7%. On November 1st, the price increase from 11.2 cents to 11.4 cents, only a 1.8 percent increase. Year on year the increase was 1 cent or an 8.9% increase, again significantly above Ontario's inflation rate.
Finally for off-peak, the increase on May 1st is 0.3 cents, from 7.7 cents to 8 cents, a 3.9% increase. On November 1st, the price increased from 7.5 cents to 7.7 cents, a 0.2 cent increase or a 2.7% increase. Year over year the increase was 0.5 cents from 7.5 to 8 cents, a 6.7% increase, which is well above Ontario's inflation but nowhere near the massive increase in on peak pricing."
What can we expect for this November? Perhaps 3.5 to 4% overall, with different increases for the different periods. With wind production up and peaking overnight, keeping off-peak rates low relative to peak pricing makes a lot of sense.
Showing posts with label kathleen wynne. Show all posts
Showing posts with label kathleen wynne. Show all posts
Sunday, October 11, 2015
Monday, April 27, 2015
Why Doesn't the Media Report the Year on Year Ontario Hydro Increases? On Peak Electricity Pricing Up 19.2% Year on Year
With news that the electricity price increases coming May 1st for Ontario will be particularly high, I'm wondering why the media never reports the year over year increases. Ontario power prices are raised every May 1st and every November first, but the media usually only reports on the six month increase and doesn't bother looking at the yearly increase, which would be useful for comparing to Ontario's inflation rate.
This CBC article has the price increases coming May 1st and this Toronto Star article has the increases that happened on November 1st 2014.
For on peak pricing, the price per kWh is increasing on May 1st from 14 cents to 16.1 cents, a 2.1 cent increase or 15%. The on peak increase on November 1st was from 13.5 cents to 14 cents, a 3.7 increase. Thus the year over year increase, from 13.5 cents to 16.1 cents, is 2.6 cents or a 19.2% increase which is obviously significantly more than Ontario's inflation rate.
For mid-peak, prices will increase on May 1st from 11.4 cents to 12.2 cents, a 0.8 cents increase or 7%. On November 1st, the price increase from 11.2 cents to 11.4 cents, only a 1.8 percent increase. Year on year the increase was 1 cent or an 8.9% increase, again significantly above Ontario's inflation rate.
Finally for off-peak, the increase on May 1st is 0.3 cents, from 7.7 cents to 8 cents, a 3.9% increase. On November 1st, the price increased from 7.5 cents to 7.7 cents, a 0.2 cent increase or a 2.7% increase. Year over year the increase was 0.5 cents from 7.5 to 8 cents, a 6.7% increase, which is well above Ontario's inflation but nowhere near the massive increase in on peak pricing.
The Ontario Liberals have crafted an electricity policy where prices have skyrocketed, despite relatively low natural gas prices and neighbouring states and provinces having seen no such crazy price increases. Starting in January, the 10% Ontario Clean Energy benefit will end, which will give an even bigger boost to electricity prices in Ontario. Unfortunately the media hasn't done a very good job of putting these prices in context.
For another post I'll look at the price increases over two years.
This CBC article has the price increases coming May 1st and this Toronto Star article has the increases that happened on November 1st 2014.
For on peak pricing, the price per kWh is increasing on May 1st from 14 cents to 16.1 cents, a 2.1 cent increase or 15%. The on peak increase on November 1st was from 13.5 cents to 14 cents, a 3.7 increase. Thus the year over year increase, from 13.5 cents to 16.1 cents, is 2.6 cents or a 19.2% increase which is obviously significantly more than Ontario's inflation rate.
For mid-peak, prices will increase on May 1st from 11.4 cents to 12.2 cents, a 0.8 cents increase or 7%. On November 1st, the price increase from 11.2 cents to 11.4 cents, only a 1.8 percent increase. Year on year the increase was 1 cent or an 8.9% increase, again significantly above Ontario's inflation rate.
Finally for off-peak, the increase on May 1st is 0.3 cents, from 7.7 cents to 8 cents, a 3.9% increase. On November 1st, the price increased from 7.5 cents to 7.7 cents, a 0.2 cent increase or a 2.7% increase. Year over year the increase was 0.5 cents from 7.5 to 8 cents, a 6.7% increase, which is well above Ontario's inflation but nowhere near the massive increase in on peak pricing.
The Ontario Liberals have crafted an electricity policy where prices have skyrocketed, despite relatively low natural gas prices and neighbouring states and provinces having seen no such crazy price increases. Starting in January, the 10% Ontario Clean Energy benefit will end, which will give an even bigger boost to electricity prices in Ontario. Unfortunately the media hasn't done a very good job of putting these prices in context.
For another post I'll look at the price increases over two years.
Thursday, September 18, 2014
Where's the Ontario Finance Ministry's First Quarter Update?
Every year the finance ministry releases quarterly updates at this site. From the site itself:
"As required by the Fiscal Transparency and Accountability Act, the First Quarter Ontario Finances is released on or before August 15 and the Third Quarter Ontario Finances is released on or before February 15. An update of the Province's fiscal outlook as of the second quarter of the fiscal year is included in the Fall Economic Outlook and Fiscal Review, which is released on or before November 15."
It is already mid-September and the first quarter numbers for 2014 still aren't available, only the ones from the year before, released on August 12th, 2013. I'm not sure if the election or late budget has caused the delay, but I would like to see this year's numbers if only to get a number for first quarter GDP growth in Ontario. I have suspicions that Ontario's number might not be good, but I could be wrong.
"As required by the Fiscal Transparency and Accountability Act, the First Quarter Ontario Finances is released on or before August 15 and the Third Quarter Ontario Finances is released on or before February 15. An update of the Province's fiscal outlook as of the second quarter of the fiscal year is included in the Fall Economic Outlook and Fiscal Review, which is released on or before November 15."
It is already mid-September and the first quarter numbers for 2014 still aren't available, only the ones from the year before, released on August 12th, 2013. I'm not sure if the election or late budget has caused the delay, but I would like to see this year's numbers if only to get a number for first quarter GDP growth in Ontario. I have suspicions that Ontario's number might not be good, but I could be wrong.
Monday, April 7, 2014
Ontario Budget 2014-2015, Predicted Revenue Down $3.5 Billion, 2013-2014 Deficit Down, Sort Of
It took me a while, but I've finally got around to some info Finance Minister Charles Sousa gave about Ontario's budgets. The media reported the fact the 2013-2014 budget that just finished is coming in at $400 million under the original $11.7 billion prediction. However there's some caveats with this. For the first time ever, the ministry added a reserve of $1 billion to the deficit prediction (similar to the feds). So the actual deficit prediction was $10.7 billion, so coming in at $11.3 billion isn't actually good in my opinion and means either the revenue or expenses were off.
Less reported was that the revenue prediction for 2014-2015 was going to be off by $3.5 billion. Originally the prediction was $120.5 billion, so being off $3.5 billion isn't good and can't be good for the 2014-2015 deficit. It was predicted at at 8.9 billion with a 1.2 billion reserve to get 10.1 billion. So revenue will hurt it and I'm wondering if there will be problems with program expenses as well.
Wednesday, March 19, 2014
Ontario Liberals Proposing New Surtax on High Income Earners; Budget in May
So the Ontario Liberals are possibly proposing a new surtax on those making more than $150,000 to try and slay the deficit as reported by Torstar papers:
"With declining tax revenues and a stubborn $11.7-billion deficit, senior officials said the Liberals are considering a new surtax on people making $150,000 and up."
The fact that the Liberals are proposing a surtax rather than another tax bracket is interesting. A couple of years ago the Liberals at the NDP's insistence added a tax bracket for those earning over $500,000 (which has since moved up with inflation slightly). The two existing surtaxes already applied to that new bracket which added another 2% in taxes for income over $500,000, actually meaning that the real tax raise for those earning over $500,000 of 3.12%. So a new surtax would also apply to the $500,000 tax bracket, possibly moving Ontario's top marginal tax rate (combined with federal income taxes) over 50%.
I've seen reports that the $500,000 bracket was supposed to raise around $500 million per year on only 23,000 individuals. Higher taxes for income over $150,000 would hit considerably more individuals than people earning over $500K so it would likely raise considerably more. However with tax avoidance approaches like keeping one's earnings in a corporation or moving to Alberta for its low tax rates means the amount raised will be less than what would be expected if people didn't respond at all to try and lower their Ontario personal income.
Also interesting is that we finally have a guess for the budget date:
"It would be just one element in a budget expected after the legislature resumes April 28 following the Easter break. Because Ontario budgets are traditionally introduced on Thursdays, that could mean May 1 or May 8."
That's a late date by historical terms, likely because crafting this budget has been difficult. Also when the new surtax would come into effect is interesting, as if it were for 2015 earnings that wouldn't have that much of an effect on the 2014-2015 budget.
"With declining tax revenues and a stubborn $11.7-billion deficit, senior officials said the Liberals are considering a new surtax on people making $150,000 and up."
The fact that the Liberals are proposing a surtax rather than another tax bracket is interesting. A couple of years ago the Liberals at the NDP's insistence added a tax bracket for those earning over $500,000 (which has since moved up with inflation slightly). The two existing surtaxes already applied to that new bracket which added another 2% in taxes for income over $500,000, actually meaning that the real tax raise for those earning over $500,000 of 3.12%. So a new surtax would also apply to the $500,000 tax bracket, possibly moving Ontario's top marginal tax rate (combined with federal income taxes) over 50%.
I've seen reports that the $500,000 bracket was supposed to raise around $500 million per year on only 23,000 individuals. Higher taxes for income over $150,000 would hit considerably more individuals than people earning over $500K so it would likely raise considerably more. However with tax avoidance approaches like keeping one's earnings in a corporation or moving to Alberta for its low tax rates means the amount raised will be less than what would be expected if people didn't respond at all to try and lower their Ontario personal income.
Also interesting is that we finally have a guess for the budget date:
"It would be just one element in a budget expected after the legislature resumes April 28 following the Easter break. Because Ontario budgets are traditionally introduced on Thursdays, that could mean May 1 or May 8."
That's a late date by historical terms, likely because crafting this budget has been difficult. Also when the new surtax would come into effect is interesting, as if it were for 2015 earnings that wouldn't have that much of an effect on the 2014-2015 budget.
Thursday, June 13, 2013
Ontario Public Elementary Teachers to Get Extra 2% Increase in 2014
Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne has given Ontario public school elementary teachers an extra 2% salary increase in 2014 to match the separate and French elementary teachers. This Globe article has a good synopsis. From the article:
ETFO lost 2 per cent in wage hikes back in 2009 under former education minister and now Premier Kathleen Wynne, because it failed to meet a deadline for accepting a contract. At the time, other teacher groups signed offers of 12 per cent in pay hikes over four years. At the time, Ms. Wynne made a last-ditch effort to avoid a strike – 10.4 per cent over four years – which ETFO grudgingly accepted.
Ms. Sandals said the government’s change of heart on the issue is a matter of fairness, saying elementary school teachers should not be punished because their union negotiated them an inferior deal several years ago.
“It’s not about did the unions have good tactics or bad tactics. It’s about the individual teacher,” she said. “Now, when we look at this, and we look at a public policy point of view going forward: why would we pay Catholic and French teachers more than public teachers?”
One stat that I found interesting in the article with regards to the cost of the 2% increase:
The move by the government contradicts earlier statements by Premier Kathleen Wynne and Education Minister Liz Sandals that there would be no new money on the table for teachers. The pay hike will cost the treasury $112-million every year.
The salary increases would take effect in September, 2014, after the current contract expires.
Ms. Sandals also left the door open to further pay increases at that time, stressing that this deal only represents an agreement on the wage parity issue, and that no other parameters had been set for future contract negotiations.
I'm surprised that the 2% costs $112 million. That means the entire current salary cost of the public elementary teachers is $5.6 billion. One other thing to take note of is that the current contract is over in 14 months and the province will have to bargain with the teachers again next summer, still with a large deficit. That won't be fun. Expect more teacher unrest, although whether the Wynne government remains in power next summer remains to be seen.
ETFO lost 2 per cent in wage hikes back in 2009 under former education minister and now Premier Kathleen Wynne, because it failed to meet a deadline for accepting a contract. At the time, other teacher groups signed offers of 12 per cent in pay hikes over four years. At the time, Ms. Wynne made a last-ditch effort to avoid a strike – 10.4 per cent over four years – which ETFO grudgingly accepted.
Ms. Sandals said the government’s change of heart on the issue is a matter of fairness, saying elementary school teachers should not be punished because their union negotiated them an inferior deal several years ago.
“It’s not about did the unions have good tactics or bad tactics. It’s about the individual teacher,” she said. “Now, when we look at this, and we look at a public policy point of view going forward: why would we pay Catholic and French teachers more than public teachers?”
One stat that I found interesting in the article with regards to the cost of the 2% increase:
The move by the government contradicts earlier statements by Premier Kathleen Wynne and Education Minister Liz Sandals that there would be no new money on the table for teachers. The pay hike will cost the treasury $112-million every year.
The salary increases would take effect in September, 2014, after the current contract expires.
Ms. Sandals also left the door open to further pay increases at that time, stressing that this deal only represents an agreement on the wage parity issue, and that no other parameters had been set for future contract negotiations.
I'm surprised that the 2% costs $112 million. That means the entire current salary cost of the public elementary teachers is $5.6 billion. One other thing to take note of is that the current contract is over in 14 months and the province will have to bargain with the teachers again next summer, still with a large deficit. That won't be fun. Expect more teacher unrest, although whether the Wynne government remains in power next summer remains to be seen.
Friday, May 31, 2013
Hamilton and the Potential GHTA HST Hike, Some Numbers
There is certainly a possibility that Ontario could raise the HST by one percentage point from 8% to 9% (provincial portion) in the GTHA to pay for Metrolinx's new transit infrastructure. Whether that actually happens is a question, as federal Minister of Finance Joe Flaherty has apparently come out against regional variations in the HST. The province could raise the rate for the entire province.
But that's for another discussion. I'm more interested in how much a HST raise would raise for Hamilton. This Star article has some info on the relationship between HST revenue in the province, along with Flaherty's complaints. Here's the data we are interested in:
But that's for another discussion. I'm more interested in how much a HST raise would raise for Hamilton. This Star article has some info on the relationship between HST revenue in the province, along with Flaherty's complaints. Here's the data we are interested in:
"One of four proposed
transit taxes, a higher HST would raise $1.4 billion in the Toronto
region but would net out at $1.3 billion after a mobility tax credit is
applied to assist low-income residents.
It would generate $1.7
billion in the rest of the province. Both Wynne and Metrolinx officials
have said that money could pay for local infrastructure priorities in
those other areas if the 1 per cent were applied Ontario-wide."
That's $3 billion per year for the entire province for the extra percentage point. Hamilton's population is 520,000, versus a total population of 13,505,900 for the province. By simple division, that's $115.5 million per year for Hamilton available for transit. The East West LRT has estimated capital costs of $800 million. If all the extra money was directed towards the LRT, that would take 6.9 years of the HST revenue. Considering we've been talking about LRT for over five years now, that's a pretty short timeline.
Of course there are other projects, namely the GO train station at James North (and maybe one in Stoney Creek). But the cost of this project (apart from the stations) doesn't totally benefit Hamilton (extending the line to Niagara at the same time surely benefits that region, plus Toronto, Mississauga, Oakville and Burlington to a lesser extent), and the required capital costs beyond the stations aren't that much, some track and a few extra trains. Plus the project is already going ahead and funded (I assume).
So if this HST hike actually happens (and there are a lot of road blocks) and Hamilton gets its share of the hike, then paying for the LRT capital costs can be done in fairly short order. Council unlikely likes the idea of the HST rise, but if it is imposed upon them then the money for LRT should be available (providing the province doesn't funnel it disproportionately into the CIty of Toronto, which is a possibility, which council needs to fight against).
That's $3 billion per year for the entire province for the extra percentage point. Hamilton's population is 520,000, versus a total population of 13,505,900 for the province. By simple division, that's $115.5 million per year for Hamilton available for transit. The East West LRT has estimated capital costs of $800 million. If all the extra money was directed towards the LRT, that would take 6.9 years of the HST revenue. Considering we've been talking about LRT for over five years now, that's a pretty short timeline.
Of course there are other projects, namely the GO train station at James North (and maybe one in Stoney Creek). But the cost of this project (apart from the stations) doesn't totally benefit Hamilton (extending the line to Niagara at the same time surely benefits that region, plus Toronto, Mississauga, Oakville and Burlington to a lesser extent), and the required capital costs beyond the stations aren't that much, some track and a few extra trains. Plus the project is already going ahead and funded (I assume).
So if this HST hike actually happens (and there are a lot of road blocks) and Hamilton gets its share of the hike, then paying for the LRT capital costs can be done in fairly short order. Council unlikely likes the idea of the HST rise, but if it is imposed upon them then the money for LRT should be available (providing the province doesn't funnel it disproportionately into the CIty of Toronto, which is a possibility, which council needs to fight against).
Tuesday, March 5, 2013
New Poll Puts Ontario Liberals in Minority Position. Really?
The Star has an article on a Forum Research poll that somehow gives the Liberals basically the same number of seats, with the Tories down one and the NDP up one (Libs 53, 36, 18). The poll has the Liberals tied at 32% each with the NDP bringing up the rear at 27%.
First about that seat distribution. Certainly the Liberals vote distribution across the province is very efficient for getting seats at these levels. However if I recall correctly, the last election had the Liberals grabbing 37% of the popular vote versus 35% for the Tories. For the Tories to lose a seat, I would be curious to see which Tory seat had the smallest margin of victory. Is this shift in the popular vote enough for the Tories to lose a seat? Maybe. I should really load in the vote data from the last election so I can play around with it. It does seem odd that the Liberals would go down several percentage points and be in a tie with the Tories and not lose a seat.
Second, what should the opposition do? There has been some clamoring for the PCs and NDP to immediately go to the polls and try and keep Wynne off-balance, especially when earlier polls had the Liberals in third place (and I don't care how efficient your vote is, that's going to cause problems). However now that the legislature is finally back in session, after being prorogued for four months, there's lots of committee time for the opposition to hammer away at the Liberals for Ornge and the gas power plants. Maybe more importantly, third and fourth quarter growth have been very weak for Ontario (right now we only have the Canada number, but there's no indication that Ontario will outperform it). So weak that GDP growth per capita was probably negative. That's bad for revenue and the current large deficit. It's also bad for Wynne since there's still a budget that needs to be tabled and it will have to deal with this weak growth (and possibly weak growth in Q1 of 2013). Voters generally don't like a bad news budget.
Also for the opposition, how accurate is this poll? Some pollsters give better results for better parties. Further, the Ontario teachers unions have usually been a force in recent Ontario elections for the Liberals. Let's just say they won't be making their best effort for the Liberals in the next one.
So what will the opposition do? Considering the news won't be good for Wynne for the next few months, I expect the opposition won't pull the trigger right away, however if there are consistent polls putting the Liberals in third place, they won't hesitate to go.
First about that seat distribution. Certainly the Liberals vote distribution across the province is very efficient for getting seats at these levels. However if I recall correctly, the last election had the Liberals grabbing 37% of the popular vote versus 35% for the Tories. For the Tories to lose a seat, I would be curious to see which Tory seat had the smallest margin of victory. Is this shift in the popular vote enough for the Tories to lose a seat? Maybe. I should really load in the vote data from the last election so I can play around with it. It does seem odd that the Liberals would go down several percentage points and be in a tie with the Tories and not lose a seat.
Second, what should the opposition do? There has been some clamoring for the PCs and NDP to immediately go to the polls and try and keep Wynne off-balance, especially when earlier polls had the Liberals in third place (and I don't care how efficient your vote is, that's going to cause problems). However now that the legislature is finally back in session, after being prorogued for four months, there's lots of committee time for the opposition to hammer away at the Liberals for Ornge and the gas power plants. Maybe more importantly, third and fourth quarter growth have been very weak for Ontario (right now we only have the Canada number, but there's no indication that Ontario will outperform it). So weak that GDP growth per capita was probably negative. That's bad for revenue and the current large deficit. It's also bad for Wynne since there's still a budget that needs to be tabled and it will have to deal with this weak growth (and possibly weak growth in Q1 of 2013). Voters generally don't like a bad news budget.
Also for the opposition, how accurate is this poll? Some pollsters give better results for better parties. Further, the Ontario teachers unions have usually been a force in recent Ontario elections for the Liberals. Let's just say they won't be making their best effort for the Liberals in the next one.
So what will the opposition do? Considering the news won't be good for Wynne for the next few months, I expect the opposition won't pull the trigger right away, however if there are consistent polls putting the Liberals in third place, they won't hesitate to go.
Sunday, January 27, 2013
Wynne Wins
So much for my elaborate game theory about what would happen in Sandra Pupatello's bye-election if she won. Will she even run now? Will Dwight Duncan resign?
On to Kathleen Wynne. Actually having a seat means the legislature can be called back henceforth, for a throne speech and a budget. Do the opposition parties want an election right away? I would say the opposition would like a bit of legislature time to do more Ornge and gas plant hearings to wound the Liberals even more on these issues. Also the budget isn't going to be particularly fun as Wynne won't have much extra cash to splash around. Restraint is never fun for politicians, especially one of Wynne's predilection.
I'm assuming Wynne's strategy will be to work with Andrea Horwath. Considering what the polls are and the long term goals of Horwath and the NDP, I can't think Horwath will go too long propping up Wynne as the premier. Although short term she may extract some legislation or amendments the Liberals would never normally agree too.
On to Kathleen Wynne. Actually having a seat means the legislature can be called back henceforth, for a throne speech and a budget. Do the opposition parties want an election right away? I would say the opposition would like a bit of legislature time to do more Ornge and gas plant hearings to wound the Liberals even more on these issues. Also the budget isn't going to be particularly fun as Wynne won't have much extra cash to splash around. Restraint is never fun for politicians, especially one of Wynne's predilection.
I'm assuming Wynne's strategy will be to work with Andrea Horwath. Considering what the polls are and the long term goals of Horwath and the NDP, I can't think Horwath will go too long propping up Wynne as the premier. Although short term she may extract some legislation or amendments the Liberals would never normally agree too.
Sunday, January 20, 2013
Kathleen Wynne Would Make OLG Keep Flamborough as Hamilton Casino Site
Interesting news that Liberal Party leadership front runner Kathleen Wynne would make OLG keep Flamborough as the casino site in Hamilton, according to this Spec article:
Wynne said she would “absolutely” back Hamilton if it decided a casino should be in Flamborough.
“Hamilton made that decision,” she said. “That’s what I’m saying. The OLG would have to live with that.”
I would guess that OLG would rather a casino at Flamborough rather than no casino in Hamilton since they are trying to increase revenues. Interesting too that prominent local Liberals like former Mayor Larry Di Ianni are downtown casino proponents.
Wynne said she would “absolutely” back Hamilton if it decided a casino should be in Flamborough.
“Hamilton made that decision,” she said. “That’s what I’m saying. The OLG would have to live with that.”
I would guess that OLG would rather a casino at Flamborough rather than no casino in Hamilton since they are trying to increase revenues. Interesting too that prominent local Liberals like former Mayor Larry Di Ianni are downtown casino proponents.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)