If you want to fight the latest Ontario budget using the language and spin found in it, good luck.  Here are some tips I’d give to the Ontario PCs that they are free to use that would change the narrative to challenge this budget on the party’s own terms.

First of all, congratulations Liberals for finally trying to wrestle down net debt-to-GDP, which will start to go down next year for the first time.  However, do you know what this means? Ontario has about an $800 billion GDP, which is the measure of the size of the economy. That means if economic growth is pegged at 2%, just to use a round number, GDP will rise by $16 billion.  What this means is that if the net debt were to rise by less than $16 billion, net debt-to-GDP would be lower next year.  So in this scenario, if net debt grew by say $15 billion, the ratio would be lower and the government wants us to applaud their fiscal prudence.  Get it? In this scenario, if net debt-to-GDP to rise, we’d have to throw in over $16 billion in new net debt.  When the economy grows, it’s easy to hide the lack of fiscal discipline if you focus on that stat.

Second, I’d completely reject the idea that Ontario’s net debt-to-GDP ratio is about 40%.  Why? Because in a federal country like Canada, the size of the Ontario economy has to pay for not only its provincial debt but its share of the national debt.  That means Ontario is saddled with $600 billion in net debt, or a net debt-to-GDP ratio of 75%. That’s worse than Spain.

Third, because of the above two things, I think it’s time we start finding another measure of our indebtedness.  For example, a bank won’t give you a mortgage on debt obligations of more than 2.5 times your salary.  Perhaps pegging debt to revenue gives a better picture of Ontario’s capacity to pay its debt obligations. N.B. Ontario’s debt is pretty much at 2.5 times its revenue suggesting the need for real fiscal balance.

Fourth, I’d totally reject the idea that the government will balance in 2018.  While the operating budget may balance, the capital budget will still show more than $8 billion increase in net-debt for 2018.  I’d start by calling the planned deficit for 2016 to be $12 billion, not $4 billion.

Fifth, I’d highlight the fact that Treasury Board President Deb Matthews was supposed to control costs in the public service.  She was supposed to be Minister No.  Yet, Treasury Board spent $400 million more than planned on operating costs, not less.  No savings were found debunking the idea that the Liberals are actually serious about cost constraints. You may wish to ask for a resignation!

Sixth, of course the government “beat” its deficit reduction targets again because of a) liberal targets to begin with and b) the Hydro One sale and depleting the reserve fund.  So, nothing was beat.  The structural deficit still exists.

It’s time to change the narrative and fight for fiscal conservative values not on their terms, but our own.

Oh, one more tip… I’d really start advocating for a monthly fiscal monitor like the federal government implemented. This gives a truer statement of the state of the finances.  The reality is that the election is being pushed up to May from October.  Before May 2018, the Liberals will “balance the budget” according to their plan.  I’m pretty sure when the public accounts are published later that summer, it’ll show a deficit, which they’d have to deal with in an October election, but they won’t have to deal with in a May election.  I’d start building that narrative now.  That would be my advice.