Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Donna E. Wood, University of Victoria IAEVG Presentation June 4, 2014 1.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Donna E. Wood, University of Victoria IAEVG Presentation June 4, 2014 1."— Presentation transcript:

1 Donna E. Wood, University of Victoria IAEVG Presentation June 4, 2014 1

2  All developed countries have a public employment service (PES) that connects job seekers with employers  Canada is a federation with 14 powerful governments  In social policy matters Canada is considered as the most decentralized federation in the OECD world  Provinces have large areas of competence plus fiscal capacity  The federal government (Ottawa) can act unilaterally as we have an ineffective Senate to represent regions  Employment and training powers have historically been contested between Ottawa and the provinces 2

3  1996 Ottawa offers to devolve the PES  Devolution triggered by 1995 Québec referendum; need for ‘flexible federalism’ and reduced spending  Realized through bilateral administrative (not constitutional) agreements: Labour Market Development Agreement (LMDA) and Labour Market Agreement (LMA) between 1996 and 2010  New arrangements supported by both Liberals and Conservatives in Ottawa  By 2010 80% of programs under provincial control and management  In 2013 Ottawa decides to re-assert control: Canada Job Grant Agreements and LMDA review 3

4  How did the devolution story play out?  What is the federal role today?  How are provinces managing these new responsibilities?  What interventions have they chosen?  What governance arrangements have they chosen?  How do these compare?  Why happens next in the federal-provincial world? 4

5  Provincial labour market offices in 1910s with federal contributions  1940 constitutional amendment gives Ottawa unemployment insurance; provinces retain social assistance as well as training  Renewed conflict starts in 1960s and becomes competitive in 1980s  Pre-LMDA Ottawa has network 500 Canada Manpower offices; few provinces offer services  LMDAs and LMAs start to restore harmony in 1990s  Provinces pleased: flexibility to meet local needs; improved coordination; most irritants removed  Federal government left with accountability ‘light’; loss of visibility; hard to lead even though they pay 5

6  LMDA agreements (focused on Employment Insurance clients) transferred federal staff, assets and funding  Early LMDA movers: Alberta, New Brunswick, Manitoba, Québec, Saskatchewan, NWT and Nunavut 1996-2000  Ontario finally comes on board 2007  From co-managed to devolved LMDA agreements: British Columbia, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland & Labrador and Yukon 2009-2010  LMA agreements (for non EI clients) 2008-2009  Complementary transfers for disabled persons ($222m) and older workers ($80m)  About 80% of cost of provincial programming covered by Ottawa 6

7 Jurisdiction LMDA implementation date Total federal positions Total LMDA funding LMA date Total LMA funding Total LMDA/LMA allocations The early movers AlbertaNov. 1, 1997204106.9m200852.5m159.4m New BrunswickApril 1, 199717091.1m200811.4m102.5m ManitobaNov. 27, 199711844.8m200818.0m62.9m QuébecApril 1, 19981084589.1m2009116.6m705.7m Northwest Territories Oct. 1, 1998243.2m20091.3m4.5m SaskatchewanJan. 1, 199911437.7m200815.1m52.8m NunavutApril 1, 2000 2.8m20081.2m4.0m Ontario comes on board OntarioJan. 1, 20071007552.7m2008200.0m752.7m From co- managed to devolved British ColumbiaFeb. 2, 2009470278.7m200866.4m345.1m Nova ScotiaJuly 1, 200919680.2m200814.1m94.3m Newfoundland and Labrador Nov. 2, 2009177131.9m20089.3m141.2m Prince Edward Island Oct. 5, 20094927.1m20082.1m29.2m YukonFeb. 1, 201073.5m20091.0m4.6m Totaln/a3,620 positions$1,950.0mn/a$509.1m$2,459.1m [1] 7

8  Youth programming ($240m managed by Service Canada)  Aboriginal programming ($245m managed by 80 organizations through ASETS program)  Pan-Canadian programming ($76m): job bank, Labour market information, literacy, foreign credential recognition, occupational classification, trades certification, labour mobility, research  Recent federal retreats from labour market issues: national sector councils; Canadian Council on Learning; skills tables; literacy secretariat  Feeble intergovernmental system  No national labour market research institutes or support for provincial organizations to connect on a pan-Canadian basis 8

9  Provinces expected to chose interventions from: employment assistance services (EAS); skills development; wage subsidy; self employment; or job creation partnerships  15 years of reporting provides limited pan-Canadian synthesis or interprovincial comparison & analysis  51% active Employment Insurance (EI) and 16% reach- back; few under-represented groups  2011/12 646,296 individuals received 962,673 interventions  Slide over time to short term EAS interventions and away from training (from 53% to 83%)  Evaluations demonstrate that skills development is most effective intervention, yet mostly EAS on offer 9

10  LMAs hearkened back to mid-1990s when Ottawa assisted under-represented groups  LMA/LMDA simultaneous implementation was challenging for co-managed provinces  Programs are similar to LMDA services  Even less reporting: only 2 consolidated provincial reports (2008/09 and 2009/10)  More emphasis on skills development vs. EAS compared to LMDAs  Services focused on vulnerable groups  Evaluation report demonstrated strong results 10

11  Focus on governance & management arrangements: ◦ Interagency cooperation or ‘one-stop’ shops ◦ Marketization of service provision ◦ Decentralization ◦ Partnerships and networks  Framework for comparison draws on international literature, especially in European Union and OECD  Almost 100 so far interviews in British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Québec  Interviews just completed in Nova Scotia, PEI, New Brunswick and Nfld. & Lab.  Ontario and Ottawa to be approached this fall 11

12  Alberta: services for social assistance (SA) clients and career services for all. Pre-existing cooperation. Political stability.  Québec: coalition of business, labour, NGOs demanding federal transfer. Coalition retained through political changes. Pre-existing integration of employment & SA programs.  Manitoba: 2-tiered SA system. Large aboriginal involvement through ASETS. Political stability.  Saskatchewan: need to update college and SA system. Large aboriginal involvement. Political changes.  BC: parallel fed-prov system until 2009. Contracted provincial services. Political changes. 12

13  Alberta and Québec have provincially managed one-stop shops: 57 Alberta Works offices and 150 LEC’s in Québec  Saskatchewan (19) and Manitoba (16) have provincially-run employment offices. SA separate.  LMDA and LMA money managed by same Ministry  72 WorkBC Employment Services Centres, all contracted out. SA offices separate. ED Ministry manages LMA money through different contracts 13

14  Following 2 year consultation British Columbia lets province-wide contracts, choosing 47 prime contractors, all governed by a provincial model  Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba have ‘mixed model’ of civil servants and place- specific contracts with for-profit and NGO involvement  Québec also has ‘mixed model’ but almost exclusively with NGOs who are ‘partners’, not ‘contractors’ 14

15  Alberta and Québec divide policy and service delivery function. Considerable flexibility at regional and local level, using provincially determined framework  Saskatchewan and Manitoba divide authority by business line; local flexibility unclear  British Columbia highly centralized. Business model for EPBC and decision-making on LMA programming managed out of Victoria. Regional and local offices provide input on contractors chosen 15

16  Québec has highly institutionalized structure: CPMT, 17 regional councils, 30 sectoral councils, all set in law  Manitoba has 16 sector councils plus Advisory Council on Workforce Development  Detailed governance model for EPBC. Consultations on BC JobsPlan and regional committees  Alberta and Saskatchewan have adhoc consultations and industry committees as needed 16

17  CPMT putting new structures in place in Québec  Alberta developing an aboriginal workforce development strategy  Saskatchewan and Manitoba (where ASETS organizations and aboriginal population are large) have parallel and cordial relationships, but largely ad hoc arrangements  BC ASETS holders still recovering from implementation of EPBC and loss of federal funding 17

18  LMDA and LMA choices over 17 years have given provinces considerable flexibility  It is provinces- not Ottawa- that have the expertise in labour market matters today  Each has found their own way to connect to their employers and other stakeholders  Huge upheaval of the system through Canada Job Grant agreements: uncertain impact  LMDA review now underway through HUMA committee as well as pan-Canadian meetings: uncertain impact  For sure less provincial flexibility: better or worse programming? 18

19  Policy field has been transformed through bilateral arrangements. Each province has chosen what works for them  Ontario, NS, NB, PEI and Nfld & Lab research concluding  Considerable federal-provincial constitutional and financial interdependence requires improved federal-provincial cooperation than we have now  New partnerships are required ◦ Consolidated F/P/T transfer, simplified accountability ◦ Improved transparency and capacity for research ◦ A renewed Forum of Labour Market Ministers ◦ Institutionalized connections to business, unions, NGOs and ASETS holders (pan-Canadian and within province)  Window of opportunity for change and improvement 19

Download ppt "Donna E. Wood, University of Victoria IAEVG Presentation June 4, 2014 1."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google