Ontario’s electricity sector has sometimes been frustrated by plans that go off the rails before they are completed – often because the plans have failed to achieve general public support. Yet there are some relatively inexpensive remedies available, mostly in the social sciences, that will help improve the level of public acceptance for electricity sector plans. The Mowat Centre finds that “broad public input and greater democratic engagement” can deliver benefits that far outweigh their costs.
A research report released in June recommends that the province adopt new energy planning processes that better engage the public. Entitled “Getting the Green Light: The Path to Public Support for Ontario’s Power Plans,” the report focuses on energy planning principles distilled from research and consultation with experts in Ontario and five other jurisdictions: New South Wales in Australia, British Columbia, Great Britain, New York State, and Sweden. The Mowat Centre is a research body based at the School of Public Policy and Governance at the University of Toronto.
“In comparison to Ontario, other jurisdictions incorporate greater democratic review and accountability in planning. Public input and democratic engagement need to be strengthened in Ontario,” says Pamela Nowina, one of the authors of the study. “This could happen in two ways: at the legislative level, for example, with governmental panels, energy committees, open planning processes and on-going reporting to the legislature; and at the public level through public advocacy and consultations,” she adds.
The report starts with a simple assertion that there is a two-way street: Although planning delivers a kind of certainty for the public, it is only through enhanced forms of public engagement in planning that planning itself can receive its own type of certainty from the public.
The Mowat document sets up the issue by explaining that “Energy assets are long-term investments that require long-term plans. Such plans produce policy consistency and certainty over time. This certainty can only come from an open decision-making process that subjects plans to public scrutiny and debate, with clearly defined roles for elected officials, the public and energy experts.”
However the benefits of public engagement are much broader than simply increased certainty for the energy sector: “implementing these recommendations has the potential to also foster more global benefits, such as greater economic efficiency and greater investor confidence.”
The study authors found, fortunately, that current conditions in Ontario are good for proceeding with the report’s recommendations. “The legislative framework laid out in 2004 remains an excellent foundation,” they note, saying further that “The government of Ontario is already moving in the direction the report recommends.”
Not surprising, the report sees significant challenges ahead. “For planning to receive greater public support, there needs to be an effective governance structure, accountability, transparency and integration with local and regional concerns and needs. This includes clear roles for the various actors, and most importantly, a well-defined role for political decision makers. One of the key concerns is that public consultations are inadequate in both type and quantity at all levels of policy making and planning – from the ministerial and the provincial, to the regional and the local. The power of the Minister to issue directives without any consultation or accountability needs to be restrained. In addition, regions and communities need to play a larger role in the planning process to enhance their ability to shape their own energy futures. As with other forms of public infrastructure that underpin social wellbeing, it is imperative that the public is brought into the process so that energy plans can gain legitimacy and public support.”
The report articulates a set of planning principles as follows:
1. The planning process should be based on public policy objectives that have been broadly debated and democratically accepted.
2. There should be a clear distinction between the roles of the policy maker, the planner, and the reviewer/regulator. Each entity must have a clear and accessible process for public engagement.
3. The planning process needs to be contextual and comprehensive.
4. The planning process has to be integrative.
5. The planning process has to include a clear economic analysis.
6. The planning process has to be transparent and accessible to all stakeholders and the public.
7. The planning process needs to be informative.
8. The planning process has to be iterative and flexible.
9. The plan must be developed by experts.
10. The results of the plan should be measured and publicly reported.
Although many of the solutions envisioned will empower local authorities, there are some challenges for local planners as well: “The legislated governance framework must require local authorities to develop local, long-term energy plans that are consistent with the IPSP and regional energy plans. … [I]t will become important for regions and communities to consider their local energy requirements, to have access to the information needed to understand the options and finally, to plan accordingly, as they do with other critical municipal infrastructure. … [T]here is a need to balance the necessity for local involvement with the accountability for decisions and their outcomes, namely reliable electricity supply and the cost of obtaining it. Local authorities and residents need to consider what options are acceptable to assure themselves of system reliability – it is not sufficient to reject all options.”
The authors seem to agree with some critics of Bill 75 that it weakened certain planning processes as it pursued a green energy agenda. “Bill 75’s proposed fundamental changes to the planning process and governance framework set in the current legislation need to be discussed.” The authors recommend “Reinstitut(ing) the Integrated Power System Planning (IPSP) process as soon as possible, ideally with a review by the Ontario Energy Board.” In addition, the report finds that there is a need for more systematic collection of information to support energy planning.
The challenges are clear and the recommendations are available for all to see. “Ontario needs the policy certainty that comes from opening the decision-making process to public discussion and debate. It is the only way to arrive at decisions that can withstand changes in government.”
“Getting the Green Light” recommendations
1 Legislate a community participation charter.
2. Create a public energy consumer advocate.
3. Define the role of ministers and elected officials and limit the use of ministerial directives
4. Require a provincial energy plan be prepared by an independent expert agency.
5. Enhance the OEB’s review criteria.
6. Give the OEB the ability and resources to review and approve the OPA’s procurement plans and leave-to-construct applications for new generation, as it does for transmission and distribution; or alternatively, create an independent generation siting board.
7. Require that regional energy plans be approved by the OEB.
8. Require municipalities to include energy planning in their infrastructure plans and create a framework for their integration.
9. Require integration between levels of planning.
10. Improve statistical availability, analysis and reporting.
11. Consider imposing a moratorium on further electricity generation procurement pending the preparation of the next IPSP.
12. Require policy changes and directives to be submitted to the legislature.