I've hesitated to weigh in on this as I agree that NVG's are a great tool and make NVFR both safer and easier. They would also add another big cost to an operation that has spent a lot of money to stay out of the flight environment that NVG's are designed for.
The question I will pose is: are those of you saying to just buy the NVG's actually looking at the job that Ornge does?
In my mind, it is the same as saying that no one should be conducting IFR unless they have synthetic vision. It would make the acquisition of visual reference much easier and increase SA.
The Ornge operation is only conducting night operations to established helipads/LZ's or airports. All are marked with lights or retroreflective cones. The SOP's were clear and appropriate to the role.
I would wager that if an objective and dispassionate assessment is made of what effect NVG's would have on the Ornge role, as it now stands, the result would be minimal. That would change if there was a need to respond to unprepared sites, navigate en route below MOCA, etc.
NVG's have their advantages, their limitations, and their place. STARS makes good use of them in western Canada to allow VFR navigation in higher terrain, but that terrain is not an issue in Ontario. Horses for courses.