(cartoon courtesy of Sue Dewar in the Toronto Sun)

In my last article I suggested that voters would be influenced by the three P’s of politics – Personality, Performance, and Policy. I then digressed from discussing Jagmeet Singh as a personality, and a potential prime minister and wandered into a somewhat truncated discussion of NDP policy objectives. That little digression reminded me that I had discussed the Conservative Party mostly in the context of personality of its leader Pierre Poilievre, and I had discussed the Liberals mostly in the context of their performance in their nine (bumbling) years in power. And so, I decided that to be fair I ought to spend some time looking at party policies to see if there are really any significant policy differences between the parties.

After wading back and forth through some 200 pages of political policy documents, as well as numerous news stories, I’m happy to say that there are, indeed, some significant policy differences. I think it’s going to be important, in the upcoming election cycle, to understand where our political parties are trying to take us.

I have written this thing several times, trying to boil it down to a decent size. In this version, I’ve decided to give you my analysis of all the policy statements I’ve seen, and then just provide lists of policies at the bottom.  With that structure, you might decide to stop reading after the analysis sections, or you might decide to read a little more to see why I reached my conclusions and see how one party’s policy differs from another on any given area of policy.

The New Democrats.

Much of my information on NDP policies comes from a 115-page 2021 policy document as well as from news clippings. Although the policy document is outdated, I believe it still reflects NDP positions accurately. I did discuss NDP policies to a certain extent in the last article. Some of what follows might be repetitive. Forgive me.

The keynote of NDP politics is the expansion of our social safety net. One has only to look at the index to their policy commitment paper to get the flavour. It’s affordable homes for everyone, medicine for all, affordable post-secondary education for everyone, high-speed broadband for all, and it goes on and on like that. The other note that seems to pervade their policies is that they are going to be reformers of an essentially corrupt system. They will clean up the military, they will clean up the RCMP, they will root out evils in most foreign countries, they will stop the unholy alliance between Corporate Canada and the two traditional governing parties. If you are distrustful of Canadian institutions, this may be the political party for you.

If you are a real optimist, I’d suggest you might vote for the NDP. I’m not philosophically opposed to the NDP’s focus on expanding the social safety net in Canada. My researches have told me that some of the best run countries in the world have very strong social programs. But I cannot vote for them. It’s not just that I’m not that optimistic. There are things in their package that I just don’t like. 

 I believe a strong climate change policy is critical. I regard the NDP policy set as weak on climate change. They have caved in to the relentless Poilievre pressure against carbon pricing, and while they say they will apply carbon pricing, they have no articulated statement on how that would be done except that it will be “fairer”. Further, they are the only party that has failed to recognize the importance of increased use of nuclear power in the battle against carbon emissions.

I think their “save the world” foreign policy objectives are immature, self-righteous and preachy. Accusing other nations of human rights abuses, and genocides may be a necessary part of quiet diplomacy, but you’re likely to be more impactful in a difference of opinion if you’re not trying to embarrass the other party. The rest of it is admirable if you want Canada to be the social conscience of the world, but I personally would prefer a Canada-centred approach, with a bit more focus on defensive alliances and posture than on the Kumbaya prayer meeting that the NDP propose.

I could not vote for lowering the voting age to 16, and while I might vote for changes to the Senate selection process, I don’t think I would vote for its abolition.

The NDP policy on the Defence portfolio is something like the foreign affairs policy – more focused on how they’re going to fix those awful people in the Defence ministry than they are on figuring out what our military requirements are. Once again, it’s immature and preachy and lacks focus on the mission of Canada’s Defence ministry. 

Finally, their tax proposals are all about socking it to rich people and to corporations. That is voter candy – convince people you can get somebody else to pay. An NDP government will cause huge growth in government services paired with a business-unfriendly tax regime. I think that’s likely to produce uncompetitive Canadian companies in the world market and galloping growth in our national debt.

If you’re optimistic you may think that the NDP can accomplish a significant portion of their social agenda without trashing the economy, that they’ll adopt firmer stances on climate change and military spending, and that they’ll learn how to wield power pragmatically and diplomatically. If that’s you, then go ahead and vote NDP. I cannot.

Conservative Party of Canada

The Conservatives published a 50-page Policy Declaration arising from their September 2023 convention. It starts with a philosophical section about the party’s fundamental beliefs, and I found that the specifics of their policy declarations stay remarkably true to their philosophy. That philosophy section prioritizes individual rights over societal rights, limits the size of government, creates a competitive environment for business, and favours incentives for private sector interests over government programs to achieve political objectives.

There is much in the Conservative view that works for me. I like their focus on simplifying our tax processes and on allowing family income splitting for all. Streamlining government processes and trying to achieve a balanced budget and national debt reduction are worthy aims. I respect their approach of trying to get private sector businesses to do what needs to be done. I think simplifying and stabilizing health care funding would be good and would make the provinces happy, and I think being open to a public/private mix for health care services is important. I endorse their opposition to religious or cultural courts in Canada. I’m happy that they would fund the defence ministry to at least 2% of GDP, and I think their identification of the procurement process as a critical improvement area is bang on. I am very supportive of their attempt to limit election spending, and I don’t mind the idea of having an elected Senate. 

They have done a fine job of articulating a philosophy about the right of the individual to compete in an open market economy, and about the need for government to feel responsible only for those things that the individual cannot reasonably do for themselves. The problem is that this “small government, competitive market” approach has been in force-  in the US and to a lesser extent in Canada – for about the last forty years, and it has led to incredible concentration of wealth (and power) in the hands of the ultra-wealthy, and to the erosion of the middle class. So, I think we need to be a bit distrustful of that general approach. 

On specific policies, there are some I find problematic. I’m not terribly happy with their opposition to the CBC. Their position that the CBC  i) should provide a wide range of services, ii) should not openly compete with private broadcasters, and iii) should be less reliant on government subsidy – is frankly ridiculous. Those three things simply cannot co-exist.

I think their labour relations package is openly hostile to unions. I think their foreign relations policies are a bit too openly aggressive against China, and a bit too supportive of Israel and too dismissive of the needs of the Palestinians.

The suggestion that we should have inmates earning money while allowing prisons to “reduce the burden on the taxpayer” looks to me like a license to create a slave labor market within the criminal justice system. And the presumption of guilt for possession of the proceeds of organized crime seems like a dangerous door to open.

None of those things are absolute red flags for me. But big red flags are popping up elsewhere.

First, they do not have a responsible climate change policy in any respect. They reject any form of carbon pricing. Their idea of a climate change program is to do research while the world spins deeper and deeper into trouble. Their commitment to extend pipelines and support oil exploration reeks of desperation to avoid change and of pandering to the oil and gas industry. I cannot support a party whose first action on climate change would be to throw away everything that previous governments, both federal and provincial, have achieved. (BC has already announced that if the requirement is removed they will be abandoning their climate program).

On the business part of the health care business, the Conservatives are talking good stuff – funding methods, staffing, diversification of providers. But on the health care aspects, they suck. Their opposition to MAID, to gender dysphoria treatments, their reluctant acceptance of abortion, and their abandonment of a strong public health position on vaccinations are all symptomatic of religious fundamentalism infecting the right wing in Canada as they have done with MAGA Republicans in the US. Their pandering to the anti-vax movement is reason enough by itself to disqualify them as a potential governing party. 

Their intention to leave the internet wide open for anyone to post content without “government sanctioned censorship” implies that they will abrogate all responsibility for dealing with the disinformation content on the internet. One of the Conservative policies is to support “robust measures to counter foreign interference in our elections.”  You cannot claim to have an aggressive foreign interference policy if you ignore internet content. Perhaps we’re not as targeted as the United States, but Russia, China and others are documented sources of disinformation campaigns in Canada.

Their policies on the criminal justice system are jarring in general. I demonstrated in “My unbroken Canada” that Poilievre’s claim that we’re in the middle of an un-precedented crime wave is a gross exaggeration. Conservative policies on mandatory life sentences and/or mandatory minimum sentences for certain crimes, are designed to reap votes from the promise that they will address the (largely non-existent) crime wave by imposing draconian punishments. I think we need to equip the judiciary to make the right sentencing decisions consistent with the actual circumstances unique to any crime. Mandatory sentences take decision power away from judges and juries and give it to politicians and that’s a mistake.

 Countries like Finland, Norway, and the Netherlands, which have low incarceration rates have low crime rates. Incarceration rate and homicide statistics in the US tell us that incarceration is not effective at stopping violent crime.  So, for my money, these criminal justice policies feel like a repressive, authoritarian approach that are more focused on punishment than they are on effectiveness. As for the policy that we should try 14-year-olds as adults?  That’s positively archaic.

The Conservatives will have you believe that they are not the MAGA Republicans and that Poilievre is not a Trump mini-me. I suggest to you that their approved policy document aligns closely with MAGA policies. The “anti-woke” policies (no cultural training, no DEI hiring, no treatment of gender dysphoria, no euthanasia, no assisted suicide) coupled with the harsh incarceration policies all feel very MAGA to me

So, because of their sadly lacking climate change policies, their ill-informed health care policies, their intention to not police the internet, their repressive and outdated policies on crime, and the general feeling that they are surrendering secular logic to the religious fundamentalism that underlies the MAGA movement, I will not be voting Conservative.

You can, of course, if you want. If you buy into the small government with tight fiscal control objectives,  if you’re not concerned about reversing the flow of wealth from the middle class to the very rich, if you are not sympathetic to the LGBTQ, if you have religious qualms about MAID and abortion,  if you think the anti-vax movement has a point, and especially if you think climate change is junk science that can be addressed several years in the future after we study it some more, then the Conservatives are a good bet for you. 

Liberal Party of Canada

That brings us to the Liberals. I have already catalogued their sad history of failures and inefficiency in their nine years in office. What does a policy review tell us about the Liberals’ direction?

There are really only two areas in which I am seriously opposed to the Liberal policies. The first is health care. The Liberal history is that they treat public delivery of health care as sacrosanct, and they use the power of Federal Transfer funds as a whip to force the Provinces to toe the line. Health care in Canada continues to decline in quality and availability, and Liberals are not open to searching for ways to improve it. In fact, their latest policy statements indicate that they are going to create even more layers of red tape and reporting for Provinces to wade through. They should back off and allow the provinces to manage health care delivery.

The second area is election reform. To announce that you will empanel a commission to “continue the work started in 2014” is bizarre. It’s clear that the country wants election reform. Suggesting that after ten years you still don’t have enough information to propose a model to be debated and approved or rejected is simply ridiculous.

A friend observed recently that there are no “Progressive” Conservatives left, and he’s right. The capture of the Progressive Conservatives by the Reform party has meant that there is no longer a centrist alternative to the Liberals. For me at least, the problem with the Liberals isn’t their policy package. It’s their woeful performance while in power.

It hasn’t all been terrible. On some big issues, they’ve done very well. Canadians suffered less from the pandemic than most other countries, and far, far less than our neighbour to the south. The “shovel money into the system” policies adopted by the Canadian government to avert a prolonged pandemic-driven recession worked, and the almost inevitable inflation that followed was managed better in Canada than in almost any other OECD nation. Their support for Ukraine has been unstinting and appropriate. And remember the Syrian refugee problems? No matter what you think about immigration policies, I think you have to agree that we did the right thing trying to scrape some of those people off the Mediterranean beaches and giving them a home.

Having said that, I have previously documented a string of bad decisions and mismanagement by the Trudeau Liberals. Today the Finance Minister resigned, and mentioned her concern that the Prime Minister indulged in “costly political gimmicks”. She’s probably referring to things like the GST holiday.  That vote-buying gimmick will cost the government something like $1.1B in foregone revenue, will benefit the average family by an almost irrelevant $25 to $50 per family, and is giving the retail sector giant headaches in changing their business accounting methods. Almost lost in the kerfluffle about Freeland’s resignation was the fact that the government deficit, targeted for $41B in 2024 jumped to something like $62B. 

Based on that performance, I’m sure you’re going to say “well how could you vote for those clowns?” But for me, a detailed study of policy proposals by the parties has clarified the picture to an amazing extent. I see no reason to believe that either the NDP or the Conservatives will be brilliantly efficient if they are elected. But if they turn out to be great at going where they say they’re going, that will be worse for me. Why? Because they’ll be making great progress in the wrong direction for me. I may not like the Liberals’ Personality (Trudeau, but maybe he’ll get replaced!) or the Liberals’ Performance (oh dear!) but I think their Policy approach is pragmatic and cautious, which is what I would hope for and expect from the only centrist party remaining in Canada. I’ll be voting Liberal.

Listed below are policy statements from all three parties on a variety of topics. In some cases I’ve quoted directly, but in many cases I’ve paraphrased, trying to be brief and succinct. If you want to compare how the parties differ on certain subject areas, read on.

Housing

NDP

• dedicated funding for co-op and non-profit housing ventures
• 30 year CMHC mortgages, 
• no GST on rental unit construction
• 20% tax on foreign buyers.

Conservatives 

– Tax relief for home buyers

– tax incentives for private sector housing developers

–  direct assistance in providing shelters for the un-housed

Liberals

 – accelerate housing by making Federally owned land available at nominal prices

• funding the rural housing Initiative
• shifting focus to “non-market housing” 
• accelerating public-private housing initiatives.

Defence

NDP

– stop privatization of services to army bases

– provide mental health support

– end sexual harassment in the military. 

– No real commitment to defence spending and no commentary on what they might see as defence imperatives.

Conservatives

• 2% GDP on defence spending 
• “streamlining, reducing timelines and removing bureaucratic impediments from the procurement interests of the Canadian Forces.” (This is a great focus area for improvement.)

Liberals

• increasing defence spending to 2% of GDP or more. 
• a shipbuilding program,
• a (woefully delayed) commitment to the F35 fighter jet procurement
• a promise to “massively invest in renovating NORAD infrastructure.” (Given the current state of relations with Russia, I believe that a focus on defence of the North is an imperative, so that last item is good news.)

Transportation

NDP

– high speed trains

–  public inter-city bus systems

– money for research and conversion to zero emissions vehicles.

Conservative

• innovative high-speed passenger rail “where warranted”. 
• capacity expansion of existing rail-based transportation infrastructure across Canada in order to secure tidewater port access.
• Increased support for highways to create “a truly national highway system”

Liberals

• high speed trains in the Quebec to Windsor corridor
•  public inter-city bus systems
• provide funding to convert transit systems to zero-emissions vehicles
•  provide funding to make it easier for people to buy and maintain zero emissions vehicles
• provide funding for R&D for ZEV technologies.

Health care

NDP Policy

-comprehensive health care improvements with a strong bias against privatization and user fees of any kind.

– Abortion services and gender dysphoria treatments included in health care.

Conservative Policies

• Stable and transparent federal funding
• Policies designed to increase the supply of health care professionals.
• balance of public and private delivery options
• palliative care “affirms life, regards dying as a normal process and excludes euthanasia and assisted suicide (MAID).”
• No further regulation of abortion in Canada. 
• Canadians have the freedom and right to refuse vaccines for moral, religious, medical or other reasons.
•  “prohibit life altering medicinal or surgical interventions on minors under 18 to treat gender confusion or dysphoria”.

Liberal Policies

• several proposals to increase the supply of health care professionals. 
• Proposal to provide Seniors’ homecare funding under the federal health care transfers. 
• resolution to tie Federal transfers to provincial reporting and performance standards, benchmarks for hiring & qualifications etc
• history of medical support for the LGBTQ community, including a law banning conversion therapy.

Climate change

NDP Policies

– ambitious emissions reduction target,

–  weak support for carbon pricing, 

– commitment to “green” government buildings and transport,

– opposition to fossil fuel subsidies

– failure to recognize the need for expanded use of nuclear power

– A National Crisis Strategy with long-term funding for climate adaptation, disaster mitigation, and climate resilient infrastructure.

Conservative Policies

• “There should be no federally imposed carbon taxes or cap and trade systems on either the provinces and territories or on the citizens of Canada. Provinces and territories should be free to develop their own climate-change policies without federal interference or federal penalties or incentives.”
• Research…carbon capture technology, energy storage processes, and stringent vehicle emissions standards.
• Support for increased use of nuclear power.
• Support hydrocarbon exploration.
• Extend/modernize Canada’s pipeline infrastructure.

Liberal Policies

• an established and committed policy on climate change 
• Abandoning subsidies and investments in fossil fuel businesses
• Home energy retrofit programs
• Zero emission vehicle (ZEV) incentives
• Public transit expansion and electrification
• Funding for clean energy projects
• include nuclear power in the “green bond framework” which supports eligible projects in the development of small modular reactors as well as supporting the safe operation and maintenance of existing facilities.
• additional funding to make buildings and infrastructure more resilient, to deal with things like heat extremes and coastal water incursions, and to work to make cities more liveable places with greenspaces and trees.

Labour Relations

NDP Policies

– Labour policies to eliminate/reduce gig work, to ban the use of replacement workers in labour disputes, enhance sick leave provisions, an expanded and flexible EI system, and to enhance protection for workers’ pension plans.

Conservative Policies

• opposed to mandatory Union membership, and forced financial contributions as a condition of employment
• Opposed to DEI hiring practices.
• support the right of union members to refuse to participate in collective bargaining activities.
• full, transparent annual reporting to reveal what Union spending supports.
• Public service benefits and pension should be made comparable to those of similar employees in the private section
• switch public sector pensions to a defined contribution pension model.
• oppose mandatory retirement at any age.

Liberal Policies

• use of replacement workers to be banned during lockouts.
• History of supporting workers’ right to strike but then imposing a government solution (recent dockworkers, rail workers, postal strikes) 
• Labour Code amendments to protect the workers’ right to disconnect from work.
• resolution to provide a minimum 4-week annual vacation in the Canada Labour Code.

Communications/Internet

NDP Policies

– A crown corporation to provide telecom services to every community with government price controls on data plans.

– Making social media platforms accountable to police their content, eliminating fraudulent accounts, harassment, threats and hate speech.

Conservative Policies

• Support the private sector to increase broadband infrastructure, especially in rural and remote communities.
• safeguard rights to create and access content on the internet without government sanctioned censorship. 
• (CBC/SRC) should offer a wide range of Canadian and international programming, while being respectful of Canadian content.
• CBC must rationalize any programming that overlaps or competes with private sector equivalents and reduce its reliance upon government funding and subsidy. 
• recognize the vital role played by the private broadcasters.

Liberal Policies

• Encourage independent tower companies to install broadband infrastructure for leasing to communications services.
• Open up the Canadian phone and internet markets to competition from international carriers, albeit with a 10% market cap.
• explore “options to hold on-line information services accountable for the veracity of material published on their platforms and to limit publication only to material whose sources can be traced.”
• Resolution to enact “truth in political advertising” legislation.
• Develop a code of conduct for political parties.
• provide additional funding to support “information reporting by Canadian media.”

Election Reform

NDP Policies

• Lower the voting age to 16
• Abolish the Senate
• mixed member proportional representation.
• Bring in stiffer Conflict of Interest penalties

Conservative Policies

• national referendum must be held prior to implementing any future electoral reform. 
• Support an elected Senate
• Don’t allow any increases to public funding of federal political parties
• Prohibit third parties from accepting foreign funding for domestic political activity.

Liberal Policies

• Failed to bring in promised Electoral reform.
• Proposal now to “establish a non-partisan National Citizens’ Assembly on Electoral Reform to continue the work started in 2014.”

 Foreign Relations:

NDP Policies

• Strong support of Ukraine.
• Cautious support of Israel’s right to defend itself + belief in a two-state solution. That support is rather negated by the “illegal occupation” and “genocide” accusations leveled at Israel by the NDP.
• Promises to stand up to China and call out human rights abuses.
• Promises to increase international development assistance to 0.7% of GDP
• Intentions to solve every social problem that exists around the world – poverty, working conditions, gender equality, global peace and justice, indigenous communities, AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, nuclear disarmament and climate change. Also, be good corporate citizens abroad, and don’t sell weapons to anyone who isn’t a certified good guy. 

Conservative Policies

• Crackdown on human smuggling.
• ensure that the Official Development Assistance envelope of spending will increase in a steady and predictable manner. 
• promote the universal right of religious freedom internationally and advocate for persecuted religious minorities around the world 
• advance the country’s economic interests while promoting human rights and individual freedom. 
• Recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. 
• Strongly supportive of Israel’s right to defend itself (On a wide range of issues surrounding the conflict in Gaza, Poilievre has adopted positions which a University of Toronto political scientist has called “virtually indistinguishable from the politics of the state of Israel in Netanyahu’s articulation.”)
• Among CANZUK countries (Canada, Australia, New Zealand, UK), promote free trade, visa-free citizen mobility, reciprocal health care, coordinated security programs.
• Expand trade and military alliances in Asia and strengthen our relationships with like-minded democracies
• Advocate several aggressive and defensive policies against China.

Liberal Policies

• Very supportive of Ukraine, although a tad slow to deliver.
• Struggling with a fine line between supporting Israel and sympathizing with Palestine.
• Support a two state solution in Israel
• Recently supported a UN motion critical of Israel’s handling of Gaza.
• Very supportive of a CANZUK alliance and trading bloc.

Tax  and Fiscal Policies

NDP Policies

• Increase corporate taxes
• Increase the top tax bracket marginal rate
• Increase capital gains tax
• Impose a wealth tax
• Close tax loopholes
• Fund better tax enforcement.
• Reduce GST

Conservative Policy

• strengthen the internal audit and controllership functions of government
•  Balanced budget legislation 
• Sustainable fiscal policy to eliminate the deficit and steadily repay the national debt.
• Tax code simplification, fewer tax brackets 
• streamline government services and eliminate waste
• Reduced taxes (personal, corporate, capital gains, taxes, payroll)
• Income splitting for tax purposes.

Liberal Policy (documents from 2021 and 2024

• Raise corporate income taxes on the largest, most profitable banks and insurance companies.
• Create a minimum tax rule for tax avoiders
• Implement a tax on luxury cars, boats, and planes.
• Significantly increase the resources of the Canada Revenue Agency to combat aggressive tax planning and tax avoidance.
• implement a global minimum tax.
• Eliminate flow through shares for oil, gas, and coal projects to help promote clean growth and Canada’s transition to a net-zero economy.
• Implement a national anti-flipping tax and move forward with Canada’s first ever national tax on non-resident, non-Canadians on vacant land and residential property.
• Move forward with a national tax on vaping products.
• lower the small business tax rate from 10.5% to 9

Law and Order

NDP Policies (from 2021 policy summary)

• Increasing RCMP numbers & resources. 
• Reforming the administration of the RCMP and strengthen mechanisms for complaints and accountability. 
•  Stopping the smuggling of illegal firearms …implement a ban on handguns. 
• Ending racial profiling and cancelling measures such as the Anti-Terrorism Act, which arbitrarily restrict the freedom of Canadian citizens. 
• Enhancing oversight of all federal intelligence agencies by parliamentarians. 
• Enhance community policing

Conservative Policies

• No religious or cultural courts in Canada. 
• Several mandatory sentencing recommendations that will result in more incarceration.
• reverse the burden of proof, so that members of a criminal organization (and not the Crown) will have to prove at the time of seizure that the goods were not acquired through criminal acts committed for organized crime 
• violent or serious repeat offenders 14 and over to be tried as adults. 
• Cost controls and income earning opportunities for individual inmates and for prison institutions to reduce the burden on the taxpayer.

Liberal Policy (2021 post-Covid plans)

• adopt virtual means such as the use of virtual remote proceedings and expanded use of the telewarrant process.
• Further support technological modernization of federal courtrooms and tribunals.
• Support provinces and territories in the digitization and modernization of their court systems.