If the 44th Parliament can hold it together until April 28, it will become the longest-lasting minority Parliament in modern Canadian history.
This Parliament’s longevity is already well above average — 823 days as of Thursday. The 10 minority Parliaments that existed between 1957 and 2021 lasted an average of 526 days.
The chance to make history isn’t the best reason the Liberals and NDP have to reach an agreement on pharmacare, but there’s something to be said — maybe even a lot — for stability.
The confidence-and-supply agreement between the Liberals and New Democrats — the deal that has helped keep this Parliament on track — is unprecedented at the federal level. It can still feel like a live experiment meant to answer the question of whether two Canadian political parties are capable of sustaining at least some level of cooperation for a meaningful period of time.
In some countries, that sort of thing is more or less expected. In Ottawa, the end of the Liberal-NDP deal has been anticipated almost from the moment it was signed, and a fresh round of questions about its possible demise has popped up every month or so.
The issue of pharmacare has produced the most speculation to date. And though it’s hard to tell exactly how great the differences between the government and the NDP are, or have been, it’s probably a mistake to dismiss the possibility that this could be the end of the Liberal-NDP deal.
“We’re working with the NDP and I’m confident we’re going to get it,” Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told CBC Radio’s Mainstreet Cape Breton on Thursday.
What pharmacare is about and what it would mean
There seem to be two broad issues: the wording of legislation that would set out the broad parameters of a national pharmacare program and immediate federal funding for specific classes of treatment. While it’s not clear how many areas are up for negotiation, the NDP says it’s focused on making sure contraception and drugs to treat diabetes are covered.
Whatever happens, what comes of these negotiations will not be a full national program covering all pharmaceuticals. The Liberals do not appear to have the fiscal room to cover that and the NDP has not demanded it. The actual deal between the parties only called for “progress” toward such a program and the passage of enabling legislation.
But if the parties do come to an agreement, the NDP would be able to claim with a straight face that it probably wouldn’t have happened if New Democrats hadn’t been in a position to exploit some leverage.
WATCH: Singh warns of consequences if government doesn’t meet pharmacare deadline
Jagmeet Singh warns of repercussions if Liberals miss another pharmacare deadline
15 days ago
Duration 0:58
NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh says there will be consequences for the Liberals if they miss the new deadline to table pharmacare legislation on March 1.
The Liberals have shown some interest in pharmacare specifically, and reducing drug costs more generally, since 2015. In 2018, the federal government drafted a former Ontario cabinet minister to advise it on a path forward. But it’s never been clear how high pharmacare ranked on the Liberal government’s list of priorities.
The same can be said of dental care — an issue that was entirely absent from the last three Liberal election platforms.
In the Ottawa bubble, where memories are short and attention spans are shorter, such things are often swept aside not long after the official announcement. But dental care and pharmacare are real things the NDP could point to for years to come — rare achievements for a smaller party in the House of Commons. And while NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh’s ability to convince Canadians to vote for the NDP remains in question, he could end up with a record of legislative accomplishment to rival any of his predecessors.
The NDP could still see plausible reasons to walk away from the confidence-and-supply agreement. Doing so might allow the New Democrats to put more political room between themselves and an unpopular government. And if the government was forced to negotiate the passage of legislation on a case-by-case basis, the NDP might be able to negotiate even greater concessions.
But the Liberals also would be free to work with the Bloc Quebecois (it’s safe to assume the Conservatives would rather not be seen agreeing with the Liberals on anything, and perhaps vice-versa). And while the demise of the Liberal-NDP deal wouldn’t immediately precipitate an election, it would significantly increase the odds of an election happening sooner rather than later.
Reasons for sticking together — or splitting apart
As things stand, it’s not obvious why either the Liberals or New Democrats should be eager for an election to happen in the near future. The latest projection from the Writ’s Eric Grenier has the Liberals falling to 72 seats and the NDP winning 27 seats, just two more than they currently hold. The Conservatives, meanwhile, would win 201 seats.
Both the Liberals and New Democrats might benefit from having as many tangible legislative accomplishments as possible to point to in the next election campaign. But if there’s a decent chance the next election will result in a majority Conservative government — a government that likely would do very different things — it might be wise for the Liberals and NDP to use the time remaining to advance as many of their policy priorities as possible.
Justin Trudeau and Jagmeet Singh take part in the federal election English-language Leaders debate on Thursday, Sept. 9, 2021. The parties have compelling reasons to stick together for now — and equally compelling reasons to call it quits. (Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press)
And for the sake of getting things done, the government might be better off maintaining the confidence-and-supply agreement. Obstruction, delay and procedural wrangling are so commonplace in Parliament that having enough support to periodically push things along, or step around roadblocks, is a valuable asset.
“One of the really important things that we’ve seen over the past couple of years in Ottawa, and [are] continuing to see, is what happens when progressive parties work together to deliver for Canadians,” Trudeau said Thursday while sidestepping a reporter’s question about the state of negotiations on pharmacare.
If the prime minister wants to be able to continue boasting about that, he has all the more reason to keep the confidence-and-supply agreement in place.
Any number of factors can cause a deal between two political parties to fall apart, such as real differences over policy, political calculation or simple miscommunication. But even if this agreement collapses at the end of this month, it’s still fair to wonder whether the future of Parliament will look more like this kind of cooperation than not.
The record for the longest-lasting Parliament since 1960 is currently held by the 39th Parliament, which survived for 888 days between 2008 and 2011. The longevity of that Parliament, presided over by a minority Conservative government, was not attributable to any agreement between parties. Instead, it would be fair to say it survived in large part because of the weakness of the opposition parties — and the fact that someone always blinked whenever a confidence vote turned parliamentary democracy into an elaborate game of chicken.
If the Liberals and NDP want to continue demonstrating that there’s a better way to do things, they only need to find a way to agree on the broad terms of pharmacare and some immediate steps to expand drug coverage.
Quebec legislature member Youri Chassin has announced he’s leaving the Coalition Avenir Québec government to sit as an Independent.
He announced the decision shortly after writing an open letter criticizing Premier François Legault’s government for abandoning its principles of smaller government.
In the letter published in Le Journal de Montréal and Le Journal de Québec, Chassin accused the party of falling back on what he called the old formula of throwing money at problems instead of looking to do things differently.
Chassin says public services are more fragile than ever, despite rising spending that pushed the province to a record $11-billion deficit projected in the last budget.
He is the second CAQ member to leave the party in a little more than one week, after economy and energy minister Pierre Fitzgibbon announced Sept. 4 he would leave because he lost motivation to do his job.
Chassin says he has no intention of joining another party and will instead sit as an Independent until the end of his term.
He has represented the Saint-Jérôme riding since the CAQ rose to power in 2018, but has not served in cabinet.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 12, 2024.
MONTREAL – NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh says he will not be taking advice from Pierre Poilievre after the Conservative leader challenged him to bring down government.
“I say directly to Pierre Poilievre: I’m not going to listen to you,” said Singh on Wednesday, accusing Poilievre of wanting to take away dental-care coverage from Canadians, among other things.
“I’m not going to listen to your advice. You want to destroy people’s lives, I want to build up a brighter future.”
Earlier in the day, Poilievre challenged Singh to commit to voting non-confidence in the government, saying his party will force a vote in the House of Commons “at the earliest possibly opportunity.”
“I’m asking Jagmeet Singh and the NDP to commit unequivocally before Monday’s byelections: will they vote non-confidence to bring down the costly coalition and trigger a carbon tax election, or will Jagmeet Singh sell out Canadians again?” Poilievre said.
“It’s put up or shut up time for the NDP.”
While Singh rejected the idea he would ever listen to Poilievre, he did not say how the NDP would vote on a non-confidence motion.
“I’ve said on any vote, we’re going to look at the vote and we’ll make our decision. I’m not going to say our decision ahead of time,” he said.
Singh’s top adviser said on Tuesday the NDP leader is not particularly eager to trigger an election, even as the Conservatives challenge him to do just that.
Anne McGrath, Singh’s principal secretary, says there will be more volatility in Parliament and the odds of an early election have risen.
“I don’t think he is anxious to launch one, or chomping at the bit to have one, but it can happen,” she said in an interview.
New Democrat MPs are in a second day of meetings in Montreal as they nail down a plan for how to navigate the minority Parliament this fall.
The caucus retreat comes one week after Singh announced the party has left the supply-and-confidence agreement with the governing Liberals.
It’s also taking place in the very city where New Democrats are hoping to pick up a seat on Monday, when voters go to the polls in Montreal’s LaSalle—Émard—Verdun. A second byelection is being held that day in the Winnipeg riding of Elmwood—Transcona, where the NDP is hoping to hold onto a seat the Conservatives are also vying for.
While New Democrats are seeking to distance themselves from the Liberals, they don’t appear ready to trigger a general election.
Singh signalled on Tuesday that he will have more to say Wednesday about the party’s strategy for the upcoming sitting.
He is hoping to convince Canadians that his party can defeat the federal Conservatives, who have been riding high in the polls over the last year.
Singh has attacked Poilievre as someone who would bring back Harper-style cuts to programs that Canadians rely on, including the national dental-care program that was part of the supply-and-confidence agreement.
The Canadian Press has asked Poilievre’s office whether the Conservative leader intends to keep the program in place, if he forms government after the next election.
With the return of Parliament just days away, the NDP is also keeping in mind how other parties will look to capitalize on the new makeup of the House of Commons.
The Bloc Québécois has already indicated that it’s written up a list of demands for the Liberals in exchange for support on votes.
The next federal election must take place by October 2025 at the latest.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 11, 2024.
Montreal Mayor Valérie Plante is defending her decision to turn off comments on her social media accounts — with an announcement on social media.
She posted screenshots to X this morning of vulgar names she’s been called on the platform, and says comments on her posts for months have been dominated by insults, to the point that she decided to block them.
Montreal’s Opposition leader and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association have criticized Plante for limiting freedom of expression by restricting comments on her X and Instagram accounts.
They say elected officials who use social media should be willing to hear from constituents on those platforms.
However, Plante says some people may believe there is a fundamental right to call someone offensive names and to normalize violence online, but she disagrees.
Her statement on X is closed to comments.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 11, 2024.
