As Joe Biden has been known to say, “Show me your budget, and I’ll tell you what you value.” The 2022 Liberal budget had a definite dose of NDP values, with quite a bit of amplified crossover reflected in the bottom line. The first of four budgets set to reflect the power-for-predictability deal struck by the two parties in March, it provided Canadians with an early taste of a certain kind of power sharing. 

By John Delacourt and Daniel Komesch

Perhaps we all should have seen it coming, given how quickly the political landscape has changed over the last two years. An incremental but considerable shift in the perception of the role government can play in our lives was not something that could be easily read by seat count in the House or in the regional, partisan divide that was largely replicated with the results of the 2021 federal election. Yet it was definitely happening on affordability issues. You could put it down to the higher resolution lens put on our most vulnerable, be it those in long-term care facilities or those unable, as Liberal MP Joel Lightbound memorably put it, to work from their laptops at their cottages. This signal shift was validated and confirmed by frequent polling and by the consultations the government has rolled out on a number of key policy fronts – both before and after the last campaign.

Still, on the night of March 22, when word of a Liberal caucus meeting discussing some kind of accord with the NDP first got out, it came as a shock. Not only to journalists but to many (like the two of us) working closely with this government on a daily basis. It has been a given that the Trudeau government only leaks information intentionally, and after more than five years, that discipline shows no sign of slackening. Jagmeet Singh’s NDP team has proven to be equally disciplined. But by 8 pm that night, with a number of confirmations, it was clear this could be a development of major proportions and it seemed to come out of nowhere. 

In moments like this, attempts at pattern recognition are inevitable. Some of those intimately involved in these conversations between the Liberals and the NDP included NDP National Director Anne McGrath and Trudeau Chief of Staff Katie Telford, who were around (and in no minor roles, either) in 2008, when an attempted coalition government involving Jack Layton and Stéphane Dion almost came together from a vote of non-confidence on that year’s fall fiscal update. So, was this perhaps, as some of the Conservative pundits first tweeting out their reaction would suggest, a replication of the coalition effort? Unfinished business from the promise of an old accord?

Well, no. Not at all. What has emerged is a compact forged in crisis and uncertainty, built upon a tacit acknowledgement that the stability to advance upon macroeconomic strategy and ambitious platform commitments like dental care and pharmacare would require some degree of certainty. And certainty is a commodity that cannot measurably increase in value in one budget cycle.

The deal — Delivering for Canadians Now, A Supply and Confidence Agreement — outlines the areas on which the two parties will collaborate to make progress, including on healthcare, affordability, climate change, reconciliation, labour, tax policy, and democratic reform. 

Key for the NDP were some of the bigger-ticket spending items, such as dental care and pharmacare of course, but also a more aggressive approach to addressing housing affordability. Of the $4.3 billion over seven years to Indigenous housing, the NDP claim their efforts increased the Liberals’ commitment by $2.3 billion of that. They have also stated their efforts made available the $1.5 billion the government committed to extend a “rapid housing” program to build at least 6,000 new affordable units. Add claims that $475 million was committed to provide a $500 boost to federal housing benefits for Canadians in need, and still another $458 million geared to provide green home renovation funds to low-income earners. It all adds up to something like $15 billion the Liberals, they say, would not have spent to address these urgent affordability issues. 

That was the alleged price tag, in American dollars, estimated for Trump’s wall to keep illegal migrants from coming in. Both parties can comfortably draw that comparison, or contrast, in the coming months.

Which is not the rhetorical stretch it once was. The shadow of a certain kind of conservative populism was no small consideration for both parties over the last few months. To endure the weeks of the Ottawa blockades and to see how a more centrist conservativism, embodied in Erin O’Toole’s leadership, ultimately proved vulnerable to these interests sent up a warning flare. Progressive agendas were at risk like never before. 

Trudeau’s team have had no small exposure to this vulnerability over the years. More legislation was tied up or amended in the Senate, even when they had a majority, than they had ever anticipated. In minority parliaments, the Opposition has used committees to expose and embarrass the government. As ideological divides in parliament sharpened, the space within which collaboration was possible narrowed. In the dark of winter in 2020, made even darker by the pandemic’s long shadow, it became clear that there was a cloud of toxicity hanging over Parliament that was only going to grow thicker as time passed. 

While the latest federal budget certainly has more than a few NDP fingerprints across its pages, it’s worthwhile noting that the party has been markedly successful in leveraging its power in both this parliament and the last. For example, Singh can take credit for pushing the Liberals to expand pandemic supports and establish paid sick days for workers. 

For many voters, Singh has built his reputation as a champion for everyday Canadians. Now, with more attention in these places, on these people, and in these communities, garnering support for action on NDP policy has been all that much easier. On the governing agreement specifically, Singh has stated it’s a way for the NDP to use their power to get “real help to the people that need it.”

However, on many battles that Singh and the NDP have taken on, a familiar guard was often thrown up – jurisdiction. Singh has often been criticized by his fellow members in the House of Commons for hitching himself to issues that, by way of the constitution, should be dealt with in provincial legislatures, not in Ottawa. 

When NDP MP Jack Harris’ private member’s motion to establish dental care was debated in the House, to no one’s surprise, the Bloc immediately honed in on issues of jurisdiction. The Liberal position recognized the need to include dental in federal health coverage but suggested that it needed to be studied further before acting. 

This is perhaps how the NDP’s leverage might emerge most significantly – forcing Liberal speed to delivery. This might prove to be the brightest orange pillar in the budget. 

This will be defined in the boldest hues in housing policy. They can say, with considerable credibility, that the Liberals’ 2021 platform focus was largely on home ownership. They can claim they’ve bolstered these efforts with commitments to affordable, rental, and co-op housing, and in the $475 million dedicated to providing a one-time, $500 payment to those facing housing affordability challenges. It’s not just about putting home ownership in reach for young people, it’s also about supporting those who can’t, or won’t, take the home ownership route. 

On pharmacare, too, the NDP can credibly claim they’re pushing the Liberals forward. While pharmacare has appeared in a number of Liberal budgets, advances have been slow. Now the Liberals are compelled to table pharmacare legislation by 2023. Surely, the NDP will be standing behind the Liberal caucus, prod in hand, ensuring they move this forward at pace. 

Of course, the NDP’s influence on delivering supports for workers can’t be overlooked, and in Budget 2022 there are notable commitments made on this front. A new union-led advisory table will be established for workers to advise government on the supports and investments needed to navigate a changing labour market, which might include funding transitioning from legacy to emerging sectors, for example. Budget 2022 also extends the supports that were provided to seasonal workers during the pandemic, and commitments are made to explore how seasonal workers can be better supported in the future. 

Don’t expect the NDP to be passive supporters of all Liberal policy, either. Singh came out after the budget and stated that he was disappointed about the Liberals’ failure to provide more funding for the climate crisis and for health care and that his party will continue to use their influence to push the Liberals forward – or leftward – on these fronts. 

Singh was particularly vocal about the budget’s tax credit for carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) – a measure that will cost the government between $500 million and $1.5 billion yearly until 2030. For the NDP Leader, funding CCUS amounts to a subsidy to Canada’s fossil fuel producers and largest emitters.

The day before the budget, Singh was critical too, noting on Twitter as the Liberals announced the approval of a new offshore drilling project on the heels of another dire report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), that, “in seven years Justin Trudeau has not been a climate leader.”

What’s next?

If the Liberal-NDP accord does indeed last until 2025, Trudeau can stride to the polls in the next federal election having been prime minister for a decade – 10 years, less two weeks, to be exact. Yet, the life of the accord is genuinely precarious, and while we’ve now seen it out of the womb, we’ve yet to see if it can walk or talk.

While one poll shows Canadians are generally receptive of the agreement, only a slim majority believe it will lead to better policy outcomes. With long shadows still hanging over the Canadian and global economies, including inflation, war and climate change, the public’s patience won’t run long. 

Neither will the patience of MPs. Members on both sides have voiced skepticism already, and if they don’t believe they can sell this to their constituents, their voices won’t stay quiet. 

A further unknown to the success of the accord is the premiers. Both dental and pharmacare will require negotiations, and while the days of “the resistance” such as on the carbon tax, are now over, cranky first ministers could still throw up their own walls for political leverage.

The pharmacare bill is slated to be introduced in 2023 and there are two key provincial elections set to be held that same year – Alberta and Manitoba. The provincial NDP have a real shot at winning both. Should those provinces turn orange, the threat of obstruction would be greatly diminished – at least on the prairies. 

Despite its precariousness, the agreement is a welcome change for many. The last Parliament ended with an air of acrimony. Neither Singh nor Trudeau can afford to be so intransigent, given that they’ll be meeting quarterly. In turn, House leaders and whips will meet at regular intervals, and a committee of both parties has been established to oversee adherence to the agreement and progress. If it succeeds, it won’t be an accident. 

It is, of course, a global phenomenon that our politics have become more polarized and political ideologies more extreme and entrenched. You could say this accord is a notably Canadian exception. With one budget down, and the mutual desire Trudeau and Singh both so evidently share to deliver help to those who need it most, this melding of red and orange could yet be one of the most significant political moments of our time.   

Contributing writer John Delacourt, Vice President and Group Leader at Hill + Knowlton Public Affairs in Ottawa, is a former director of the Liberal research bureau.

Daniel Komesch is an account director at Hill+Knowlton Strategies.