Unpacking party platform strategies, timing important in a tight two-way race

I spent most of my political career as a ground war operative specializing in byelections, get out the vote efforts, election readiness committees, nomination races, and leadership campaigns. I’ve knocked on doors in too many ridings to count and I’ll admit to sometimes mocking policy teams for overestimating the value of their platforms. As many politicos will agree, voters at the doors rarely raise something in a party platform as the main motivation to why they are voting a certain way—I can truthfully count those instances on one hand. Still, the strategy, timing, and political considerations behind platforms have always been of interest to me. And on multiple occasions, I had the privilege of being pulled-in to gut check these plans by policy teams. Like many in the Ottawa bubble, I’ve studied the approaches and themes to the various party platforms released during this federal general election and have sought to assess their underlying strategies. These are important to understand, particularly in the tight two-way race that we are seeing today. The NDP and Conservatives were brilliant in releasing their platforms early, taking away the opportunity for opposing parties to exaggerate their approaches (huge tax hikes, massive cuts to public services, etc.). By removing the potential for speculation early, they forced the Liberals to pivot in the first week of the campaign. They also demonstrated to voters that they are ready for a campaign. The Liberals, on the other hand, clearly took the time to reorient their platform. They had this opportunity given their recent budget already laid out many of their policy priorities: continuing to fight COVID-19, national childcare, climate action, supporting women and BIPOC entrepreneurs, to name a few. By holding off on the platform release, it allowed them to pivot and respond to emerging issues and address gaps in the other party platforms. Their platform team should be congratulated on this point—it is never easy to change direction, especially given the short timelines of this election period. Of note, Liberal platform commitments on improving patient care and hiring more doctors were clearly in response to the Nova Scotia election results. Although it seems extraordinary for a federal government to focus on what is traditionally provincial jurisdiction, our current pandemic reality and the associated political considerations validated the need to take such an approach. In comparison to other platforms, the Liberal plan is fully costed. While one would expect such an approach by the Conservatives, their early release may have hampered their ability to provide such detail. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will surely point to this over and over again in the coming days. On costing, the early release of the Conservative and NDP platforms provided other parties the opportunity to refer questions pertaining to their platforms to the Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO). As of Sept. 1, the PBO published responses to 12 party requests—11 of which were requested by the Liberal campaign. The late release of the Liberal platform may hamper opposition efforts to criticize their numbers. These PBO responses may set the stage for some political fodder over the coming days. Of further note, the Liberal platform didn’t include big-ticket items that were voted upon and approved by their supporter base at their recent convention. Items like universal national pharmacare and various approaches to universal basic income were avoided. While this is understandable given the campaign’s current dynamics, this could lead to a disgruntled Liberal supporter base over the short and long term. What is not included in party platforms is often just as telling as what is. Gaps in the Liberal platform on new approaches to universal national pharmacare or a national pharmaceutical security of supply strategy are indicative of two strategic considerations. First off, by costing their platform, the Liberals wanted to manage the overall ticket price in hopes of countering any Conservative accusations that Liberals are “seeking to spend like drunken sailors.” Secondly, by not making new commitments on items like universal national pharmacare, it seems quite clear (at least to me) that the Liberals are setting the stage for obvious gaps to be filled by others. On this latter point, there is an emerging scenario where a Liberal minority outcome in the election could demand that the Liberals work out some form of an accord with another party. Universal national pharmacare could be appealing to both the Bloc Québécois (Quebec has a program but could use more health funding to offset their costs) and the NDP (who may be tempted to push for a national dental plan to be included). While the outcome of the election won’t be clear until Sept 20 (or perhaps longer), the underlying strategies of the various party platforms provide a glimpse of the potential scenarios ahead of us. Pundits and stakeholders would be wise to assess where various party platform commitments align. We could be in for a complicated new Parliament this fall that will need to immediately address the impacts of an aggressive fourth wave of COVID-19 and reassure Canadians there is indeed light at the end of the tunnel. Pierre Cyr is vice-president of public affairs at FleishmanHillard HighRoad, and previously served as director of board and stakeholder relations at Canadian Blood Services. He also served two Ontario premiers, a federal leader, and eight ministers, including an Ontario minister of health and long-term care. The Hill Times