Searching for consensus in a divided country

OTTAWA—Sometimes people pull together in hard times, but the political fault lines in Canada only seem to be hardening in the tumultuous aftermath of the pandemic. The response to Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland's latest attempt to balance the country’s priorities in the face of gathering regional, economic, and political headwinds is a reminder of how divided Canadians have become along conservative versus progressive lines. Freeland’s March 28 budget was long on vision and short on immediate help for Canadian households. After several years of handing out billions of dollars in direct support payments to keep individuals and business afloat during COVID-19, the federal Liberals this time prioritized a long-term industrial strategy linked to intensified climate action. As expected, Freeland unrolled a package of spending programs—$21-billion in net new spending over five years—based around the notion of building a post-carbon economy for the decades ahead and staying competitive with the United States. Also, in line with Ottawa's agreement with the premiers, health-care transfers of an additional $46-billion over 10 years represented another big outlay, along with $13-billion for dental care to help non-rich, uninsured people. There are also several items mentioned in the budget that are meant to do something to address wealth inequality. These included a change in minimum tax payments aimed at the very rich, a tax on corporate share buybacks, and less generous tax treatment of stock dividends earned by banks. Freeland also tried to address the affordability issue without sparking more inflation. The only headline item here was the so-called Grocery Rebate, an extension of the GST rebate allocating $2.5-billion to assist about 11 million low-income households. Not surprisingly, Freeland’s affordability measures were widely panned as inadequate. And, in a new Angus Reid Institute poll, only 51 per cent of respondents in a "terrible" financial situation said they thought the GST rebate extension will help their household. Of those who said they were "in bad shape" financially, only 29 per cent said the measure would be of help. Even so, the government, which has been regularly accused by the federal Conservatives of causing the inflation crisis through its spending programs, is seen by 45 per cent of Canadians as spending too much in the budget, according to the Angus Reid Institute survey. Only 33 per cent said the government is taking the right approach “investing in industries and supporting lower-income Canadians.” Among Conservative voters, 83 per cent said the government is taking the wrong approach and should balance the budget. Interestingly, only 57 per cent of Liberal voters and 54 per cent of NDP voters told the pollster the government's approach is the right one. Freeland offered tens of billions of dollars in tax credits and potential funding for clean-tech manufacturing, clean electricity, and hydrogen—initiatives welcomed by some in the business community. But four out of 10 respondents nationally told the Angus Reid Institute that this spending was “an unnecessary move that subsidizes business costs.” This view was most pronounced among Conservatives, 62 per cent of whom said the spending measures were unnecessary, compared to 25 per cent of Conservatives who said they were needed. These kinds of results appear to echo the polarized national voting picture that has been a constant, with some variations, for many months. Overall, this budget, with the NDP in the background, is in keeping with the left-leaning, progressive social-economic framework and climate campaign Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has put front and centre. NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, who has established a de facto coalition with the Liberals, is actually touring the country to remind people of the NDP’s ability to influence the Liberal minority government on measures such as dental care and the extended GST rebate. Despite the lack of extensive affordability help in this budget, the Liberals can in fact point to a number of significant measures they have brought in over the past seven years to help families. Among them are support for low-income renters, the upgraded Canada Workers Benefit, increased Old Age Security payments, a much more generous Canada Childcare Benefit, and reduced daycare costs. But, whatever the reason, the Trudeau government doesn’t seem to be getting a huge amount of credit for these efforts to make Canada fairer. And the why not is all the more pertinent for the governing party at a time when culture war issues and factions thriving on anger, paranoia, and lies are eclipsing already meagre policy-related consensus-building. And in this budget strategy, the Liberals are asking a lot of Canadians coping with a failing health system, skyrocketing food and housing costs, rising mortgage payments, and the prospect of a recession. It will be instructive to see if Trudeau’s and Freeland’s vision—for all its strategic sense and commitment to a better future—will get much traction in today’s volatile, splintered political climate. Les Whittington is a regular columnist for The Hill Times. The Hill Times