Conventional wisdom says it never pays for a political party to release its platform early. Let’s just say that in this election, the parties avoided tragedy. The Liberals released theirs on
April 19
, nine days before the vote; the Conservatives waited until
April 22
, six days before the vote — and after more than seven million Canadians had already cast their ballot — to release the blue plan. What does this frenzy of last-minute reading mean for us who live in the nation’s capital?
The short answer is not much. The long answer, after reading the platforms about as carefully as I could, given how many toothpicks I went through trying to keep my eyelids from falling to the floor from tedium, is also not much.
Except for the obvious: The prime minister will be a local MP, likely Liberal Mark Carney in Nepean, the way things are going. And if Conservative Pierre Poilievre keeps his Carleton seat, then both leaders will be local MPs. (Unless the Tories boot him from the leadership position for having blown a 20-point lead.)
But beyond that, what can the major party platforms tell us about what measures might impact us locally?
Both the red and the blue platforms contain ambitious measures to build hundreds of thousands of new homes a year across the country including, presumably, in Ottawa. Whether you believe one plan is better or more realistic than the other is a fine thing to debate but it’s clear both major parties want more houses.
Nobody has anything useful to say about upping their financial contribution to our beleaguered public transit system, or about Mayor Mark Sutcliffe’s
“Fairness for Ottawa”
campaign unless it’s in the tiny print written in invisible ink.
I like the Liberals’ idea to recruit researchers and academics (anti-Trump Americans are a good place to start looking), and the plan to have one licensing system for health care professionals so that a doctor licensed in one province or territory can practise anywhere else in the country. That might help address the local doctor shortage. Oh, and the systematic review of interprovincial trade barriers with a view to liberalize trade within Canada starting this summer. Also, presumably, good for us locally, if it works.
I am not especially impressed with the Conservative platform, certainly not the parts having to do with consecutive life sentences or mandatory drug treatment, to say nothing of the use of Section 33 of the Charter to keep those unconstitutional measures in force. The party’s promise to “trim the bloated bureaucracy” doesn’t sound too Ottawa-friendly, compared with the Liberals’ stated goal of
“capping, not cutting”
the public service.
There is one promise in the blue platform that I like: review hiring standards in the federal public service to allow some people to get hired without a
university degree
. As usual, the devil is in the details and we don’t have many, but in principle this is an interesting idea. It would be weird to hire someone as a biologist who didn’t have a degree in biology. And it would be unproductive to use this measure to bash higher education. But for jobs where a good attitude, a willingness to work and ability to learn are what you need to advance, why not dispense with the degree requirement?
Such a change would impact Ottawa in a positive way, given that the bulk of federal public service jobs are here. It would provide opportunities for young people to get started in the public sector and grow from there.
This unusual campaign is focused on the threat from the United States, not so much on local issues. But those matter, too. I’m not here to tell you how to use your voice, but I do hope we collectively pick the best team to get us through this rough patch. Please vote!
Brigitte Pellerin (they/them) is an Ottawa writer.
