Canadian Politics

A05(b) - Social Policy

Date: Jun 3 | Time: 03:30pm to 05:00pm | Location:

Chair/Président/Présidente : André Lecours (Université d'Ottawa)

Discussant/Commentateur/Commentatrice : André Lecours (Université d'Ottawa)

Explaining Social Policy Expansion: The Case of the Justin Trudeau Governments: Daniel Béland (McGill University), Olivier Jacques (Université de Montréal), Peter Graefe (McMaster University)
Abstract: Since late 2015, the successive Justin Trudeau governments have brought about significant social policy expansion, including the adoption of new programs or the expansion of existing social policies in areas such as childcare, dental care, family benefits, old-age security, and income support for the working poor. This expansion caught many political observers by surprise and contrasts with the era of “permanent austerity” (Paul Pierson) that has characterized social policies in advanced democracies since the early 1980s. Why did the Liberal Party of Canada (LPC) under Justin Trudeau proceed to such significant social policy expansion? We argue that this social policy expansion can be explained by an alignment of electoral interests, institutions, and ideas. We argue that the LPC’s program drifted towards the left to resemble the NDP’s platforms in 2015 and to attract voters that demanded more spending after a decade of conservative governments. We also argue that the presence of the centre-left Bloc Québécois incentivized the LPC to increase public spending, while preventing the rise of the Conservative Party in Quebec’s rural ridings. We contend that this expansionary dynamic was also facilitated by the presence of vertical fiscal imbalance, which exacerbated public demand for social policy expansion as a response to provincial inaction and helped the federal government to fund its social policy expansion by deficits rather than new or higher taxes. Finally, we argue that social policy expansion was enabled by a shift in the policy consensus from neoliberal budgetary restraint to an emphasis on fighting inequality and stimulating demand.

A Right to a Guaranteed Basic Income? How a Guaranteed Basic Income has been Framed and The Prospect of Charter Claims to Support Adoption: Ryan Catney (University of Waterloo), Gerard Boychuk (University of Waterloo), Nancy Hills (University of Waterloo)
Abstract: Discussion of a guaranteed basic income (GBI) emerged in mainstream political discourse in the 1960s and has been resurgent in recent years following the success of the Canada Emergency Response Benefit during the COVID-19 pandemic and the introduction of legislation in Parliament to develop a framework for a GBI. While the concept of a GBI is not new, the way advocates have framed the need for a GBI continues to evolve. There are two dominant framings explaining why adopting a GBI is desirable. The first views a GBI as a matter of rights, usually premised on the argument that a minimum standard of economic security is a right, possibly guaranteed under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Supporters of this framing view a GBI as an anti-poverty measure and a right of citizenship, much like Medicare. The other prominent view eschews discussion of rights in favour of promoting the economic benefits of a GBI, such as the protection it offers workers in an increasing era of automation and workplace uncertainty. This paper asks: how has a GBI been framed in Parliament and among advocacy groups? Through a content analysis of parliamentary debates and stakeholder’s websites over the last 20 years, this paper will document how the framing of a GBI has evolved over time and determine whether there is a connection between the choice of frame and willingness to make a positive-rights Charter argument in favour of GBI.

Building a Pan-Canadian System: Overcoming Constitutional Barriers to Implement the Canada-wide Early Learning and Child Care Plan: Kenya Thompson (York University), Emma Willert (York University)
Abstract: In Budget 2021, Canada launched the Canada-Wide Early Learning and Child Care Agreement (CWELCC), a policy incentive to provinces and territories to build an affordable, accessible, non-profit, and universal system of early learning and child care nationwide, at an average daily cost of $10 to families. While the federal government has successfully negotiated bilateral funding agreements with each of its subnational partners, delivering a national child care system has proven challenging. Affordable spaces are sparse, critically-needed space expansion is slow, the early childhood education workforce is in crisis, private interests loom large, and care quality ultimately varies—to name only a few challenges. The resulting patchwork of 13 disparate child care programs across the country calls into question whether the CWELCC can be called a “Canada-wide” system at all. Examining the jurisdictional and political challenges that complicate the rollout of the CWELCC, this paper considers the challenges and limitations to social policy innovation at the federal level. It highlights the obstacles Canada’s constitutional structure presents to building a universal child care system, and the steps necessary to overcome them. This paper provides a detailed policy map to ensure access to affordable, inclusive, high-quality child care for all children across Canada, located where families need them, staffed by well-supported and trained early childhood educators. Thompson and Willert argue that, by exercising its constitutional ability to manage the outcome of the CWELCC in each jurisdiction, Canada can fulfil its vision of creating a truly pan-Canadian early learning and child care system.