The pandemic cut a swath through our public services, and they still haven’t recovered. Health care and community service workers have been working flat out for five years in a system plagued by funding shortfalls, workforce shortages, entrenched service silos, and the steady creep of privatization.
Yet concerns about the state of Canada’s care economy and the gaping holes in our social safety net haven’t commanded the attention they deserve in the federal election, as the ongoing trade war with the United States continues to consume much—if not all—of our collective political attention.
These worries haven’t been forgotten by the millions without a family doctor, the families fearful of the safety of loved ones in long term care, the parents desperate for an affordable child care spot, or the students who are dropping out of schools because they can’t pay skyrocketing tuition fees and housing costs at the same time.
Where do the parties stand on health care?
Until one week before election day—well after the leaders debates—voters had been left to parse random press releases and throw away lines at press conferences for answers. As of April 22, we have costed platforms from the parties. Better late than never.
During the 2021 election, as COVID-19 raged, health care was a central plank in party platforms—not so in 2025. The public conversation has been largely limited to whether or not a future government would maintain, enhance or kill the new child care, dental care or pharmacare programs.
Since then, the Liberal government has concluded agreements with the provinces and territories to flow an additional $46.2 billion in funding for health care over 10 years (only 58 per cent of which is actually required to be spent on health care) and introduced dental care and pharmacare plans aimed at filling gaps in Canada’s current public systems—both key planks in the 2022 Liberal-NDP supply-confidence agreement.
The federal government is now in the process of rolling out dental care to low- and middle-income households without private coverage. Three and a half million people have registered for the plan and another 4.5 million 18-64 year-olds will be eligible to sign up starting this May.
The Liberals, NDP and the Green Party have committed, at a minimum, to maintaining the program. The Conservative Party voted against the introduction of dental care but has since stated that, if elected, it would “preserve existing dental care coverage.” They have not explained what this might mean.
On pharmacare, the NDP and Greens have thrown their support behind expanding Canada’s fledgling program. The first phase of a national pharmacare plan was introduced last year, promising free coverage of diabetes medication and contraception under the public system. The NDP is the only party promising to deliver “full public pharmacare” within four years.
In 2024, the Conservative Party again voted against the introduction of the pharmacare program, stating that providing access to medications through a “single-payer” plan would ban Canadians from having private health plans. The party’s election platform now says that it will “honour existing deals with provinces and territories”—of which there are four (British Columbia, Manitoba, PEI and Yukon). What about the rest of the country? Will these programs be permanent? What about expansion to other medications and therapies?
The new Liberal leader’s intentions aren’t particularly clear either. The Liberal platform commits to “protecting dental care and pharmacare—two critical services and key parts of a strong public health care system.” Again, no details as to whether expansion will be on the table if they form the next government.
The health care workforce is another pressing issue. The NDP is presenting the most comprehensive plan, promising to tackle the lack of family doctors in Canada via $10 billion over four years in additional funding for provinces and territories that “deliver on guaranteed access to a family doctor and primary care”, streamlined immigration and licensing for international medical professionals, and expanded supports for those serving rural and remote communities.
The NDP would also set $7 billion aside to expand mental health coverage to address the sizable gaps in service. Likewise, it is promising to expand access to reproductive health care, including abortion, through diligent enforcement of the Canada Health Act (CHA). They would introduce a Health Care Workforce Strategy to boost hiring and improve working conditions for nurses and personal support workers, including a new non-refundable $5,000 Canadian Health Care Workers Tax Credit for those workers.
The Liberals would direct $4 billion to construct and renovate community health care infrastructure such as hospitals, clinics and long-term care facilities and flow additional funds to recruit and train health care professionals. They would also introduce a refundable Health Care Workers Hero Tax Credit of up to $1,100 for Personal Support Workers and establish a new Youth Mental Health Fund to serve 100,000 young people a year. The party is promising to protect reproductive rights and make the Sexual and Reproductive Health Fund Program permanent.
The Conservative Party promises to uphold the Canada Health Act and to honour current federal health transfer agreements. It would work with the provinces and territories to create a system of nationally-recognized licenses for doctors, nurses, early childhood educators, and other professions and fund 350 medical residency spots at a cost of $70 million per year. It also promises that “there will be no laws, rules or regulations passed restricting abortion.” There are no additional dollars attached to these pledges.
The Bloc Quebecois, for their part, are arguing for a 35 per cent boost to federal health transfers—no strings attached—while the People’s Party “would repeal the Canada Health Act and enable provinces and territories to set up mixed private-public universal systems” for which they would be financially responsible. It would also severely restrict access to abortion and gender affirming care.
Where do the parties stand on child care?
Canada is finally on the way to creating a countrywide system of early learning and child care that is affordable, inclusive and accessible. But the efforts to build a vibrant and viable system are now at risk—stymied by lack of staff and slow growth in the stock of nonprofit/public spaces, and under attack from for-profit providers and private equity interests. What are the parties’ plans for the future?
The Liberal government has signed agreements worth $36.8 billion with 11 provinces and territories—all except Alberta and Saskatchewan—extending the federal child care program to 2031. New Liberal leader Mark Carney is promising to “protect and strengthen” the $10-a-day Early Learning and Child Care system by creating 100,000 new spaces by 2031 (presumably via the new provincial-territorial agreements) and working with the provinces and territories to improve wages and benefits.
The NDP and the Green Party are also on the record in support of building out a universal and affordable public system. “An NDP government will make sure more affordable child care spots open up so more parents can build their best life.”
For their part, the Conservative Party has pledged “to honour the agreements on child care with the provinces” but has indicated that it will “give more freedom and flexibility to parents, providers and provinces to support the child care of all the kids.” Again the question is: what does this mean?
The Conservative party has a longstanding preference for “cash for care” and support for private market delivery. In the 2021 election, for example, the Conservatives vowed to cancel the newly announced program if elected— just as the Stephen Harper government did in 2006—and to replace it with a refundable tax credit to offset a portion of a family’s child care expenses.
What we know from studies in Quebec—which has both a $9.35-a-day child care program and a generous tax credit regime for those paying for for-profit care—is that the “cash for care” option is a poor substitute for high quality nonprofit child care. Indeed, it’s two-to-three times cheaper for middle class families to be in an $9.35-a-day spot than in the for-profit system—even after taking the tax credit into account. Moreover, the for-profit system in Quebec provides lower quality care, despite costing parents more.
Who’s speaking out to protect publicly-managed and publicly-delivered services?
Neither the Liberal nor Conservative platforms address the issue of for-profit delivery of care, which exacted such an enormous toll in long term-care homes during the pandemic. Indeed, the Conservative Party has stated its support for public health care but encourages the expansion of private health services as the provinces see fit.
Decades of research here in Canada and abroad have demonstrated the damaging impacts of privatization within health care and other essential services—as measured by higher costs, long wait times for essential services, and the loss of crucial resources and health care workers to the private system. Privatization also exacerbates existing health inequities as the affluent jump to the front of the line for care and resources.
The NDP has said that it will take action to close loopholes in the Canada Health Act that allow for-profit companies to provide and charge for virtual health care, penalizing provinces and territories that violate the CHA. It would also ban American corporations from buying Canadian health care facilities and block any effort to lift exemptions for public health care services in future trade negotiations.
Taking action to protect and enhance Canada’s care economy in this moment of economic crisis is not only essential to producing the conditions where all can thrive, but it is also key to positioning Canada for the future—no less important than the physical infrastructure on which we all depend.
Canada’s care economy should have had a more fulsome airing and discussion in this election. Canadian voters deserved better.
