Vote Compass: Government programs — the parties' positions

Supporting Story Content

End of Supporting Story Content

Back to accessibility links

Beginning of Story Content

The team of scholars behind Vote Compass gave Canada's five political parties the opportunity to take part in the process to ensure the parties' policies lined up with the way Vote Compass interprets respondents' answers.

All five parties had the chance to answer the Vote Compass questionnaire for themselves, and were given the opportunity to challenge the assessments before the "final codes" went in.

Here are the party positions on three questions about government programs in the Vote Compass questionnaire, and what was behind those answers. Over the coming days, CBC News will look at each of the 10 Vote Compass issue areas.

1) How much of a role should the private sector have in health care?

• Much more
• Somewhat more
• About the same as now
• Somewhat less
• Much less
• Don’t know

New Democratic Party — Much less

We will work with provincial and territorial partners to: promote a clear commitment to the single-payer system [and] take appropriate steps to replace fee-for-service delivery. [p. 11] Source:Giving Your Family a Break: Practical First Steps (April 2011) New Democrats believe in:

1. The right of all Canadians to have universal access to high-quality public health care that is transferable between provinces and territories.

2. Fighting the privatization of public health care services, including through the use of existing mechanisms within the Canada Health Act.

Source: Investing in a Canada where no one is left behind

Green Party — Much less

The Greens fully support the Canada Health Act (CHA) and all of its principles. We oppose any level of privatized, for-profit health care. The five criteria of the CHA guiding the provincial public health insurance plans, which we believe to be non-negotiable, are: 1. Public Administration: The public health insurance plan must be managed in a public, not-for-profit fashion. 2. Comprehensiveness: All residents must be covered for “medically necessary” health services. 3. Universality: All residents must be covered by the public insurance plan on uniform terms and conditions. 4. Portability: All residents must be covered by their public plan, wherever they are treated in Canada. 5. Accessibility: All residents must have access to insured health care services on uniform terms and conditions without direct or indirect financial charges, or discrimination based on age, health status or financial circumstances. [pp. 67-68]

Source: Vision Green 2010: Healthier people — healthier health care (January 2010)

Bloc Québécois — About the same as now

Text not available in English

Le Bloc Québécois adhère aux principes sur lesquels le système de santé et de services sociaux du Québec est fondé : notamment l’accessibilité, l’universalité, le financement public et l’équité. Cependant, tout débat sur la gestion du système de santé québécois doit être exclusivement québécois. Au terme de celui-ci, s’il existe un consensus au Québec qui doit avoir écho à Ottawa, le Bloc Québécois s’en fera le défenseur à la Chambre des communes.

Source : Proposition principale (fevrier 2011)

Conservative Party — Somewhat more

Stephen Harper’s Government is committed to a universal public health care system and the Canada Health Act, and the right of provinces to deliver health care within their jurisdictions. [p.30]

Source: Here for Canada: Stephen Harper's Low-Tax Plan for Jobs and Economic Growth (April 8, 2011)

The Conservative Party believes all Canadians should have reasonable access to timely, quality health care services, regardless of their ability to pay. i) The provinces and territories should have maximum flexibility to ensure the delivery of medically necessary health services within a universal, public health care system. We support adding a sixth principle to the Canada Health Act to provide stable and transparent federal funding. The government should work with the provinces in a co-operative and constructive manner. ii) Flexibility for the provinces and territories in the implementation of health services should include a balance of public and private delivery options. [p.18]

Source: Conservative Party of Canada 2008 Policy Declaration (November 15, 2008)

Liberal Party — Somewhat less

For Liberals, the promise of universal, publicly funded health care is at the core of what it means to be a Canadian. We will never waver from that commitment.

Source: Health and Family Care

2) The government should fund daycare instead of giving money directly to parents

• Strongly agree
• Somewhat agree
• Neither agree nor disagree
• Somewhat disagree
• Strongly disagree
• Don't know

New Democratic Party — Neither agree nor disagree

We will work with the provinces and territories to establish and fund a Canada-wide child care and early learning program. [p. 5] Source:Giving Your Family a Break: Practical First Steps (April 2011) New Democrats believe in: Providing long-term, secure funding to provinces and territories for early childhood education and child care services; Ensuring federal funding provides high-quality, accessible, affordable, non-profit universal services; Establishing an enhanced and simplified child tax benefit.

Source: Investing in a Canada where no one is left behind

Green Party — Strongly agree

Canadian families need access to affordable, high-quality child care as an aspect of early childhood education. There are also clear benefits to maximizing time together for parents with young children. Canadians want a program with flexibility. A cheque for $100/month does not begin to address these needs.

The Greens are committed to a high-quality federally-funded child care program in Canada, accessible to any family that wants to place children into early childhood education. Green Party MPs will [...] Restore and revamp the 2005 agreement reached between the federal government, provinces and territories to achieve a universal access child care program in Canada. [p. 63]

Source: Vision Green 2010: Child care (January 2010)

Bloc Québécois —Somewhat agree

Text not available in English

On le sait, en matière de services de garde, Québec paye et Ottawa empoche. Aujourd’hui, la politique familiale du Québec est l’une des plus généreuses au monde. Elle répond aux attentes et, depuis sa mise en place, la natalité augmente au Québec. La conciliation travail-famille atteint ses objectifs : le taux d’emploi des femmes s’améliore et le taux de pauvreté infantile est l’un des plus bas au Canada. Un des meilleurs exemples d’efficacité à cet égard est le système de garderie à contribution réduite, à sept dollars par jour, qui permet d’alléger fortement le fardeau financier des familles québécoises. Le Bloc Québécois déplore que le gouvernement fédéral perpétue son ingérence dans les champs de compétence du Québec par le biais de programmes qui ne reconnaissent pas la spécificité du modèle québécois en matière de politique familiale. Le Bloc Québécois exige plutôt que le gouvernement fédéral verse les montants attribués à ces programmes au gouvernement du Québec, qui est bien mieux placé pour venir en aide aux parents québécois.

Source : Proposition Principale (fevrier 2011)

Conservative Party — Strongly disagree

Stephen Harper’s Government has taken action to support all Canadians. [We] established the Universal Child Care Benefit, providing $1,200 per year, per child under six years of age, to support all parents and to respect their right to choose the form of child care that’s best for their families. [p.26]

Source: Here for Canada: Stephen Harper's Low-Tax Plan for Jobs and Economic Growth (April 8, 2011)

The Conservative Party recognizes that parents are in the best position to determine the care needs of their children, and that they should be able to do so in an environment that encourages as many options as possible, and in a manner that does not discriminate against parents who opt to raise their children in the family, social, linguistic, and religious environment that they judge to be best for their own families. [...] We believe that support should go to all parents and families raising children, especially to lower and middle income parents. We strongly support the Universal Child Care Benefit introduced in the 2006 Budget. [p.21]

Source: Conservative Party of Canada 2008 Policy Declaration (November 15, 2008)

Liberal Party — Neither agree nor disagree

A Liberal government will establish a new Early Childhood Learning and Care Fund that will begin with $500 million in the first year, rising to an annual commitment of $1 billion by the fourth year.

Administered as a new social infrastructure fund, provinces and territories will be able to apply to the Fund for cost-sharing of early childhood learning and care plans that create and operate new, affordable, high-quality early childhood learning and care spaces across Canada, with well-trained professional staff. The long-term goal is a high-quality, affordable early childhood learning and care space for every Canadian family that wants one. [p. 24]

Source: Your Family. Your Future. Your Canada. (April 2011)

[T]he Liberal team will highlight Liberal policies that will help working families: Quality, affordable early learning and childcare to give our kids the head start they need. Liberals will offer working families a real choice when they need to find childcare spaces for their kids.

Source: Liberals launch “Working Families Tour” (February 16, 2011)

3) It should be easier to qualify for Employment Insurance

• Strongly agree
• Somewhat agree
• Neither agree nor disagree
• Somewhat disagree
• Strongly disagree
• Don't know

New Democratic Party — Strongly agree

We will extend Employment Insurance stimulus measures until unemployment falls to pre-recession levels. In practical steps and as finances permit, we will restore the integrity of the Employment Insurance program by amending the Employment Insurance Act to: Eliminate the two-week waiting period; Return the qualifying period to a minimum of 360 hours of work, regardless of the regional rate of unemployment; Raise the rate of benefits to 60 per cent and basing benefits on the best 12 weeks in the qualifying period; And improving the quality and monitoring of training and re-training. [p. 6]

Source:Giving Your Family a Break: Practical First Steps (April 2011)

New Democrats believe in: A protected fund for Employment Insurance to protect workers; Expanding access to EI by reducing the hours of work required to qualify; Improving EI by abolishing waiting periods, calculating benefits based on the twelve best weeks of work, expanding eligibility to self-employed workers, and improving sickness and injury benefits.

Source: Investing in a Canada where No One is Left Behind

Green Party — Strongly agree

Green Party MPs will [...] During this time of need (until the unemployment rate in Canada drops below 6%), provide EI benefits retroactively, without imposing additional premiums, to all those who have lost their jobs since the beginning of November 2008 and who have paid into EI for at least three months, and also urge that EI benefits last for 52 weeks to provide a safety net while waiting for the economy to recover and, if necessary, extend EI benefits beyond 52 weeks if the economic recovery is not sustained. [pp. 92-93] Source: Vision Green 2011: Reforming the Employment Insurance system (January 2010)

Bloc Québécois — Somewhat agree

Text not available in English

Alors que moins de la moitié des chômeurs et chômeuses ont accès au régime d'assurance-emploi, le Bloc Québécois demande une réforme globale du régime pour notamment en augmenter l'accessibilité. Le Bloc Québécois demande, entre autres, l'élimination du délai de carence, le calcul des prestations sur les douze meilleures semaines assurables et l'établissement du seuil d’admissibilité à 360 heures. Dans sa forme actuelle, le régime d'assurance-emploi est injuste, discriminatoire et il ne sert clairement plus les objectifs pour lesquels il a été conçu.

Source : Assurance-emploi : les réformes sont nécessaires

Conservative Party — Neither agree nor disagree

Over the next fiscal year, Year 2 of the Economic Action Plan will continue to maintain and create jobs, and help Canadian workers and families manage through still difficult economic conditions, including: [...] Over $4 billion in actions to create and protect jobs. This includes additional Employment Insurance (EI) benefits and more training opportunities to help unemployed Canadians through this difficult period, and help ensure they are equipped to re-enter the workforce and prosper in the future.

Source: Budget 2010 - Leading the way on jobs and growth (March 4, 2010)

Liberal Party — Neither agree nor disagree

Michael Ignatieff is reversing his support for a wide range of enhancements to Employment Insurance benefits, saying they are too expensive and are no longer required. [...] The legislation, introduced by Bloc MP Yves Lessard, would reduce the qualifying period for EI from the current minimum of 420 hours down to 360 hours. It would also increase the weekly earnings from 55 per cent to 60 per cent of past earnings and increase the length of time that benefits could be collected. Mr. Ignatieff’s comments strongly suggest the Liberals will defeat the legislation, given that he described the bill as being dead on arrival and a complete waste of time. He did not say definitively, however, that the Liberals will vote to ensure the bill is defeated. The Liberal Leader argued his support for such measures last year was a product of the recession. “We supported measures when there was an economic crisis. We were in the middle of full crisis with a much higher unemployment rate. The situation has changed,” Mr. Ignatieff said in French.

Source: Ignatieff changes his mind on EI bill; Bloc legislation ‘not fiscally responsible,’ Liberal Leader says ahead of Commons vote (September 29, 2010)

End of Story Content

Back to accessibility links