"Ripping up" the supply deal

A real missed opportunity for the NDP to advance new ideas and for Jagmeet Singh to show substance in his leadership.

Despite the silly theatrics on display yesterday, I still think the best approach is to embrace cooperation in our politics if it means getting things done that improve people's lives.

Since the supply deal was struck, we've seen continued progress on climate action and reconciliation, a new disability benefit, a new dental care program, a new and serious federal housing plan, the beginnings of pharmacare, and more (don’t take my word for it, though, read this rundown of what got done).

Yes, the progress has been imperfect. And yes, there are many reasons to criticize different decisions.

But I didn't see any substantive criticism from Singh to warrant "ripping up” the supply deal.

I also didn't see Singh use his announcement to advance anything new. If I'd been in his position, I'd have put a few big ideas on the table this fall and made a continued deal conditional on seeing them through. Seems like a real missed opportunity.

Of course, cooperation can come in many forms. It can mean a formal supply deal or a less stable case-by-case negotiation. Hopefully we see a continued but different kind of cooperation on shared priorities this fall.

Poilievre supporters will, no doubt, keep demanding an election to kill effective carbon pricing, dental care, and the CBC. But most people just want the government to focus on governing, and get tired pretty quick of the Ottawa-bubble posturing.

I also spoke to David Common/Metro Morning (not yet posted) and to Greg Brady/AM640 this morning about what this means for our politics going forward, and we’ll touch on this in our next Uncommons Weekly episode.