It appears that Jagmeet Singh is attempting to play a particular kind of political long game, designed solely to increase the level of cynicism among voters through a series of cute legislation, disingenuous moves, and outright mendacity. Case in point was the party’s “pharmacare bill,” which died at Second Reading yesterday – something that was always inevitable, and it was planned as a ham-fisted trap for the Liberals, to be amplified by an incurious media that only both-sides issues rather than calls out bullshit when they see it.

To wit – the NDP’s “pharmacare” bill was shenanigans. Private members’ bills cannot spend money (as that is the sole domain of the government), and the NDP thought they were going to be super clever and instead of outright making a spending commitment in the bill, it would build a framework that would then obligate the government to pass a second bill that would have the spending commitment, but I have particular doubts that this could possibly be considered kosher without a Royal Recommendation, because it tries to bind the government into a spending obligation. Add to that, this particular framework is essentially a top-down imposition on provinces that dares premiers to say no to “free money,” which is a) not free, and b) fraught with complications. Both of those particulars make this bill essentially unconstitutional, and if it’s not, then it’s empty political theatre.

Going to re-up this video I did about the pharmacare bill.
Pharmacare is perfectly legitimate if negotiated beforehand. This private member’s bill is not. Yes, there is a distinction. #cdnpoli https://t.co/ZRR1SqhJVn

— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) February 24, 2021

The bill was designed to fail. Singh knew that the Liberals were committed to the process laid out in the Hoskins Report, which they have been pursuing with negotiation with premiers, as well as the establishment of the Canadian Drug Agency, which got funding in the 2019 budget. And the Hoskins Report is quite clear that this could take as long as seven years to negotiate the national formulary as part of this process. It’s not going to happen overnight – but that’s what Singh is trying to claim, that all the federal government has to do is cut cheques to provinces if they pay for all prescription drugs. That’s not how a pharmacare plan works. Singh also claims that the Liberals were voting against the Hoskins Report by killing this bill, which dishonest – yes, the report says a federal statute would need to be drafted, but that is the end-point of negotiations, not the beginning.

Singh is not being honest here. The bill would not pave the way because it would be a top-down approach dictated to provinces. It does not mean the government rejected the Hoskins Report – rather, Singh is cherry-picking one item out of context of the whole report. #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/ohcPxMKXnw

— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) February 24, 2021

Those principles – universality, comprehensiveness, portability, accessibility, and public administration – don't actually bind the provinces. If the CHA attempted to directly dictate provincial policy, it would be unconstitutional. 3/n

— Emmett Macfarlane 🇺🇦 🇨🇦 (@EmmMacfarlane) February 25, 2021

I don't think anything stops the feds from doling out checks to Canadians to cover drug expenses, for example. But a pharmacare system integrated into something like OHIP (or any provincial plan) isn't something the feds can do unilaterally with a bill. 5/n

— Emmett Macfarlane 🇺🇦 🇨🇦 (@EmmMacfarlane) February 25, 2021

And this is the thing – because this was designed to fail, it was an attempt to paint the Liberals as betraying their promise to implement universal pharmacare, when they’re already doing the hard work to make it happen. This is solely about breeding cynicism, pretending that there are magic wand solutions, or that you can force things on provinces by sheer force of will. Singh likes to make promises he can’t keep, and by trying to paint the Liberals as betraying their promises – which they are keeping, but which take time to implement because federalism is hard – he is just breeding unrealistic expectations and disappointment that will fuel disengagement. There has not been any honest discourse over this bill – and attempts to point out the truth are met with hostile responses, including a bunch of straw man arguments that pointing out that this bill is unconstitutional is Trudeau priming to declare the Canada Health Act unconstitutional, which is batshit crazy logic – and that just poisons the well for everyone. Well done, guys. I had not gauged the level of sheer cynicism that Singh possesses for the political process, but he’s made it abundantly clear.

Good reads:

• Justin Trudeau says that Moderna will be delivering some 1.3 million doses in March, meeting is contractual obligation for two million doses in Q1.
• The Chief of Defence Staff, Admiral Art McDonald, is voluntary stepping aside during an investigation – which we don’t know what it’s about.
• Hundreds of employees at CSE have voted to strike over wage supplements that would close pay gaps with private sector workers doing similar work.
• A former member of staff at Rideau Hall says she resigned in the summer over issues of racism.
• Documents released to the health committee showed that when the Trump administration tried to withhold ventilators, we warned him about retaliations.
• Ghana is getting AstraZeneca doses thanks to COVAX, but the NDP are trying to play mischief by misrepresenting the programme in a motion at committee.
• Erin O’Toole has been Conservative leader for six months, and he’s facing concerns and questions about whether he would capitulate on carbon prices.
• Alberta tried to launch their vaccine booking website, and it immediately crashed.
• Robert Hiltz points out that the Conservatives’ pandemic plans begin and end with vaccines, which leaves premiers off the hook for failing in every aspect.

Odds and ends:

Want more Routine Proceedings? Become a patron and get exclusive new content.