rabble blogs are the personal pages of some of Canada's most insightful progressive activists and commentators. All opinions belong to the writer; however, writers are expected to adhere to our guidelines. We welcome new bloggers -- contact us for details.

No love lost between newly elected Wynne and PM Harper

Please chip in to support more articles like this. Support rabble.ca in its summer fundraiser today for as little as $5 per month!

Please support our coverage of democratic movements. Become a monthly supporter of rabble.ca.

Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne is back -- with a majority no less -- and there's going to be lots of tension between her government and Stephen Harper's.

The news release from the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) on Thursday night was terse and dry.

You could almost hear the gritting of teeth.

"On June 12, 2014," the PMO started out, "the people of Ontario gave Kathleen Wynne a mandate to continue to serve as their Premier." 

No mention of Wynne winning a majority; she is merely, it seems, permitted to "continue to serve ..."

The Prime Minister went on to say, perfunctorily, that he was looking forward to "working with" the Premier of Canada's most populous province, and then threw in the usual Conservative slogan about -- you guessed it -- "jobs, growth and long-term prosperity."

Lots of friction between Queen's Park and Ottawa

The hard truth is that there are irritants aplenty in the Ontario-Ottawa relationship.

Wynne very publicly complained when the late Finance Minister Jim Flaherty cut equalization to Ontario in his last budget.

That cut came as a result of some modest economic growth in Ontario. It meant that, taken together, equalization and the Canada Health and Social Transfer paid to Ontario dropped over $600 million.

When that has happened to other provinces, during the current difficult economic period, the Harper government has adjusted the total payment to assure there was no sudden loss of revenue.

Then, without warning, in their most recent budget, the federal Conservatives ended that practice -- a policy change that, as it happens, affected only one province: Ontario.

As long as Wynne was a sort of lame duck, and the Harper folks had reasonable expectations that their friend, Conservative Leader Tim Hudak would be taking over soon, the Liberal Premier was in a weak position to fight hard for Ontario's due.

Now, the gloves will be off.

And to those, such as Hudak, who argue that it is shameful that Ontario should even be receiving what he calls "welfare-like" equalization from the federal government, Wynne and company will be able to argue that a good deal of the tax dollars that go into federal-provincial transfers actually come from Ontario taxpayers.

Federal Conservatives fret about Ontario's debt and deficits

On the Harper government's side, current Finance Minister (and Toronto MP) Joe Oliver has publicly fretted about his home province's level of indebtedness and the potentially negative consequences of that supposedly high level of debt on the economy of the country as a whole.

On that front, don't expect Oliver and his Harper government colleagues to be any more deferential to Wynne, now, just because she won a majority.

The Conservatives can reason, after all, that they won a much more convincing majority of seats in Ontario in the last federal election.

Harper and his colleagues are not likely to calculate that the way to similar success next time is to play nice with the provincial Liberals.

Quite the contrary: the Harper government's instincts are always to play hardball and define hard lines of distinction between themselves and their adversaries.

In the near future, Ontario will very likely face a downgrade of its credit rating (from the predatory gnomes of Wall Street. . .?)

If (or when) it happens, we can expect the Harper team to try to take full advantage of that downgrade -- and of the Wynne government's more generalized "irresponsible profligacy" -- as it gears up for the next federal election.

Even if it were possible to prove to Harper and company that making nice with Wynne would be more tactically effective than playing bully-boy, the fact is that they just do not have it in them to do so.

Refugees and immigrants are also a source of conflict

And there are many other points of friction.

When Ottawa unilaterally slashed the federal refugee health program, Ontario picked up some of the slack. The province also continues to provide social assistance to all refugee claimants, something about which Jason Kenney complained bitterly when he was Harper's Immigration Minister.

As well, the federal government has deeply cut funding to Ontario organizations which work in the immigrant integration field.

Indeed, we can expect the entire field of refugees and immigrants to be an ongoing source of bad blood between the Harper and Wynne governments.  

Then there is Wynne's plan to start an Ontario pension plan, to fill in the gaps left by the existing federal pensions: the Canada Pension Plan and Old Age Security (plus, for those most in need, the Guaranteed Income Supplement).

Despite its notional commitment to a balanced federal system, the Conservative government will not find it easy to smile at any expansion, anywhere in Canada, of the basic social safety net.

Ideological opposition to expanded pension system

Flaherty may have had a sneaking sympathy with the idea that the public pension system should be expanded. He is gone now, however, and the neither the current Finance Minister nor any other cabinet heavyweights such as Kenney and Tony Clement have shown any interest in improving the lot of present and future retirees through direct government action.

People should save for their own retirement, the Conservatives reason, and the federal government has provided adequate instruments to encourage that saving.

Those instruments, the Registered Retirement Savings Plan and the recently created Pooled Registered Pension Plans, are also, coincidentally, of great benefit to the financial services industry, where Finance Minister Joe Oliver worked for many years.

And what about the federal electoral consequences?

Most of the chatter in the wake of the Ontario election is not about potential public policy conflicts between Wynne and Harper.

It is about the significance of the June 12 result for the next federal election.

As a rule, provincial elections in Canada portend very little for their federal counterparts.

By the time the next federal election rolls around Wynne will have a few battle scars of her own (and will thus be less of an asset to her federal cousins), and the Harper Conservatives are not likely to be foolish enough to run on a campaign of cutting 100,000 public service jobs -- wedded to a mathematically challenged promise to magically create one million private sector jobs.

The Conservatives, federally, will be the incumbents. And they will run on their notionally pragmatic and prudent stewardship of the economy, not on a set of radical and scary promises.

The federal Liberals will be running under an untested leader, not a sitting Premier and highly experienced and skillful politician. Justin Trudeau's team will also be running on what appears to be a mushy and vague pro-"middle class" policy-book, nothing like Wynnes's vigorous series of far-reaching, and very tangible, progressive proposals.

And as for the federal NDPers -- they will not be burdened with the task of explaining why they could not support a budget that was so obviously progressive it attracted support from many unions and social activists.

Instead, Tom Mulcair's NDPers will be competing with the Liberals (and their untested leader) to show that the current Official Opposition is, in fact, the best alternative to the Harper regime.

In other words, the next federal election will be whole new ball game.

Please support our coverage of democratic movements by clicking here to become a monthly supporter of rabble.ca.

Thank you for reading this story…

More people are reading rabble.ca than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable.

rabble.ca has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.

So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.

And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.


We welcome your comments! rabble.ca embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist, queer-positive, anti-imperialist and pro-labour stance, and encourages discussions which develop progressive thought. Our full comment policy can be found here. Learn more about Disqus on rabble.ca and your privacy here. Please keep in mind:


  • Tell the truth and avoid rumours.
  • Add context and background.
  • Report typos and logical fallacies.
  • Be respectful.
  • Respect copyright - link to articles.
  • Stay focused. Bring in-depth commentary to our discussion forum, babble.


  • Use oppressive/offensive language.
  • Libel or defame.
  • Bully or troll.
  • Post spam.
  • Engage trolls. Flag suspect activity instead.