Despite all the ballyhoo from the Pallister government over the past eight months about “holding out” for a better health care funding deal from Ottawa, they sure didn’t get much for all their chest pounding.

In fact, it’s arguable they got anything at all beyond what was already announced by the federal Liberal government in its 2017 budget.

Provincial health ministers, including Manitoba’s health boss Kelvin Goertzen, renewed their protest last year over plans by the federal government to reduce annual increases in the Canada Health Transfer.

Under a plan first announced by the former Harper government in 2011 and carried out by the current Liberal administration, CHT increases have been reduced to about 3% a year from 6%, beginning in 2017. The provinces, who have had five full years to plan for the changes, tried and failed to make a last ditch effort in December to convince the federal government to change its mind.

For its part, Ottawa has clumsily tried to describe the new funding formula as a “health accord,” which it isn’t. It’s a unilateral decision by the federal government on how much money it plans to give the provinces to help pay for health care, which includes a small amount of targeted funding for home care and addictions treatment.

There were no federal-provincial negotiations over the matter, just as there weren’t when the former Harper government first announced changes to CHT funding.

Provincial governments always complain about not getting their “fair share” of health care dollars from Ottawa. It’s part of the fabric of federal-provincial relations. Even when Ottawa was increasing CHT payments by 6% a year, which they did for over a decade, provincial health ministers still whined about being shortchanged.

Nevertheless, one-by-one, provinces “signed on” to the latest funding arrangement with Ottawa, mainly because they had no other choice. CHT transfers were already set and if the provinces wanted some of the extra targeted funding for home care and addictions, they would have to participate in Ottawa’s dog and pony show and sign on to the new deal.

Manitoba was the lone “hold out” province, proudly claiming it was holding the fed’s feet to the fire, when in reality there was nothing they could say or do to change how much money Ottawa was prepared to fork over. It was grandstanding mostly. Which is why Manitoba eventually signed on this week and got, for the most part, what Ottawa was offering in the first place.

The CHT transfers didn’t change. Manitoba is getting $1.355 billion in CHT this year, up 3.4% from last year. In addition, the province will receive $400 million over 10 years in targeted funding from Ottawa for home care, mental health and addictions. But that money was already on the table for all provinces as part of the federal government’s $11-billion in targeted funding for those areas. It was announced months ago.

At best, Goertzen could argue that he got an extra $5 million this year from Ottawa to fight the opioid crisis and to help treat kidney disease. Although other provinces already got similar cash payments months ago. British Columbia, for example, got $10 million to help fund its opioid crisis and Alberta received $6 million.

In other words, the hold-out was more about political posturing than anything. It’s likely Manitoba would have received the $5 million through normal, ongoing dialogue.

Provinces will always complain the federal government is underfunding health care, no matter how much money they receive. That’s been going on for decades. And regardless of how many times provinces like Manitoba protest, the federal government will continue to decide unilaterally how much it’s prepared to give.

The last go-around was no different.