NDP Leader Tom Mulcair will use Monday's return of the Commons to sharpen contrasts between his party’s “active” economic policies and a Liberal “laissez-faire” approach he argues heightens inequality.

In a phone discussion about economics I had with Mulcair, which at times got impassioned, he also questioned the Prime Minister’s definition of “middle class” and suggested Trudeau’s promised infrastructure money may get cut back.

“There’s no equality of opportunity when the deck is stacked against you” he stated, giving a flurry of examples.

“If you come from a family that’s poor and even though you’re a bright student, you can’t even fathom borrowing $50,000 to do your studies, you won’t.”

“You know 1.1 million Canadian children still live in poverty. For me that’s a top priority, fixing that.”

“Someone working full time never has to live in poverty,” he continued. “Let’s start with a living wage of $15 an hour,” he added, drawing contrast with the Liberal’s position.

“Government can play an active role in reducing inequality,” added Mulcair, who says the hands-off approach has left Canada with “a less diverse and less stable economy.”

“For hundreds of years in Canada, it’s been just take the resources out -- rip-and-ship,” he argued. To Mulcair, this “reflex” is the fatal flaw of the Keystone XL project, the Liberal-backed pipeline plan to ship raw resources to Texas. “It makes no sense for Canada,” he said.

Mulcair sees the same hands-off style behind the previous government’s failure to salvage anything from the collapse of Nortel Networks and support a Canadian tech sector. “It was just a total failure. They just let it die.”

And he’s concerned key Liberal economic Ministers share the same philosophy. “Chrystia Freeland famously said General Motors should’ve been left to go bankrupt,” he added. “We’re worried about industrial jobs in Canada. A good place to start would be by refusing to sign the TPP, because that’s going to kill off tens of thousands more good-paying manufacturing jobs.”

To Mulcair, a more active economic strategy would “create new knowledge, working with universities, research institutes, the private sector and the granting authorities of government.”

As an example, Mulcair pointed to green energy research and innovation which represent “several trillion dollars of investment in the next few years. You can create a role for Canada and go after that market – we’re nowhere right now on that.”

He’s also concerned the Liberals’ commitment to another key strategy may be slipping. “The Liberals started off saying $10 billion maximum deficit for big infrastructure spending. They’re completely backing away from that now.”

Mulcair brings the focus back to inequality. Last year’s $35 billion bank profits and $12.5 billion in executive bonuses show corporate Canadians “are not paying their fair share.” Additional revenue from increased corporate taxes and tightened CEO stock options rules – again both opposed by Trudeau – are needed to keep social investments, he argues.

And the Liberals’ recent tax cuts clearly rankles him. “Where I live and where I come from, $45,000 a year, two kids – that’s middle class. If you’re one of those people, you know how much you got? Bupkis. Zero. But if you’re earning $200,000 a year and no dependants, you get the full, maximum tax cut.

“At some point Justin Trudeau is going to have to clarify what he means by ‘the middle class’.”

Mulcair’s sharpened policy contrasts are anchored on a widely-held election assessment by New Democrats: that they offered a progressive platform but lost voters with a campaign that failed to excite. In preparing his return to Question Period, it seems Mulcair has wisely chosen to keep what’s working and address what isn’t.