Article content continued

But to NDP-Liberal vote switchers, it’s a real and practical problem.

At the start of the 2015 election, that group was lining up to make Tom Mulcair the Prime Minister. Trudeau’s campaign crafted promises specifically targeted to woo back those key switchers – and they were wooed. That’s what campaigns are supposed to do.

But what Trudeau was supposed to do is keep his promises. Centre-left switchers kept their end of the deal by giving Trudeau a majority to implement his promises; Trudeau took that majority and used it to break his promises to them. It was an extremely cynical turn-about.

We apologize, but this video has failed to load.

tap here to see other videos from our team. Try refreshing your browser, or

All of which makes the Liberals’ recent signaling about pharmacare extremely worrying. After all, the Liberals first promised pharmacare in 1997 and never did it. And while there’ve been many reports on how to implement pharmacare, the Liberals have now opted for more talk and study, rather than implementation. It has all the appearance of a broken promise in the making.

Let’s be absolutely clear – universal phramacare makes a ton of good sense. It would give every Canadian free access to the medicines they’re prescribed. And it would save billions of dollars for individuals and businesses. It’s a proven health care and financial success in many other countries.

We should have pharmacare here in Canada. Which is why Singh’s NDP would be absolutely right to take every opportunity to promote pharmacare – and pitch themselves as it’s only guarantor.

Every vote needs a purpose. In 2019, for NDP-Liberal switchers, a purpose for marking a ballot for an NDP candidate can be to ensure a government that keeps its promise – on pharmacare and other progressive reforms. A Justin Trudeau majority is no guarantee of that. Singh’s New Democrats can be.

Tom Parkin is a former NDP staffer and social democrat media commentator.