It's alarming that we even need to say that election candidates should be clear and transparent about what they’re proposing, and what it will cost. Sadly, elections across Canada confirm that voters can no longer take even this base level of transparency for granted. Our democracy is worse off for that, as the recent Ontario election made clear.

The risks of slogan-based governance are all too easy to spot right now. All Canadians have to do is look to our southern neighbour, where commitments are changing from moment to moment. This is the opposite of the evidence-based approach for which Gen Squeeze has advocated for more than a decade.

Following the evidence means grounding decisions in data – not the latest poll or wedge issue. When policy proposals are grounded in evidence, voters are better equipped to hold governments to account, because there’s little wiggle room for parties to ‘renegotiate’ commitments down the road.

So what fine print do voters need to avoid being duped? Here’s the minimum that we should call on all candidates and parties to deliver.

1. A Policy Platform

All parties should deliver a detailed platform document no more than two weeks after the election period begins. (We’d like federal and provincial election regulators to make having a platform a requirement parties must meet before they are permitted to field candidates… but we’ll take it one step at a time.)

A policy platform isn’t a set of broad principles. It’s not a collection of high-level statements pointing out what’s not working, but failing to propose a fix. Nor is it a vehicle to blame others.

A policy platform is a thorough, careful, detailed accounting of how a party understands current issues, and will undertake measures to address them.  

Beware of ‘platforms’ that spend more time pointing fingers than presenting a vision or solutions. If a party can’t explain its concrete plan to solve the problems that matter, there’s no way to really assess what they’ll deliver.

Beware of ‘platforms’ that stop with slogans. Sadly, real solutions are seldom that simple. Parties should be willing and able to talk about complexity and how they will balance trade-offs. Because there are always trade-offs – implying otherwise is definitely a dupe!

2. A Costing Table

Responsible platforms must include a tally of the cost of each proposed action, whether new or expanded services, or cuts to current commitments. Without detailed cost information, it’s a press release – not a platform.

Many cuts have a cost, especially when they reduce revenue. Cutting taxes, for example, leaves future governments with fewer resources to fund services on which Canadians rely.

Whether or not you’re in favour of the tax cuts on offer by leading parties, it’s essential to know what they cost – and what measures parties will take to compensate for lost revenue. This is especially pressing with Ottawa already running a $42 billion deficit. Clawing Canada out of this deep fiscal hole should be a top priority for any party campaigning to form government. Cutting taxes makes this climb even steeper.

Assuming parties actually do deliver cost information, here are some things to keep in mind:

• Platform costings must be sufficiently detailed for voters to assess whether the ambition of a proposal is in line with the funding behind it. It’s easy for parties to oversell a grand vision, but fail to commit sufficient funds to realize it. Beware of this sneaky platform practice designed to dupe voters into buying the hype.
• Cost information should enable voters to hold parties to account on their spending promises. This means that costs aren’t just rolled up into big categories, but rather are broken down across individual commitments. It also means projecting costs over multiple years, to guard again big election year promises that peter out over time.
• Platform cost tables should include the impact of party promises on revenue and spending – as well as on the big picture of restoring budget balance. If parties only tell you about the sweeteners, but not the gnarly details on who will pay the price, be on guard. Costings must be placed in the context of current federal finances to give you a meaningful picture of the level of fiscal responsibility to which each party is committed.