Elections are about choices. To frame positions – and potentially, inform voter decisions at the ballot box – political parties define their governing plans and priorities in platforms. For the past three decades, political platforms have been part of election time discussion and debate in Canada. Platforms are relevant for predicting government behaviour, signalling party priorities, and are an important tool to hold a newly elected government to account.
Platforms can be analyzed and assessed against a number of criteria, from policy relevance to implementation feasibility to coherence. The fiscal credibility of electoral platforms are another dimension that we, at IFSD, consider of critical importance. Using fiscal credibility as a lens, the internal consistency of platform narratives can be tested, by aligning declared priorities to proposed economic and fiscal assumptions, revenues, and expenditures.
Ahead of the 2019 election, IFSD developed principles and scoring criteria to assess the fiscal credibility of political platforms. IFSD assessed all major party platforms in the 2019 and 2021 federal elections and will continue this work in 2025.
The assessments are designed to test for coherence between policy proposals and fiscal and economic plans, as well as the realism of assumptions. Platforms are political documents and are expected to provide reliable and realistic proposals, making them different than budgets or government documents that have different requirements for accuracy, realism, and transparency.
The 2025 election takes place in an historical context. The President of the United States has threatened Canadian sovereignty with repeated public assertions to make Canada a 51st state. Tariffs are being used as an instrument of economic and political coercion. A credible platform includes the economic and fiscal tools and resources to respond meaningfully to shifting geopolitics and threats (trade and other) from the United States. It is imperative that party plans reflect the consequential circumstances of this election and our times.
IFSD’s platform scoring framework has three parts to assess:
- Use of realistic and credible economic and fiscal projections: Platforms are realistic and credible when views of the future are based on assumptions and baselines that are commonly perceived to be reasonable and trustworthy because they reflect a balance of risks, are generated by trustworthy and independent sources. This should include uncertain geopolitics and threats from the United States.
- Responsible fiscal management: Platforms demonstrate responsible fiscal management when the costs of policy proposals are managed within clear and accountable budgetary constraints, that promote economic growth and stabilization over the business cycle, with consideration of the long-term sustainability of public finances. This should include tools and resources to respond to shifting geopolitics and threats.
- Transparency: Platforms are transparent when sufficient information is provided about commitments to assess impacts on the economy, the finances of the Government of Canada, and the well-being of individuals and families. This should consider the implementation of proposals.
IFSD acknowledges that scoring the platforms based on these principles involves a degree of subjectivity. Evaluation criteria have been summarized below (each sub-principle has a maximum value of 4 points) with a detailed scoring rubric available here.
For each criterion, a political party could achieve a score of 0 to 4 depending on the degree the platform responds or aligns to the principle.
A platform is eligible for a total score of 44 based on this fiscal credibility assessment. First class standing would require a score of 35 (out of 44) or 80 per cent. This would be a good score and would suggest that the platform performs well from a fiscal credibility perspective and should provide some confidence to voters.
We think the major political parties are well positioned to have strong political platforms for the 2025 federal election from a fiscal credibility perspective (i.e. first class standing). The Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO) has been given the mandate and resources to help political parties with their platforms by costing proposals before they are public.