OTTAWA - Stephen Harper's promise to legislate limits on the federal spending power doesn't appear to go much further than a deal struck eight years ago by Liberal Leader Stephane Dion.
According to Tuesday's throne speech, the prime minister will introduce legislation "to place formal limits on the use of the federal spending power for new shared-cost programs in areas of exclusive provincial jurisdiction.''
"This legislation will allow provinces and territories to opt out with reasonable compensation if they offer compatible programs.''
The legislation is proof, the speech asserts, that the Harper government is "guided by our federalism of openness.''
Harper's Quebec lieutenant, Transport Minister Lawrence Cannon, has said the limits on the spending power will contrast sharply with the Liberals' practice of centralized federalism aimed at keeping "Quebec in its place.''
Exactly what Harper has in mind won't be clear until the legislation is introduced and the details are clear.
But Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe said the throne speech promise is "almost word by word'' the same as the 1999 social union agreement, which was "unanimously rejected in Quebec,'' although all other provinces signed on.
The architect of that deal was Dion, then unity minister for Jean Chretien. The former prime minister was derided by Quebec nationalists as a notorious centralizer.
Duceppe said Harper has denounced the Liberal approach as "paternalistic federalism'' and is now "acting the same way.'' He speculated that Harper has given up on genuinely limiting the spending power because other provinces, including Ontario, have signalled their wariness of anything that might curtail Ottawa's ability to launch new national social programs.
"So, he chose the rest of Canada against Quebec's will. Period.''
Cannon said Duceppe should wait to see the legislation before jumping to conclusions. He predicted that the legislation will "stop the isolation of Quebec.''
Dion did not comment on the spending power initiative Tuesday but his House leader, Ralph Goodale, said Liberals are concerned that it seems to be a unilateral measure, dreamt up by Harper without any consultation with the provinces.
Under Dion's 1999 deal, the federal government agreed not to introduce new shared-cost programs in areas of provincial jurisdiction unless it had the approval of at least six provinces. Provinces could opt out of a program with full compensation provided they spent the money in a related area.
Harper might yet tinker with the number of provinces needed before launching a new shared-cost program, making it slightly more difficult in theory to, for instance, launch a nationwide child care program. But, in practice, the Harper government has no known plans for new social programs in any event.
The promise to put the limits in legislation arguably means they will be more enforceable than Dion's administrative agreement.
But legislation still doesn't have the same force as a constitutional amendment. At any point in the future, the federal government could simply repeal the law if it proved to be standing in the way of some program the government desperately wanted to create.
As one provincial official put it recently, legislated limits amount to little more than empty symbolism aimed at courting votes in Quebec.
"Unless they're talking about amending the Constitution and have the votes to do it, it seems like all sound and fury,'' the official said.
Harper has not gone as far as some provinces feared. He has not extended the limits to social programs, such as national scholarships, that are funded solely by the federal government.
And he has not acquiesced to Quebec's longstanding demand to be able to opt out of national programs with its full share of the federal cash and no strings attached.
