Ian Roberge (York University) , Mirusha Ramaj (York University)
Canada’s Equalization Transfer Program (ETP), while technical, is highly politicized. This paper is interested in how provinces have addressed and framed their position on equalization to advance their interest. How has the political discourse of provinces on equalization evolved over the recent past? We argue that provincial discourse is intertwined with the federation’s political dynamics. Equalization is alternatively presented as a pillar of national solidarity or as an unjust penalty for prosperity, depending on who is telling the story. This study examines how political actors in Ontario, Alberta and Newfoundland and Labrador have constructed and deployed competing narratives around the ETP to advance their regional objectives and influence public perception from 2006 to 2024. Using qualitative discourse analysis, the research analyzes legislative debates (Hansard), budget speeches, and media coverage from both national and provincial outlets to identify the rhetorical strategies in play. Through thematic coding, four dominant narratives emerge: fairness and equity; regional autonomy and identity; economic efficiency and dependency; and intergovernmental competition and solidarity. While Alberta and Newfoundland and Labrador often invoke equalization as emblematic of regional grievances and intergovernmental rivalry, Ontario’s narrative stands apart. For Ontario, the province’s transition from donor to recipient status was less about long-standing grievance and more a moment of an unsettling indicator of declining economic health. The findings suggest that equalization debates are not just about the money; rather they represent competing visions of federalism, fairness, and the struggle for influence in a decentralized and fractured federation.