Québec Reacts Cautiously to Federal Budget

The federal budget tabled last week drew a cool and measured response from the Québec government, which sees alignment on certain fiscal principles but remains dissatisfied with Ottawa’s level of infrastructure support. The Legault government argues that the new infrastructure fund announced by Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne falls short of the province’s needs, offering limited new spending over a ten-year period. When compared with Québec’s own annual capital investments, the expected federal contribution appears modest and unlikely to ease Québec’s infrastructure backlog.

While the tone from Québec has been restrained, the reaction nevertheless highlights persistent frustration about the division of fiscal responsibilities within the federation. Québec’s own analysis suggests that much of the funding announced simply reuses money already earmarked under previous frameworks. The province, along with other jurisdictions, had been calling for a more ambitious, longer-term federal plan to address major projects such as hospital modernization and public transit expansion.

What is striking this time around is what Québec has opted not to criticize. For once, the government has not complained about the level of federal health and social transfers, an issue that traditionally dominates intergovernmental finance debates. Instead, the province appears willing to acknowledge that Ottawa’s positioning toward capital spending and operational restraint broadly mirrors its own approach. Québec’s leadership views this convergence as a positive signal, though it also underlines the limited influence that provinces have on the design of national programs that directly affect them.

Québec also missed an opportunity to press Ottawa more firmly on broader economic cooperation within Canada. The new federal budget offered an opening to advocate for the reduction of interprovincial trade barriers and greater harmonization of fiscal and regulatory measures across the 13 provinces and territories – objectives that remain central to improving competitiveness but were absent from Québec’s public response to the budget.

Elsewhere, political and social leaders in Québec reacted predictably: business groups welcomed elements promoting investment and innovation but warned about competitiveness gaps with the United States, while labour organizations criticized public service cuts and the lack of progressive tax measures.

Overall, Québec’s reaction to the Carney budget reflects a combination of both policy alignment and practical disappointment. In other words, the province supports the general economic direction but sees Ottawa’s commitments as insufficient to meet the scale of its infrastructure and competitiveness challenges.