Donald Trump’s trade threats have thrown Canada into a national crisis. Like the early days of COVID-19, tariffs have the country rallying together and governments promising decisive action to help us weather the storm.
Our emergency response to COVID-19 included vital income supports, new paid sick day programs and policies to reduce homelessness. Unfortunately, many of these measures were either temporary or incomplete, leaving out some of our most at-risk communities.
With another crisis upon us, the time has come to learn from these experiences and build safeguards not just for the tariff crisis ahead, but for other storms we know will come to shore.
What does that look like? The pandemic made it abundantly clear: health, work and income are all fundamentally connected. Support in one area strengthens others.
That’s why it’s clear we need to not only prepare the health-care system for a recession that may put millions of jobs at risk, but also bolster income support so that people can make ends meet. Many of those at risk of losing their job are also at risk of losing work-linked benefits for prescription drugs and mental health supports. At even higher risk are precarious workers struggling to make ends meet and already without access to private benefits. Migrant workers in areas where tariffs will hit first will be left to the whims of their employers, some with reputations for inhumane treatment that the United Nations has compared to slavery.
Workers and their advocates are calling for a response equal to the emergency ahead of us. This includes temporary income support of at least $600 per week and permanent changes to Employment Insurance to ensure its availability to all workers, including the precariously employed, misclassified workers and migrant workers. Income supports like the Canada Emergency Response Benefit during the pandemic helped reduce inequality, poverty and food insecurity for everyone, especially racialized workers.
Outside of income support, a temporary moratorium on evictions is needed, just as it was during the pandemic. Storm-proofing also means implementing lasting and permanent rent control, another measure being called for. And, of course, investing in access to health care is vital. As a family doctor and advocate for universal pharmacare, that means protecting patients against unemployment shocks by extending a nascent public pharmacare program to everyone in Canada, not just the early adopters in B.C., Manitoba, P.E.I. and the Yukon.
Major investments in the primary health-care workforce also are long overdue. Everyone in Canada deserves access to not only a family doctor, but team-based primary care. What if that expansion was paired with a jobs program for creating team-based care? Investing in other care sectors like childcare and public education holds the same potential. In fact, it is Canada’s public infrastructure that has helped us weather past crises and must be prioritized as a government strategy to respond to this crisis.
Of course, public investment of this nature requires meaningful financial power; the umbrella will not build itself. The Prime Minister has said that all money collected from tariffs will be used to support workers. That will help, but building a storm-worthy ship needs more sustainable support.
The latest data from Statistics Canada shows the divide between rich and working-class Canadians is at its highest level since it began tracking. If this is a moment of nation building, wealthy Canadians and profitable corporations must step up and pay their fair share to build a stronger country.
The strength and breadth of our shared response must go beyond temporary fixes. By investing in income supports, health care and public infrastructure, we can build a stronger, healthier, more equitable future for all of us.

Thanks Dr. Raza for your article and advocacy.
Extending societal entitlements (income supports, healthcare investment) are an alluring and arguably just option to advocate for… but with what money? Marginal tax rates on the wealthy are already at 53.5%; pushing them higher risks crossing the threshold where taxation becomes counterproductive, disincentivizing economic output and ultimately shrinking the tax base these programs rely on.
Rather than unsustainably expanding entitlements, I would argue we need to critically examine structural policies that have led to lagging productivity and cost of living crisis. Some options that come to mind include adjusting zoning policies to increase housing density, fine tuning immigration targets to focus on GDP-per capita growth, triaging current expenditures (ie. being judicious with foreign aid, focusing on structural inefficiencies)
Health care people are very good at spending money but have no concept of wealth creation. Always seeking more government spending.