Mental Health Policy is Workforce Policy: Three issues to watch

Mental Health Policy is Workforce Policy:

Three issues to watch

By Mary Bartram | October, 2026

As the Canadian Health Workforce Network’s mental health and substance use health (MHSUH) sector lead, I’ve been thinking about how major policy developments could affect the people delivering services across Canada. Here are three areas where we need to connect the policy dots — and do more research.

1. What happens when the federal funding runs out?

The $5-billion, 10-year targeted federal transfer for mental health and substance use health services, delivered through bilateral agreements with provinces and territories was just extended for just one year. With no renewal currently planned beyond March 2028, what happens next?

This is a workforce issue as much as a financing issue. Much of this funding supports service providers, including counsellors, social workers, nurses and peer support workers. If funding disappears, what happens to the positions it supports? Could we lose capacity just as demand continues to grow, particularly in the community sector, where gaps in guaranteed public insurance coverage are widest?

The consequences will vary across jurisdictions. Understanding how federal funding has affected service delivery, workforce capacity and employment — and what might happen if it ends — should be a research priority.

2. New MAID policy raises questions about workforce readiness

On October 7, the federal government announced plans to introduce legislation that would indefinitely exclude people whose sole underlying medical condition is a mental illness from eligibility for medical assistance in dying (MAID). It also announced plans to allow advance requests for MAID, with provinces and territories deciding whether to permit the practice. Quebec already allows advance requests in certain circumstances.

These developments raise different workforce questions. The decision on mental illness does not make the preceding years of debate disappear. People have been waiting for a possible change in eligibility, while providers and organizations have had to consider what a potential change could mean for their work. What are the implications of this decision for people experiencing severe and persistent mental illness, their care providers and the services available to them?

Meanwhile, advance requests could have implications for providers supporting people with dementia and other serious conditions, including those with co-occurring mental health or substance use needs. What training, guidance and supports will providers need? How prepared are organizations to respond?

These are not simply questions for psychiatrists or MAID assessors. They matter to the broader network of providers supporting people in the community.

3. Can greater professional mobility improve access to care?

Momentum has been building for a few years to reduce interprovincial mobility barriers for the health workforce. In July 2026, First Ministers agreed to work toward common mutual-recognition legislation to reduce barriers to labour mobility across Canada, including for healthcare providers.

National discussions often focus on physicians and nurses, with some attention to psychologists. What about social workers, addiction counsellors, psychotherapists and counselling therapists, and peer support workers? These groups are essential to MHSUH services, but their roles, credentials and regulatory arrangements vary across jurisdictions. How could greater mobility work for these providers, and what regulatory harmonization would be needed?

We need more workforce research

The Canadian Institute for Health Information's recent report, Canada's mental health and substance use workforce, highlights workforce pressures and important data gaps, including limited information about unregulated providers such as addiction counsellors and peer support workers.

We need research that connects policy decisions to workforce outcomes: examining the employment and service impacts of federal funding changes; assessing workforce readiness for evolving MAID policies; and understanding interprovincial mobility across the full range of MHSUH providers.

As the Canadian Health Workforce Network, we have an opportunity to bring researchers, policy-makers, service providers and people with lived and living experience together around these questions. I hope this roundup sparks ideas for collaborative research and future funding proposals to address the evidence gaps facing Canada's MHSUH workforce.