> Speaking as a Canadian, I wonder if at least part of it is the attitude that investments in these areas are "welfare" and not simply a part of the portfolio of essential services that are delivered by the state to citizens?

Also speaking as a Canadian, I don't understand the distinction you're drawing.

The distinction is in whether there's a value judgment. Is healthcare and welfare something we assume is part of the package living in a developed nation, or is it an indulgent extra, subject to suspicion and scrutiny above and beyond what essentials like military spending get?

I would say that the mainstream Canadian view is the opposite of this. We expect healthcare funding and many are supportive of the strikes when it gets cut, but we are much more likely to treat military budget as the purchase of a lot of unnecessary toys.