The PM was off to Mumbai, and Pierre Poilievre was in Toronto for his big “foreign policy” speech (which wasn’t much new, really), which meant the b-team was in charge today. Melissa Lantsman led off with a return to the dogpile on Lina Diab, to which Steven MacKinnon called it shameful that the opposition was using this as a wedge issue. Lantsman tried again, and this time Gary Anandasangaree listed the reductions in immigration and asylum levels, and ghe increase in removal levels. Chris Warkentin took over, and decried “inflationary spending” as killing the hopes of youth. François-Philippe Champagne pronounced there was good news in that Canada had the highest level of foreign direct investment in eighteen years. Warkentin tried again with added bombast, and Champagne praised the government’s record on affordability measures that the Conservatives voted against. Dominique Vien took over to ask the same in French, and Champagne repeated his same points. Vien tried again, and Champange hoped that they would return to their ridings next week to listen to how these benefits help people. 

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and yet again returned to the pension software question, to which MacKinnon praised the modernisation project, and that 7.7 million Canadians are already being served by it. Normandin raised that the National Assembly in Quebec called for an inquiry (which seems to be well outside of their bailiwick), and Patty Hajdu got up to again praise the modernisation project, and that if anyone has an issue, and that they are confident as they transform the next to payment programmes. Sébastien Lemire tried the same again, and Hajdu again reiterated that the system needed to be modernised as the old system was fraught with problems. 

Round two, and Dane Lloyd railed about the situation young people find themselves in (Church: Hooray for Bill C-4, and Build Canada Homes bill; Canadians elected a government with a plan), Tamara Jansen worried about the struggles her five children have in raising their own families (McKelvie: We are working on bringing the cost of housing down; You are voting against measures to help young Canadians), Ted Falk read a script on the same “fears” by young Canadians (van Koeverden: You should actually read up on why food prices are rising, and support our benefits), Kerry Diotte read the same (Fragiskatos: You keep voting against supports people need), and Jason Groleau res the French version of the script (Desrochers; You voted against the supports for young Canadians).

Sigh. Inflation is on target.FFS#QP

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-02-26T19:32:17.726Z

Jean-Denis Garon worried about the powers for expropriation for the high-speed rail project (MacKinnon: You are opposed to this project all Canadians want, and we will show respect for those along the route; Alto is doing consultations and did one this week).

Stephane Kusie asked about the pension software (Hajdu: Let’s start with the difference between an estimate and an expenditure, and new are well below the estimate and the caseload backlog is going down; if 7.7 million successful migrations is considered a failure, I’m not sure how you are doing accounting), Kelly Block asked the same (McLean: We are taking action on a critical programme that dated back to 1966, which the Auditor General flagged as a high risk for failure; To date only $1.5 billion has been spent so I’m not sure where you are getting your numbers from), and Anna Roberts shouted the same again (McLean: I can’t tolerate you talking down our public servants, and consultants had specific knowledge).

Round three saw questions on the pension software (MacKinnon: You know this programme is on budget and is replacing software from the sixties; The old system was constantly making mistakes; Hajdu: This software is going to serve three separate benefit programmes, and the number you are quoting is the potential for the whole envelope for all three transformations), emergency use of strychnine for farmers (MacDonald: I was disappointed in the PMRA’s decision but they are an independent agency; We are continuing to advocate on their behalf; I am working with the provinces), whinging that a private member’s bill was defeated (Klassen: Fisheries management must be done according to the science), a temporary resident not getting a criminal record (Sahota: These cases are tried in provincial courts; This is a failure of the administration of justice, which is a provincial issue), the asylum system (MacKinnon: Claims are down by one third), the Energy Regulator denying a permit for Brookfield (Hogan: Put aside some of these conspiracy theories), Build Canada Homes’ projects (Desrochers: You should do some homework and we can offer you briefings), and access to abortion care in Manitoba—which is squarely within provincial jurisdiction (Chi: We have made progress but we will work to close barriers). 

Overall, it was a weird, Friday-esque grab-bag of issues that were both reheating the same ones from earlier in the week, with a couple of new ones that were a bit outsized in their theatricality. While we continued to get some of the same gross, misleading questions on asylum seekers from earlier in the week, along with bizarre questions about temporary residents who commit crimes as though the immigration minister were responsible, and a few more jabs at Lina Diab, who was not present, we also saw a consistent series of questions on the pension software issue in English for the first time, rather than just the odd one-off, and they got increasingly performative and theatrical for something that has been an exclusively French-only issue for weeks now (make of that what you will). And we did actually see Patty Hajdu try to explain the figures for a change, rather than just make assurances that the project is actually under-budget (her point that the figure they keep citing is to transform not only OAS, which is now wrapping up, but also CPP and EI, which have yet to happen), and that the figure is the total envelope and not a cost-overrun on the OAS portion, which again, she insists in under budget. And that’s great! But she ran out of time, and didn’t go back to it, or make that clear, other than to say that she has explained this over and over at committee, but that isn’t going to get clips anywhere.

I was also a bit mystified by the whole strychnine issue, which for those of you who are unaware is that its use has been banned by farmers who used it on the prairies to control the gopher/Richardson’s ground squirrel population. The decision was not made by the minister, but by the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA), which is arm’s-length and independent, for good reason. Their decisions should not be subject to political pressure. But the Conservatives on the issue were screaming that the minister “broke his promise” on this (the minister pointed out that he did not promise, but said that he would advocate for them which he did), and went so far as to demand that the government work with them to draft a bill to override the PMRA. There just seems to be such a disconnect between the Conservatives and the reality of both independent agencies and the fact that pesticides are a major trade issue, particularly with the EU, whom we are trying to trade with more. (For example, the use of glyphosate on durum wheat is particularly contentious in Italy, which is the main market for durum). It’s all so incoherent and short-sighted.

Sartorially speaking, snaps go out Rechie Valdez for a tailored navy jacket over a black top and slacks, and to Peter Fragiskatos for a tailored dark grey three-piece suit with a crisp white shirt and matching pocket square with a dark blue patterned tie. Style citations go out to Mark Gerretsen for a dark grey-brown jacket over a blue-grey shirt and dark blue jeans with a grey striped tie, and to Marilyn Gladu for a navy dress with egregious wizard sleeves.