The PM was wrapping up his trip to the UN, while Pierre Poilievre was again absent. Melissa Lantsman led off, and quote a National Payroll Institute study about people using their entire income on expenses, to which François-Philippe Champagne insisted that they have acted for Canadians, with new housing programmes, the enhanced GST credit, and extending the excise fuel tax exemption. Lantsman insisted that if the government’s plans worked, then they wouldn’t have these stories, before she recited the story of a totally real constituent. Champagne responded by listing benefit programmes that help people, which the Conservatives voted against. Sandra Cobena took over, and she quoted a downgraded OECD report on reduced growth expectations, and also gave a constituent sob story. Champagne was shocked that she would talk the economy down, and listed off good news talking points. Cobena insisted that the Liberals were driving the economy down and listed projects with timelines that were a decade out (because you can deliver a major project overnight). Tim Hodgson listed projects currently underway and how many jobs they were generating. Luc Berthold took over in French, and he read his own script that said the very same quotes of the payroll report. Champagne reiterated his first response about the three major actions they have taken to help Canadians. Berthold recited a sob story from “Jessie” in Quebec Centre, and Joël Lightbound asked how he explains to “Jessie” how he voted against programmes that help people like her.

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, even though Yves-François Blanchet was present, and she decried the latest omnibus bill, and in particular noted the “special economic zone” portion of the bill. Steven MacKinnon grumbled that she was ignoring the work the government was doing, and raised the Churchill Falls agreement as an example. Normandin asked about ports privatisation, and he insisted that wasn’t happening. Jean-Denis Garon took over to denounce that the Quebec government was not consulted on a tax cut that would hurt the province’s finances, and Champagne insisted they provided breathing room for Quebec businesses.

Round two, and Frank Caputo denounced “Liberal parole,” and wanted the government to change parole hearings to every five years instead of two (Gary Anandasangaree: We passed two bills to strengthen our laws; It’s unfortunate that this issue is being politicised), Arpan Khanna tried the same again (Anandasangaree: This Sunday is the first responders’ memorial day, and we stand with the police officer in Belleville; Your remarks are disingenuous), Tony Baldinelli gave another attempt, this time raising Paul Bernardo (Sahota: These bills would never survive a Charter challenge), Pierre Paul-Hus tried again in French (Fraser, partly in French: We have legislation to do more to keep people behind bars and supports for victims; You voted against our bills to get tougher on criminals).

Can the government not point out that the Conservatives are demanding unconstitutional legislation? #QP

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-09-23T18:36:40.395Z

Seriously, guys. Parole is a Charter right. It would be nice if someone could point this out. Maybe the “Party of the Charter” could? #QP

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-09-23T18:38:32.885Z

Martin Champoux said the government was flouting their own law in abandoning contributions from streaming giants (Miller: We didn’t say we would disregard the Broadcasting Act; We have 50 Quebec MPs and are making historic investments).

Rhonda Kirkland returned to the demands on parole legislation (Sahota: this is not “Liberal parole” and you are trying to politicise this; You opposed Lawful Access), Laila Goodridge asked the same again (Anandasangaree: Let me talk about the victims of Paul Bernardo; You keep voting against bills to make Canadians safe), Roman Baber tried again on the Bernardo point (Anandasangaree: These issues should never be politicised, and we need to recognise that we have the Charter of Rights and Freedoms).

I am going to start throwing things. “Liberal parole?” Fuck off. And for Sahota to use this to chastise the Conservatives for opposing Lawful Access? Beyond the pale. #QP

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-09-23T18:46:02.002Z

Round three saw questions on the payroll institute/paycheque-to-paycheque report (Champagne: We have cut taxes for 22 million Canadians and the excise tax on gas; Lightbound: What will you tell your constituents about why you voted against help for them?; Belanger: Some rambling nonsense; Hogan: There has never been a better time to be an Albertan in Canada; Naqvi: We are focused on building trade around the world), partial airport privatisation (MacKinnon: There are no regulations on airport fees currently, and we intend to regulate them), the contradictory statements from the PM around the U.S. (Hodgson: Yay Canadian potash, and we are in a complicated geopolitical situation), and a business case for abandoning climate action (Dabrusin: We are committed to climate action and Churchill Falls is an example).

Hodgson: Maybe your constituent “Mark” may want to talk to an Albertan named Danielle Smith…Good Zeus… #QP

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-09-23T19:00:15.048Z

Overall, much of the day was a continuation of the Conservatives’ attempt to build the narrative of “people are suffering, the Liberals are out of touch” with more of their totally real sob stories featuring totally real constituents who all have suspiciously white names, but they merely appended the National Payroll Institute study as the anecdote to tie the theme together today. It remains disingenuous, but this is their particular strategy. The other topic of the day was so-called “Liberal parole,” which had me absolutely spitting mad because it’s such complete bullshit. They would use the pain of victims of horrific crimes to try and claim that the Liberal government is responsible for having them dealt with parole hearings every two years, when they know exactly why this is, which is because there are Charter rights at play. They know this. And the Liberals should be pointing this out. Ruby Sahota mentioned that the Conservatives bills “wouldn’t survive a Charter challenge” after the fifth question, and Gary Anandasangaree didn’t raise the Charter until the final question of the round, twelve questions in. That’s absolutely unacceptable. It was also unacceptable for Ruby Sahota to use this question to promote Lawful Access. They should know better, but they can’t help themselves.

Otherwise, I would add that the Bloc have been the only ones to substantively raise the problems with the government’s latest omnibus bill, as the Conservatives are entirely absent on that file (because they don’t know if they actually want to oppose it or how), and they are continuing to push on the government to reinstate both the Digital Services Tax and the Online Streaming Act levies for streaming giants, which they absolutely should, since both are essential for digital sovereignty and a well-deserved middle finger to the Americans who have tried to use this as leverage against us in trade talks, and frankly, the government’s answers on this issue have been weak and wanting.

Sartorially speaking, snaps go out to Ryan Turnbull for a dark grey suit with a crisp white shirt and matching pocket square along with a light blue tie, and to Heather McPherson for a dark grey jacket over a white crew-necked top and black slacks. Style citations go out to Rachel Bendayan for a collared, long-sleeved dress with random, coloured, patterned blocks across it, and to Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe for a navy jacket and tie with a blue-grey shirt and faded blue jeans. Dishonourable mention goes out to Shannon Miedema for a bright yellow jacket over a black top and slacks.