Category Archives: Uncategorized

Roundup: Running the party like a frat house

Posted on by

With the House of Commons not sitting this week, one can expect the drama of the Conservative ranks to continue to reverberate this week, seeing as the government’s big budget roll-out has been ringing a little bit flat, in part because they already announced everything ahead of time, but also the fact that it’s missing the mark in some key places. Regardless, MP Chris d’Entremont is now speaking to media a bit more now that he’s crossed the floor, and it’s revealing.

d’Entremont told the CBC over the weekend that he hadn’t been 100 percent on board with crossing the floor until his remarks were published in Politico, and Andrew Scheer and Chris Warkentin barged into his office to yell at him and call him a snake, which was the point he knew it was time to go. And frankly, that’s not a surprise, but my dudes, this did not work for Erin O’Toole when he was in the dying days of his leadership, so why do you think that bullying your caucus is going to work for you? And for Poilievre’s office to respond by saying that d’Entremont is a “liar” for “wilfully deceiving his voters, friends and colleagues” is rich coming from known liars like Poilievre and Scheer. And d’Entremont also said that it wasn’t just Poilievre, but his entire leadership team who are running the party like a frat house, which sounds about right because there are no adults in the room.

I will add that something that has come up a couple of times online but not in the media was the fact that d’Entremont has been a pro-life voter throughout his political career and time in Parliament, which was something that would have mattered in the Trudeau years, but looks like Carney has dumped (possibly because he is more devoutly Catholic than Trudeau was). That wasn’t to say that certain pro-life Liberals weren’t still in Trudeau’s caucus, likely under some kind of promise extracted from them not to vote in certain ways on those issues, but there has been no discussion as to whether any similar promise was extracted from d’Entremont, or if being resolutely pro-choice is no longer a requirement for the Liberal caucus.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-11-09T15:08:04.404Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Over the weekend, Russia targeted the power sub-stations to two nuclear power plants, killing seven, along with other strikes on cities like Dnipro. Ukrainian strikes have apparently disrupted power and heat in two Russian cities near the border.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Heavy-handed caucus management

Posted on by

The Ways and Means motion on the budget survived its second confidence vote, on the Bloc’s amendment, as no other party supported it (unsurprisingly). But outside of that, the drama inside the Conservative caucus room continues to spill out into the open as the party tries to deflect scrutiny. Leaks are talking about ten to fifteen very unhappy members, though nothing to indicate they’re going to cross the floor or leave caucus. At least not in the immediate future. Nevertheless, it is probably not lost on anyone that Andrew Scheer and Chris Warkentin storming into Chris d’Entremont’s office to yell at him when he let it be known he was contemplating crossing the floor is probably not great caucus management.

To that end, Scheer huffed and puffed his way out to the Foyer after Question Period yesterday to claim that it’s the Liberals who are harassing Conservatives, and it was that “harassment” that drove Matt Jeneroux to tender his resignation when there are accounts about how he was meeting with senior Liberals and was allegedly “eighty percent there” in terms of being convinced to cross over before this all blew up. Of course, nothing Scheer says is remotely believable, and his trying to claim that the Liberals are manufacturing this to “distract” from their budget is beyond risible considering just how complete and total their sales job on said budget is. The fact that Scheer is resorting to that kind of a dismissal is a sign of just how completely out of his depth he is here.

Scheer says Liberals are trying to “undemocratically” get a majority through backroom deals and accuse Liberals of harassing Conservatives to cross the floor. (Sure, Jan)

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-11-07T17:16:03.099Z

Scheer claims Jeneroux was pressured into resigning because Liberals were harassing him. He’s actually claiming that.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-11-07T17:18:59.423Z

What gets me is that no one in that caucus seems to have learned a single gods damned lesson after Erin O’Toole’s final days. For those of you who memory-holed the whole incident in trying to rehabilitate O’Toole’s image while trying to turn him into a statesman, in the dying days of his leadership, he weaponized the (garbage) Reform Act to kick out any member of caucus who dared to question him, and that member of caucus was Senator Batters, which was a big mistake because she has some pretty deep networks. Within days, the vote in caucus on O’Toole’s leadership was organised and he lost decisively. And despite this object lesson, Poilievre and Scheer are trying to use a heavy-hand and threats to enforce loyalty? Seriously? The other thing that seems to be emerging is a rift between the eastern and western flanks of the party, as eastern Tories are much more progressive and even-tempered than the Reform-rooted Conservatives, who are increasingly turning MAGA, and Poilievre needs to get a handle on this and start mending some fences before this blows up in his face.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-11-07T14:24:04.975Z

Ukraine Dispatch

The fighting continues in Pokrovsk, while Ukrainian forces are stepping up their assault on Russian forces in Dobropillia to ease the pressure on Pokrovsk. Ukrainian soldiers fighting with drones are being rewarded with points for confirmed hits and kills, leading to ethical concerns about the gamification of war. Ukraine says that 1400 Africans from dozens of countries have signed up to fight for Russia as mercenaries, but mostly are just used in “meat assaults.”

Continue reading →

Roundup: Jeneroux heads for the exit

Posted on by

It’s been a strange couple of days in the House of Commons. First of all, Pierre Poilievre made his speech on the budget (technically on the Ways and Means motion for the budget), and traditionally, the official opposition moves an amendment, followed by the next-largest party, in this case the Bloc. And these amendments are usually things like “the budget not pass because x, y, z.” But for some reason, Poilievre didn’t move the amendment in his speech like he normally would, so the Bloc took up the opportunity do so, meaning they got the amendment, and the Conservatives had to suffice with a sub-amendment, which doesn’t matter other than it being kind of embarrassing because they obviously don’t have their shit together.

And this got compounded by the votes. Unless I’m mistaken, normally these amendments/sub-amendments happen at the same time as the main vote on the Ways and Means motion, so it’s done in one fell swoop. Not this time. The Government House Leader declared that the vote on the Conservative sub-amendment would happen yesterday evening, and the Bloc amendment tomorrow afternoon, and that these would be considered confidence votes (which they aren’t normally—only the main vote). And let me stress—it is very, very, very unusual for any vote to happen on a Friday, let alone a confidence vote, and that’s only because they can now vote on their phones (which is a parliamentary abomination). This is not how this normally goes, and it’s a bunch of really childish gamesmanship. But suffice to say, the government passed the first vote as neither the Bloc nor the NDP would support the Conservative sub-amendment, and the NDP have already indicated they won’t vote for the Bloc’s amendment either—but they’re still not decided if they’re voting on the actual motion, sometime in the week after next (because next week is a constituency week).

It’s very, very unusual that they would hold any vote on a Friday, let alone a vote they have deemed to be a confidence vote.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-11-06T20:21:34.500Z

And then, as this was all going on, Conservative MP Matt Jeneroux announced he was going to resign his seat, and the language in his letter sounded like it was going to be pretty soon, saying he hoped he could speak in the House one more time. But then Pierre Poilievre tweets that he’s not going to retire until spring, which is weird. Paul Wells likened this to negotiating in public, and having a silent “or else.” And this is while rumours have been swirling that the Liberals have been having conversations with Jeneroux about crossing the floor, and other rumours swirling that Conservative MPs are being threatened if they follow d’Entremont across the floor. And then to compound the weirdness, Jeneroux posts on Facebook that he totally wasn’t coerced and that he’s still determining his resignation date, but it will “probably” be in the spring. This is not normal. And if you needed reassurance that things totally aren’t falling apart inside caucus, Gérard Deltell told the media that d’Entremont’s defection was an isolated case. Guys. You’re in five-alarm clown show territory now.

Per Paul Wells: I take Pierre here to be bargaining in public. The “next spring” directly contradicts Jeneroux and, the way it's placed, all clever at the end, amounts to an “if you know what's good for you.”

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-11-07T02:00:51.437Z

I totally wasn't coerced, he says.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-11-07T02:52:25.993Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia claims they are advancing in the ruins of Pokrovsk, as fighting continues. Ukraine has hit the major Volgograd oil refinery in a drone strike, and shut down its operations. And here’s what Angelina Jolie was doing in Kherson.

Continue reading →

QP: Trading “Food Professor” quotes back-and-forth

Posted on by

The PM was present for a second day in a row, and you would have expected all the other leaders would be as well, but Pierre Poilievre was absent. That left Melissa Lantsman to lead off instead, and she dutifully read the script about the size of the deficit that accomplishes so little. Mark Carney thundered that the budget is about building the country and that they will put $3000 in the pockets of very Canadian by the end of the decade. Lantsman worried about debt servicing charges and that it goes to “bankers” (as opposed to, say, pension funds), and Carney said that the health transfers were preserved and that the interest charges are less than they were under Harper. Luc Berthold took over in French to read the lines in French about fuelling inflation and children lining up at food banks, to which Carney responded with his lines about 75 percent of the budget is about protecting sovereignty, and that repeated the $3000 claim. Berthold insisted that Carney would go down in history as the most expensive, before repeating his canard about inflation. Carney countered that it was not the most costly budget, but the most ambitious. Jasraj Hallan took over to rush though some swipes at Carney possibly holding money in offshore tax havens. Carney responded that the budget fights for tax fairness and cuts taxes for 22 million people. Hallan repeated the same accusation, and Carney said that he was proud of his time in the private sector but now he is helping to grow the country.

Yves-François Blanchet rose for the Bloc, and he complained about the so-called “discrimination” in Old-Age Security, and Carney noted the social transfers in the budget, and that it was indeed just that older seniors can get more. Blanchet then raised their plan for credits to help young people buy a first home, and Carney said that there is already an advantage for young people, which was on top of their investment in housing. Blanchet then demanded higher health transfers with no conditions attached, and Carney said that Quebec is getting $12 billion for healthcare and $5 billion for infrastructure, along with a few other big numbers.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Red flags around the “grand bargain”

Posted on by

The more I read about the budget’s “climate competitiveness,” the more I find myself questioning just what is on offer from Mark Carney. There is an attempt to build this so-called “grand bargain” that failed the last time it was tried, where approving the Trans-Mountain Expansion was supposed to help fund the green transition and provide the social licence for doing things like the tanker ban on the northwest coast of BC, and yet here we are, where the oil and gas sector and by extension, the provincial government of Alberta, have not lived up to their end of the bargain at all. The companies that insisted they were going to meet their 2025 Net-Zero targets suddenly started to complain that it was too hard, and when the greenwashing legislation kicked in, suddenly all of those Net-Zero pledges vanished, as though they were never real to begin with.

That’s why I’m particularly unimpressed that one of the promises in the budget is to water down the greenwashing legislation, which sounds an awful lot like Carney is looking for the industry to lie to him once more about all of the reductions that they’re totally going to make in the future—really! You just need to let them have a free hand with even fewer environmental regulations in the meantime. As well, the fact that Carney is pinning his hopes on so-called “decarbonized” oil production with the Pathways project is even looking like he’s going to lose a tonne of money trying to get it to scale up, because hey, he’s offering a bunch of tax credits for them to operate, which is a de facto subsidy for oil operations. But it’s extremely expensive, and all of those oil companies want even more taxpayer money to make it work, while they pocket their profits, naturally. Nevertheless, it looks an awful lot like Carney is going to capitulate to that sector and remove the emissions cap on a bunch of half-hearted greenwashed promises and pretend that he still cares about the environment.

Speaking of the tanker ban, BC premier David Eby and the coastal First Nations are organising a pushback against any move by the federal government to lift it in order to push a pipeline through the region, while Danielle Smith puts ever more pressure on the federal government to approve that project (even though there’s no proponent, or route, or even just a line on a map). Will it be enough to dissuade Carney? At the pace he’s going, I’m not taking any bets.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-11-05T14:25:06.884Z

Ukraine Dispatch

The fighting continues in the streets of Pokrovsk, which is the kind of fighting that can’t be done with the same kind of drone warfare that the rest of the front line has become accustomed to.

Continue reading →

QP: Continually invoking the so-called “Food Professor”

Posted on by

Post-budget, the PM was finally present for the first time in two weeks, as were all of the other leaders, ready to put on a show. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he declared that never has any budget forced Canadians to pay more for so little, decried the size of the deficit. Mark Carney insisted that Canada still has the best position in the G7, and that this was about building for the future. Poilievre decried that the cost to service the debt meant less money for doctors, and Carney retorted that debt servicing charges were less than they were under Harper. Poilievre repeated his first question in English, and threw in a couple of added slogans. Carney declared that 75 percent of the measures in the budget are to protect are sovereignty while the rest are for help for the cost of living, such as their tax cut. Poilievre insisted that the industrial carbon price was threatening “food sovereignty,” and quoted the so-called “Food Professor” to make his point. Carney patted himself on the back for killing the consumer carbon levy, that farms all fell below the industrial carbon price cut-off, and that the Climate Institute calculated that the impact of the industrial carbon price on inflation is zero. Poilievre tried to tie this to steel production and food prices, and Carney repeated that the effect of the industrial carbon price on food inflation is zero. Poilievre then switched to Friday’s Supreme Court decision, falsely characterised it, and demanded the government invoke the Notwithstanding Clause. Carney said that they would come up with new legislative measures in response. 

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, to lament that their priorities were not in the budget, and Carney responded that clean electricity tax credits was a good measure. Blanchet insisted that a tax credit was just creative accounting, and Carney insisted that Hydro-Quebec would be the biggest beneficiary, and that carbon capture was needed for the oil Quebec uses. Blanchet decried that the budget was just austerity, and Carney insisted this was about investing and that this was a growth budget.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A floor-crossing during the budget reveal

Posted on by

So, that was the “generational” budget, which is cutting away at the civil service, and claiming “efficiencies” in most government departments (though a few defence and security related departments, as well as Indigenous Services only faced a two percent cut), while there are plenty of those investments for resource projects. The “climate competitiveness” strategy is promising to remove the emissions cap if provinces and industry can get other things like methane emissions reductions and carbon capture implemented at scale, but considering the latter isn’t cost-effective without a sufficiently high carbon price, I’m guessing that’s going to wind up failing (and no, there is “grand bargain” because Alberta and the industry won’t respect it). The deficit is at $78 billion, which is actually smaller than Stephen Harper’s $55.6 billion deficit in 2009-10 if you adjust for today’s dollars.

Here are some highlight stories, starting with some key numbers:

  • A $2 billion “critical minerals sovereign fund” that can include equity stakes
  • A suite of new tax measures designed to help compete with the US
  • $73 billion for national defence by the end of the decade, but there are few details about how it will all happen..
  • Slashing temporary immigration numbers and freezing permanent resident intake (because that’ll help with labour shortages)
  • $150 million more for CBC, and “exploring” participation in Eurovision.
  • Using buying power to spur the development of data centres without actually funding those projects (because it’s likely a bubble).
  • Moving ahead with regulating stablecoins.
  • Oversight over open banking was moved from the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada to the Bank of Canada.
  • Ending investment transfer fees to encourage more banking competition.
  • $2.7 billion in cuts to foreign aid over four years (as the destruction of USAID has created a massive need for foreign aid, so well done there).
  • Research and Development tax incentives aren’t limited to Canadian-owned firms.
  • They lifted the tax on luxury yachts and on foreign-owned vacation homes.
  • Weakening the laws around greenwashing, because of course they are.
  • Establishing sovereign space-lift capabilities.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-11-04T21:31:12.741Z

The seemingly outsized cuts to Global Affairs Canada in Budget 2025 are hard to square with the government’s repeated call to expand and deepen Canada's international partnerships. Reinvesting in the military is welcome – but defence is just one tool of our international policy.

— Roland Paris (@rolandparis.bsky.social) 2025-11-04T22:00:30.407Z

https://bsky.app/profile/plagasse.bsky.social/post/3m4tnilpugk2j

We're cutting $s to low-income 18 year-olds to access education, but we still have half a billion a year to make student loans interest-free for early-career 20-somethings "to help with the rent" AS DUMB AS A BAG OF HAMMERS.

— Alex Usher (@alexusherhesa.bsky.social) 2025-11-04T23:47:10.318Z

Staring at Canada's own gender-based analysis of its budget. Give you one guess at the main beneficiary of all the major spending investments….

— Lauren Dobson-Hughes (@ldobsonhughes.bsky.social) 2025-11-05T01:09:27.537Z

In pundit reaction, Heather Scoffield has a quick overview of some of the tax and investment measures. Mike Moffatt is sorely disappointed in just how little there was for the housing crisis in the budget, particularly as it puts too much focus on reducing immigration. Justin Ling notes the corporate tax cuts, and the fact that the budget doesn’t acknowledge the short-term problems associated with Trump’s gangster economics. Kevin Carmichael considers this a hybrid of Harper and Trudeau’s budgets, which winds up missing the mark as a result. Paul Wells remarks on some of the political considerations in the budget that is geared to investment when business hasn’t been keen to do so, and that there is a whole lot of downside in the budget, some of which is the fact that our chronic weaknesses of low productivity and internal barriers are an even bigger problem than they were before. Susan Delacourt says the budget misses the mark, being too vague in where the cuts will come from, and does a poor job in telling its story.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-11-04T22:22:02.466Z

Floor-crossing

In amidst budget being delivered, Conservative MP Chris d’Entremont went on record with Politico that he was considering crossing the floor to the Liberals, and my immediate thought was that there was some residual bitterness because he was forbidden from running to be Speaker, and to be put forward as Deputy Speaker once Francis Scarpaleggia had been voted in. But he has also seemed dejected when I’ve seen him in the Chamber of late, never wearing a tie, not participating in anything. Once this was public, I heard from a source that there was screaming happening in the opposition lobby outside of the House of Commons. d’Entremont quickly resigned from caucus, and within an hour, had formally crossed to the Liberals, who were happy to have him, particularly because he’s an affable Red Tory, and it doesn’t hurt that this completes the Liberals’ sweep of Nova Scotia. The Conservatives later put out a bitter statement (and by contrast, when Leona Allslev crossed from the Liberals to the Conservatives, Justin Trudeau wished her well). This means that the Liberals only need two more votes or abstentions to get their budget through, so we’ll see what that looks like in the days ahead.

Continue reading →

QP: Trading budget slogans back-and-forth

Posted on by

In advance of the budget release, the PM was around but not at QP yet again (and it is just shy of two weeks since he last has been). Pierre Poilievre was absent, likely getting his budget briefing so that he can comment to the media once it’s released, so it was up to Andrew Scheer to lead off, and he recited the tired lines about every dollar the government spending coming from the pockets of Canadians whether in taxes or inflation, and they were about to find out how much money the budget would take from Canadians’ pockets, and declared that they wanted an “affordable budget.” Steve MacKinnon thundering that this was a good day for the opposition because they would see that this is an affordable and historic budget that would build the country. Scheer then went onto the imaginary taxes and demanded the industrial carbon price he killed. MacKinnon said it was great news that those imaginary taxes weren’t in the budget. Scheer went on about the clean fuel standard, claiming that CRA collects it (utter nonsense), and Julie Dabrusin scoffed at this notion. Gérard Deltell took over in French to demand an affordable budget, and MacKinnon gave his “good news” talking point in French. Deltell quoted the “Food Professor,” meaning there was no credibility to be had, and Anna Gainey praised the good things that would be in the budget. Deltell then raised the industrial carbon price, still quoting the “Food Professor,” and Dabrusin again scoffed at imaginary taxes before praising the upcoming budget. 

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and she lambasted the planned cancellation of the two billion tree programme and the that the implementation was always going to be their issue. Tim Hodgson recited a bland statement about the budget. Normandin called out the government for abandoning even the meagre measures from Trudeau, and MacKinnon insisted that they would have climate measures as they invest in the future. Patrick Bonin gave his own condemnation of the cancellation and the climate capitulation plan, and Dabrusin insisted that they would continue to fight against climate change as they build Canada.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Making his own budget shoes

Posted on by

On Budget Eve, finance minister François-Philippe Champagne summoned the media to Saint-Tite, Quebec, where he was not just buying new shoes for the budget, in that strange Canadian tradition, but he was actually helping to make them at a shoe manufacturer, which was to symbolise the importance of investing in Canadian business. His message was that there will be no surprises in the budget, which they keep describing with the term “generational investment.” (Carney has also used “austerity,” so there’s that as well).

Meanwhile, more leaks about what’s in the budget are coming out, like the cancellation of the two billion trees programme (meaning by the time the current contracts are fulfilled, it will be about one billion trees). Or the fact that they have rejected calls to increase judges’ salaries to attract more talent to the bench. There are also going to be tax changes and updates to things like the capital cost allowances, because of course there are. Here is the updated tally of what has been promised so far. Also of note is that it looks like about $3 billion was collected in counter-tariffs in the trade war with the US before most of them were lifted—but they promised to raise $20 billion as part of their election platform.

Meanwhile, the Conservatives keep making the same demands for things that are imaginary—ending supposed “hidden taxes” which are not taxes, and in some cases are regulatory regimes either for the environment or other purposes, but they’re calling them taxes because dur, taxes are bad. But the worst canard that they have been allowed to get away with scot-free is this bullshit notion that somehow, deficits are being financed by “printed money” which is driving up inflation, which is not true at all. No money has been printed, even at the height of COVID, when the Bank of Canada did briefly engage in quantitative easing to keep liquidity in the market, but that’s not printing money, and they have been engaged in quantitative tightening for at least two years now. And even more to the point, if inflation was rampant, the Bank of Canada wouldn’t have cut interest rates again, but what are facts? And Carney, as a former central banker, should be putting a stop to this kind of thing, but he refuses, and sticks to his four prepared bullet points instead. To what end? I do not understand the reluctance to challenge this economic disinfo.

The Conservatives' budgetary demands include fiction. There are no "hidden taxes" on food. The industrial carbon price doesn't apply to agriculture. There is no "food packaging tax," and plastic regulations largely exempt food packaging. The clean fuel standard "17¢" was one scenario over time. 1/2

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-11-03T14:31:01.939Z

And most egregious of all, nobody is printing money to pay for deficits. Nobody. There isn't even quantitative easing happening as there was during the height of the pandemic, and the Bank of Canada has been on quantitative tightening since. These are all lies that the Liberals just let fester. 2/2

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-11-03T14:31:01.940Z

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-11-03T23:08:02.163Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia claims they have advanced within Pokrovsk, but Ukraine says they continue to hold them at bay. Meanwhile, Ukrainian troops have advanced near Dobropillia, reclaiming territory. Ukrainian drones have attacked a Russian petrochemical plant in Bashkortostan.

Continue reading →

QP: Vile accusations amidst imaginary tax nonsense

Posted on by

The PM was back in town after his Asia trip, but opted not to come to QP for whatever reason. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he immediately worried that tomorrow would be another “costly” budget that would “skyrocket” the cost of living, and said that they would vote for it only if it lowers the cost of living, and demanded an “affordable” budget. Steve MacKinnon took this as good news, and that Poilievre would order his MPs to vote for it because it will be an affordable budget. Poilievre then took swipes at the finance minister and blamed the government for the cost of housing, and again demanded an “affordable budget.” MacKinnon again repeated that it would be an affordable budget and would “open the door” to opportunities. Poilievre switched to English to repeat his first question and the claim he would vote for an affordable budget. (Spoiler: He won’t). MacKinnon repeats that he took this as good news that Poilievre would order his troops to vote for their “affordable” budget and listed the tax cuts they were promising. Poilievre then called on the government to scrap the industrial carbon price under dubious pretexts, and MacKinnon noted that farmers are largely exempt from any of those prices, and again insisted not to call an election. Poilievre again listed things the price applies to and tried to tie it to food prices, and this time Wayne Long got up to deliver the “generational budget” lines. Poilievre mocked along calling the government “new,” and made another appeal of falsehoods about the industrial carbon price. Long tried to mock Poilievre’s tenure in return, and said that in 20 years, Poilievre has only voted against any help for Canadians.

Christine Normandin rose for the Bloc, and said it was curious that 24 hours before the budget, that the government isn’t negotiating and just threatening an election instead. MacKinnon first congratulated the municipal election winners in Quebec, and then raised their discussions so far. Normandin tried again, and MacKinnon praised what is in the budget and the investments that would benefit Quebec. Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay took over and wondered why the priority in the budget wasn’t help for Quebeckers, and listed their demands. Mélanie Joly said that they are still in negotiations with the U.S., and that they have support for sectors in the meantime. 

Continue reading →