Tag Archives: Supply Management

QP: An incomplete “economics lesson”

Posted on by

The PM was present today, as we learned he has been having pre-budget meetings with opposition leaders (for what it’s worth, given that the document is about to head to the printers). Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and raised his meeting with Mark Carney later in the day, and demanded an “affordable budget for an affordable life.” Carney assert that this budget would be bring operational spending under control while making major investments in capital projects. Poilievre said that the Liberals promised this a decade ago and we have only had economic ruin since, before again demanding an end to deficits and so-called “hidden taxes.” Carney reiterated they would clean up operational spending before reminding him that inflation remains in the target zone. Poilievre switched to English to repeat his first question, and Carney repeated his points about cleaning up operational spending to invest more, and that people have been doing better singe he became prime minister. Poilievre went on a rant about how Carney was telling people that they have never had it so good, to which Carney decided to give an economic lesson, pointing out that inflation is in the target zone, food inflation is in the G7 average, and that Canada is in the best position in the G7. Poilievre accused Carney of lecturing Canadians lining up at food banks—to which the Liberals shouted “you!”—and listed high food prices. Carney pointed to his tax cuts and stated he was here for single mothers and Canadians. Poilievre again railed about the inflation figures, and Carney again listed off his bullet points of his budget promises for operational spending and capital investment.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, raised another auto plant closing because of tariffs, and demanded action from the government. Carney stated their disappointment with the closures, and stated that they were still negotiating but Canada still has the best deal possible. Blanchet dismissed this as not being enough, and demanded other assurances in the negotiations. Carney promised they would protect Supply Management and Quebec culture in the negotiations. Blanchet wanted assurances for forestry, and Carney reminded him that they have a fund to help the sector.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Questions about the barriers to building

Posted on by

There was an interesting piece from The Logic yesterday where they asked the proponents of three projects to describe what their barriers are, and they’re…not all that coherent? One of them was complaining that they don’t really know where to apply for things and that it’s a black box once they do. And I find that curious, because there is a city full of consultants, lobbyists and government relations professionals out there whose job it is to help you navigate these kinds of processes. These people exist. It’s their jobs. Other proponents are complaining about federalism—some things trigger federal rules, some provincial, and they just want a one-stop shop. Which, sure, I get, but there are joint review processes available for certain projects that have both federal and provincial assessment components, but also that’s the nature of a federal state. Neither jurisdiction is going to abdicate their sovereignty, and I think that there are legitimate concerns if you expect one level of government to give up their process to “avoid duplication,” because it’s not actually duplication—they each look at different things, and I would not trust certain provincial governments to adequately address the concerns of federal legislation in their own processes.

The other complaint that these proponents have has to do with negotiating with provincial electricity suppliers for their projects, and the process of trying to negotiate adequate electricity for the project so that they can advance their proposals, which again, is not a barrier the federal government can do anything about. And sometimes hard things are hard, but I didn’t see any particular barriers in these descriptions that seemed insurmountable—it was a lot of “we don’t know what we’re doing,” and “I don’t want to have to do it,” particularly where there are environmental concerns. Which is one of the reasons why I’m particularly concerned about Bill C-5 federally, which can essentially ignore rules with the wave of a pen, and Ontario’s Bill 5, which literally can declare certain zones in the province to be lawless. These are not good approaches, but they seem to be what our leader have settle on, particularly because Mark Carney seems to operate on an ethos of seeking forgiveness rather than permission, which is not a good look for a government.

Meanwhile, here is Andrew Leach with a couple of added observations about these projects:

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia has launched an all-night attack on Kyiv that has injured at least fourteen. There were also strikes against port infrastructure in Odesa that have killed two people, and shelling of Pokrovsk has killed five people. There was also an airstrike against Poltava that his a military recruitment office that killed two people. Meanwhile, the EU was discussing how to adapt to Trump’s decision to withhold needed arms to Ukraine, as some cannot be sourced elsewhere.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Quietly objecting to the Henry VIII clause

Posted on by

The Liberals’ “One Canada Economy” bill continues to be railroaded through Parliament without proper scrutiny, and with the worst possible excuses from ministers and parliamentary secretaries possible. “We won the election promising this” or “This is in response to a crisis”? Get lost with that nonsense. While there are Liberals who are quietly objecting to the process—particularly the speed through which the second half of the bill (i.e. the giant Henry VIII clause) are going through without actual Indigenous consultation on the legislation itself, they are absolutely correct in saying that this is going to damage the trust that they have spent a decade carefully building.

Here’s the thing. While ministers are going to committees and the Senate swearing up and down that these projects of national importance are going to respect environmental regulations and Indigenous consultation, the very text of the bill betrays that notion. The open-ended list of legislation affected by the Henry VIII clause shows that they can bypass environmental laws or even the Indian Act through regulation shows that clearly they don’t have to respect either environmental laws, or that the consultation doesn’t need to be meaningful, or engage in free, prior and informed consent. If they did want to respect those things, they wouldn’t need a giant Henry VIII clause to bypass them. And frankly the fact that the Conservatives are supporting this bill should be yet another red flag, because the Conservatives very much want to use this Henry VIII clause if they form government next before this law sunsets, and they can blame the Liberals for implementing it. It’s so stupid and they refuse to see what’s right in front of them.

And let’s not forget that you still have Danielle Smith and Scott Moe demanding that environmental legislation be repealed, as the planet is about to blow through its carbon budget to keep global temperatures from rising more than 1.5ºC. And when it comes to Indigenous consultation, Doug Ford rammed through a bill to make these development projects law-free zones, while falsely claiming that First Nations are coming “cap in hand” while refusing to develop resources (in a clearly racist rant), ignoring that their objections are often to do with the fact that they have repeatedly been screwed over by proponents and wind up being worse off, which is why they want revenue-sharing agreements that companies don’t want to provide. When this is the “partnership with provinces” that Carney touts, it’s really, really not building a whole lot of trust.

If Ford listened to the First Nations near the Ring of Fire, they are largely concerned that proponents haven't lived up to past promises, and are not convinced the will live up to future promises either, unless they have a revenue-sharing agreement.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-06-18T21:12:01.246Z

Meanwhile, 300 civil society groups are calling on the government to scrap the border bill because it has so many potential rights violations within it. The department offered some clarifications on the immigration and refugee portions, but that’s not sufficient for those groups. Citizen Lab also did an analysis of the lawful access provisions within the bill as they interface with American data-sharing laws, and they can be pretty alarming for the kinds of information that the Americans can demand that the border bill would provide them with.

The more I think about it, the more troubling #BillC2 is. The warrantless demand for "subscriber information" can include a demand to a women's shelter, abortion clinic or psychiatrist. All provide services to the public and info about services rendered really goes to the biographical core.

— David TS Fraser (@privacylawyer.ca) 2025-06-16T23:24:04.585Z

Ukraine Dispatch

More bodies were discovered after the early morning Tuesday attack on Kyiv, meaning the death toll is now at least 28. Russians hit Ukrainian troops in the Sumy region with Iskander missiles.

Good reads:

  • In the wake of the G7 Summit, here’s a bit of a stock-taking on Carney’s government so far, and there are some friction points bubbling up, especially in caucus.
  • A Treasury Board report shows that women and minorities still face pay inequities within the federal civil service.
  • StatsCan data shows that there was almost no population growth in the first quarter of the year, which is a precipitous decline (and not good in the long run).
  • You might be relieved to hear that there were no wildlife incidents during the G7 summit in Kananaskis.
  • Protesters marking the second anniversary of the killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar are concerned  and frustrated about the moves to normalise diplomatic ties with India.
  • The Federal Court has denied a case by Afghan-Canadians to apply the Ukraine temporary resident rules to allow them to bring family members over.
  • The Senate has passed the Bloc’s Supply Management bill, which would seem to be at odds with trying to diversify our trade relationships.
  • Now-former Conservative MP Damien Kurek says that he wasn’t asked to step aside for Poilievre, but offered as his way to “serve.”
  • Saskatchewan is going to extend the life of their coal-fired electricity plants, because of course they are.
  • Philippe Lagassé has some more thoughts on the NATO spending goals and Canada shifting away from American procurement by degrees.
  • Paul Wells features a former PMO comms staffer talking about his experiences in dealing with reporters on the Hill, and how he approached the job.

Odds and ends:

For National Magazine, I wrote about former Supreme Court of Canada Justice Gérard La Forest, who passed away last week at age 99.

Want more Routine Proceedings? Become a patron and get exclusive new content.

Roundup: Ontario MPPs get a raise

Posted on by

I don’t often write about Ontario politics, but I did want to make a couple of remarks on the fact that Doug Ford pushed through both pay raises for MPPs, as well as a restoration of their pensions, and this actually a Good Thing. MPPs have had their salaries frozen since 2009, when Dalton McGuinty froze them in response to the global financial crisis (which is always one of those dumb populist moves that astroturf groups like the so-called “Canadian Taxpayers Federation” demand, and it always ends up bad). Ford’s legislation will peg MPP salaries at 75 percent of those of MPs, who already have their own salaries adjusted automatically per a particular formula, and it pegs itself to something like judges’ salaries, all in an attempt to depoliticise the issue (and has largely been successful).

The thing about salaries for elected officials is that you want them to be high enough to discourage them from either freelancing on the job, or being susceptible to financial inducements (aka bribery) by keeping them at a reasonably comfortable level (without being obviously lavish or ostentatious). And frankly, the fact that anyone who is in a profession, like a doctor or lawyer, needing to take a pay cut to get into elected politics is usually a bad sign, because it discourages them from running or contributing in a meaningful way. And as for pensions, which Mike Harris killed in more populist excesses, it again helps to keep MPPs from pursuing other remuneration given the low salaries they’re already accepting, when they’re not earning pensionable income from their previous employers. Over time, there have been complaints that certain MPPs wouldn’t retire because they couldn’t afford to, and there was recently one story about a former Toronto MPP who wound up sleeping in a shelter after a financial collapse from a divorce. This was pretty sad indictment of how petty Ontario’s legislature had become on these questions.

This having been said, I’m still dubious about Ford’s motives, given that he has stuffed his Cabinet with MPPs in order to give them raises while going on about how hard they work. This feels a little bit like spoils of war as the province’s books get in worse and worse shape, but again, this is still the right thing to do. I know the books are a mess, and hospitals are crumbling, and they’re dismantling post-secondary education, but not giving these raises doesn’t fix any of that. Let’s hope that we’re not going to witness a bunch more hand-wringing about how nest-feathering, otherwise I can see the dumb populism making things even worse, as they force MPPs to start competing over who does sackcloth and ashes best.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-05-29T21:27:21.302Z

Ukraine Dispatch

President Zelenskyy says that Russia is engaging in yet another deception by not handing over its peace settlement proposal ahead of their planned talks.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Moving onto the dairy front

Posted on by

The trade war seemed slightly more stable yesterday as the reprieve on most goods seemed to be holding, but it took no time at all for Trump to start musing about new, invented grievances and irritants. The latest is the dairy sector, for which there are limits as to how much the US can export to Canada tariff-free, but again, Trump has blown this out of proportion in his own mind. And as a result, he threatened 250 percent tariffs on Canadian dairy…but we don’t really export to them, certainly not liquid milk in large part because of the Supply Management system, so that would have very little impact on our industry.

The thing that did have people worried was fresh news out of the New York Times that Trump’s annexation talk has moved into threats about tearing up boundary treaties, particularly around things like the Great Lakes and cross-border river systems, and moving into things like shared military operations and NORAD, and after the floated threats about the Five Eyes a couple of weeks ago, it’s hard to ignore any of these threats, and why there needs to be a very concerted effort by the government to make plans for how we’re going to deal with this once it happens, because we know that nothing is off the table with Trump any longer.

I’m generally not into White House drama, but following it becomes more necessary than I’d like to admit these days. To that end, here is a look at an explosive meeting in the Cabinet room where several cabinet secretaries unloaded on Elon Musk, which wound up reining him in (somewhat, for now). But oh, man, the absolute stupidity of what is happening in that administration is boggling. As well, here’s a look at how framing the Trump presidency through the lens of reality television helps to make some of the chaos make a little more sense.

https://twitter.com/josheakle/status/1898212255604568305

Ukraine Dispatch

After the US cut off military aid, including access to satellite imagery for Ukraine, Russia launched a major missile attack, which targeted energy infrastructure, killed four in the eastern town of Dobropillia, while another five died in attacks in the Donetsk region. The Ukrainian forces within Kursk region appear to be nearly surrounded by Russians, though there have been counteroffensives in the past few days. Ukrainian drones did attack the Kirishi refinery.

Continue reading →

QP: Policing feminism as a gross concern troll

Posted on by

Neither the prime minister or his deputy were present today, and neither were most of the other leaders either. Andrew Scheer led off today, and he raised today’s Globe and Mail story that says Trudeau has made more outreaches to Mark Carney to get involved in politics, which Scheer interpreted as a plot to replace Freeland with Carney, and that he is somehow orchestrating the larger deficit spending. Arif Virani took this, for some reason, and he praised the work Freeland has been doing for Canadians, which yesterday’s Bank of Canada rate cut apparently reflected, and then praised their GST “holiday.” Scheer claimed the rate cut was because the economy is performing so poorly—which is not what the governor said in his remarks—and again claimed that Carney was pulling all the strings before replacing Freeland, concern trolling for Freeland’s future. Virani quoted Tiff Macklem’s remarks about inflation being tamed. Scheer disputed this, and quoted other Liberal MPs who wanted more fiscal discipline and demanded they get a “free vote,” to which Virani cited IMF economic growth projections and our status as having the lowest debt and deficit in the G7. Dominique Vien took over in French, and she too concern trolled about Freeland’s future and called Trudeau a “fake feminist,” this time François-Philippe Champagne deployed his “take no lessons” line before praising the Bank of Canada lowering rates, and the upcoming GST “holiday.” Vien repeated the claim that Trudeau was about to replace Freeland with Carney, and called him a hypocrite for his speech at Equal Voice about being a proud feminist. Diane Lebouthillier responded by wondering how a woman from Quebec could attack a woman like Freeland who brought in child care, and the Speaker called for order, she dismissed the men heckling because women are the ones who handle men head on.

Claude DeBellefeuille led for the Bloc, and worried about the Senate voting on their Supply Management bill, and wondered if the government contacted each of their appointments to tell them how to vote. Marie-Claude Bibeau reminded her that senators are independent. DeBellefeuille wanted each party leader to tell senators to support the bill in its original form, and Bibeau repeated her same point.

DeBellefeuille wonders if the government contacted each of their senate appointees to tell them how to vote on the Supply Management bill. #QP

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-12-12T19:30:46.447Z

Alexandre Boulerice led for the NDP and demanded the government improve access to healthcare in Quebec, which is a provincial responsibility. Mark Holland praised the investments they have made with the provinces. Brian Masse demanded the government consult with workers before a Trump plan, and demanded a “Buy Canada” plan (which is utterly boneheaded in a trade-dependent economy). Mary Ng said that all voices matter in this issue.

Continue reading →

QP: Avoiding questions about the deficit

Posted on by

After a morning where the Conservatives were on the losing end of procedural warfare with their planned confidence vote debate, neither the PM nor his deputy were present today, nor were any of the other leaders. Jasraj Hallan led off, spouted nonsense about the deficit and inflation, and demanded to know the size of the deficit. Sean Fraser responded by praising the country’s growth projections, and that the Conservatives voted against measures to help people. Hallan listed things that were “broken,” and Fraser chided him for his alliteration before again pointing out the things the Conservatives have voted against. Hallan again demanded the deficit number, and this time Jenna Sudds rose to point out how many more children were in poverty when the Conservatives were in power before listing programmes the government rolled out. Luc Berthold took over in French, and demanded the Fall Economic Statement be delivered on Monday. Steven Guilbeault took this one and decried that the Conservatives voted against the GST “holiday.” Berthold then quoted the “Food Professor” on food prices and blamed the carbon price, and Guilbeault quoted said professor back again in saying that climate change is responsible for food prices. 

Berthold just cited the Food Dude about food prices, and I can’t even. #QP

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-12-05T19:31:02.629Z

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and railed about the Senate dragging out the vote on their Supply Management bill, to which Karina Gould reminded him that the government supported the bill, but the Conservatives were divided on it. Therrien railed some more about senators, and Gould again repeated her response. 

Peter Julian rose for the NDP, and decried grocery giant greed in French. Guilbeault again praised the GST “holiday.” Alistair MacGregor decried the same in English, and Fraser praised their school food programme and the GST “holiday.”

Continue reading →

QP: Trotting out a Canada First™ slogan

Posted on by

In the wake of the panic over the first Trump 2.0 pronouncement about Canada, the PM was present for QP, though his deputy was not. All of the other leaders were presented for a second day in a row, and Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and immediately demanded a “Canada First™” plan for the border and security, and claimed the government had no plan other than a Zoom call, and blamed Trudeau for the “chaos” at the borders. Justin Trudeau responded that he had a good call with Trump last night and that he underscored how well they have worked together for decades in order to create prosperity for all, and insisted that they would always defend Canadian jobs in an non-partisan way as a team. Poilievre said the call didn’t work because Trump threatened with tariffs a few minutes later—not true—and brought up softwood lumber and Buy America, and claimed Trudeau had not gotten any gains for Canada, and claimed Trudeau broke the immigration system. Trudeau said that there are international students who come to Canada, and after they complete their studies, they return home in the majority of cases, and they have a system when they don’t return, and praised their latest immigration changes. Poilievre switched to English to again demand a ”Canada First™” approach, and claiming that Trudeau didn’t have a plan other than a Zoom call, and listed a number of specious issues. Trudeau again noted that he did speak with Trump, and that they had a good conversation and that he was working with the premiers. Poilievre again claimed that the tariff announcement was after Trudeau’s call, and then lent credence to Trump’s nonsense about drugs and the border. Trudeau noted that Poilievre was making stuff up, that the call was after the announcement, and that it was time to work togetherness rather than engage in partisanship. Poilievre, flailing, tried to claim that the timing was somehow worse, and then claimed that Trudeau was putting a “tariff on jobs” and demanded tax cuts and an end to the carbon levy. Trudeau said that again Poilievre was making stuff up, and if he wanted to re-criminalise marijuana, he should just say so.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, noted the disruptions all around, and wanted the “rebate” cheques extended to seniors. Trudeau noted that everyone gets the tax cut, but talked around the issue with somewhat hollow platitudes. Blanchet wanted the threshold for the cheques pulled down so seniors could get the cheques, and Trudeau noted that people are struggling in different ways, and listed programmes to help like child care, dental care, and enriched OAS and GIS.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and demanded a plan to fight back, because bullies only respect strength. Trudeau said that rather than panicking, they are engaging in constructive dialogue with all sides, and that they will stand up for jobs and prosperity. Singh repeated his demand in French, and Trudeau reiterated that they are need to take action in a way that isn’t out of panic.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The worst policy for retail politics reasons

Posted on by

With the smell of desperation lingering in the air, Justin Trudeau and Chrystia Freeland announced a “GST holiday” for two months on all sorts of items—ready-made meals, children’s clothes, diapers, books, toys, beer, alcohol below a certain percentage, restaurant meals, you name it—to happen between December 15th and February 15th, to be followed by $250 cheques in April for anyone who worked in 2023 and whose household income is below $150,000 (so, not the top five percent of wage-earners).

OMG this two-month GST holiday is the dumbest idea ever. Who came up with this? Did they read any of the literature from the US sales tax holidays on school supplies? Includes restaurant meals, takeaway, fastfood, beer, wine, in addition to kids clothes, toys, etc.

— Dr Lindsay Tedds (@lindsaytedds.bsky.social) 2024-11-21T16:23:50.682Z

It’s absolutely terrible economic policy, it’s poorly implemented (and is going to be an absolute nightmare all around to ensure implementation happens) it will benefit higher-income households disproportionately, and it’s not going to do any favours for the deficit situation that they insist they want to put on a downward trajectory, but it’s apparently good retail politics. (And good for the restaurant industry, particularly during their slower months, but a dog’s breakfast for retailers). Apparently, the Liberals are frustrated that all of their good work with the Canada Child Benefit, $10/day childcare, dental care and any incoming pharmacare deal with provinces (and not to mention rebounding faster from the pandemic and tacking inflation faster than any other comparator government) isn’t helping them in the polls, so they’re resorting to direct bribes, because reasons. It’s so stupid. We live in the stupidest times, and everyone is just going along with it.

If this GST holiday is an NDP initiative then I ask them what do they think this accomplishes over enriching the GST/HST refundable tax credit. The primary beneficiaries of the tax holiday are high income households. The primary beneficiaries of an enriched rebate are low income households.

— Dr Lindsay Tedds (@lindsaytedds.bsky.social) 2024-11-21T16:40:37.584Z

I haven't calculated the impact of this GST holiday but if consumption doesn't drastically change, this GST holiday will likely mean that families in high income deciles will see a large reduction in the GST paid whereas families in lower-income deciles will see more moderate declines.

— Gillian Petit (@gillianpetit.bsky.social) 2024-11-21T17:22:59.293Z

As a reminder that ableism starts by imagining a lack of disability as the normal or default state for members of society and permits or even promotes the unequal or inferior treatment of persons with disabilities. Linking the GST rebate to working income is ableism.

— Dr Lindsay Tedds (@lindsaytedds.bsky.social) 2024-11-21T17:11:20.096Z

Amendment! Not quite no matter what. Backgrounder says “earned up to $150K net”. But that’s a bit fudgy. It could be total net income but it doesn’t say that. If I have $140k in wage income but $25k in investment income do I qualify?

— Jennifer Robson (@jrobson.bsky.social) 2024-11-21T20:11:22.726Z

Part of this was a sop to the NDP in the hopes that they would help end the filibuster in the House of Commons, but they’re not all that keen on that (as they are happy to watch the Liberals twist in the wind), and are talking about trying to push a programming motion to pass the bill with these promised tax changes in a single day, which is not terribly bright, and the government really, really needs to actually pass the capital gains changes, because they’re already being applied while the legislation has been held up by this filibuster. Can the government play hardball with the NDP to break the filibuster and send the privilege matter to committee? I guess we’ll wait and see.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia fired new hypersonic intermediate-range ballistic missiles at Dnipro on Tuesday, claiming to be in retaliation for long-range strikes inside Russian territory, hitting an industrial enterprise and a rehabilitation centre. (Curiously enough, a Russian spokeswoman was giving a briefing on the missiles when she was called mid-conference and told not to talk about them). Russia’s strikes over the weekend have badly damaged Ukraine’s largest private power producer, while Russians are now claiming they have taken the village of Dalne in eastern Ukraine.

Continue reading →

QP: Boissonnault out vs caucus muzzling

Posted on by

Fresh from his trips to Peru and Brazil, the prime minister was present for QP today, ready to respond to any and all questions, though his deputy was elsewhere. All of the other leaders were present, and just before QP started, it was announced that Randy Boissonnault was stepping away from Cabinet to “clear his name” from the various allegations against him. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and led off with the various salacious allegations against Boissonnault. Justin Trudeau noted that Boissonnault has left Cabinet to focus on the allegations, but the Conservatives only want to cut. Poilievre raised Jody Wilson-Raybould and tried to compare her to Boissonnault, and Trudeau noted that for a leader who claims to want the truth is muzzling his own caucus. Poilievre switched to English, gave a quip about doubling hosing prices and gun crimes, and up until a minute ago, had a minister with a “double identity,” and Trudeau again repeated the points about Poilievre muzzling his MPs rather than letting them advocate for their communities. Poilievre again tried compare Wilson-Raybould to Boissonnault, and Trudeau repeated that Poilievre won’t let his caucus talk because he’s afraid of what they are going to say about him. Poilievre retorted that twenty Liberals want Trudeau gone, and demanded an election. Trudeau said that MPs on his side were free to share their opinions unlike the other side.

That threw a wrench in a bunch of planned #QP questions.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-11-20T19:32:28.061Z

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, said this display proved why Quebec needs to be on its own, and then demanded that the government force the Senate to pass the Supply Management bill. Trudeau noted that his party was in favour of it, and demanded the prime minister personally meet with senators to get them to pass it, and Trudeau noted that he does meet with them often, but regardless, the government will protect the system.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, complained about the cost of living, and demanded the government support their economically illiterate GST cut plan. Trudeau said that if the NDP was so concerned about the cost of living, they would help the government break the Conservative obstruction in the Chamber. Singh repeated the demand in French, and Trudeau repeated his same response. 

Continue reading →