SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 233 - Oct/17/23

Oct/17/23 4:00:02 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, my comments were never meant to draw the ire of the opposition. It is simply that when I read the text of the motion and what the Conservatives are proposing, the idea that it would bring interest rates back to balanced is unrealistic. I do not mean to offend the opposition party. I know they have tough skin on that side. This government is trying to walk a balance between being fiscally prudent and making sure the programs that matter to Canadians are in place. They talk about going back to balance. I think that is important. The government has already shown some steps in the right direction. My question for the Conservatives is this: What programs that matter to Canadians would the Conservatives like to see taken away to help us get back there? That is an extremely important question.

143 words

Mr. Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, BQ)

Oct/17/23 4:00:48 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I think that there are some things on which we can agree. First, public spending is needed in times of crisis, that is obvious. Even when we are not in a crisis, public spending is needed, which can sometimes create deficits. Of course, balancing the books must not be synonymous with brutal austerity, like in the disastrous days of triumphant neo-liberalism. At the end of the day, what this motion calls for, despite the Conservatives' usual overblown rhetoric, is the introduction of a plan. To govern is to anticipate, as they say. The government will table a plan. When this plan is before us, we will debate it to see whether it is a good plan to get back to a balanced budget. What is wrong with that?

131 words

Mr. Kody Blois

Oct/17/23 4:01:37 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I apologize. In normal times, I would try to respond in French, but that was an extended question. I want to give the best answer possible. We are going to have a great debate on the fall economic statement, where the Minister of Finance will provide an update on the fiscal finances of the country, including what the government intends to do in the days ahead. Therefore, that debate is coming. I agree with the hon. member that the conversations that need to happen are important. The opposition day motion, as I said earlier in my speech, and the member may not have heard it, is not necessarily constructive public policy discussion on where we need to go, what programs we need to consider or whether we are able to actually extend programs that I know some members in this House would like to see. However, maybe now is not the time to be able to extend them in the extenuating circumstances that we are in. I would encourage the member to look to the fall economic statement. Hopefully, he and I can continue this really important discussion at that moment.

193 words

Mr. Matthew Green (Hamilton Centre, NDP)

Oct/17/23 4:02:35 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I only caught the last three minutes of the member's speech, but I heard him touch on some things, and he has presented to the House that he is indeed fiscally responsible and looking for some cost recovery in some of the programs and services. However, when he speaks of balance, I have never heard that particular member talk about the out-of-control compensation for CEOs and the profiteering of big corporations. It seems that much of the discussion around inflation is centred on the Bank of Canada, where we have Conservatives blaming the government and the Liberal government blaming workers. Whether it is regarding this particular matter, the fall economic statement or the budget he has proposed, we have a scenario where, in 2021, the highest-paid CEOs made $14.3 million or collectively brought in $1.4 billion, while the good hard-working people I know in Wolfville are still struggling to get by on their average salaries for everyday Canadians. What does he have to say about that?

175 words

Mr. Kody Blois

Oct/17/23 4:03:38 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize that my hon. colleague has ties to Acadia University, having played on the men's football team. We share an affinity for the beautiful Annapolis Valley. We differ on ideology. I think it is important and incumbent on corporate leaders that they are mindful of the circumstances we are in. That is exactly why the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry called grocery CEOs to talk about the fact that they need to be part of these responsible solutions. However, suggesting that corporate CEOs might be rigging a system or that they are against Canadians is dangerous talk. I do not want to say the word “villainize”, but it is very similar to the extreme right, which sometimes projects itself either in Canadian or federal politics. We have to understand and be proud of our Canadian leaders, as well as to call upon them when necessary to make the difference alongside government.

161 words

Mr. Philip Lawrence (Northumberland—Peterborough South, CPC)

Oct/17/23 4:04:32 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I want to start my remarks by saying I will be splitting my time with the spectacular member for South Surrey—White Rock. My comments are in no way related to the fact that she happens to be our whip. That is just a bit of levity. I want to paint a picture here because, as I said in my question for the member for Kings—Hants, we are in serious times. We are in perilous times. When we look around the world with respect to foreign policy and see what is happening in Israel and Ukraine, we see that it is a time that requires serious leadership. Back here in Canada, things are not all rosy either. Canada's debt for 2023-24 is projected to be $1.2 trillion. That might be hard for the average individual to contemplate and get their head around. I know it is for me. However, that is $81,000 per household. That means people wake up in the morning and their starting place is $81,000 in debt. That is particularly troubling, because Canadians themselves, as individuals, are the most in debt in the G7. Therefore, the amount of debt and burden that is being piled on Canadians is, at some points, overwhelming. As has been famously said, the first step to getting out of a hole is to stop digging. Unfortunately, the Liberal government continues to dig the hole deeper. This year, the PBO said that the deficit will be closer to $46.5 billion. We have heard some chatter in this House already with respect to the fall economic statement. I look forward to seeing that document. I am the eternal optimist. I am hopeful that there will be some type of path for fiscal sustainability, a fiscal anchor and a return one day to a balanced budget. However, given the last budget, in which the government pushed back the date for a balanced budget from 2030 to never, perhaps my optimism is a little exaggerated. Canada's debt-to-GDP ratio, which is the other number the Liberals use, is the fiscal anchor that the Minister of Finance put before Canadians and said would never go up. Then, six months later, it did go up. The challenge too, even with the debt-to-GDP ratio, is that it does not take into consideration the per capita calculation. Canada's population is growing. Of course, as all Canadians do, I think that is a great thing. We are growing the number of Canadians, and that is terrific; however, the challenge is that the GDP is not keeping up with the population growth. Our per capita GDP, which in layman's terms just means the amount of money Canadians are earning, is going down. Therefore, while there are more Canadians, they are earning less money. That is challenging. We are getting poorer as a nation as the government takes a larger portion. After eight years, we have a debt at $1.22 trillion and a deficit approaching $50 billion at the end of this year. We are digging that hole even deeper. We simply can no longer afford the Prime Minister and the Liberal government, as they continue to pound Canadians into the ground with more debt, which is now $81,000 of debt per Canadian household. It does not stop there. Obviously, that money will have to be recovered somehow. The former governor of the Bank of Canada, David Dodge, recently said at the finance committee that the government will have to do one of two things, which is to cut spending or raise taxes. The money has to come from somewhere. We have no doubt that the government will be raising taxes. If I were a homeowner, I would not be shocked. However, I would be a little worried that the government will start taxing the principal residence exemption. It has a track record of seeking taxes wherever it can get them, and it will be increasingly desperate as we go forward to collect revenue from Canadians. There would be not only direct taxation but also indirect taxation. When there is deficit spending, and the government continues to spend, that increases the money supply, which increases inflation. If members do not believe me on that, they can just ask a former Liberal finance minister, John Manley. He recently stated that, because the government keeps pushing on the inflationary pedal, the gas pedal or the spending pedal, that is forcing Tiff Macklem, the Governor of the Bank of Canada, to push down on interest rates in order to fight inflation. Therefore, we have fiscal policy, which is what the Liberals are doing. They are spending more and more money increasingly recklessly, such as $50 million on the arrive scam. This is causing inflation, which is making everything more expensive. As a result of that increased inflation, the Governor of the Bank of Canada is having to increase interest rates, which is increasing the cost of housing. As I said, after eight years, Canadians simply cannot afford the current government. Let us look at the current housing situation and how it is going. It might be different in other provinces and other communities, but in the towns of Cobourg, Port Hope and Brighton, it is nearly impossible to get a rental property. If someone wants to get so much as a one-bedroom apartment, they are looking at $2,500, at least. That is a wild amount of money. If someone is fortunate enough to be able to buy a house, mortgage payments have now gone up from an average of $1,500 a month to $3,000 a month. Therefore, inflation is taking a larger and larger chunk of paycheques. We have taxation that actually takes up more than transportation, housing and food combined. The government is taking a larger and larger share of Canadians' increasingly smaller paycheques. As I said, if someone is trying to rent in Port Hope or Cobourg, they are looking at a cost of $2,500 or $3,000. They are looking at a mortgage payment well in excess of that. I want to share a little anecdote. This is an actual email that I received from one of my constituents. It says the following: “[My wife and I] have good jobs and are very thankful to have what we have. We have yet to own a home together in our 5 years of marriage and have been continually renting with our two young children. “We are again very thankful to have what we have. We are able to secure approximately $400k for a down payment from selling a property I owned in a different city before we were married.... “We were recently trying to purchase our first home together with a listing price of $800k. This means we would be putting 50% down”. They are two well-heeled individuals, making good incomes and they would have a mortgage payment of approximately $2,200 a month. The email continues: “After redoing our budget with the rising costs of groceries, gas, and everything else, we would be in a monthly deficit of between $1,000-$3,000. We have no debts, no car payments and believe we are financially responsible people.” The constituent goes on to ask, “if people like us have decent jobs and a large amount saved and cannot even afford a home these days, who can?” These are serious times. These are people who have done everything right. They have had their priorities right. They have saved their income. They got good jobs. They have worked hard for the community, for our country and for their children. The deal is broken. It used to be, in 2015, when houses cost half as much and when food was a fraction of the cost, that these individuals would be rewarded with being able to afford a house, being able to afford a steak dinner once a week and maybe even, God forbid, being able to go on vacation. Increasingly, the great thief of our prosperity is the current Liberal government. Canadians cannot afford the Liberals. After eight years, they have done nothing but bring us into poverty and away from prosperity. We need a common-sense leader, and I cannot wait for the member for Carleton to be our next prime minister.

1409 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Oct/17/23 4:14:10 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-56

Mr. Speaker, the member started off by being critical of the amount of debt that the Government of Canada has acquired. They understand very clearly that most of the debt that was accrued was during the pandemic. Billions and billions of dollars were spent to support small businesses, individual Canadians, seniors, people with disabilities and so forth; the Conservative Party supported a lot of that. With hindsight, the Conservatives are saying we should not have spent the billions of dollars that they supported at the time. That is one issue. Actions speak louder than words. The member says he is concerned about inflation. The government is also concerned about inflation; that is the reason we brought forward Bill C-56, which would provide literally hundreds of thousands of new homes in the years ahead for rental properties. The Conservatives' response is to filibuster the legislation. They will not even let the legislation pass. Why is the Conservative Party so out of touch with the reality of what Canadians are facing today?

171 words

Mr. Philip Lawrence

Oct/17/23 4:15:11 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I always enjoy the member's passion, if not the substance, of his remarks. Let us look at history and the facts. Every year prior to the pandemic, the Liberal government had a deficit. The government is now spending $120 billion more than prior to the pandemic. In addition to that, there was $200 billion of non-COVID-related expenditures during the pandemic. These monies were spent on things like arrive scam. There was millions of dollars for fridges for Loblaws and millions of dollars for Mastercard. These are not proper ways to spend money. Yes, we will debate this, and if we are skeptical of some of your solutions, forgive us since you have doubled household costs and put us into poverty.

125 words

The Deputy Speaker

Oct/17/23 4:16:02 p.m.
Watch

I would remind hon. members that I did not do that as the Chair. Let us make sure we run our questions through the Chair. The hon. member for Drummond.

30 words

Drummond

Mr. Martin Champoux (Drummond, BQ)

Oct/17/23 4:16:15 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, sometimes, once in a generation, the Conservatives have an idea that makes a modicum of sense. Unfortunately, they always hide their good ideas behind wacky political stunts. Last June, the Bloc Québécois supported a similar motion calling for a plan to return to balanced budgets. We believe that this is the reasonable and responsible thing to do for a government. Governments need to have some idea of what is ahead. The Conservatives are once again trying to force the government to table a road map to balanced budgets. However, they want it in a few days only, by October 25. If it is so important—and we believe it is— why are the Conservatives once again sticking this inside a political black pill that is impossible to swallow and that they will then use to show that the Liberal government has stumbled and not delivered? The Liberals are perfectly capable of doing that themselves without “gotcha” motions.

167 words

Mr. Philip Lawrence

Oct/17/23 4:17:15 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his good questions and good work. One day, before I retire, I hope to answer completely in French. We agree that we need to balance the budget. If the member is asking us why we are blaming the Liberal government, it is because of eight years of failure. After eight years, it has driven the car in the ditch. I do not know who else to blame.

74 words

Mr. Matthew Green (Hamilton Centre, NDP)

Oct/17/23 4:17:43 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I often enjoy my debates with the hon. member for Northumberland—Peterborough South. He likes to reference his economic theory. He did some of that today in talking about the out-of-control housing crisis we have, what I affectionately call the crisis of capitalism. I would like the hon. member to reflect on this. In 2013, in Hamilton, the average house cost was $350,000. The high end of a unionized carpenter's salary was $42 an hour. Fast-forward 10 years and the high end for a unionized carpenter's salary is $48 an hour, but the same home the carpenter builds has now doubled in price, to over $700,000. That is what we are looking at now. The reality is that the surplus value of the labourer's work, the money he or she is building and wealth he or she is creating in this country, is going somewhere, but who is not going to? It is not going to the worker. My question for the hon. member is on his economic theory. When he looks at the crisis of capitalism and the housing crisis, would he at least have the courage today to stand up and talk about where the surplus value of labour is going? It is not going to the working class but to Bay Street, the banks and big developers.

231 words

Mr. Philip Lawrence

Oct/17/23 4:19:15 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will tell the member exactly where that money is going: It is going here, to Ottawa. That is where the money is getting burned. It is not a crisis of capitalism. By the way, I enjoy the debates with the great member as well, and I get passionate about them, so my apologies. The money is being burned in Ottawa. We have far too many resources going to unproductive government, away from the productive cycle of the private sector. Wealth is only created in one place, and that is with the workers of Canada. I could not agree with the member more. The workers are getting cheated and ripped off by the government. We need the next prime minister, the member for Carleton, to fix this and bring prosperity back to our land.

136 words

Mr. Luc Berthold (Mégantic—L'Érable, CPC)

Oct/17/23 4:20:06 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak to comments made yesterday by the member for Winnipeg North on the question of privilege raised by the member for Calgary Nose Hill on Thursday, October 5. Yesterday, in his remarks, the member for Winnipeg North misled the House. I would like to quote a few of his statements concerning the question of privilege raised by the member for Calgary Nose Hill. The issue we are discussing has to do with the government's written responses to questions about the Prime Minister's travel. I submitted those three questions to the government myself, in writing. Yesterday, the member for Winnipeg North spoke about the last two questions that I asked. I would like to quote what the member for Winnipeg North said yesterday: The crux of the questions posed is based on the notion of “total costs incurred by the government”. The government takes the view that “the government” includes all core departments of the public service and not independent arm's-length agencies, such as the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. This is what the member for Winnipeg North stated and alleged yesterday. I will continue with the quotation: The fact is that neither of these questions specifically asked for that information. It is not for the government to make assumptions about what the member means to ask when submitting an Order Paper question. The government simply responds to the precise question that was asked. I feel that the questions were well formulated, that they were entirely in order and that the government was asked to provide all the information requested. The proof is in Question No. 1180, which I asked on January 31. I will read the questions that were asked and the specific requests that were made at the time: (a) what were the total costs incurred by the government for (i) accommodations, (ii) per diems, (iii) other expenses for the flight crew and government officials who travelled to Jamaica in connection with the Prime Minister's trip.... That was the wording of the question asked on January 31. I will now read Question No. 1417, which I asked on April 19 and to which the member for Winnipeg North referred yesterday: (a) what were the total costs incurred by the government for (i) accommodations, (ii) per diems, (iii) other expenses, for the flight crew and government officials who travelled to Montana in connection with the Prime Minister's trip.... Other than the destination, both questions are identical. The difference is that, in its answer to Question No. 1180, the government included all the costs, including those incurred by the RCMP. This leads me to conclude that the government deliberately omitted the costs incurred by the RCMP in its answers to the two subsequent questions. All three questions were written in the same way. I thought this was extremely important information for the House to consider, especially given that the answer to Question No. 1180 was signed off on by the members for Winnipeg North and Hull—Aylmer. The people saying that the questions were not properly written, specifically the member for Winnipeg North, actually answered the first question properly. They should have answered the other two in the same way by including the costs related to the RCMP's participation in the other two trips.

566 words

All Topics

Hon. Kerry-Lynne Findlay (South Surrey—White Rock, CPC)

Oct/17/23 4:24:11 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are facing an affordability crisis. Everything costs more, from the grocery store to the gas pumps. Mortgages have doubled, rents have doubled and down payments have doubled. The dream of home ownership is dead for nine out of 10 Canadians. Liberal inflationary spending has caused food prices to skyrocket, and one in five Canadians is skipping meals because they cannot afford to eat. Families are struggling to make ends meet. Food banks are overwhelmed. In my community, food banks are at risk of bankruptcy because of a surge in demand, and 33%, or one-third, of food bank users are children. Overdose deaths have increased 300% in B.C. The leading cause of death among 10- to 18-year-olds is drug overdose. This is heartbreaking, and the people in my province need some good news. Unfortunately, StatsCan reported today that inflation remains high. After eight years of reckless spending, Canada's national debt sits at $1.2 trillion. Think about that for a second. That means debt servicing costs will be almost $44 billion this year alone. These are tax dollars that could have been used to invest in addiction recovery services or to help address the housing crisis. Instead, those tax dollars will go to rich bondholders. At a time when everything feels broken, the Prime Minister has spent the cupboards bare and has no plan to bring the nation's finances into a better position to respond to the real needs of Canadians. This is because of years of blatant disregard for fiscal prudence and monetary policy. We now have a tired, desperate NDP-Liberal government that is out of ideas. It has resorted to recycling broken campaign promises and adopting Conservative policy, albeit watered down. Its housing accelerator fund has not built a single home. It is nothing more than a housing hoax. The Prime Minister has added more debt than all other prime ministers combined. There is no plan to balance the budget and no plan to get his inflationary deficits under control. This is the Prime Minister who thinks budgets balance themselves and asks Canadians to forgive him for not thinking about monetary policy. His laissez-faire attitude toward public finance has put the well-being of far too many Canadians in crisis. Government spending has driven up inflation rates, and those rates have put Canada at the brink of a mortgage default crisis. That is why the leader of the Conservative opposition brought a common-sense motion to the House today. Our motion calls on the Prime Minister to table a fiscal plan that includes a pathway back to a balanced budget. He must do so before the Bank of Canada announces its next rate decision later this month. This motion is urgent and necessary. The government must start spending within its means, something that Canadian families do every day to balance their own household budgets. In June, the Minister of Finance took to social media to declare victory over inflation. She told Canadians the Liberal plan to tackle inflation is “working” and that the Liberals were making “real progress”. Since then, inflation has gone up 43%. She fails to learn the lesson that excessive government spending and cruel tax hikes are the reason she is losing the war against inflation. After eight years, it is clear that the Liberal fiscal plan is not working and that the Prime Minister is not worth the cost. Common-sense Conservatives have a plan to reverse these deficits so we can bring down inflation, bring home lower prices and bring homes that people can afford. We will cap government spending, cut waste and bring in a dollar-for-dollar law that requires the government to find a dollar of savings for any new dollar of spending. That is common sense. We will also axe the punitive carbon tax. When we tax the farmer who grows the food, the trucker who ships the food and the store that sells the food, we are taxing the hard-working Canadian family struggling to pay for that food. The Liberal government has failed to reach any of its emission reduction targets, so all of this financial pain is for no environmental gain. Liberals and their enablers in the NDP justify their position by suggesting that the carbon tax is not high enough. Speaking about the carbon tax, the Liberal member for Halifax said, “Ultimately they don't want to pay for it, but that's what changes behaviour, so if we rebate them everything they've paid for the pollution price, it defeats the whole purpose. There needs to be a bit of pain there. That's the point of it.” How out of touch can they be? Other Liberals, such as the member for Avalon, finally admitted that the carbon tax is causing harm to Canadians. When asked about the political consequences the Liberals will face because of the carbon tax, the member for Avalon said: I think it's hurting them a fair bit. Everywhere I go, people come up to me and say, “We're losing faith in the Liberal Party”. I've had people tell me they can't afford to buy groceries. They can't afford to heat their homes.... It is too little too late. That member voted to implement the carbon tax, and his party continues to punish Canadians with it. On housing, the Prime Minister does not think it is his responsibility, but the buck stops with him. It used to take 25 years to pay off a mortgage. Now it takes 25 years to save for a down payment. Vancouver is the third most unaffordable housing market on the planet. In my community, mortgages now cost thousands of dollars more per month, forcing people out of home ownership. We are not building homes quick enough to keep up with demand because big city gatekeepers impose unnecessary delays and red tape. A C.D. Howe study determined that gatekeepers and regulations add nearly $1.3 million to the cost of an average home in Vancouver. Meanwhile, CMHC bureaucrats in Ottawa are rewarded with millions of dollars in bonuses for a lackluster performance. Conservatives know we need to build homes, not bureaucracy. We will reward cities that are getting homes built with additional infrastructure dollars and a building bonus, and we will withhold transit and infrastructure funding from cities until sufficient high density housing around transit stations is built and occupied. We will cut the bonuses and salaries for ineffective bureaucrats, and if needed, we will fire the gatekeepers at CMHC if they are unable to speed up approvals for housing programs to an average of 60 days. We will list 15% of the federal government's 37,000 buildings and all appropriate federal land to be turned into homes people can afford. Conservatives will turn the hurt the government has inflicted into the hope Canadians deserve. Canada should be a place where our citizens can afford to buy a home, put food on the table and save for the future. This is common sense. Only Conservatives will bring it home.

1199 words

The Deputy Speaker

Oct/17/23 4:24:11 p.m.
Watch

I thank the hon. member for the additional information.

9 words

All Topics

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Oct/17/23 4:32:21 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-56

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives, at times, just want to put their heads in the sand and stick with their slogans and bumper stickers, quite frankly. The member talks about inflation. Back in June of 2022, inflation in Canada was at around 8%. In the United States, it was at 9%. Today it is 4% and 3%, or just under 4%. Let us put it that way. The Conservatives will go around Canada and say that Canada is broken. Does that mean the whole world is broken? The Conservatives are so extreme. They like to get those slogans on the bumper stickers. Does the member not believe she is misleading Canadians when she tries to give this false impression? Yes, inflation is hurting. That is the reason we bring forward good legislation, such as Bill C-56, which is legislation the Conservatives is filibustering. Why?

144 words

Hon. Kerry-Lynne Findlay

Oct/17/23 4:33:21 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, my Conservative colleagues, this caucus and our leader are out there talking to Canadians every day. They tell us a very different story than the story this member wants to portray. When they tell us they cannot pay their rent and they tell us they cannot pay their mortgages to hold on to the home they bought some homes ago, they have tears in their eyes. This is real. The food banks facing bankruptcy in my community are real. The demand is so high they cannot keep up. Liberals are the ones with their heads in the sand. They are the ones who do not know the reality on the ground. They better wake up.

117 words

Mr. Martin Champoux (Drummond, BQ)

Oct/17/23 4:34:15 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am going to repeat a question I asked my Conservative colleague earlier, because I may not have worded my question correctly. The fact is, we are not at all opposed to the idea put forward today by the Conservatives, which is to ask the government to offer some predictability, act responsibly and introduce a plan for returning to a balanced budget. However, the Conservatives want to give the government about eight days to do this. They are demanding that it be done by October 25, when we know that this government is not necessarily the quickest at getting things done. Does my colleague think that we could perhaps give it a little more time, for example, until the next fall budget update? Are the Conservatives really insisting on this October 25 deadline as a way to once again play political games and blame the government for what it has not yet done?

158 words

Hon. Kerry-Lynne Findlay

Oct/17/23 4:34:58 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am always happy to see when members of the House from other parties are able to come together with the Conservatives and agree on something. That is always a pleasure. With respect to timelines, the government has had eight years to get this right. It certainly has been many years that we have been telling the government that the way it is going about things, with its unnecessary flagrant spending, is going to result in inflation, and what we have now is rampant inflation. The PBO agreed with us that 40% of its spending during COVID was not COVID related. The government also drove up debt before COVID even happened. It cannot run with that cover anymore.

120 words