QP: Freeland steps up to call out Poilievre’s false tax claims

Posted on by

While the prime minister was still at the UN General Assembly, his deputy was present today, so it was hoped we would get a better series of exchanges. Fingers crossed. Poilievre led off with his same talking points about the share of paycheques being devoted to housing, and demanded that “tax hikes” be cancelled. In response, Chrystia Freeland responded by reading a script about the role of the opposition in a Westminster system, but whatever point she was trying to make got lost. Poilievre switched to English to repeat same question, and Freeland noted that since EI premiums were mentioned, she pointed out that when Poilievre was the employment minister, premiums were $1.81, while they will soon be $1.61. Poilievre retorted with combined CPP and EI figures to show that they are higher overall, and Freeland lectured him that EI and CPP are deferred income, they don’t go to general revenue, they are the safety nets for Canadians. Poilievre insisted that the government was trying to raise CPP so its surplus could go to general revenue, and decried inflation and these so-called tax increases. Freeland said that it was irresponsible to talk down the economy, but Canada is better positioned than any country in the world. Poilievre insisted that thirty-year-olds in their parents’ basements would disagree with the rosy assessment of the economic picture, and Freeland pointed out that the government has measures for people in need, while the Conservatives have irresponsible plans, like investing in Bitcoin.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he congratulated Poilievre and gave a shoutout to Alain Rayes before saying that the prime minister should take Roxham Road on his way back to Canada because it is “faster.” Freeland read a response about respecting the rights of asylum seekers, and working with the Americans on border obligations including the Safe Third Country Agreement. Blanchet suggested that when Trudeau returns, he sing his responses before he demanded the Safe Third Country Agreement be suspended and Quebec be given its own immigration powers. Freeland pointed out that Quebec does get to control its immigration levels.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, decrying rising prices, while grocery profits have increased since 2020. Freeland assured him they are ensuring that big businesses pay their fair share, including higher corporate taxes, the pandemic dividend tax for banks and insurance companies, and the new luxury tax. Singh repeated the question in French, trying to introduce the term “greed-flation,” to which Freeland repeated her response.

Round two, and Dominique Vien decried rising “taxes” in light of inflation (Freeland: We are prudent and can afford compassion, and here are our measures to help), Mark Strahl worried about “punishing tax hikes” (Freeland: If Conservatives really cared about struggling families, they would support our measures; You used to be a party with core economic competence), and Garnett Genuis gave the same faux tax-hike line, and on his followed-up, included lyrics from “Bohemian Rhapsody,” because he thinks he’s that clever, but really isn’t. (Freeland: Do you really want to deprive Alberta families of the climate incentive payments?)

Kristina Michaud wanted more measures to combat gun crime (Damoff: Here is a list of investments we have made), and she included Roxham Road in her follow-up (Damoff: We are cracking down at the border, and CBSA seized a record number of guns last year).

Matt Jeneroux demanded “paycheque tax increases” be cancelled (Freeland: Canadians want compassion from us; Gould: There are no tax increases—we’re talking about EI and CPP, and our child care plan is helping families), and Stephanie Kusie gave a rather restrained—for her—question on so-called “paycheque taxes” (Freeland: We know Canadians are smart, and understand the differences between taxes and saving for retirement and safety nets; In chasing populist talking points, the Conservatives have abandoned fiscal responsibility).

Lori Idlout demanded more housing in Nunavut (Vandal: We have been making historical investments, and we are committed to getting it done), and Jenny Kwan decried corporate landlords—which is a provincial issue (Hussen: We have been focused on putting in programmes like the Canada Housing Benefit).

Round three saw questions on the fertiliser emissions plan (Bibeau: Farmers know the biggest threat to production is climate change), carbon prices (Duguid: Most families get more back than they paid; Gould: These increases are not taxes), reforming EI (Qualtrough: Yes the temporary measures are winding down but we are pushing forward with modernising it), energy poverty in Atlantic Canada (Duguid: Climate incentives come quarterly; We launched a programme to help Atlantic Canada transition from heating oil), not enough federal dollars going to provinces for healthcare (Duclos: We have announced billions of dollars in investments, and we are going to continue that), and climate effects requiring urgent action, meaning cancelling TMX and Bay du Nord (Duguid: We have an ambitious sector-by-sector path).

Overall, the questions were very much the same as yesterday, though the Conservatives were trying to debut the misleading term “paycheque taxes” (it used to be misleadingly termed “payroll taxes”) so take that for what it is. The government did actually push back against those today, unlike yesterday, with the correction that these are not taxes, and that Canadians rely on these safety nets. Not mentioned was the fact that provinces need to agree to changes to CPP premiums, so it’s not something the federal government can do unilaterally, which makes Poilievre’s demands all the more hollow. I will say that, first question aside, Chrystia Freeland was giving much better answers than the ministers and parliamentary secretaries were yesterday, so we got a bit better quality of exchanges today. Most important was the fact that they did call out that what Poilievre was demanding was based on misleading talking points, and that she gave Canadians credit for knowing the difference. That may be optimistic on her part, but she’s giving them credit nevertheless.

Otherwise, there weren’t too many fireworks, and behaviour has been generally pretty good, but the prime minister has been away, so that may change things when he’s back. I was surprised that the Speaker didn’t call out Yves-François Blanchet’s references to the prime minister being out of the country, because MPs are not supposed to draw attention to the presence or absence of members in the Chamber, and yet there he was, cracking jokes about it. Then again, this Speaker is not great about enforcing rules, for what it’s worth.

Sartorially speaking, snaps go out to Melissa Lantsman for a dark grey suit jacket over a white banded-collared shirt and black slacks, and to Jeremy Patzer for a fitted dark grey suit with a black shirt and dark green tartan tie. Style citations go out to Luc Desilets for a powder blue suit with a white shirt and grey tie, and to Louise Chabot for a navy dress with big florals and wide sleeves.