Rogers Media uses cookies for personalization, to customize its online advertisements, and for other purposes. Learn more or change your cookie preferences. Rogers Media supports the Digital Advertising Alliance principles. By continuing to use our service, you agree to our use of cookies.
We use cookies (why?) You can change cookie preferences. Continued site use signifies consent.
Thursday’s budget debate began with a time allocation motion. Nathan Cullen, among others, was displeased and cited the Young Stephen Harper to support his displeasure.
There are 421 pages of complex and individual ideas now lumped together in an omnibus bill. If the government had the actual courage of its convictions and believed that these were right issues to debate and present to Canadians, it would not lump them all together: the rollback of OAS rights to Canadians, the devastation of pay equity rules that apply to federal contracts and a ripping up and destruction of environmental protections when it comes to major projects.
If the Conservatives used to believe that these distinct issues should stand on their own merit for debate so Canadians can understand what is being applied, why the change of heart, why the change of convictions now?
After the motion was approved by a vote of 145-122, debate of the bill resumed with Peter Kent speaking for the government side.
