Connect with us

National

Alexandra Mendès becomes first Liberal MP to publicly call on Trudeau to resign

Published

2 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

The House of Commons assistant deputy speaker said he has heard from multiple constituents that the current prime minister is no longer the right man for the job.

A Liberal MP who serves as the assistant deputy speaker of the House of Commons has become the first in the party to publicly call for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to resign, saying directly that he is not the “right leader” for the party.

The call for Trudeau to step down came from Liberal MP Alexandra Mendès, who is from Quebec’s Brossard-St. Lambert riding. In an interview with Radio Canada on Monday, Mendès said directly, “My constituents do not see Mr. Trudeau as the person who should carry the Party into the next election and that’s the message that I carry.”

“I didn’t hear from two, three people. I heard it from dozens and dozens of people. He is no longer the right leader,” she said.

Mendès said that as she listens to her constituents, which is what “supposedly what we’re meant to do,” then “yes, I have to say we would have to change leadership.”

The Trudeau resignation call comes amid dismal polling numbers for Trudeau as well as losing support from the socialist New Democratic Party (NDP) to keep him in power. NDP leader Jagmeet Singh pulled his official support for Trudeau’s Liberals last week.

Late last month, Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre called on Singh to pull his support for Trudeau’s Liberals in order for an election to be held.

Recent polls show that the Conservatives under Poilievre would win a majority government in a landslide were an election held today. Singh’s NDP and Trudeau’s Liberals would lose a massive number of seats.

As for Trudeau, his woes continue to mount. LifeSiteNews recently reported how the national elections campaign director for Canada’s federal Liberal Party announced he was stepping down because, according to sources close to the party, he does not think Trudeau can with a fourth consecutive election.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Economy

If Canadian families spent and borrowed like the federal government, they would be $427,759 in debt

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Grady Munro and Jake Fuss

If the median Canadian family spent and borrowed like the federal government, they would already be $427,759 in debt and continuing to borrow, finds a new study published today by the Fraser Institute.

“If the median family in Canada spent and borrowed like the federal government, they would be in serious financial trouble,” said Grady Munro, a Fraser Institute policy analyst and co-author of Understanding the Scale of Canada’s Federal Deficit.

The $39.8 billion deficit expected by Ottawa in 2024/25 represents the 17th consecutive annual federal deficit, with continued deficits expected into the foreseeable future, eventually resulting in higher taxes for Canadians.

Continuous annual borrowing by Ottawa to finance increased spending has driven federal total debt from 53.0 per cent of the economy ($1.1 trillion) in 2014/15 up to an expected 69.8 per cent ($2.1 trillion) in 2024/25.

To put this into perspective, the study’s analysis offers an example of what a median family’s household finances would look like if they were to spend and borrow like the federal government in 2024.

The study found that the median Canadian family in 2024 would spend $109,982 while only earning $101,821, meaning that it would borrow $8,161 just to pay for its normal spending. This $8,000-plus in additional debt is on top of the $427,759 in existing debt the family would already hold based on previous borrowing.

Illustrative of the burden of debt, $11,066 of the family’s income, representing almost 11 per cent, would be spent on just the interest costs of existing debt.

“Unlike most households, where debt is often offset by assets such as a home or investments, the federal government has little in the way of assets to offset its enormous debt,” said Jake Fuss, director of fiscal policy at the Fraser Institute and coauthor. “And it’s important to note that this government debt burden on Canadian families does not include the burden of provincial and municipal government debt, which depending on one’s location, can be significant.”

  • For many years the federal government’s approach to government finances has relied on spending-driven deficits and a growing debt burden, causing a deterioration in the state of federal finances.
  • While deficits can sometimes be justified in certain circumstances, perpetual spending-driven deficits have become the norm rather than a temporary exception for the federal government. The $39.8 billion deficit expected in 2024/25 is the 17th consecutive annual deficit, and deficits are expected to continue into the foreseeable future.
  • Deficits have helped drive federal gross debt from 53.0% of the economy ($1.1 trillion) in 2014/15 up to an expected 69.8% ($2.1 trillion) in 2024/25.
  • This increase in the level of federal debt comes with costs and will result in higher taxes on Canadians.
  • It may be hard to comprehend the scale of the deficits and debt, so to contextualize the current state of federal finances this bulletin provides an example of what a median family’s household budget would look like in 2024 if it managed its finances the way the federal government does.
  • The median family earning $101,821 in 2024 would be spending $109,982 if it spent the way the federal government does. To cover the difference, it would put $8,161 on a credit card, despite already being $427,759 in debt.
  • Of the total amount spent, $11,066 would go towards interest on the debt his year. Simply put, a Canadian family that chose to spend like the federal government would be in financial trouble.

Adobe PDF Read the Full Report

Continue Reading

COVID-19

Trial for Freedom Convoy leaders ends, verdict may take 6 months

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

In her concluding statements last Friday in an Ottawa courthouse, presiding judge Heather Perkins-McVey said that she does ‘not know’ when a decision will be rendered in the Freedom Convoy leaders’ trial.

The trial for Freedom Convoy leaders Tamara Lich and Chris Barber, which was supposed to have been only 16 days long, has now concluded after over a year, with the presiding judge observing that determining a verdict, which could take up to six months, will be “daunting” task.  

In her concluding statements last Friday in an Ottawa courthouse, presiding judge Heather Perkins-McVey said that she does “not know” when she will “be in a position to give my decision,” adding that coming up with a verdict will be “a little daunting.” 

The judge has promised that on November 26, she will be providing an update as to when a decision could be forthcoming.  

The trial has been ongoing for over one year and began on September 3, 2023. As reported by LifeSiteNews, both Lich and Barber face a possible 10-year prison sentence for their role in the 2022 Freedom Convoy.

In an X post on Friday, Lich shared her thoughts on the trial finally wrapping up.  

“Well, that’s a wrap to the Longest Mischief Trial of All Time,” she wrote. 

“The Crown really disappointed me today. His remarks about the Event That Shall Not Be Named (Freedom Convoy) being nothing more than a weekend party are indicative of a level of smugness and elitism that I can never and will never understand,” added Lich.

Both Lich and Barber had attended the hearings in person, travelling from their homes in Alberta and Saskatchewan respectively. Last Friday, however, they attended via video.

The Crown prosecution has held steadfast to the notion that Lich and Barber somehow influenced the protesters’ actions through their words as part of a co-conspiracy. This claim has been rejected by the defense as weak. 

It has also been asserted “that the absence of violence or peaceful nature of the protest didn’t make it lawful, emphasizing that the onus was on the Crown to prove the protest’s unlawfulness.” 

The reality is that Lich and Barber collaborated with police on many occasions so that the protest remained law abiding.  

The Democracy Fund, which is crowdfunding Lich’s legal costs, noted in one of its last legal updates of the trial that it expected the Crown would try to prove the leaders were “co-conspirators,” meaning that accusations placed against one leader automatically apply to the other.

As reported by LifeSiteNews at the time, despite the non-violent nature of the protest and the charges, Lich was jailed for  weeks before she was granted bail. 

Continue Reading

Trending

X