She seems to agree; an explanation was offered. Given the dates - last two weeks of March, at end FY - it’s certainly plausible for mandatory payout of untaken accrued leave. If her account doesn’t add up I’m sure there will be several knowledgeable people who will waste no time saying so.
View attachment 96773
If Liberal MP's, generally speaking, clarified their matters as directly as this lady here did, I wouldn't have such an issue with the LPC.
Props to her for clarifying things & putting things in context.
I'm with
@brihard on this one - if her explanation doesn't add up, there are enough internal and external eyes on government finances these days that someone will say something.
(I don't trust the LPC either
@ArmyRick, but in this case her explanation seems pretty reasonable)
and risk a liberal majority? not bloody likely. Save the no vote for an issue that will resonate with the people or when folks start looking closely at what is really happening (if there is anything to see). I would say that the opposition played it smart.
Totally agreed.
This budget was partially intended to trigger an election - and the strategy seems obvious...
On the one hand, present a budget that is impossible to truly support, re Almost $80B of new national debt
in just this one budget alone - which is beyond crippling for future economic growth, and that Canadians will have absolutely nothing to show for it...
And on the other hand have all of the mainstream media outlets start hammering on the Leader of the Opposition for a few weeks prior to/during the budget release...
This distracts the population from the fact that PM Carney just put us $80B in more debt - which people
should be asking questions about and be alarmed - but also helps to potentially turn voters away from PP if they did oppose the budget and trigger an election
...
The Opposition played it smart here
