Parliament Discusses Election Reform and Care Program
The Quebec parliament recently discussed two important topics: receiving care since May 1st and election reform. About 60% of dental care providers in Quebec have signed up for a new program that provides care to patients.
However, the Conservative leader announced that the program does not exist, which was met with criticism from the government. The government also made historic investments in the Official Languages Act and the action plan, doubling investments and continuing to support French language and minority languages in Quebec and Canada.
Meanwhile, the New Democratic Party (NDP) criticized the Liberal government’s handling of the overdose crisis in British Columbia, citing rising deaths and misinformation spread by Conservatives. The NDP also criticized the government’s handling of corporate taxes, citing a recent Parliamentary Budget Officer report that oil and gas corporations pay among the lowest federal tax rates in Canada.
In addition to these issues, parliament also discussed a bill aimed at improving election reform. The bill proposes adding two more days to the advance polling period, which some argue is unnecessary and creates more chaos than benefits. However, others see it as a step in the right direction towards making Canadian elections fairer and more accessible for all citizens.
The author of this speech argues that people already have the option to vote at any time at the returning officer’s office, so the last day of advance polling not falling on a religious holiday (in this case, Diwali) is not a major issue. The real concern is the potential for municipal elections in 1,108 municipalities across Quebec to be held simultaneously with federal elections, creating a logistical nightmare.
The author also criticizes the Liberal government for trying to help their own members by manipulating the Canada Elections Act, specifically by adding a provision that allows them to keep their pensions even if they lose their seats in parliament. This, the author argues, is “pathetic” and will only fuel public cynicism about politics.
In conclusion, the author argues that the bill is unnecessary and creates more problems than it solves, and therefore plans to vote against it.