A tame first debate, but Pablo Rodriguez is main target of attacks
Quebec Politics
By
It wasn't what you would call a barnburner but, after shadow boxing for months, the five candidates vying for the Quebec Liberal leadership finally had a chance to debate policy and ideas with each other, face-to-face, Saturday.
And as expected former federal MP Pablo Rodriguez was the target of most of the attacks, with his opponents invoking his past life as a federal Liberal cabinet minister in the government of Justin Trudeau.
The first jab came early in the debate — held at a hotel in Laval before 500 Liberal militants — when the candidates were discussing fiscal policies to counter the effects of inflation.
'One thing we won't do is send everyone a cheque,' Rodriguez said. 'The other thing we won't do is give money to the L.A. Kings.'
Seizing the opening, candidate Charles Milliard, the former president of the Fédération des chambres de commerce du Québec, reminded Rodriquez he was part of a government that in 2024 wanted to send all Canadians $250 cheques to help them deal with inflation.
'I'm happy to hear Pablo you don't want to send any cheques,' Milliard joked. 'Because there were a lot of them from the federal level.'
Milliard went on to say the Coalition Avenir Québec government was guilty of the same policy-making, which he called the 'cheque syndrome,' a tactic designed for short-term electoral gains.
Rodriguez brushed off the comment, but it was one of several lobbed his way during the debate, including references from other candidates to people who are 'career politicians.'
And Karl Blackburn, the former president of the Conseil du Patronat, bluntly accused Rodriguez of being part of a federal government that 'closed the door' to more immigration by playing politics with the issue.
He said the Trudeau government caved into pressure from the Legault government when there are 124,000 jobs open in Quebec because there are no workers.
'People see it (racism) as a threat when it should instead be seen as a richness,' Blackburn said.
Later, the Rodriquez camp made the rounds of the media, stressing Rodriguez was already an independent MP when the cheque issue came to life and he voted against the idea.
Milliard was unapologetic.
'I did it a bit tongue and cheek because we need to remember there were actions taken by the Legault and Trudeau governments in the last few years which increased inflation,' Milliard told reporters after the debate. 'It was a one-liner, but it is based on the truth.'
Rodriguez later said he was not surprised the candidates took aim at him.
'It means I have a lot of experience,' Rodriguez told reporters. 'This is exactly what the Liberal Party of Quebec needs. It's tough to run a government, especially in difficult periods, but I've been there, I've done that. This is what the Liberal Party of Quebec needs. They need a leader with experience.'
But it was a first debate, with the candidates politely sizing each other up for five future jousting matches. On Sunday, they will do it all over again in English at John Abbott College. The debates are being live-streamed on the Liberal Party website.
'They asked me to be a gentleman,' candidate Karl Blackburn quipped on his way out the door when asked about the tone of the debate.
There were no glaring policy differences between the five. All agreed Quebec needs to take more steps to improve it's energy independence in the face of a hostile U.S. government.
Allowing the construction of more gas and oil pipelines to bring energy from the Canadian west is an idea worth looking at, but any projects would need a level of social acceptability, they agreed.
Rodriguez, who got the loudest cheers from his supporters who occupied a vast swath of the seating, arrived with one announcement in his pocket, saying if he becomes premier his government will tackle the problem of hungry children in schools.
It was also a chance for the two lesser-known candidates, Matane lawyer and fiscal expert Marc Bélanger, and the 31-year-old Beauce agricultural producer and economist Mario Roy to get some exposure. Roy and Blackburn were the last candidates to enter the race.
'Today, I feel like David versus Goliath,' Roy said in his first remarks to the audience.
He stood out from the pack by saying if he was premier he would pull Quebec out of the carbon exchange it shares with California. Unlike the other candidates who stressed Premier François Legault is the one the party has to target, Roy insisted he would go after Parti Québécois Leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon.
On their way out the door, some Liberals said they remain undecided, but pleased with the quality of the debate and the candidates.
Among the undecided was the Liberal MNA for the riding of Saint-Laurent, Marwah Rizqy, who is married to the MNA for Jacques-Cartier, Greg Kelley. They are the only two MNAs left in the Liberal caucus who have not chosen a candidate.
'Greg and I we really wanted to see the debates,' Rizqy said. 'We didn't want to rush a decision without hearing what people had to say. I am 95 per cent decided.'
Rodriguez, who is positioning himself as the candidate who can bring back Liberals who have drifted away, leads the other candidates in one area — fundraising.
According to the chief electoral officer's website, as of May 2 Rodriguez has raised $209,790. He is followed by Milliard, who has raised $139,805. Blackburn, who arrived late in the race, has picked up $54,390. Candidate Bélanger raised $14,877, while candidate Roy has $3,191 in the bank.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
an hour ago
Faster isn't always better. Slow-charging EVs could have big benefits
When Julia McNally decided to buy an EV and started her research, she came across a lot of articles and ads pushing an apparent must-have accessory — a speedy home charger designed specifically for EVs. Everything was pointing me to Level 2, recalled McNally, director of climate action at Toronto Hydro. She knew that all EVs can do Level 1 slow charging, or trickle charging, from a regular 120-volt wall outlet, adding about six kilometres of range per hour (except in very cold winter temperatures, which can slow charging speeds). And she already had an outlet of those in her backyard, near the alleyway where she planned to park her new Mini EV. But more than four out of five U.S. EV owners used Level 2 for home-charging in 2023, according to market research firm J.D. Power (new window) . Using a higher 240 voltage, often needed for a stove or dryer, Level 2 chargers can add about 30 to 50 kilometres of range per hour and refill a typical EV's entire 400-kilometre range overnight. Meanwhile, Level 3, or DC fast chargers, often installed along major highways, can add 250 kilometres of range per hour (some are even faster (new window) ) and charge a battery to 80 per cent in 30 minutes. Get more with a free CBC account Comment on articles, stay in the know with our newsletters and stream more on CBC Gem. Sign In (new window) Create a free account (new window) Why faster may not be better Some experts, such as Daniel Breton, CEO of Electric Mobility Canada, have argued people "really need" Level 2 chargers at home (new window) , as it can take days to charge an empty battery to full at Level 1. But most people don't drive the hundreds of kilometres needed to empty their battery each day — and there's a downside to faster charging. You're adding cost, McNally said — potentially thousands of dollars. Installing a Level 2 charger requires a licensed electrician, she said. In Toronto, it means consulting with Toronto Hydro and the Electrical Safety Authority. And homeowners often will need to increase the size of their electrical panel, adding additional costs. But it's something more Canadians may be thinking about soon, amid Canada's zero-emission vehicle mandate (new window) , requiring that 20 per cent of cars, vans and light trucks sold in Canada be electric, hybrid or hydrogen-powered cars by next year. The goal is to reach 100 per cent zero-emission vehicle sales by 2035. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre had vowed to scrap the target if elected (new window) , but with a Liberal re-election (new window) , the target still stands. WATCH | Can northern power grids handle electric vehicles and heat?: Début du widget Widget. Passer le widget ? Fin du widget Widget. Retourner au début du widget ? Can northern power grids handle electric vehicles and heat? Electric vehicles and electric heating are expected to put a strain on northern power grids. A new study out of Yukon University offers utilities some ways to fix that. The CBC's Liny Lamberink has more. Level 2 charging isn't just more expensive and logistically difficult for individual EV owners. In some Canadian communities, the aging electrical grid may not be able to handle too much Level 2 charging at once. For example, a recent Yukon University study found that if more northerners install Level 2 chargers and electric heating, that could cause problems for transformers (new window) — a key piece of equipment in local electricity distribution networks. At the time of the study, published last December, there were only 88 EVs in all of Yukon, and half of them were plug-in hybrids. Blake Shaffer, a University of Calgary associate professor, studied the situation in his community with local utility Enmax. He previously told CBC News (new window) that electricity distribution networks would need significant upgrades in order for all EV drivers to be able to charge at Level 2. That's where the real challenge of EVs comes about, he said, noting high costs for both individuals and electric utilities. McNally says Toronto Hydro has adequate capacity for whatever EVs and heat pumps come at us. She acknowledged, however, that in cases where someone does ask Toronto Hydro for extra capacity you need to pay for the upgrades. Meanwhile, Level 1 takes advantage of wall outlets that people often already have, including residents of apartments or condo buildings. In colder parts of Canada, many parking spaces have a plug intended for block heaters. (Although tenants may have to negotiate with their landlord to use it for charging (new window) .) WATCH | This electric vehicle owner says tenants who pay hydro should be able to plug in: Début du widget Widget. Passer le widget ? Fin du widget Widget. Retourner au début du widget ? This electric vehicle owner says tenants who pay hydro should be able to plug in Renters might find themselves in uncharted legal territory if their landlord wants to make them pay for charging their electric vehicles — even if electricity is included in their lease. Many people don't need Level 2 at home Living in Toronto, McNally doesn't drive 400 kilometres a day; typically, she only covers 600 kilometres in an entire month. So she knew that Level 1 charging was probably good enough for her needs. That's not unusual — even outside Canada's largest city. Shaffer studied the driving and parking habits of 129 EV drivers in Calgary from December 2021 to December 2022. (While that was during the tail end of the pandemic, Statistics Canada reports very similar commute times in Calgary in 2022 and 2024 (new window) .) The study found 29 per cent of drivers only ever needed Level 1 charging (new window) because they drove very little relative to the time they were parked. Another 53 per cent could use Level 1 most of the time, but might need to visit a public Level 2 or fast charging station up to once per month to top off their battery. WATCH | Canada needs more charging stations to hit EV targets: Début du widget Widget. Passer le widget ? Fin du widget Widget. Retourner au début du widget ? Canada needs more charging stations to hit EV targets Experts say Canada needs hundreds of thousands more charging stations to support electric vehicle targets, but it's unclear who's in charge of building them. The City of Vancouver estimates that the average driver can meet their daily driving needs in under four hours using a Level 1 charger and in about 45 minutes using a Level 2 charger (new window) . Either of those is plenty of time if people have a place to park and charge overnight. Level 1 can even work for drivers in rural communities. Rob van Adrichem lives in Prince George, B.C., and got an electric car this past summer. He only has Level 1 charging at home, but tops up at Level 2 chargers at the park or the library in town if he needs to. I'm finding Level 1 is no problem, he said. I think people get scared off on Level 2s because they think it's going to be thousands of dollars and I don't know that it's always necessary. Is it a tenant's right to charge an EV at their rental? (new window) Ali Mohazab is co-founder of a startup called Parkizio Technologies that helps people such as apartment dwellers access electricity for charging. He said people thinking about switching to an EV may imagine doing a variation of what they did with their gas car: driving to empty and then going to a gas station and filling the entire tank — something they're forced to do because they don't have a gas pump at their home. Mohazab said that gas mentality may not allow people to see that with an EV, every parking opportunity is a charging opportunity and it doesn't matter if you charge faster so your battery is full at 1 a.m. instead of 8 a.m. when you leave for work — you can just leave it plugged in overnight. He added, If you kind of look at your car as a, you know, cell phone with wheels, then it really makes sense. McNally has found that she doesn't even need to charge every day, even at Level 1. I charge about once a week, she said. Couldn't be easier. But how can you tell if Level 1 will be enough for you? Level 1 is probably enough for most people, Mohazab says, except those who drive all day for work, such as Uber drivers. McNally suggests this rule of thumb: If you drive less than 60 kilometres a day, you are probably just fine with the regular plug that is already at your house. She recommends that new EV owners start with Level 1 to keep things cheap and simple. Start there, see how it works, learn your patterns — and then if you really want Level 2, you can add that cost later. Emily Chung (new window) · CBC News
Winnipeg Free Press
3 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Many Canadians losing confidence in future of trade relationship with U.S.: Poll
OTTAWA – Almost two in five Canadians say recent court rulings in the U.S., and the ongoing legal battle over President Donald Trump's tariffs, have made them feel less confident in the future of trade relations, a new poll suggests. The poll suggests that 38 per cent of Canadians say they feel less confident now about the future of Canada-U.S. trade as well as trade between the U.S. and other countries. Sixteen per cent of Canadian respondents say they feel more confident, while 37 per cent say their level confidence in the future of the trade relationship hasn't changed. The Leger poll, which was conducted online and can't be assigned a margin of error, surveyed more than 1,500 people between May 30 and June 1. The poll also surveyed more than 1,000 Americans. Their responses to the poll were substantially similar. Thirty-six per cent of American respondents said the recent court rulings and the ongoing legal battle over Trump's tariffs made them feel less confident about the future of trade with Canada and with the rest of the world. Another 19 per cent reported feeling more confident and 31 per cent said their opinion hadn't changed. Trump's tariffs are still hitting most countries around the world after a federal appeals court temporarily paused a decision last week by the U.S. Court of International Trade to block his tariffs. The court said Trump went beyond his authority when he used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 to take his trade war to the world. A federal appeals court granted the Trump administration's emergency motion for a temporary stay, allowing those tariffs to stay in place for now. The poll suggests that Albertans are reporting the lowest level of confidence in the state of trade relations — 48 per cent of them told Leger they feel less confident about the future of Canada—U.S. and U.S.–international trade relations. That's compared to 38 per cent of Quebecers, 37 per cent of Ontarians and 35 per cent of people in B.C. Among Canadians 55 years of age and older, 43 per cent reported feeling less confident in trade relations; just 33 per cent of Canadians aged 18 to 34 said the same. More women than men said they were losing confidence. While many Canadians expressed concern about the future of trade relationships, many also said the fact that U.S. courts are trying to limit Trump's impact on trade policy increases their trust in America's institutions. The poll suggests that 45 per cent of Canadians say their trust in U.S. democratic institutions has increased, while 17 per cent say it has decreased. Almost a third of Canadians said it has had no impact on their opinion. Quebecers were the most likely to say their trust had increased, at 54 per cent, compared to 45 per cent of people in B.C., 43 per cent of Ontarians and 39 per cent of Albertans. Canadians aged 55 and over were more likely to say their trust had increased than younger Canadians. Among the Americans surveyed, 38 per cent said the fact that U.S. courts are trying to limit Trump's trade powers increases their trust in U.S. democratic institutions. Another 24 per cent said it decreases their trust and 26 per cent said it had no impact on their opinion. Andrew Enns, Leger's executive vice-president for Central Canada, said that if there had been only one ruling — the one that blocked the tariffs — the confidence levels recorded by the poll might have been higher. 'There was a second ruling and I think, if anything, it's left people a bit uncertain about the situation,' Enns said, noting that levels of concern seemed to be higher earlier in the year. 'I think the confidence, it's going to take some time to rebuild that.' The polling industry's professional body, the Canadian Research Insights Council, says online surveys cannot be assigned a margin of error because they do not randomly sample the population. — With files from David Baxter and Kelly Geraldine Malone This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 6, 2025.
6 hours ago
Experts warn of Bill C-2 as 'anti-refugee' and 'anti-immigrant' giving Canada 'unchecked powers' like the U.S.
Mbonisi Zikhali came to Canada in 2009 from Zimbabwe to pursue a master's in journalism at Carleton University. Post-graduation, the international student found himself homeless in Windsor and applied for refugee status – a privilege soon unavailable if Bill C-2 becomes the law. The bill is unnecessary and not sympathetic at all to people's well-being, Zikhali said. Many experts and community groups working with newcomers in Canada agree. They are calling the Liberal government's sweeping new legislation, Bill C-2 or the Strong Borders Act, anti-immigrant and anti-refugee, and say they hoping the legislation does not become law. Zikhali said he came on scholarship and in 2012 found himself in Windsor picking tomatoes at a greenhouse. Soon enough, he was living on the streets, and lost his passport which also had his study permit in it. Applying for refugee status, Zikhali said, was his saving grace and worries this bill will deprive vulnerable people of a safe haven. What is Bill C-2? The legislation proposes changes to a number of laws including the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Specifically it allows officials to cancel, suspend or change immigration documents immediately, pause the acceptance of new applications and cancel applications already in process if deemed in the public interest. Début du widget Widget. Passer le widget ? Fin du widget Widget. Retourner au début du widget ? Critics say new border legislation aligns Canada's immigration system with the U.S. 2 days agoDuration2:43The Liberal government proposed new border legislation this week. But critics say they worry the law will do more harm than good. The CBC's Pratyush Dayal reports. Asylum claims would also have to be made within a year of entering the country, including for international students and temporary residents. Take this hypothetical: An Afghan international student who came to study here in July 2020. When the Taliban takes over in August 2021 and things become uncertain back home, that student could have applied for asylum. But with this bill, the one-year time period would have lapsed and they would be ineligible. The immigration changes would also require irregular border crossers — people who enter Canada between official ports of entry — to make an asylum claim within 14 days of arriving in Canada. Immigration Minister Lena Metlege Diab is defending the measures (new window) . There's a lot of applications in the system. We need to act fairly, and treat people appropriately who really do need to claim asylum and who really do need to be protected to stay in Canada, Diab told CBC News. We need to be more efficient in doing that. At the same time, Canadians demand that we have a system that works for everyone. 'Very U.S.-like' bill: refugee help centre director says Windsor's Matthew House gives refugees a place to live and helps them with resettlement. Mike Morency, the organization's executive director, says he worries this bill will put more vulnerable people at greater harm. It continues to align our immigration system with that of the United States, Morency said. Refugee claimants are not the problem. The one year-ban is a major concern for us. The other major concern for us is the ability of the government to declare an emergency and suspend applications. That one to me feels very U.S.-like. Morency said he understands the government's will to try to cut back on international students and migrant workers making a refugee claim as a way to stay in Canada, but worries for people who have a legitimate need for protection being unfairly targeted. It also feels very much like a workaround to our commitment to the Geneva Convention. If the government wants to step out of the Geneva Convention, then then we need to do it with integrity and we need to approach the UN and say we're going to withdraw, he said. Syed Hussan, spokesperson for the Migrant Rights Network, agrees saying the bill violates Canada's most basic legal obligations and is immoral . 'Gives the government unchecked power to take away people's status': Migrant Rights Network Hussan asserts the bill infringes upon Canada's legal commitments and ethical standards by granting the government excessive authority to cancel permits. Every refugee gets to have the right to have their case heard. That's now being taken away, he said. Collectively it's a bill that gives the government unchecked power to take away people's status… This is an anti-immigrant and anti-refugee bill. It's illegal. Without any ability for people to appeal or have their case individually heard, Hussan said, the bill allows the government to make people undocumented or just throw people out of the country in the hundreds of thousands . Syed Hussan says the Migrant Rights Network condemns Bill C-2's anti-Refugee and mass deportation provisions. Photo: CBC The changes also allow the federal immigration department to share information more widely with different agencies within Canada. Hussan said anyone who was not a citizen or later became a citizen will have their data impacted by the bill. Hassan said this is similar to the US immigration policies. This is Carney's first test and he's failed it. He's no different from Donald Trump. 'Major rollback of rights,' 'disservice to refugees': Queen's university law professor Sharry Aiken, professor of law at Queen's University, also finds the bill troubling. Very disappointing. It's a betrayal of many Canadians that supported this government in the most recent election, she said, noting these issues weren't part of the Liberal election campaign. The omnibus bill, she said, is quite complicated with 16 different parts and neither serves to reform the asylum system nor address Canadians' privacy rights. Typically, omnibus bills don't get the degree of parliamentary scrutiny and oversight, she said, which is concerning. Aiken said the one year-bar for asylum claimants represents a major rollback of rights . No longer are these claimants eligible for a hearing before the Refugee Protection Division, she said. The division of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB) hears and decides claims for refugee protection in Canada. Aikens said this arbitrary bill will also very quickly develop a backlog. The bill proposes a legislative fix for a problem that doesn't require new law. It requires operational intervention, she said. This one year rule mimics what's in place in the U.S. and what has been the subject of extensive international criticism… This bill does a disservice to refugees and betrays the Canadian public's trust in the Liberal government for ensuring a fair refugee determination system consistent with international standards. She urges the MPs to separate out the provisions having the issues desegregated. 'Will make the process more cumbersome': immigration lawyer Toronto-based immigration lawyer, Mario Bellissimo, said with the bill creating arbitrary distinctions of 14 days and one year after June 2020, an individualized assessment approach is being taken away. While the number of refugee claimants have recently dipped, Bellissimo said the bill signals that Canada wants to potentially limit immigration. It wants to send messages to individuals who want to traverse the system over many years without legitimate claims that this is not a destination of choice for you, he said. Bellissimo agrees that targeting individuals who impact the immigration system in a negative way is important but the bill will end up targeting individuals in genuine need of assistance. Pratyush Dayal (new window) · CBC News
