“Average Canadians are really struggling right now, having to choose between heat and food. The government is listening to consultants instead of giving regular people tax relief on fuel.”

“Mr. Speaker, I do not think they are coming from the average Canadian. The average Canadian is really struggling right now. Canadians are struggling with everything. Their mental health is even being affected because they are having to choose between heat and food. These stories are not coming from the grassroots. They are not coming from people at their kitchen tables. They are coming from consultants or someone who thinks it is a better idea to do something different than give Canadians a little relief.”

“Cutting this tax saves drivers money at the pump. I want the member to explain his claim that it helps oil companies instead.”

“Mr. Speaker, I am a little confused by the NDP member’s comments about rounding the math. I do not want to criticize him for going off topic so much, because I will probably do a bit of that in three hours when I have to speak, but in some of his comments, he said that taking this tax off would somehow subsidize the oil companies. I do not see how he can say that when it is going to help take taxes off the consumer at the pump. Could he explain how he rounds that math?”

“I support this bill, but it does not go far enough. Pausing the fuel tax helps, but the government should remove all federal fuel taxes until July 2027 to give families real relief.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to rise on behalf of my community of Edmonton Southeast. As Parliament returns for the fall sitting, I am proud to stand in the House with my Conservative colleagues as we fight for a more affordable life for all Canadians. This evening, I have the privilege of debating legislation that not only is Conservative in principle, but reflects a policy that Conservatives have been pushing for months. The tabling of Bill C-38 by the government represents a successful policy push by Conservatives that would help ease the strain on the wallets of millions of Canadians, but while this legislation is a step in the right direction, it does not go far enough. Earlier this year, the federal government temporarily suspended the fuel excise tax, reducing the tax on gasoline by 10¢ per litre and on diesel by four cents per litre. That relief was supposed to expire after Labour Day. Conservatives fought that tax increase and called on the government to extend the relief. Now the government has changed course. Under Bill C-38, the excise tax would remain suspended until the end of January, and half of the tax would return in February and March, before the full tax would return in April. Any relief for working Canadians is good news, but Canadians should understand what this legislation would actually do. It would not eliminate the tax. It would delay its return, and it would leave in place other federal taxes and regulatory costs that continue to affect the price Canadians pay for fuel. That matters because fuel is not simply another household expense. Fuel moves our economy. It gets workers to their jobs. It powers farm equipment. It moves building materials to construction sites. It delivers food to grocery stores and products to businesses across this vast country. When the cost of fuel increases, those costs do not remain at the gas station. Those costs move through our supply chains and eventually land on the bills paid by Canadian families. We are already seeing the pressures. In July, gasoline prices were up over 25% compared with the year before. Energy costs were up over 16%. Transportation costs increased by over 7%, while grocery prices rose another 3%. Canadian households now carry about $1.76 in debt for every dollar of disposable income. At the same time, consumer insolvencies are up over 5% from the year before. These are not simply numbers on a spreadsheet. They represent real Canadians trying to make their paycheques stretch further. Just this Sunday on my way to the Edmonton airport, my ride-share driver shared some of the struggles he faces every day. This hard-working man from south Edmonton is named Peter. Peter came to Canada 25 years ago and built a life for himself and his family. He owned and operated a small business in our community, employed local residents and contributed to Canada’s economic engine. After almost three decades of working hard and providing for his family on a single income, it was finally time for him to retire, but there was a problem. The rapidly increasing cost of living meant that his retirement savings could no longer keep up with the price of everyday essentials. After decades of contributing to Canada’s economic base and providing for his family, Peter’s wife is now forced to work a retail job. At the same time, Peter cannot enjoy his well-deserved retirement years. Instead, he drives for a ride-share service five days a week just to keep his head above water. Unfortunately, Peter’s story is all too common among Canadians. We used to have a simple bargain in this country: work hard, earn a decent paycheque, provide for one’s family, buy a home in a safe neighbourhood and, after decades of work, enjoy a secure retirement. After 11 years of Liberal government, that bargain has been torn apart. Canadians like Peter can no longer enjoy the fruits of their labour because the cost of basics continues to eat away at their paycheques and savings. That is why Bill C-38 cannot be where this conversation ends. The government itself recognizes that fuel tax relief benefits truckers, agriculture, housing, construction and delivery businesses. If lower fuel taxes help those sectors today, then Canadians should not be satisfied watching those taxes being returned in only a few months. Conservatives are proposing something more substantial. We have called on the government to remove all federal taxes on gasoline and diesel until at least Canada Day 2027. That means going beyond the excise tax suspension and addressing costs attributed to the clean fuel regulations and the industrial carbon tax. The common-sense Conservative proposal would save drivers up to 25¢ per litre and put as much as $1,000 back into the pockets of Canadian families. That is the difference between temporary relief and meaningful relief. Conservatives fought the return of the fuel excise tax after Labour Day. The government changed course, and Canadians will save money because of it. That is a positive development, but we should not confuse a temporary extension with a solution to Canada’s affordability crisis. Canadians still face high fuel prices, rising grocery bills and household budgets stretched too thin. Conservatives will always fight for measures that leave more money in Canadians’ pockets while continuing to push for greater and longer-lasting relief, because Canadians like Peter did everything we asked of them. They worked hard, built businesses, raised their families, paid their taxes and contributed to their communities. They deserve more than another temporary relief. They deserve a Canada where hard work once again provides the opportunity to get ahead, build a good life and retire with security. That can only be done by extending government tax relief until at least July 1, 2027, and permanently removing the clean fuel standard and industrial carbon tax.”

• Echo ×3

  A repeated line

  “Any relief for working Canadians is good news.”

  Said 3 times by 3 members since September 22.

  Every time it was said →

“This bill helps, but it does not go far enough. I want the government to extend the fuel tax break until Canada Day 2027. I also want them to get rid of the clean fuel rules and the industrial carbon tax, because they make everyday life too expensive.”

“Mr. Speaker, as I said in my speech, Conservatives welcome anything that saves Canadians money. However, when the measure is a half-measure, not a full-fledged plan, then we must ask the government to do what is needed so that Canadians can keep more in their pockets and have an affordable life. The government is proposing to cut these taxes only until April. We are asking for relief to be given until Canada Day 2027, and to also get rid of the fuel standard tax as well as the industrial carbon tax, which are driving up the cost of fuel and which drive up the cost of everyday living.”

“Does my colleague agree that cutting all fuel taxes would help Canadians more than this bill? It would let people afford to go to work and buy groceries, which would be better for the economy.”

“Mr. Speaker, could my hon. colleague comment on whether he thinks that if we actually followed the Conservative plan and reduced all of the taxes it would actually benefit the citizens of Canada far more than the 25¢ a litre, so they could afford to get out, go to work and buy their groceries? Does the member think that would be better for the overall economy than this half-measure that the government is proposing?”

“The government's plan to lower fuel taxes temporarily will not help Canadians for very long. The government should get rid of these taxes completely because they make life unaffordable.”

“Mr. Speaker, my learned friend was a CPA by profession in his past life, and I believe no one knows numbers better than he does. I totally agree with him that the policies that the government has at least agreed to adopt are not going to help as it intends them to, or they are only going to help for a bit. We are saying the government should get rid of these taxes, those that do not make sense and those that make life unaffordable for Canadians. I agree with what my friend has said, word for word, in his analogy.”

“Government relief programs only put bandages on the problem. Life is expensive because of federal fuel taxes and energy laws. We need to cut those taxes instead.”

“Mr. Speaker, going back to the root cause, it is good that the government is providing those reliefs, but who is going to look after the real cost of those reliefs? Why do we not get rid of the anti-energy laws that are making life unaffordable? It is like the government is creating a problem and then providing a solution for it. We do not believe in putting bandages on wounds. We believe in providing real medicine, and in this context, the real medicine is to get rid of the taxes on fuel that are driving up costs, be it the standard fuel tax or the anti-energy laws.”

“I want the member to explain what the government is doing to lower costs for Canadians. I also want him to answer why they will not get rid of the gas tax completely.”

“Mr. Speaker, I would like my colleague to please emphasize the importance of lowering costs on Canadians. Could he actually lay out all of the measures taking place right now, as well as answer why they are not implementing the entire plan and eliminating all the federal tax on gas?”

“I support this bill to keep pausing the fuel tax, but it does not go far enough. High gas prices make food, housing, and everyday life cost more. The government should cut this tax permanently instead of bringing it back later.”

“Mr. Speaker, today I rise to speak, on behalf of the great people of Brampton West, to Bill C-38, an act to amend the Excise Tax Act, also known as the Canadian fuel affordability act, and the impact of high prices on Canadian businesses and families. After visiting and talking to the residents of Brampton West this summer, I can say that this is an incredibly important issue affecting Canadians. For months, Conservatives have delivered a simple message: Stop raising costs, cut taxes, lower the cost of fuel and let Canadians keep more of the money they earn. Now, after months of Conservative pressure, the government would be extending the fuel tax relief. That is good news for Canadians, but let us be clear. This would not be permanent tax relief. It would be a temporary extension. The tax is still scheduled to come back, and Canadians deserve better than a temporary break from high prices. Conservatives have been fighting for lower fuel taxes because we understand something the government has been slow to recognize: Fuel taxes do not stop at the gas pump. They travel through the entire economy. When it costs more for fuel, it costs more to produce our food, build our homes and supply our businesses, and eventually we all end up paying higher prices. The government itself now acknowledges that the fuel tax relief benefits truckers. It also benefits agriculture, construction and housing. Conservatives agree. In fact, we have been making the argument for years. That is why we fought against higher fuel prices. That is why we demanded relief. That is why the government should go further. If lower fuel taxes help Canadians today, why bring those back tomorrow? That is the question the government needs to answer. Under the current plan, the regular federal excise tax is 10¢ per litre on gasoline and four cents per litre on diesel. The suspension would be extended through January. Then the tax would come back again at half the regular rate in February and March, and the full rate is scheduled to return in April 2027. Let us think about that. Canadians would get relief today, but the government has scheduled the tax to come back. That is not a long-term affordability plan. Conservatives believe that Canadians need long-lasting relief because the affordability crisis will not disappear in February. The grocery bills and mortgage payments will not disappear in February. The family that needs its vehicle to get to work will need gasoline in February and beyond. Why should the tax break disappear? I represent the wonderful riding of Brampton West. This issue is very real for the people I represent. Brampton is a working city. It is a trucking, manufacturing and small business city. Every morning, people get up early, get into their car or truck and go to work. They are not driving because it is a luxury. They are driving because they have a business to run, a construction site to reach or children to take to school. These Canadians work hard. Increasingly, they feel like the government is taking more, while their paycheques buy less. They see it at the grocery store, in their housing costs and every time they fill their tank. That is why Conservatives have been demanding affordability measures that put money in people’s pockets. Canadians do not need more bureaucracy or another complicated program. Canada is competing for jobs. We are competing for investments. We are competing for manufacturing. Communities such as Brampton know what happens when those jobs leave. Recently, Brampton has experienced the devastating uncertainty surrounding the Stellantis assembly plant. Thousands of workers and their families have been affected. Those workers do not need more speeches about competitiveness. They need Canada to become competitive, affordable, and a land of opportunity. That means lowering the cost of doing business, and it means encouraging businesses to hire here. Conservatives believe Canada should compete by making our economy stronger with lower taxes, faster approvals, more investments, more productions and more Canadian jobs. We should make Canada the best place in the world to invest, build and hire, because every investment represents something more important than a government announcement. It represents a paycheque. It represents a worker. It represents a family. The government estimates that extending the fuel tax suspension would provide billions of dollars in additional relief. That is good, but it raises another question: If keeping that money in the economy helps Canadians now, why should the government be in such a hurry to take it back? Conservatives believe that the money Canadians earn belongs to Canadians. The government must justify taking it. Families know where their money is needed. Maybe it is a mortgage, groceries, the hydro bill, hockey registration or keeping a small business alive. Canadians do not need government telling them how to spend every additional dollar. Conservatives also understand who ultimately carries the burden when government raises the costs. It is the trucker leaving Brampton before sunrise, the contractor trying to keep a project on budget, the small business owners wondering whether there will be enough left at the end of the month, and the parents sitting at their kitchen table deciding which bills get paid first. Government policy should make their life easier, not harder. Conservatives will support meaningful tax relief. We will support measures that make life more affordable. However, we will also continue pushing the government to go further, because one temporary tax measure cannot undo years of rising costs. Canada needs an economic plan based on growth that rewards work, investment and entrepreneurship. We need to build homes, infrastructure and energy projects that create jobs, and we need to bring down the cost of doing business. That is how Canada becomes competitive, that is how wages grow, that is how opportunities are created and that is how we give young Canadians the hope that working hard will get them ahead. Bill C-38 presents the government with an opportunity. It can acknowledge what Conservatives have been saying: Canadians are overtaxed, families need relief, businesses need lower taxes and our economy needs to become more competitive. Therefore, extend the relief, make affordability the priority, keep fuel prices down, lower taxes on work and investment, get Canadian projects built, bring investment back to Canada, protect Canadian manufacturing and create powerful paycheques for Canadian workers. Conservatives believe in the Canadian worker. We believe in our farmers, our truckers, our tradespeople and our entrepreneurs. We believe that Canadians should be rewarded for working hard, so our message with respect to Bill C-38 is simple: Any relief is welcome, but temporary relief is not enough. Keep taxes down, bring costs down, make Canada competitive, protect Canadians’ jobs and let Canadians keep more of what they earn, because Canadians do not need another band-aid solution. They need everlasting affordability. They need good jobs, better opportunity and an economy where hard work pays again. A government cannot run from a fundamental responsibility to protect and help citizens. Canadians deserve safety, security and affordability. That is what families in Brampton West and across Canada are asking for, and that is what Conservatives will continue fighting for.”

“I support any help for Canadians, but this bill only gives temporary relief. The government is only doing this because Conservatives pushed for it. We will keep fighting to remove all fuel taxes permanently.”

“Mr. Speaker, if the member had listened to my speech, I encouraged every measure as welcome. Every measure that helps Canadians, Canadian families, Canadian workers or Canadian business is welcome. We Conservatives believe this bill is a half measure that would not give Canadian families and businesses the long-term relief they need. Only after months of Conservative pressure is the government now extending this temporary measure. We will continue to pressure the government until it gives Canadians real long-term relief and takes all the taxes off fuel. One thing I would like to say is that we will welcome any ideas, and if they are willing to accept our ideas, they are also more than welcome to accept them to make—”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

  Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

  See full analysis →

“I agree with the member. The government should make a real long-term economic plan instead of short-term fixes that do not last.”

“Mr. Speaker, I listened intently to the hon. member’s statement, and I agreed with everything he had to say there. My question to him would be this. Does he think it would be better if the Liberals actually had a long-term plan rather than making short-term, interim adjustments and things that are not going to necessarily last for the economy and for Canadian citizens?”

“I agree that we need permanent solutions to lower costs for Canadians, not just temporary ones. The government needs to cut the carbon tax, lower business taxes, and cut red tape. This will help people afford homes and food.”

“Mr. Speaker, I agree with my hon. colleague. We are looking for a permanent solution for the problems that have been created in the last 11 years of Liberal government rule. We need to provide a better relief structure to Canadians and eliminate the industrial carbon tax, eliminate unnecessary taxes on business, cut red tape, do the needful things that help Canadians and bring Canada and Canadians to a point where they can live with good affordability, they can buy a house and they can have meat at the food table every single day.”

“I support cutting fuel taxes because high costs hurt people on fixed incomes. Nobody should have to choose between food and heat. We want the government to remove all federal taxes on gas and diesel until July 2027 to save drivers up to 25 cents a litre.”

“Mr. Speaker, we are always in for measures that are going to help Canadians. I agree with my colleague that Canadians on fixed incomes are especially hard hit by taxes on fuel. No Canadian should have to make the choice between heating or eating, nor between rent or dinner. We are going to continue to pressure the government to remove all the federal tax on gas and diesel until at least Canada Day 2027 to save Canadians up to 25¢ per litre. Further to your question, whenever you are going to bring any pragmatic idea that is going to improve the health of Canadians in any aspect, we will support those measures, and we will continue to work for Canadians in this Parliament and beyond so they can have a better life in Canada.”

• Vague
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Clarity 32 of 100

  Much of this statement used imprecise wording, lacked details on timing or responsibility, or made broad claims without support.

  See full analysis →

“It is better to lower taxes than to take people's money and spend it on government programs. The government should stop taking so much money from people through the fuel tax.”

“Mr. Speaker, I did not catch all of the member opposite’s comments, but he talked about a lot of the programs the Liberals were spending money on. Would he not agree that it is better for the individual taxpayer, the consumer out there, to actually take less from the consumer and not tax them like the government does with this excise tax? Would it not be better to just not have the money taken away from them to move it around versus spending the money on all the other programs the Liberals have?”

“I support this bill to cut the fuel tax, but it does not go far enough. People in my rural riding have to drive, and high fuel prices make everything more expensive. We should change this bill to keep the tax relief longer and eventually remove federal fuel taxes for good.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to rise in the House to represent the great residents of Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay. Their words and their feedback will always guide me in this chamber, as they do in this debate on Bill C-38. For rural and remote communities like the one I represent, driving is a fact of life. It is not a choice. When I checked GasBuddy before coming to the House today, I found that regular gas was priced as high as $2.09 per litre and diesel was $2.95 a litre. Whether someone lives in Tulameen, Princeton, Keremeos, Cawston, Osoyoos, Rock Creek, Midway, Greenwood, Grand Forks, Christina Lake or Castlegar, a basic fact of life is that they drive, which means that almost everyone is paying high prices at the pump. The journey I just described across my riding is 360 kilometres. Unlike the urban regions of the country that many Liberal colleagues across from me represent, there is no SkyTrain. There is no subway, no LimeBike and no e-scooter that my constituents can turn to and travel across our riding in. Transportation costs are also affected by high gas prices. These costs then transfer to nearly every item on store shelves. Keeping prices down at the pump, as we have been speaking about for the past year, means keeping prices down on essential items at Walmart, Canadian Tire and Safeway. This is true not just for my constituents, but for anyone across the country who lives in a remote or rural region, from island communities to our Arctic territories. This is why, since the spring, my colleagues and I on this side of the House have been arguing that at a time of higher gas prices, the result of both conflict abroad and policy decisions at home, it was of the utmost importance for all members of Parliament to act to reduce the price of gas where we can do so. No one is pretending it can or should magically fall to zero, but providing tax relief at the pump is the least we can do when so many Canadians are in need. It is no coincidence that the lack of an affordable life is the number one thing I heard from my constituents this summer. I am guessing everyone else heard the same thing while they were in their ridings this summer. Of course, there were other issues, including health care, tariffs and wildfires. In my region, as many know, wildfires hit Summerland and the Penticton area tremendously. This was obviously what people talked about, but gas prices were very important because they have skyrocketed 25.7%, while overall energy costs have surged 16%. This pushed transportation costs up 7% while grocery prices rose 3%. A recent poll found that 63% of Canadians oppose the Liberals bringing back the fuel excise tax, including 43% who strongly oppose it. This includes 72% of seniors, 68% of women and 61% of those aged 35 to 54. Opposition crosses every region of the country: 71% in Manitoba and Saskatchewan; 64% in British Columbia, Alberta and Atlantic Canada; 62% in Ontario; and 60% in Quebec. Everyone is opposed to this tax, in other words. There is no reason the House cannot deliver for them. When the Liberals offered what they called summer gas tax relief, it was clear that what they were offering was not only insufficient, but very confusing. When I asked government members about this policy, they made no commitment to it beyond the summer, and the member for Delta also made it sound like the policy was meant to help people explore our home province and go camping. While I did have the opportunity to see much of my beautiful province this summer, it was not cheap to do so. In fact, I know several British Columbians who cancelled road trips and hunting expeditions this summer because the cost was too much and the price of gas was too high. Those costs will only rise as the snow starts to fall. That is why my colleagues and I were clear on the need for an extension to the gas tax relief so it could go further and for longer than just the summer until Labour Day. The bill before us today is because of those efforts, stopping what would have been a punishing tax hike at the pumps just this month. The Liberals’ rosy rhetoric has not matched what Canadians are seeing in their wallets or on their bank statements. They cannot afford higher taxes. Thanks to Conservatives keeping up the fight for affordability, Canadians will keep more money in their pockets when they are filling up at the gas station this month, but we can go further. We can improve the bill before us. Bill C-38, as it is currently written, would suspend the fuel tax until January 31, 2027. Half the tax would return on February 1 and the full tax on April 1. Is the Liberal government predicting that Canadians will not be challenged by the costs at the grocery store, by their heating bills or by the price of the pump by April 1? Is everything going to change by then? I do not believe the Liberals have invented that kind of crystal ball, so why time-limit the relief people need? Why reimpose taxes they are currently recognizing as unnecessary? The Liberals have filled their treasury with unnecessary taxes and fees from Canadians’ pockets. They have wasted far more tax dollars than we need in order to fund health care, road repairs or national defence properly. Canadians should not have to pay more for Liberal waste. The Minister of Finance himself said that truckers, farmers, home builders and delivery drivers benefit from fuel tax relief. Would they not benefit more if the government extended this relief to Canada next year, as we are calling for? Would they not benefit by permanently eliminating some of the government’s gas taxes at the pump, as Conservatives are calling for? Of course, the only reason to allow gas taxes to go higher is that the government would choose to prioritize raising taxes instead of providing limited relief. Removing all federal taxes on gas and diesel, including the fuel excise tax, is what we are calling for. Eliminating costly fuel taxes like the fuel standard tax permanently would help keep prices lower. The Liberal government does not need more of Canadians’ gas tax dollars for wasteful boutique projects like Alto rail, which will cost Canadians $60 billion to $90 billion in its life cycle. Instead of forcing families of four in my community to spend between $8,000 and $9,000 on eastern Canadian priorities, they want to see their gas tax dollars spent on efficient local infrastructure, like a secondary route for the South Okanagan to Kelowna, which we have been calling for for years. Conservatives support the Liberals’ half measures like those in Bill C-38 if it means Canadians can get some savings, but we will be pushing for more. The legislation has the potential to provide more relief for longer, but only if we amend it. I hope all colleagues in the House can work together to do just that.”

• Echo ×3

  A repeated line

  “A recent poll found that 63% of Canadians oppose the Liberals bringing back the fuel excise tax.”

  Said 3 times by 3 members since September 22.

  Every time it was said →

“Conservatives want to make life more affordable, but we vote against policies that make no sense. We want to cut gas taxes. In a large riding like mine, where it takes eight hours to drive across, people need cheaper gas.”

“Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives have been pushing to make life more affordable. When we have packages of bills that come at us or policies that come at us that do not make sense, of course we are not going to accept every one. We need Canadians’ lives to be more affordable. We have been pushing for lower taxes on gasoline everywhere, but in a riding like mine, where it is a seven- to eight-hour drive from end to end, one can understand why Canadians or why the people in my riding need to have gas prices go down. That is what we have been pushing for since last year.”

“I recently visited your riding and saw the problems you mentioned.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I was recently in your riding and saw some of the issues that you talked about—”

“This bill brings back the fuel tax in the spring, which is when gas prices are highest in my riding. I want to know if that timing will really help Canadians.”

“Mr. Speaker, if we look at the timing of things, I do not know about the riding in B.C. but I know that in my riding in Yellowhead, quite often gas prices are at their absolute lowest in January. They then start rising again in the spring. Every time it hits me. That is when the prices actually get to their highest. Do you think that the timing of their removal and then the putting of them back on is actually going to help Canadians going forward?”

“I support this bill, but the fuel tax cut ends too soon. Life will still be expensive after April. People in my area are already struggling because of recent wildfires and lost tourism. Canadians will need tax relief for much longer.”

“Mr. Speaker, obviously this is a temporary fix. I do not think there is anyone in the House or anyone in Canada right now who thinks that life is going to be a lot more affordable by April, when this tax relief is due to end in the bill. We need to look at the long run here. This is going to be a tough winter. This is going to be very difficult in my riding. In particular, as many members know, many people in my riding have suffered through the recent wildfire disasters. Our tourism has hit, unfortunately, rock bottom right now, because of the fires during our big tourist season. It is not just in my riding. Throughout Canada, we are going through a very difficult time, and we are going to need relief far beyond this April.”

“The Liberals are running a deficit of nearly $100 billion. It is one of the highest deficits ever, and our children will suffer when they have to pay it back.”

“Mr. Speaker, I am so glad the member is looking a gift horse in the mouth so readily. The Liberals have a deficit of nearly $100 billion. It is one of the highest deficits ever. It is my children and the children of Canadians right now who are going to suffer when they try to pay back that deficit.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 0 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →