HELPS US WITH SOCIAL PROGRAMS AND AT THE SAME TIME, HELPS US REDUCE THE DEFICIT AT THE SAME TIME. >> JG METE SINGH: I'M PROUD TO SAY THAT WE ARE THE ONLY PARTY THAT HAS A PLAN THAT WILL ENSURE THAT WE ARE NOT GOING TO PUT ANY EXTRA BURDEN ON WORKING PLACE PEOPLE ON THE MIDDLE CLASS. ON SMALL BUSINESSES. OUR PLAN IS THE ONLY ONE WITH A CREDIBLE VISION TO INCREASING REVENUE SIGNIFICANTLY AND SUBSTANTIALLY SO THAT WE CAN INVEST IN THE PROGRAMS THAT PEOPLE NEED. THE HELP THAT PEOPLE NEED. AT THE SAME TIME AS PUTTING US IN A BETTER POSITION TO REDUCE OUR DEBT. >> Reporter: NEXT QUESTION? >> Reporter: HELLO THERE. DO YOU HAVE IN THIS PLATFORM AN ACOSTED AMBITIOUS SPENDING. AMBITIOUS REVENUE PROJECTION. FOR ONE OF THEM FOR EXAMPLE THE WEALTH TAX THE PBO HAS SAID THERE ARE SOME UNCERTAINTY ABOUT WHO WE'RE BASING THAT ON. ASSUMPTIONS OF BEHAVIOUR. THERE IS A LOT OF UNCERTAINTY WHEN IT COMES TO THESE NUMBERS. HOW REALISTIC DO YOU THINK YOUR COSTED PLATFORM IS? >> JAGMEET SINGH: SOME OF THAT UNCERTAINTY IS BECAUSE IT HASN'T BEEN DONE BEFORE. AND I ACKNOWLEDGE THAT. IT HASN'T BEEN DONE BEFORE RECENTLY. BUT IT IS A REAL PATH FORWARD TO ASK THOSE AT THE VERY TOP TO START PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE. AND IT'S SOMETHING CANADIANS BELIEVE MAKES SENSE. AND WHILE IT HASN'T BEEN SOMETHING THAT WE'VE DONE RECENTLY AND THAT'S WHY THERE'S SOME UNCERTAINTY, IT HAS BEEN SOMETHING WE'VE DONE IN THIS NOT TOO DISTANT PAST. THERE WAS A TIME WHEN THE SUPER WEALTHY PAID MORE OF THEIR FAIR SHARE. AND IT DIDN'T RELY ON FAMILIES AS MUCH AND WHEN CORPORATIONS AND THE ULTRAWEALTHY WERE CONTRIBUTING MORE FAIRLY, THERE WAS A TIME WHEN THAT HAPPENED. AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO RETURN TO. BUT THE BURDEN SHOULD NOT BE SHOULDERED BY WORKING PEOPLE. IT SHOULD BE SHOULDERED AT THE VERY, VERY TOP. THEY SHOULD BE SHOULDERING THEIR FAIR SHARE. AND THAT HASN'T BEEN THE CASE FOR A LONG TIME BECAUSE OF LIBERAL AND CONSERVATIVE GOVERNMENTS. AND WE WANT TO FIX THAT. >> Reporter: AND IN TERMS OF YOUR-- THE EXCESS PROFIT TAX. FOR AS YOU SAY CORPORATIONS THAT MADE OUT LIKE BANDITS DURING THE PANDEMIC IS HOW I THINK YOU PUT IT THIS MORNING. IS IT FAIR TO APPLY A TAX LIKE THAT TO COMPANIES NO MATTER HOW WELL THEY DID, WHEN THEY DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THIS BEFORE THE PANDEMIC? YOU KNOW THE PANDEMIC HAPPENED. THEY DID WELL. AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO TAX. >> JAGMEET SINGH: WE DID IT IN THE WORLD WARS. COMPANIES THAT WERE ADHERING. SOME MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN DOING IT PERFECTLY. BUT IN CONDITIONS OF A CRISIS MEAN THAT EVERYDAY FOLKS HAVE HAD TO SACRIFICE, SMALL BUSINESSES STRUGGLED. BUT THERE'S SOME COMPANIES JUST BECAUSE THEY WERE IN THE RIGHT PLACE AT THE THE RIGHT TIME, MADE RECORD PROFITS WHILE EVERYONE ELSE SUFFERED. AND WE'RE WONDERING WHO SHOULD PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE FOR THIS CRISIS. I WOULD THINK IT MAKES SENSE THAT IF SOMEONE MADE MONEY OFF OF THE PANDEMIC, THEY'VE GOT A RESPONSIBILITY MORALLY TO CONTRIBUTE A BIT MORE. AND THIS IS AGAIN NOT A BRAND NEW IDEA. WE ACKNOWLEDGE THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS DURING THE WORLD WAR PERIOD. THERE WAS PROFIT-EERING TAXES AND WE ADJUSTED THEM TO MAKE SURE THEY WORKED. AND WE'RE SAY LET'S DO THE SAME. AMAZON KEEP COMING BACK TO IT AS AN EXAMPLE. IT'S PRETTY OUTRAGEOUS HOW MUCH THEY HAVE EARNED IN THIS PANDEMIC. HOW MUCH OF A RECORD PROFIT THAT THEY'VE EARNED. AND THE FACT THAT THEY PAY VIRTUALLY NOTHING IN CANADA IN TERMS OF TAXES. THAT'S ALREADY A PROBLEM. BUT ON TOP OF THAT, THERE SHOULD BE AN EXTRA PORTION THAT COMPANIES THAT HAVE MADE OUT LIKE BANDITS THAT THEY PAY. AND CANADIANS AGREE WITH THAT. THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE. >> Reporter: NEXT QUESTION, ANNIE BERGERON OLIVER FROM CTV NEWS. >> Reporter: HI MR. SINGH. $114 BILLION OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS WHICH IS ROUGHLY THREE TIMES WHAT THE LIBERALS ARE PROPOEGZ AS WELL AS THE CONSERVATIVES. GIVEN THE SPENDING HERE, DO YOU NOT THINK THAT THIS IS A DOCUMENT THAT VOTERS COULD HAVE BENEFITTED FROM SEEING EARLIER? YOU DID RELEASE YOUR PLATFORM A MONTH AGO. >> JAGMEET SINGH: WELL IT'S NOT A SURPRISE TO CANADIANS THAT WE WANT TO INVEST IN PEOPLE. IT'S NOT A SURPRISE, WE'VE SAID FOR A LONG TIME THAT WE BELIEVE WE GOT A LIST OF PEOPLE. WE'VE DONE THAT THROUGHOUT THE PANDEMIC. WE'VE IMPOSED THAT THROUGHOUT THE ELECTION. WE'VE LONG BEEN SAYING WE NEED TO INVEST IN PEOPLE. WE BELIEVE IN THAT. WE ABSOLUTELY ARE FIRMLY CONFIDENT THAT THAT IS THE RIGHT WAY TO MOVE FORWARD. WE'VE ALSO SAID THE WAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO PAY FOR THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE ON THE WORING DR WORKERS OR THE MIDDLE CLASS. WE'VE BEEN REALLY CLEAR ON THAT. THIS DOCUMENT HIGHLIGHTS WHAT WE'VE BEEN SAYING FOR A LONG TIME. IT PROVIDES MORE DETAILS. BUT THE PLAN HAS BEEN REALLY CLEAR TO CANADIANS. WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE A BURDEN ON YOU. WE'RE GOING TO ASK THAT THE ULTRAWEALTHY PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE AND THAT'S WHAT TODAY'S DOCUMENT ALIGNS. >> REPORTER: THE PROVINCES HAVE BEEN ASKING FOR $28 BILLION IN HEALTH TRANSFERS. YOUR PLATFORM COSTED DOES NOT PROVIDE ANY CLEAR SPECIFICS ABOUT HEALTH TRANSFERS. I KNOW OFFICIALS WERE SAYING THERE IS $68 BILLION IN HEALTH SPENDING. BUT IT STILL WON'T REACH THAT $28 BILLION. SO WHAT DO YOU SAY TO THE PROVINCES AND SPECIFICALLY QUEBEC? WHO HAVE BEEN PUSHING AND ASKING FOR $28 BILLION SPECIFICALLY FROM THE FEDS? >> JAGMEET SINGH: WE SAY TO PROVINCES AND TERRITORIES AND TO QUEBEC THAT WE ARE INVESTING THE MOST IN HEALTH CARE. IF HEALTH CARE IS SOMETHING YOU CARE ABOUT, DEMOCRATS ARE OFFERING THE MOST INVESTMENTS IN HEALTH CARE. FAR MORE THAN LIBERALS AND CONSERVATIVES. JUST PHARMA CARE INVESTMENTS ALONE ARE MORE THAN WHAT THE CONSERVATIVES ARE INVESTING. THAT $10 BILLION TO PUT IN PLACE A NATIONAL UNIVERSAL PHARMA CARE IS MORE THAN THE CONSERVATIVES' PLAN. THAT'S JUST ONE OF OUR COMMITMENTS. SO IF HEALTH CARE IS A QUESTION THAT PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT AND THEY ARE WONDERING ABOUT WHO IS GOING TO INVEST THE MOST. AND KEEPING OUR PUBLIC SYSTEM PUBLIC. AND INVESTING IN IT SO WE CAN BE THERE FOR PEOPLE WHEN THEY NEED IT, OUR PLAN OFFERS THE MOST INVESTMENT. AND FOR QUEBEC, THAT APPLIES AS WELL. OUR PLAN TO INVEST THE MOST IN HEALTH CARE AND THAT WILL HELP PEOPLE. IN QUEBEC AND ACROSS CANADA. >> NEXT QUESTION RICHARD SUSSMAN FROM GLOBAL NEWS. >> Reporter: THERE'S NO PATH IN HERE TO GET BACK TO BALANCED BUDGETS. WHEN SHOULD CANADIANS EXPECT THERE IS AN NDP GOVERNMENT TO GET BACK TO THE BOOKS BEING BALANCED? >> JAGMEET SINGH: WE HAVE THE MOST AGGRESSIVE PLAN TO ACTUALLY INCREASE REVENUE TO GET US IN A BETTER POSITION TO REACH THAT BALANCE. AND WE BELIEVE THAT THAT WOULD BE-- THAT'S IMPORTANT, BUT WE WOULDN'T DO IT ON THE BACKS OF PEOPLE. AND WE WOULD GET TO THAT BETTER POSITION FINANCIALLY, FISCALLY, BY THE MEASURES THAT WE'VE OUTLINED. CLOSING THE LOOPHOLES. ENDING THE OFFSHORE TAX EVENTS. THE WELL TAXED. RETURNING THE CAPITAL GAINS INCLUSION. BACK TO WHAT IT USED TO BE IN THE 2000s. THE METRICS OR THE MEASURE THAT WE'RE PUTTING FORWARD WILL ENSURE THAT THE BURDEN DOES NOT FALL ON WORKERS. DOES NOT FALL ON FAMILIES. PUTS US IN A BETTER POSITION TO PAY DOWN OUR DEBT IN A WAY THAT PUTS THE BURDEN ON THE WEALTHIEST. ON THE BILLIONAIRES. ON THE COMPANIES LIKE AMAZON. AND THAT'S THE RIGHT WAY TO MOVE FORWARD. AND WE'VE BEEN LONG SAYING THAT THAT'S THE WAY WE WOULD GO FORWARD. LIBERALS AND CONSERVATIVES HAVE A DIFFERENT APPROACH. THEY ARE NOT LOOKING AT INCREASING REVENUE IN A SIGNIFICANT WAY LIKE WE ARE. AND THEY ARE GOING TO BE CUTTING THE HELP THAT PEOPLE NEED. >> BUT IS THERE A PATH THERE? YOU HAVEN'T ANSWERED WHETHER THERE IS A PATH TO GET TO THE BOOKS BEING BALANCED. >> JAGMEET SINGH: YEAH THERE'S A PATH. AND OUR PATH IS THAT PATH TO GET TO THAT POINT SHOULD BE ABOUT INCREASING REVENUE. MAKING SURE THAT THE ULTRAWEALTHY ARE PAYING MORE OF THEIR FAIR SHARE LIKE THEY USED OTO. AND WE ARE THE ONLY ONES LAYING OUT A CREDIBLE PATH GETTING TO A POSITION WHERE WE'RE BEING BALANCED. IT DOESN'T HELP CUT PEOPLE OR PUT BURDENS BACK ON THE SAME PEOPLE THAT HAVE STRUGGLEED. WE ARE THE ONLY ONES PROVIDING A PLAN THAT GETS US BACK TOWARDS BALANCE WHILE WE CAN STILL INVEST IN PEOPLE THAT PUTS THE BURDEN ON THOSE THAT SHOULD BE PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE. >> NEXT QUESTION? FROM THE GLOBE AND MAIL. >> Reporter: E BURNABY OPENED EARLY ADVANCE POLLS. ANYONE WHO VOTED YESTERDAY OR EARLIER TODAY WOULD HAVE DONE SO WITHOUT SEEING YOUR COSTED BUDGET. SO IF YOU WANT PEOPLE TO BE INFORMED WHEN THEY ARE MAKING THIS DECISION, DOESN'T THE TIMING OF RELEASING THIS COSTING NOW GO AGAINST THAT IDEA? >> JAGMEET SINGH: COSTING IS JUST MORE DETAILS ABOUT WHAT WE'VE ALWAYS SAID. FROM THE BEGINNING WE'VE TOLD PEOPLE WE'RE NOT GOING TO INCREASE TAXES ON WORKING CLASS, MIDDLE CLASS. CLEARLY WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THE BILLIONAIRES PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE. REALLY CLEAR INVESTING IN THE PROGRAMS PEOPLE NEED AND THE HELP THAT PEOPLE NEED. [ PLEASE STAND BY FOR CAPTIONING ] >> BOTH THE NDP AND THE LIBERALS HAVE A PLAN FOR $10 A DAY CHILD CARE, SOME PEOPLE MAY HE THINK THESE ARE SIMILAR PLANS, THEN. CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOUR CHILD CARE PLAN AND THE LIBERAL CHILD CARE PLAN? >> THE DIFFERENCE IS WE'RE NOT GOING TO TAKE 30 YEARS TO DO IT. THE DIFFERENCE IS WE'RE NOT JUST GOING TO CAMPAIGN ON SOMETHING BECAUSE IT SOUNDS GOOD AND THEN NEVER DELIVER ON IT. THE DIFFERENCE IS WE WANT TO GET IT DONE. FOR US IT'S NOT ABOUT TRYING TO SOUND GOOD AT ONE POINT AND BACK AWAY FROM IT. OUR COMMITMENT HAS BEEN STRONG ON THIS, AND WE CAN LOOK TO THE LIBERALS REALLY CLEARLY TO MAKE THAT COMPARISON. IF YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THEIR COMMITMENTS, ONE OF THE HALLMARK COMMITMENTS OF 2019 WAS PHARMACARE. THEY PROMISED IT, CAMPAIGNED ON IT, THEY SAID THEY WOULD MAKE IT HAPPEN, THEY SAID IT IN THE THRONE SPEECH. 2 YEARS LATER THERE IS ZERO DOLLARS IN THEIR COSTED BUDGET FOR PHARMACARE WHICH MEANS THEY HAVE COMPLETELY ABANDONED THAT COMMITMENT. THAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT THEY DO. THEY CAMPAIGN ON THINGS. THEY PROMISE THINGS. THEY DON'T DELIVER IT, AND PEOPLE END UP PAYING THE PRICE. FAMILIES ARE STILL PAYING # A $50 ON -- A $550 CAN ON AVERAGE. FAMILIES THAT NEEDED CHILD CARE IN 2015 WHO PAY ON AVERAGE 20,000 PER CHILD. NOW SPEND MORE ON CHILD CARE. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN US AND LIBERALS, WE WANT TO GET IT DONE. WE'RE NOT JUST GOING TO CAMPAIGN FOR IT. WE CAMPAIGNED ON PHARMACARE. WE PUT FORWARD A BILL ON IT. THE LIBERALS VOTED AGAINST IT. WE ARE GOING TO SHOW FOLKS WE BELIEVE IN THIS. IT'S NOT JUST A CAMPAIGN PROMISE. WE CARE ABOUT IT AND WILL MAKE IT HAPPEN. I DIDN'T SAY CONGRATULATIONS, BY THE WAY. >> THANK YOU. >> YEAH. >> YOU SPENT THE LAST FEW WEEKS TELLING PROGRESSIVE VOTERS THEY SHOULD AIM HIGHER, THINK BIGGER AND BOULDER THAN WHAT THE LIBERALS ARE SUGGESTING. WHEN YOU WERE ASKED ABOUT THE CHILD CARE PLAN AFTER THE DEBATE YOU SAID YOU PLANNED TO MEET OR EXCEED WHAT THE LIBERALS BUDGETED FOR. YOUR COSTING SHOWS YOU DON'T PLAN TO SPEND A DOLLAR BEHR THAN THE LIBERALS ON CHILD CARE. WHAT DO YOU SAY TO POTENTIAL NEW DEMOCRAT VOTERS WHO MIGHT FEEL LIKE THEY HAVE BEEN LET DOWN. >> I KNOW THEY HAVE BEEN LET DOWN BY LIBERALS BECAUSE KIDS THAT NEEDED CHILD CARE 30 YEARS AGO HAVE GROWN UP AND HAVE KIDS OF THEIR OWN AND THERE IS STILL NO CHILD CARE. THEY HAVE BEEN LET DOWN. DON'T GET LET DOWN AGAIN. DON'T LET THE LIBERALS SELL YOU A STORY WHEN WE KNOW WHAT THEY DO. IF YOU WANT THESE THINGS TO HAPPEN, IF YOU WANT CHILD CARE TO HAPPEN, THE BEST WAY TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE CHILD CARE IS MORE NEW DEMOCRATS IN OTTAWA. THAT'S THE BEST WAY. MORE NEW DEMOCRATS WILL FIGHT FOR THIS TO HAPPEN. YOU VOTE ENOUGH OF US IN, WE MAKE GOVERNMENT, AND WE WILL MAKE THIS HAPPEN. THE LIBERALS HAVE SHOWN THROUGH THEIR TRACK RECORD EVEN WHEN THEY ARE IN A MAJORITY IN 2015, THEY DIDN'T DO IT. THEY PROMISED IT THREE DECADES AGO NEARLY, THEY DIDN'T GET IT DONE. THEY SIGNED SOME DEALS NOW WHICH IS GOOD BUT INSTEAD OF FOLLOWING THROUGH AND FINISHING THE JOB THEY CALLED AN ELECTION. REALLY, HOW MUCH DID THEY REALLY MEAN TO GET THIS DONE IF THEY HAVE CALLED AN ELECTION THAT JEOPARDIZES IT MOVING FORWARD? TO ME IT REALLY LOOKS CYNICAL. IF THEY WANTED THIS DONE THEY HAD TWO MORE YEARS ON THEIR MANDATE TO GET IT IT DONE. >> IF THE LIBERALS ARE SO BAD WHY DID YOU ADOPT THEIR PLAN? >> IT'S NOT THAT THEIR PLAN IS BAD, IT'S THE FACT THEY DRAG THINGS OUT. THEY PROMISE THINGS AND DON'T DELIVER. THEY HAVE BEEN COMMITTING TO DO THIS FOR 30 YEARS AND LET FAMILIES STRUGGLE FOR 30 YEARS. THE PROBLEM IS THE LIBERALS HAVE THIS STRATEGY, WHY DELIVER SOMETHING WHEN WE CAN JUST CAMPAIGN ON IT ANYWAYS. THEY HAVE DONE THAT, AND THEY HAVE DONE THAT TO CANADIANS AGAIN AND AGAIN. AND PEOPLE ARE PAYING THE PRICE FOR THAT AND FEELING THAT. I HAVE MET LOTS OF PEOPLE WHO SAID I WAS HOPEFUL FOR JUSTIN TRUDEAU. I VOTED FOR JUSTIN TRUDEAU. I WILL BE HONEST FOR YOU. I DIDN'T IT AGAIN. I'M NOT GOING TO DO IT ANYMORE. IT COST ME TOO MUCH. PEOPLE WHO WANTED CHILD CARE SAY IT COST ME TOO MUCH TO HOPE FOR SOMEONE WHO DOESN'T DELIVER. IT COSTS ME TOO MUCH WHEN THE EMISSIONS KEEP REQUESTING GOING UP. IT COSTS TOO MUCH WHEN I THINK ABOUT HOW MUCH SAVING THE COST OF MY MEDICATION WOULD BE. AND MR. TRUDEAU PROMISES IT, DOESN'T DELIVER, AND I END PAYING THE PRICE. PEOPLE ARING TELLING ME FINANCIALLY THEY CANNOT AFFORD ANOTHER FOUR YEARS OF THIS NOT HAPPENING. WE BELIEVE IN THIS. WE FOUGHT FOR IT. WE CONTINUE TO FOR FIGHT FOR IT, AND WE CAN GET IT DONE. >> NEXT QUESTION. >> DID FOLLOWING UP ON CHILD CARE, MR. SINGH. >> YES. >> ONE OF YOUR STRONGEST POLITICAL ALLIES IN JOHN HORGAN WAS A FIRST TO SIGN WITH JUSTIN TRUDEAU TO HAVE THE CHILD CARE DEAL DONE. AT THAT CONFERENCE HE SAID HOW EXCITED HE WAS TO SEE THE CHEQUE. NOW IN THE BRIEFING WITH US BEFORE THE OFFICIALS SAID THE SAME MONEY IS GOING TO BE USED. CAN YOU TELL US OUTSIDE OF JUST SAYING YOU ARE GOING TO DO IT WHEN THE LIBERALS HAVE SIGNED 8 OUT OF THE 10 DEALS, ARE THERE ANY BIG DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE JUSTIN TRUDEAU PLAN AND JAGMEET SINGH PLAN FOR CHILD CARE? >> JUSTIN TRUDEAU'S PLAN TOOK 30 YEARS, JAGMEET SINGH'S PLAN IS GETTING IT DONE RIGHT AWAY. THREE DECADES IS A LONG TIME. THAT'S A LOT OF PAIN. THAT'S A LOT OF STRUGGLE. THAT'S A LOT OF WOMEN WITH THAT COULDN'T GET ACCESS TO CHILD CARE. THAT'S A LOT OF BROKEN DREAMS. THAT'S A LOT OF DASHED HOPES. THAT'S A LOT OF KID THAT IS COULDN'T GET THE CARE THEY NEEDED. A LOT OF PARENT THAT IS DIDN'T GET THE CARE THEY NEEDED. TRUDEAU WAS IN POWER IN 2015. HE HAD SIX YEARS, THAT'S SIX YEARS OF FAMILIES PAYING $20,000 A YEAR. THEY SPEND IS 20,000 -- 120,000 A YEAR. THAT'S AN EXPENSIVE BROKEN PROMISE. THAT COST A LOT. FOUR MORE YEARS OF THAT IS GOING TO COST A LOT. THE PLAN IS GOOD. MY CONCERN IS NOT ABOUT THE PLAN. MY CONCERN ABOUT IS THE TRACK RECORD OF PROMISING THINGS AND NOT DELIVERING IT. MY CONCERN IS PROMISING THINGS LIKE PHARMACARE AND SAYING THAT WAS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING AND PEOPLE BEING LIKE, OKAY, THAT'S GREAT. AND TWO YEARS LATER COMPLETELY ABANDONING IT. THAT DOESN'T GIVE PEOPLE A LOT OF IT CONFIDENCE THAT MR. TRUDEAU IS GOING TO PROMISE SOMETHING IN THIS CAMPAIGN AND ACTUALLY FOLLOW THROUGH WITH IT WHEN WE HAVE -- PEOPLE DON'T FORGET THINGS. TWO YEARS AGO, IT WASN'T A LONG TIME AGO. HE PROMISED TO DO SOMETHING AND DIDN'T DO IT SO FOLKS ARE SAYING, WOMEN, I AM NERVOUS NOW. YOU SOUND GOOD, BUT I HAVE HEARD THAT STORY BEFORE. THESE THINGS SOUNDED GOOD IN 2019 AS WELL BUT NOTHING HAPPENED. I WANT FOLKS TO KNOW WE BACK IT UP. WE DIDN'T JUST CAMPAIGN ON PHARMACARE. WE PUT FORWARD A BILL ON IT AND TRUDEAU VOTED AGAINST IT. THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE. WE WANT TO GET THIS DONE AND WE HAVE SHOWN AGAIN AND AGAIN WITH REAL CONCRETE BE DAMPSS BETWEEN US AND THE LIBERALS HOW WE GET THINGS DONE AND HOW THEY TALK ABOUT IT AND DON'T DELIVER. >> FROM A FILL SECRETARY OFFICIAL PERSPECTIVE, HOW IMPORTANT IS IT FOR YOU IF YOU ARE PRIME MINISTER TO HAVE THE BUDGET BALANCED. >> FOR ME LIVING WITHIN OUR MEANS IS IMPORTANT BUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ME AND JUSTIN TRUDEAU, FOR EXAMPLE, IS I DON'T BELIEVE IN CUTTING HELP TO PEOPLE. I BELIEVE PEOPLE NEED SUPPORT, AND GIVEN A CHOICE, WILL I CLAW BACK FROM SOMEONE WHO NEEDS THE CRB OR WOULD I GO AFTER THE HUNDREDS OF COMPANIES THAT TOOK PUBLIC MONEY AND THEN PAID OUT DIVIDENDS? I WOULD GO AFTER THOSE COMPANIES AND SAY THEY SHOULD PAY BACK THEIR FAIR SHARE. THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE. MR. TRUDEAU HAS ALREADY SIGNALED ONE OF THE THINGS HE WOULD DO, WHICH IS TO CUT THE THE HELP PEOPLE NEED. I WOULDN'T DO THAT. THE OTHER DIFFERENCE IS I AM LOOKING FOR REVENUES AND THE REVENUES WE'RE CLAWING IS ON HE BACKS OF THE WEALTIEST CORPORATIONS THAT MAKE INCREDIBLE PROFIT, HIDE THE PROFIT, AND PUT IT ON OFF-SHORE TAX HAVENS. MR. TRUDEAU HAS KNOWN ABOUT THAT FOR SIX YEARS AND HASN'T PROSECUTED A SINGLE CASE OF TAX EVASION. WE THINK THAT'S WRONG. WE WOULD INVEST AND MAKE SURE COMPANIES ARE PAYING THEIR FAIRER SHAY. WE HAVE A DIFFERENT APPROACH. WE DON'T THINK THE BURDEN SHOULD BE ON YOU AND YOU'RE FAMILY. WE THINK -- THAT'S NOT SMALL BUSINESSES, THAT'S THE SUPER WEALTHY. THE SUPER WEALTHY, THEN, YES, WE'RE GOING TO
