BUSU’s mid-term board meeting yielded some interesting results, including the first failed motion of the year. 

October saw the BUSU Board of Directors meet twice. The first was an hour-and-a-half long, in-camera special meeting on Oct. 1, in which no motions were reported, but the second was their regularly scheduled monthly public meeting. 

Posted on their YouTube meeting playlist two days after it took place, the board’s Oct. 22 meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m. The agenda and the last meeting’s minutes were approved before Kayleigh Rossetto began her presentation on the 2024-25 BUSU Division 1 Operating Budget. 

BUSU General Manager Robert Hilson acknowledged that the budget was coming a bit later than usual due to BUSU VPEA Mark Chrabalowski’s being away in Ghana for an academic excursion in the summer. 

Rossetto explained that this several million-dollar budget was based on the BUSU Operating Fee, the $24.40 per credit ancillary cost applied to full-time Brock students. She explained that BUSU is a multi-million-dollar organization, around $15-16 million, so the numbers here are high for a reason. 

This is a long and thorough list, but as Rossetto did, this article will only highlight the most pertinent stats. Students wishing to see the complete budget can do so through the BUSU Governance page on their website. 

She began by outlining BUSU’s revenue, which comes from a variety of sources including $150,000 from the university, $12,018 in rental income from both The Brock Press and BrockTV, locker sales, food bank donations and more. 

By far the largest source of income is through student fees, which provide $2,044,938 of the total $2,341,424 of revenue. 

Next up were expenses, in which the budget had split into four categories. 

The first category, “Staff Costs,” consisted of a total of $1,437,000. Notable items in this category were the $184,000 in BUSU executive team salaries, $790,000 to salary the BUSU permanent staff, $120,000 to cover part-time costs — for the 20 BUSU office part-timers, not staff at General Brock, Union Station, et cetera — $13,000 in parking for staff and executives, $8,500 for staff and executive food allowances, and $12,000 for the monthly cell phone plan. Also included in this list were numbers for typical wage expenses like EI and CPP as well as stat, holiday and vacation pay. 

The second category was “Appointed/Elected Student Training and Development,” to which $58,300 was allotted. This fund included $18,000 in honorariums to recognize the time of the six student senators; a combined $5,800 for the BUSU Transition Retreat; a combined $4,000 for BUSU executive professional development and $20,000 for BUSU executive annual priorities — funds which the Board allocates via a vote. 

The third category of “Office Expenses” had a total of $619,000, which covered everything from insurance premiums ($107,000), legal costs ($20,000), consulting fees ($40,000), IT support ($78,000) — which Rossetto elaborated are not covered by Brock’s IT Services — miscellaneous office expenses ($10,000) and more. The largest of these costs were the property expenses including utilities at $233,000, a reduced cost from last year since BUSU replaced the lighting in their building with more cost-effective and environmentally friendly alternatives. 

The fourth and final category was titled “Other Expenses.” Included here were relatively minor expenses like a $2,000 donation fund, $1,000 for meeting expenses and $4,500 for elections and referendums. Also listed were some major expenses, like a combined $10,000 for end-of-term BUSU parties “to recognize our students,” a $20,000 food bank donation, $15,000 for exam drive-home and safety services, a $35,000 Division 1 marketing expense, a combined $12,500 for costs associated with sending permanent staff members to conferences, $25,000 to keep the website running, a $20,000 contingency fund and $40,000 set aside to cover BUSU Social Enterprises losses.  

This category listed an additional $225,500 of expenses, putting the total expenses at $2,340,000. When comparing revenue to expenses, the budget outlined a small earning of $724, a number that Hilson explained would be put into BUSU’s $1.6 million unrestricted surplus fund, money which is reallocated for a “rainy day.” 

The board members had some questions: 

Mohiz Imtiaz asked for clarification on the annual priorities worth $20,000. Rossetto explained that this is a pooled fund for BUSU executives to spend on their goals for the year. This fund used to be split between all four executives, but this year they decided to let Pahuja and the team decide how to split that money. 

Vice-Chair Charlie Martin asked for clarification on the Donation/Goodwill line, a $2,000 expense. Rossetto and Hilson explained that this fund gives BUSU a chance to be a sponsor when they want to be present for something going on in the community, like the Hadiya’dagénhahs Pow Wow in January or the BLCS Play for Memories Ball Hockey Tournament. 

Imtiaz asked to see staff salaries from previous years to have a benchmark to compare with this year’s $790,000 permanent staff expense. Hilson explained that students can see the last seven years of financial statements and budgets on the BUSU Governance page, but he said looking at just the last few years was “deceiving” because of their limited expenditures in the wake of COVID-19. He said this year is probably BUSU’s “first normal year of operation” since that time. 

Imtiaz also questioned whether “group benefits or other contributions can be reduced,” to which Rossetto explained that BUSU regularly compares its employee benefits with other student unions and that they are “certainly in line and within the realm of what other people are doing.” To a follow-up question about pay scale, Rossetto said that this too had controls via pay bands based on the roles, responsibilities and skills associated with each job. She said these numbers are also benchmarked not only against other student unions but also the St. Catharines job market. 

Board Chair Brielle Kaminsky requested the board be reminded how much each BUSU executive makes in a year. Rossetto explained that each of the three Vice Presidents makes $45,491 a year and the President makes $46,726 a year. 

Kaminsky asked for elaboration on the $13,000 staff and executive parking expense. Rossetto said that the expense covers a spot for all permanent staff and all executives in Lot A, right beside the school. 

Kaminsky asked for the breakdown of the $8,500 staff and executive food allowances. Rossetto explained that each executive and the General Manager get $1,000, and all permanent staff — except unionized staff — get $500. This allowance covers meals at Isaac’s, Harvey’s and Booster Juice as an “added bonus,” and the straight $500 is an expense that “doesn’t cost the organization,” said Rossetto. She further explained that this is supposed to cover meals for when workers are on campus for their jobs. 

Kaminsky asked for clarification on the $12,000 monthly cell phone plan. Rossetto explained that this is also a tiered system based on pay bands: the lower pay band employees get $50 a month, the medium tier gets $75 and the executive tier gets $100. She explained that a corporate plan is “cumbersome” and “complicated” with constantly switching executives and the added grievance of carrying two cell phones. 

Martin put it succinctly when he asked for clarification: “So essentially people who are getting paid more get more money for their phone plan?” 

Rossetto countered that executives have the highest plan even though they aren’t paid the most and that it was better to think about it in terms of job responsibility and corporate hierarchy. Hilson clarified that from a communications perspective, executives have to deal with a lot more messages and he’s the one who people call when things go awry whether it’s a weekend or the middle of the night. 

Imtiaz pointed to the increase in executive salaries from the last year, leaping from $120,000 in 2023-24 to the current $184,000, and asked for clarification on why this was the case, even as permanent staff salaries decreased. 

Hilson explained that a couple of reasons had affected the permanent staff salary: the Student Choice Initiative where students could opt out of ancillary fees and the COVID-19 pandemic, both of which diminished BUSU’s resources. 

To answer the executive salary question, he said that last year, the board accepted a request to increase the executives’ salaries and to keep these salaries growing each year in line with the cost-of-living index (CLI), which this year was a 3.67 per cent increase. Rossetto added that a portion of the VPUA’s salary used to come out of the Health and Dental Plan, but this is no longer the case, hence the large visible increase. 

Imtiaz asked when the board could “contest or re-evaluate” the salaries of the executive team, which Rossetto responded would have to wait until the hiring process begins, but the board could look into the process come January. 

With no further questions, the board moved to approve the budget, a resolution that passed unanimously by the seven present voting members. 

With that hefty motion finished, the board moved to in-camera at 7:42 p.m., where they remained until 9:19 p.m. There were no motions reported in the minutes, though a later comment by Imtiaz describes one of the elements they discussed, that being a “perception that BUSU is paying using student dollars for vacations or trips or conferences.” This would be a major point of discussion in the next motion. 

BUSU President Anusha Pahuja motioned for the board to fund BUSU VPUA Carleigh Charlton’s trip to Brisbane, Australia for the OE Global Conference and award ceremony in November, in which Charlton was the only student award winner. The amount requested was $1,900, this being additional to the $1,000 from Charlton’s pre-approved professional development funding and a $2,500 contribution from Brock. 

Pahuja explained the importance of open education resources (OER) — teaching, learning and research materials in any medium that exists in the public domain or is released under open license copyright. She pointed to a survey in 2020, in which 667 Brock students said cost was the reason for not purchasing textbooks in both required and elective courses, and some went so far as to say that cost had led to them receiving lower grades or dropping courses outright.  

She explained that Brock’s program is the first of its kind in Ontario and has been acknowledged as a model for mid- to large-scale universities. Sending Charlton to Australia, she said, would honour her contributions and yield a benefit for BUSU as they are writing a “Tech Enabled Learning” OUSA paper in the spring and Charlton’s experience at this conference would make for a better paper. 

This, however, was not enough to convince board members. 

Martin began the question period by speaking in favour of the motion, saying he felt this was a worthwhile cost and citing Brock’s funding of it as proof. He said the trip was “a good moment for BUSU as an organization to get OERs known more world-round [and] in the Brock community.” 

But the rest of the board was apprehensive, asking if there was anywhere else the money could come from. Imtiaz requested a reminder of Charlton’s yearly salary, a $45,491 figure that has increased from last year due to the CPI. 

Hilson put forth a concern relating to a discussion they had in-camera about Charlton’s absence from the office for an additional week on top of whatever future OUSA plans arise on top of the current General Assembly at Brock. 

Kaminsky requested they have a further discussion before voting, beginning the conversation with her own opinion: “As an executive of BUSU, she’s already making a significant salary; I think the $1,900 should come directly from her since she’s already receiving funding for this conference from Brock.” 

“Good for her that she’s going, but I don’t think that has to come out of more student dollars,” said Kaminsky. 

Moreover, she agreed with Hilson that it would be better if Charlton remained at Brock to perform her roles as VPUA. 

Imtiaz said that he was concerned with a proposed outsider’s perspective that this would appear as though BUSU was just using student money to send one of its members on a trip. Imtiaz’s clarification on the professional development fund led to a discussion wherein the board realized Charlton would need to request the $1,000 that had been guaranteed in the initial proposal on top of the additional $1,900. 

The board also figured that this $1,000 couldn’t possibly be used in full, as there are costs associated with the then-ongoing OUSA General Assembly and any upcoming OUSA events which this professional development fund is already covering. 

Imtiaz said that there are many conferences he would love to attend, but he wouldn’t consider using student dollars, a point he said is especially prescient considering Charlton is already paid using student funds. 

The concern of Charlton’s time away from the office for a conference “halfway around the world” came up again, with someone worried about an increasing backlog of work should the funds be approved. Kaminsky went so far as to question if the board had the power to outright prohibit Charlton from going to Australia regardless of their decision on the requested funds. 

Rossetto and Hilson said in that case, Charlton could request vacation time to go, something Pahuja has authorization over and not the board, though this would depend on how many vacation hours Charlton has already used. 

Kaminsky asked if the professional development fund was used in full last year, to which Hilson responded yes, “by a lot, like a very lot,” with each executive using around $10,000. After further clarification on the subject and a re-phrasing of the motion to capture the dual request of $1,000 in professional development funds and $1,900 in additional funds, Kaminsky put forward the motion. 

Martin was the mover, but with no seconder, the motion failed without going to a vote. 

There was some additional conversation about whether the motion should have been split into two motions, with Hilson asking if the board wanted to approve the $1,000 request and Pahuja seemingly interested in a motion to reconsider, but after more clarification of intentions and specifics, the conversation fizzled out. 

Hilson and Pahuja then provided their monthly reports. 

Hilson described their fourth meeting with the architect for the new student centre. He said BUSU would present the plans to the Brock Board of Trustees on Dec. 4 and Dec. 5, and if approved, construction would begin as soon as the coming spring or summer. 

He also provided some quick updates: the BUSU Instagram page has a blue checkmark and is approaching 17,300 followers; club ratification began on Oct. 21 — with clubs like the Brock Labour Studies Student Association and Brock Miniatures being BUSU-recognized — and will continue until Nov. 8; the President’s Advisory Committee on Human Rights, Equity and Decolonization (PACHRED) is looking for BUSU to run a referendum in February 2025 and have requested to meet with the board in November; BUSU will be recognizing both Remembrance Day and Indigenous Veteran’s Day; and the Night Market is coming on Nov. 20. 

Pahuja got right into her report, saying that each executive wrote their own report this month, as requested by the board — unfortunately, these reports were restricted to the board members portal and are not visible to the public. 

She highlighted the successful Fall Carnival, which saw around 5,000 attendees and a new arcade prize system; her and the executives’ meetings with local politicians; her email communications with Brad Clarke — Brock’s Associate VP, Students and Acting Associate VP, Equity, Diversity and Inclusion — on Oct. 2 regarding BUSU’s Food First program, to which she has not heard back from; her and Charlton’s invitation to the newly approved Strategic Plan’s launch on Nov. 7; her and Charlton’s planned meeting with the Provost; and the success of the Fall Convocation. 

Pahuja’s most interesting note was that she and the executive team have been working to improve their communications with students. They’ve begun holding Instagram Live videos to update students on weekly events and initiatives, and they are working on setting up office hours where students can physically speak with executives. 

With her report finished, the board moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:56 p.m. 

While this was an incredibly bulky meeting, it was a critical one, in which the board exercised their right to deny the use of student funding for reasons deemed unfit, and wherein Brock students got an in-depth look at where a large portion of their ancillary fees are being used. 

These meetings may not be glamorous, but it is imperative that Brock students recognize the decisions their board is making on their behalf. 

Any communications with the board can be directed to Board Chair Brielle Kaminsky at chair@brockbusu.ca. 

As part of the Reducing Gridlock, Saving You Time Act announced on Oct. 21, Ontario plans to speed up construction of Highway 413 and other roadway projects, despite labour disputes that will likely impact its construction and increasing concern surrounding the environmental costs of the project. 

The Professional Engineers Government of Ontario (PEGO) has been in negotiation with the municipal government, as their workers have gone “almost two years” without a contract. After a conversation on Oct. 18 brought little progress for the union’s goals, they decided to begin taking their workers off of the government’s Highway 413 and Bradford Bypass projects. 

The union represents professional engineers, engineers-in-training and land surveyors who work with the Ontario Public Service. According to the union, without these workers the projects will lack the figures needed for “oversight and management,” making it increasingly difficult for Highway 413 to proceed past planning stages it has been in for years. 

PEGO’s president Nihar Bhatt called the negotiations “frustrating,” saying that the proposals they are receiving do not align with what the workers need to continue putting time into the project, emphasizing that they are still far from what the union perceives as an equitable deal. 

“Without proper investment in Ontario’s vital engineering and surveying functions, this government’s key infrastructure priorities cannot be met on a cost-effective and timely basis,” said Bhatt. 

Despite the frustration caused by the lack of agreement between Doug Ford’s government and the union, PEGO said they aim to keep their strike “tightly focused and responsible,” wanting to make real progress towards a new, fairer contract. 

PEGO’s labour disputes have not been the only roadblock in the way of Ford’s desire to begin construction on Highway 413.  

Environmentalists have directly opposed construction of the Highway because of its controversial proposed route. The proposed route shows that the highway will run through “400 acres of the Greenbelt” — the federally protected stretch of land used to conserve nature from development — and 2,000 acres of farmland, while also threatening “forests and waterways.” 

According to Environmental Defence, the highway will also have a large impact on biodiversity, threatening 29 species with varying levels of endangerment. 

Additionally, Environmental Defence claims that the huge financial and environmental costs of Highway 413 will not be worth the small amounts of time it might save commuters, urging Ford and his government to instead consider investing in public transit, using the 407 exclusively for transport truck commuting and to monitor evolving “transportation technologies.” 

The environmentalist group continues to urge citizens to contact their local politicians to interfere with the project, despite the recent Highway 413 Act proposing to exempt the project from the Environmental Assessment Act, meaning that “additional environmental studies” and finishing the environmental assessment process would not be required for the government to proceed with the project. 

Though PEGO’s labour disputes with the government are still ongoing and environmentalists are still asking Ford to reconsider his project, Ford continues to push legislation to begin construction on Highway 413 as soon as possible. 

Many students attend university intending to start their careers, but it is quite possible to start that journey while you’re still taking classes with freelancing.  

Brock LINC, an organization that supports research commercialization, entrepreneurship and industry partnerships at Brock University, held a workshop on Oct. 23 titled How to Become a Freelancer. The workshop saw self-employment expert Tamara Jensen, Principal of Tamara Jensen Strategy, discussing the ins and outs of freelancing, wherein you get to be your own boss and run your own business. 

Jensen began her freelance journey by opening a food truck, a process that included doing her own marketing and branding. When others saw her work, they asked for her help, and she was eventually able to launch her own business from it. Since then, she’s worked at an in-house marketing agency, opened her own restaurant, taught many classes on the subject and continued to develop her freelance business. 

She started the presentation by describing that any number of skills could be applied to a freelancing business, including writing, video editing, graphic design, photography and more. Skills that may come easy to you could be commodities that others will pay you for. Furthermore, freelancing allows you to generate income while working flexible hours, doing something you love and working with either a specific or diverse array of clients. “The sky is the limit,” said Jensen. 

This process can start during your time at Brock, made easier by the Brock Student Freelance Directory, a free service that allows students to market themselves to other students looking for help with small projects. 

Getting involved with directories like this can be crucial for networking and developing a professional portfolio early in your career. 

There are two main types of freelance work you can do, Jensen explained: project-based, where you work with a specific client for a specific assignment; and retainer-based, where you work a set number of hours a month for a company but could be doing any number of assignments. 

Both styles have their positives and negatives; for example, retainer-based work may provide a steadier income, but that income may not be as high as you can charge for project-based work. Retainer-based work may give you stronger connections and industry skills, but without the defined scope of project-based work, your assignments can quickly spiral out of control as companies ask for a bit of help here and there. Moreover, while project-based work may provide you with more opportunities, it can be hectic to secure jobs, and time management is incredibly important if you take too much on. Retainer-based work can allow you to catch your breath, so to speak. 

Jensen went on to discuss the topic most entrepreneurs are most interested in: payment. How do you charge people, and what kind of rate do you set for yourself?  

She said that finding your rate can take time and it should change throughout your career, but researching market rates is a great way to start. Knowing what you’re worth is incredibly important: you should consider your skills, experience, the time and energy you’ll spend, as well as additional costs like travel, necessary software and more, but your financial needs and goals are just as paramount. 

Doing work at a discounted rate or pro bono can be effective in expanding your business when you’re starting out, said Jensen, but it should never become a constant, even when you’re working with friends and family. At the end of the day, communication with your customers is the most important principle to maintain. 

Jensen also discussed some specific details about running your own business, like the importance of registering yourself with Service Ontario — even if the name of your business is just your name — and keeping track of your expenses for when tax season rolls around. Professional invoices also streamline the process of billing your customers by acting as a “mini contract” to set up the terms of your agreement. 

Online directories like the one at Brock, Fiverr or Freelance.com can also help you build a stronger presence, but Jensen said local business will likely always be your best bet because it’s “better to work in the world you know.” 

Jensen said communication with clients is one of the most important aspects of growing your business. Setting expectations and boundaries, then respecting those boundaries and continuing to have healthy, transparent conversations with your clients will increase the likelihood of them hiring you again, referring you to someone else or writing a testimonial for you. 

Furthermore, increasing your rates is important as you gain more experience in your field and continue to recognize your rising worth as a business commodity. Charging more for your work as that work becomes of a higher calibre is not only reasonable but necessary for your growth so long as you make sure to maintain that communication with your clients. 

Jensen gave two more seemingly simple but critical bits of advice for anyone seriously interested in making freelancing a main source of income: practice saying no, so you don’t overwork yourself to the point of burnout; and always keep learning. 

You’ll figure out what parts of the business you most enjoy and which you always put off, and this is where the brilliant part of freelancing comes into effect, said Jensen. For those parts you don’t enjoy, you can hire other freelancers to create an interconnected network of business and focus on doing what you love most. 

All this may seem like formless, unreachable future plans, but Brock students can start freelancing today. The Brock Student Freelance Directory is a possible way to get your name out there, but Brock LINC holds other workshops and networking events to hone your entrepreneurial skills, which you can find on their ExperienceBU page. 

You might just be creating the business that defines your career. 

Liam Payne passed away on Wednesday, Oct. 16 following a tragic fall from his hotel balcony in Buenos Aires, Argentina.  

While very little is known about the exact circumstances of the death of the 31-year-old former One Direction star, speculation surrounding the cause of the singer’s accident has been running rampant online.  

At the time of his death, Payne was in Argentina to visit friend and former bandmate, Niall Horan, who was performing a show in Buenos Aires. Payne and his partner, actress Kate Cassidy, flew out to Argentina to attend the show. Payne posted on his Snapchat, “It’s been a while since me and Niall have spoken, we’ve got a lot to talk about.”  

Following their arrival in Argentina, Payne and Cassidy made an appearance at Horan’s show. Payne interacted with fans and posted videos of himself having a good time.  

After the singer’s death, the BBC interviewed Noelia Verón, a fan of Payne’s, who had attended the concert and interacted with the star. She said Payne seemed fine at the concert, “dancing, waving and cheering… [he] seemed to be enjoying himself.” Verón went on to clear up speculation that the singer was under the influence, stating that after the fact, “people said he was either drunk or on drugs. But that wasn’t the case at all. He talked to us, hugged us and even made jokes.” 

But things took a turn for the worse after the concert.  

While Payne and his partner were only supposed to be in the country for five days, according to a TikTok Cassidy made on the Monday before his death, their stay was extended. During this time, the pair were staying at a friend’s home. Following Cassidy’s return to Florida, it seems Payne checked in to the CasaSur hotel in the upmarket neighbourhood of Palermo. 

On Oct. 16 around 5 p.m. local time, hotel staff at the CasaSur made a call to the police about a guest “who [was] overwhelmed by drugs and alcohol” and “destroying his room.” In a second call to emergency services, the hotel manager said, “[Payne] has a room with a balcony and we’re a little afraid that he might do something life-threatening.”  

Just seven minutes after the initial call was made, Payne fell 45 feet to his death off the balcony attached to his third-floor room. Emergency services pronounced the singer dead at the scene, with “no possibility of resuscitation.”  

Police found Payne’s room in “total disorder,” with a bottle of whiskey, a lighter and various medications — including the anxiety drug Clonazepam — scattered around. Argentinian media sources went on to publish pictures that were allegedly of the singer’s hotel room, showing a broken TV screen, various bottles, cans and candles, as well as aluminum foil and a half-consumed glass of champagne.  

According to anonymous Argentinian sources, Payne’s autopsy supposedly reported finding a cocktail of drugs called “pink cocaine” in the singer’s system. This mixture is made up of methamphetamine, ketamine and MDMA. Furthermore, crack cocaine and benzodiazepine were also purported to be found.  

Still, it is worth noting that the final toxicology results have yet to be released and will not be known to the public for some time, so these claims cannot be confirmed. At this time, the only thing that has been revealed was that the official autopsy concluded Payne’s death was caused by the traumatic injuries he sustained from his three-story fall. Prosecutors have also ruled out the possibility that another person was involved.  

In July of last year, Payne posted a YouTube video talking about his sobriety journey, stating that he was nearly six months sober after a nearly 100-day stay in a rehab facility in Louisiana. Payne was still very vocal about his sobriety even into the early summer of 2024.  

Online speculation has run rampant about what transpired between Payne’s vocal sobriety and his death, which some believe came as the result of the substances in his hotel room and supposedly in his system. 

Yet, there is no official word on what exactly caused Payne’s fall. Still, friends, fans and the singer’s former bandmates have expressed support for Payne’s family in the wake of his tragic passing.  

The Brock Horror Club shows that horror is more than just movies: it’s literature, conversation and community. 

It’s that time of year again: Halloween is right around the corner. But for the Brock Horror Club, every day is a creepy one. In fact, they’ve been preparing students for the holiday since Sept. 27, when they held their first event of the year, a Scary Stories Around the Fire event at the Alphie’s Trough Firepit. 

“[It] went phenomenally for our first official event of the year,” said Rowan Whate, founder and president of the Brock Horror Club. “I think scary stories are a tradition that many people hold dear, so with our collaboration with the Creative Writing Club, we wanted to bring this tradition to Brock.” 

A literature-themed event is uncommon for the club, whose events last year largely consisted of horror movie watch parties, but Whate says that the format is actually the most fitting of any for the genre: 

“As great as movies and video games in the genre are, I vehemently believe that literature is at the heart of horror. Dracula, Frankenstein, Psycho, The Shining, you name it, there’s a solid chance that your favourite horror movie is a literary adaptation,” said Whate. “As beneficial as the screen is for horror, the best horror utilizes one’s imagination, and that’s how literary horror works.” 

“If there’s one thing I want to get across, it’s to read more horror books,” said Whate. “Authors like Gretchen Felker-Martin, Stephen Graham Jones, Nick Cutter and Grady Hendrix are breaking the barriers of what we know as horror every year, and all I can really do is spread the word.” 

Of course, horror movies still have their place. As Whate explained last year in a conversation with The Brock Press, “movies are a fantastic way to meet other people,” and horror is “a genre perfect for watching in big groups, jumping at each and every scare.” 

Unfortunately, though, hosting movie events can be tougher than one might expect. The club recently had to cancel a trip to see Smile 2 in theatres “due to an unexpected increase in event cinema released this month, causing Smile 2 to only be available in Laser Ultra, even days after its initial release,” said Whate. As this would mean increasing the entry fee by more than double, they decided to cancel, but have “added new precautions to ensure this does not happen again for future events.” 

What’s more, choosing a movie to show at Brock can also be a beastly exercise for the club. “As a public entity, Brock clubs must follow Canadian copyright law, which unfortunately does significantly reduce the number of movies […] Brock has the license to [show],” said Whate.  

“None of this is to mention the content of the movies. Horror has always toyed with boundaries of what is and isn’t societally accessible, and so we must also consider this when planning events, as accessibility is deeply important to us. When planning an event, the running of it is only half of the story, as finding a movie is often just as tough.” 

Despite the troubles, horror is worth it, much in part to the genre having “a united goal” to scare audiences, said Whate. Furthermore, it provides a sense of togetherness, and a club like this is a way for people to come together and celebrate a genre traditionally cast in a negative light, as “lesser in both critical examination and popular culture,” said Whate. “It can be hard to find people to discuss it with,” but a club like this thrives off that “desire to connect.” 

The Brock Horror Club hopes to expand this conversation in the months to come as they develop a Brock Horror Podcast, where students and staff can discuss and delve into the many different avenues that horror offers. 

“Podcasts are an interesting context to discuss because we live in an environment that is incredibly oversaturated, and yet, there is something so novel and important about the unscripted nature and back-and-forth of the format,” said Whate. 

With plans like theirs, it’s easy to see how the Brock Horror Club will continue to thrive and adapt, even after the Halloween season is over. Horror is not just a once-a-year genre, it’s a pillar of unity for lovers of film, literature, podcasts and more. 

The Pharmacare Act finally passed through the Senate on Oct. 10, bringing new medication coverage and increased healthcare access for all Canadians, pointing to the beginning of a universal pharmacare program. 

According to a news release from the Government of Canada, Bill-C64 passing into law is the first step towards a national universal pharmacare program. 

The bill aims to alleviate financial pressure from Canadians and provide universal access to life-saving medications. 

“Canadians should not have to choose between purchasing the medications that keep them healthy and putting food on the table,” said Health Canada in the news release. 

The Pharmacare Act promises universal access to contraception for Canadians in the hopes of improving reproductive rights. The costly nature of contraceptives is the biggest barrier to reproductive freedom for many women, causing them to opt for cheaper yet less effective methods, if they can access any methods at all, says Health Canada. 

The bill will cover several oral birth control pills, copper Intrauterine Devices (IUDs), hormonal IUDs, contraceptive injections, various hormonal contraceptives and emergency contraceptives. A full list of covered brands can be found on the Government of Canada website. 

The bill also promises universal access to various diabetes medications and a fund for diabetes devices and supplies. 

The bill will cover “first-line treatments for diabetes that lower blood glucose levels,” which includes insulin, metformin and medications used in combination with the two. More information about brand coverage can be found on the Government of Canada website. 

The fund for diabetes devices and supplies will be separate from Bill-C64 but helps to fulfill its promise of turning towards universal pharmacare access for Canadians. 

The fund will support the purchase of equipment that is necessary for administering insulin, including “syringes, insulin pens and pen tips, or insulin pumps and supplies such as insertion sets and insulin cartridges,” says Health Canada. 

The Pharmacare Act requires Canada’s Drug Agency to make a list of essential drugs and medical products to reduce medical costs through a “national bulk purchasing strategy” and a consideration of the appropriate use of prescription medications. 

The bill also says that a committee to give recommendations on “the operation and financing of national, universal, single-payer pharmacare in Canada” must be created within 30 days. 

The Pharmacare Act was one of the New Democratic Party’s (NDP) priorities included in the now terminated Supply and Confidence Agreement (SACA) they had with the Liberal Party. 

The NDP’s health critic Peter Julian emphasized the importance of the passing of this bill, saying “Canada is the only country with universal healthcare that doesn’t have universal pharmacare.” 

For the bill to be implemented for all Canadians, the individual provinces and territories must make deals with the Federal Government to discern whether they agree to providing this universal coverage and how they will go about doing so. 

Minister of Health Mark Holland says he is confident that he can work with the provinces and territories to sign on to the plan, saying things are looking “very positive” and reassuring that deals will be announced soon. 

Although it will take some time for the Pharmacare Act to fully be in motion, the government is on the path to ensuring increased healthcare access for all Canadians. 

On Oct. 1, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau appeared on MP Nate Erskine-Smith’s podcast Uncommons to discuss a plethora of subjects from his failures and successes in office to the priorities he is bringing into the next election. 

Erskine-Smith prefaced the conversation by noting for transparency that there were no pre-approved questions by Trudeau. 

They began by reflecting on Trudeau’s time in office and the concerns Canadian citizens and other members of the Liberal Party have about him as the leader of the country. Erskine-Smith questioned Trudeau on why he wants to represent the Liberal Party again, after nine years, amidst all the concerns about his leadership. 

Trudeau reflected on his dissatisfaction with the Harper government and his drive to be the candidate to give Canadians a “choice,” saying he feels this choice is just as important in the upcoming election. 

He expressed the difficulty he anticipates for the upcoming election and said that if he were “ten points ahead in the polls right now,” Trudeau’s constituents and Canadian citizens would not be criticizing his priorities so harshly. 

They continued their conversation by discussing Trudeau’s Progressive Conservative opponent Pierre Poilievre and the differences between their leadership methods and priorities. 

Trudeau began by saying that everyone knows what Poilievre is “fighting against” but he has never shared what he is “fighting for,” which Trudeau noted has been the case for Poilievre’s 20 years in the house. 

Erskine-Smith turned the discussion towards the matters Trudeau is fighting for and what his leadership will bring to Canadians if he wins the upcoming election.  

Erskine-Smith elaborated that, in his opinion, Trudeau and the Liberal Party’s greatest strength is their efforts to make lives easier, more affordable and safer for families, referring to the Canada Child Benefit, their efforts to protect children online and their promises for healthy school food, among others. 

Trudeau agreed, noting that these things would likely be at risk if the Progressive Conservatives won the election, as Poilievre voted against the Canada Child Benefit. 

Trudeau went on to say that it is crucial that Canadians not only consider what he plans to do if he remains in office, but also what he has done for Canada over the past nine years. 

He also emphasized that he refuses to “pick a fight” with Poilievre because his top priority is “fighting for Canadians.” 

Erskine-Smith brought up the Liberals’ recent major byelection loss, where the Conservative Party was able to acquire the long-held Liberal seat in Toronto—St. Paul’s. He questioned Trudeau for not putting out any sort of “paid ad” against Poilievre, as he let the Conservative Party criticize the Liberals without any critique in return. 

Trudeau agreed, saying in retrospect he wished he would have done something. 

Regarding Trudeau’s successes in office, Erskine-Smith pointed to the social programs Trudeau helped establish, namely the “Canada Child Benefit, childcare, dental care” and the upcoming pharmacare plan that the government is working on. 

Trudeau agreed with categorizing these efforts as successes, saying that he often thinks back to his father, Pierre Trudeau, and how some things he accomplished in office still impact Canadians today. Trudeau elaborated that he usually thinks about his successes in the long term, wanting them to leave a positive impact on future generations. 

After discussing Trudeau’s various successes in office, Erskine-Smith asked Trudeau what he would have done differently from his time in office.  

Trudeau answered with certainty, saying “electoral reform” was something he regrets not doing differently. 

He said that “the winner takes all version of first past the post” that is currently in use devalues votes and is troubling alongside the increased polarization and “excesses of populism” that have infiltrated political spaces. 

“I certainly would have done things differently around electoral reform to try and make sure that we are not going to be fighting this next election under first past the post again,” said Trudeau. 

Moving the discussion towards Trudeau’s relationships in politics, Erskine-Smith brought up the New Democratic Party’s (NDP) leader Jagmeet Singh, and his recent withdrawal from supporting the Liberals and termination of the Supply and Confidence Agreement (SACA). 

Trudeau called Singh’s concerns over the Liberals’ lack of strides in office relating specifically to the NDP’s priorities in SACA a “cynical ploy that undermines any faith that progressives have in what we elected this progressive government.” 

To end the conversation, Erskine-Smith asked Trudeau what he might say to motivate supporters of the Liberal Party and Canadians overall. 

Trudeau responded that the Liberals “are a team that needs to stay in power,” elaborating that they get elected on “things that go to the heart of the Charter, because that’s what a Liberal is.” 

Trudeau said he also aims to motivate those who have been “sitting on the sidelines,” saying that he does not only want to warn against the negatives he sees in the future if Poilievre and the Conservatives take over leadership, but he also wants to share a vision of a better Canada. 

“The things we’ve been fighting for for eight years: environment and economy, inclusion, progressive values, defense of individual rights, respect for everyone,” said Trudeau, “all those things that we’ve been fighting for are not just still important, they’re more important in this upcoming election than they ever have been.” 

Trudeau ended on a hopeful note and urged Canadians to reflect on the conversation he shared with Erskine-Smith. 

The full podcast episode with the accompanying video can be found on the Uncommons website. 

BUSU has uploaded the recordings of their August and September board meetings. Here are the highlights. 

Every month, BUSU meets to discuss and vote on various matters that concern the student body. The Brock Press recently reported on the meetings BUSU held over the summer, stating that they met four times in total. 

BUSU also met on Aug. 28, but as the public recording of this meeting was not uploaded until Oct. 1 — after the September meeting was uploaded — our article was technically incorrect in that statement. 

As this recording is now available, The Brock Press can now report on the decisions the Board made just before the school year kicked off, as well as their first meeting of the fall term. 

Aug. 28 Meeting 

Following the call to order at 7:03 p.m., the BUSU Board of Directors’ first topic of discussion was a request from BUSU Director of Governance and Advocacy Kayleigh Rossetto regarding the BUSU Green Levy. Rossetto reminded the board and anyone watching that earlier in the year, the board approved approximately $45,000 of funding for waste sorting, supplies for the patio at Isaac’s and sustainable swag, leaving about $55,000 left in the budget. Rossetto also reminded the board that the levy had a $330,000 surplus. 

Like last time, Rossetto’s proposal had three parts. The first requested $8,600 to support recycling pickup. Before this year, Brock covered these pickups but is now billing BUSU. Rossetto noted that this cost was somewhat higher than usual because they recycle everything, and nothing ends up in the trash. 

The second request was $1,500 to support Brock’s Seed Library and to run a seed-planting workshop in the spring. The Seed Library is a free service allowing students, staff and community members to pick up vegetable, herb and flower seeds for planting at home. As their source of funding dried up, they requested BUSU’s assistance; as part of the agreement, BUSU would be allowed to distribute seeds from their desk and as a bonus, the Seed Library fits in with their Food First initiative. 

The final request was $46,416 to purchase, brand and market 50 coffee cup recycling bins across the main campus and the Marilyn I. Walker building. Rossetto explained that during their yearly third-party waste audit, Brock University was flagged for only capturing 2.4 per cent of coffee cup waste, the rest of which was improperly disposed of. As Brock Sustainability did not have the funds for a purchase of this size, they turned to BUSU. 

Rossetto noted that while this was an extraordinary cost — each unit costing $780 — she would not recommend it if not for the $330,000 Green Levy surplus, which is intended for large initiatives like this one. As a bonus, BUSU would be allowed to put their logo on each of the bins, the cost of which was $750 of the total request, and run a marketing campaign, the cost of which was $575 of the request. 

Before the vote, there were a few questions. Charlie Martin asked who would be in charge of the upkeep of these bins. Rossetto said Brock would be; BUSU’s only responsibility would be the initial purchase and perhaps the labelling.  

Mohamed Ahmed asked where the high demand for 50 units came from; Rossetto said the thinking was that if they had the money now, they should simply do it in one fell swoop. Moreover, she said if there is a convenient unit by every garbage container, students will be more inclined to use them instead of just tossing their waste in the trash.  

Finally, Mohiz Imtiaz asked if BUSU supported or was a signatory on any strategic sustainability plans. General Manager Robert Hilson explained that Brock subscribes to the STARS initiative, which is standard for post-secondary institutions, and that while BUSU cannot be a signatory, it is committed to sustainability, especially regarding the new student centre. 

With no further questions, the motion passed with the majority in favour, two abstentions and no oppositions. 

The board moved in-camera at 7:33 p.m. and moved out of camera at 8:57 p.m.; no motions were reported in the minutes. 

Concluding the meeting were reports from the General Manager and the BUSU President. 

Hilson highlighted only one part of his report, regarding employee contracts: moving forward, all BUSU employees will receive employment contracts, no matter how many hours a week they work. He described that this is becoming a standard in the HR industry, and it is a standard BUSU needs to move toward. 

President Anusha Pahuja’s report featured some general updates, including that the new VPSS, Shinaya Peiris, had been fully briefed and was doing “absolutely fantastic”; that the VPEA, Mark Chrabalowski, returned to the office after his travels abroad on Aug. 19 and was brought up to speed; and that Badgerfest and the Community Fair were all planned and ready to go. 

Following her report, Ahmed asked about the then-recent parking development, in which Parking Services established a $6 fee for students parking on campus after 6 p.m., a service which used to be free. 

Pahuja responded by explaining the situation, describing how they — like students — did not directly receive the news from Parking Services but first saw it online. At the time, she was working with VPUA Carleigh Charlton and Hilson to find a potential solution to the situation and advocate for students. 

Hilson explained further that the main issue with this development was that neither BUSU nor the student population were consulted in advance about the decision, nor were they notified in any public manner. As students may have planned their schedules around the fact that parking was free after 6 p.m., he said it was a big problem, and they had already escalated the discussion up the university ranks. 

Board Chair Brielle Kaminsky appreciated their effort but said it would be a “miracle” if the university went back on its decision, as this is one way it’s trying to make up for its financial deficit.  

Hilson said that Charlton was being very professional in her argument, focusing on the fact that students were not consulted or informed; moreover, as this decision may discourage students from attending the gym, participating in intramurals, joining clubs and more, he said it was not conducive to student life on campus and student retention. He said the university had an obligation to tell students and failed to do so. 

With no concrete developments at the moment, Hilson said they would keep the board updated. This being the final discussion point, the meeting adjourned at 9:08 p.m. 

Sept. 24 Meeting 

BUSU’s first in-person meeting was called to order at 7:06 p.m. Filling most of this meeting was a presentation on BUSU’s audit report through Grant Thornton for the year ending on April 30, 2024. 

Grant Thornton had no significant findings in BUSU’s statements regarding fraud or anything else that would be “funky.” While the Grant Thornton representative provided plenty of information on auditing in general, potential risks for a non-profit like BUSU, and minor changes in the company’s statements, there was very little to note here. 

There were some findings regarding BUSU’s internal controls, which the representative said were consistent with an entity of its kind. Grant Thornton recommended that book entries be reviewed by a treasurer or someone of higher ranking. They also recommend that BUSU create a formula risk register for itself to consider all of its potential risks and think about how to mitigate each of them. They also noted a super user in their account — who had both bookkeeping access and access to the creation and deletion of users — which is frowned upon but seems to have occurred by accident. 

Next, the representative went through a copy of BUSU’s draft statements, another unqualified and clean report. He discussed some general qualities of BUSU’s investments, its cash flow and more. 

Following the presentation, there were a few questions, though due to the nature of the video, it is difficult to discern who asked what. Someone asked if there were any risks that the board should closely monitor, to which the representative responded that an open dialogue between the board and management was important and that they should volunteer to monitor BUSU’s statements once a week to strengthen its internal controls. 

Someone also asked for clarification on an increase of $1.2 million in Brock’s investment income, to which the representative responded that Brock simply made good investment decisions, something that was out of BUSU’s control. Somebody also asked if the statements could be forwarded to the board members, which the representative said would be all right so long as the statements didn’t leave the circle of the board. 

With no further questions, the Grant Thornton representative left. The Board approved the current draft of the report, but not the final draft, as it was technically not complete yet. They agreed that their complete approval should wait until a later date. 

The board then moved in-camera at 7:41 p.m., where they remained until 9:01 p.m. No motions were reported in the minutes as they appeared in the video. 

Hilson then provided his General Manager’s report, in which he noted that he met with the architect of the new student centre for the third time, that 8,000 U-Pass stickers were given out as of reporting, that the Health and Dental opt-out deadline was approaching on Sept. 30 and that Rossetto was pregnant and would be going on maternity leave at the end of January. 

Finally, Pahuja gave her President’s report. This included general updates, like the beginning of Senate and Board of Trustees meetings, a reminder of the upcoming OUSA fall General Assembly at Brock, Charlton’s victory of the 2024 Open Education Award for Excellence, BUSU-AC’s first meeting and the beginning of the BUSU Clubs Advisory Committee. 

Pahuja also mentioned that as a follow-up to the parking fiasco, they had successfully advocated to make parking at Lot 2 free after 6 p.m., making it the only spot on campus to park for free at night. This deal only applies to the fall term, but she said further conversations will be held to discuss options for the winter term. 

Finally, Pahuja concluded by saying that the fall term is her last semester at Brock, and she will be graduating in April 2025. 

After the report, Kaminsky requested that the other BUSU executives provide their own reports, even if Pahuja is the one presenting them, so the President isn’t reporting on their behalf. Pahuja said she would ask the executives for the next board meeting. 

With that, the meeting was adjourned at 9:08 p.m. 

— 

While this article provides the highlights of these meetings, the only way to get this information in its raw, original form is to watch the BUSU videos yourself.  

Currently, despite the 19,000 students at Brock, the August video only has nine views as of writing, and the September video has 16.  

Voting decisions are often brought up at least one meeting in advance of the actual vote, meaning students can have a say in them — if they can watch the videos, of course. If a referendum is held, or an election is held, the only way to make an informed decision is to stay informed. 

All BUSU board meeting recordings can be viewed on their YouTube channel. If students want to attend meetings in person or contact the board, they can email chair@brockbusu.ca, 

Haunted houses may provide the perfect experience for those looking for something terrifying to do this Halloween season. 

Horror lovers seek the thrill of the jump scare, revelling in frightening and grotesque scenes. It’s easy to remove yourself from a movie, but a haunted house puts you directly into the action. 

With Halloween upon us, now is the perfect time to explore these frightening attractions. Not everyone has the time or the means to get to Halloween Haunt, so here are some of Niagara’s best haunted houses. 

Clifton Hill 

One of the most well-known Niagara Falls attractions also features a fair number of creepy attractions and rides. 

At Clifton Hill, you can take up arms against clowns, zombies, ghosts or you can wander through decrepit and frightening haunted houses. House of Frankenstein is a haunted house that features a new element, The Frank’N Coaster: Canada’s only rooftop roller coaster. Dracula’s Haunted Castle offers three different levels of fear for its patrons, and the aptly titled Haunted House offers the “usual frights.” 

One of the most interesting destinations at Clifton Hill is the Movieland Wax Museum, which features lifelike sculptures from popular culture. Near the end of the exhibit is the “House of Horrors,” a fun and spooky experience for horror lovers. 

The $35 Clifton Hill Fun Pass only features a few of these attractions, but the street is worth checking out for a day’s worth of activities. 

Ghost Walks: Niagara-on-the-Lake 

Somewhat of an oddball on this list is the haunted tour of Niagara-on-the-Lake by Ghost Walks. Both informative and creepy, this cheap excursion — $16 per ticket — can teach you about the darker side of Canada’s oldest and most haunted town. 

This is a Traditional Ghost Tour, meaning it doesn’t have costumed ghouls or shocking thrills, instead relying on “real history and ghosts” to turn your blood cold. As an outdoor tour, you won’t enter any of the following buildings, but you will hear about The Prince of Wales Hotel, Royal George Theatre, Apothecary, the infamous Olde Angel Inn and more. Moreover, you’ll be told the tale of North America’s oldest legend. 

If you’re into haunted histories, this one is for you. 

Nightmares Fear Factory 

This one is not for the faint of heart. Located at the top of Clifton Hill, Nightmares Fear Factory is a haunted house boasting that over 185,000 people have chickened out and failed to complete it. 

Home of the once industrious Cataract Coffin Factory, the legend goes that old proprietor Abraham Mortimer was crushed to death beneath his coffins after a scuffle with some young pranksters. Soon after his funeral, Mortimer’s coffin was found empty, and some say he still walks the halls looking to punish any trespassers. 

This haunted house relies on a more psychological effect to achieve its scares, with one reviewer writing that “it plays on your psyche and creates an atmosphere of absolute dread and suspense.” 

Tickets for those brave enough are $17.70 per person. Bring your friends or go alone, many say it doesn’t matter; you’ll still be terrified. 

Queenston Heights Park 

As a Brock-themed bonus, you can visit this monument site free of charge. This is not an attraction, but rather the home of the Brock Monument. Sir Isaac Brock was killed in the Battle of Queenston Heights and rests beneath the monument.  

With so many having died at this location, it’s no wonder that some have claimed to see the spirits of dead soldiers, red-hued shadows in their headlights as they drive up the road at night — perhaps the ghost of Sir Isaac Brock himself. 

Even without any supernatural activity, the monument and location are worth checking out if you’re interested in the namesake of our university and Niagara’s history. 

— 

With ghosts and goblins abound, both historical and fantastical, there’s much to explore around the Niagara region if you want to get a bit more out of the Halloween season. There’s no better way to remind yourself that you’re alive than with a good scare, and there’s no better time to do so than when midterms are ending and exams are lurking around the corner. 

Ontario’s Premier Doug Ford says that he plans to deal with Toronto’s gridlock problem on Highway 401 by building a tunnel underneath the stretch of road, giving drivers alternate routes to beat the traffic — but infrastructure experts have concerns over the laborious costs of the project. 

On Sept. 25, Ford debuted his Highway 401 tunnel project at a news conference held alongside the highway. The project he called “ambitious” entails the construction of an expressway to run through a tunnel beneath Highway 401. Ford says the tunnel will ideally run entirely through Toronto, from Mississauga to Scarborough, but an internal feasibility study to determine the logistics of the project is still underway. 

Ford says the study’s main purpose is to give the government an idea of what length will be best for the project, though it will also provide insight into how much the tunnel might cost and the amount of time the province will have to dedicate to construction. 

“If they’re telling me, 30 kilometres is x, 40 kilometres is y, and 70 kilometres or 60 kilometres is another cost, let’s take a look at it,” said Ford. 

During the question period, a reporter asked if the government would be “upfront” about the financial costs of the project, a concern among citizens as Ford and his government have been reluctant to share the potential costs of their Highway 413 project. 

The Premier responded that their feasibility study would help the government be “transparent” about the possible cost of the project, but he followed up the response by emphasizing that he wanted to begin construction on the project as soon as possible, no matter the price. 

“I’ll tell you one thing: we’re getting this tunnel built,” said Ford. 

Despite Ford’s determination to begin construction on the tunnel, many infrastructure experts are having trouble understanding the necessity of the project. 

Matti Siemiatycki of University of Toronto’s Infrastructure Institute told Global News that he has concerns over the logistics of Ford’s proposal. 

Siemiatycki said the price will likely be “astronomical,” adding that it might not solve the problems Ford discussed. 

“The impact and the benefits are likely not to materialize in terms of resolving congestion,” said Siemiatycki. 

Dr. Shoshanna Saxe of University of Toronto’s Department of Civil and Mineral Engineering echoed Siemaitycki’s concerns about the downsides of the project. She estimates that the project will cost $55 billion, and the construction associated with the project could take “up to 20 years to complete.” 

Saxe says the government needs to account for the cost of construction materials, workers, machinery and planning. 

She says a significant amount of money will need to go to assembling proper infrastructure. This includes “air shafts, emergency exits and underground interchanges.” 

Saxe estimates that the project will not only be long and costly but also highly inconvenient to Highway 401’s commuters, saying that construction can only go “a few kilometers at a time.” She says this will make the project “disruptive.” 

“There is no way not to bother the highway,” said Saxe. 

Though the path ahead for the project remains unclear as the government waits on the results of the internal feasibility study, Ford has demonstrated that he aims to begin the project as soon as he can regardless of costs and concerns.  

Opposition parties have begun to realize the power they possess over the Liberal Party through their vote of confidence. 

Bloc Québécois leader Yves-François Blanchet is using this newfound power to pressure the Liberals into prioritizing issues that matter to the Bloc Party at the threat of facilitating a federal election — moving the Prime Minister and his party further away from stability in Parliament. 

After Justin Trudeau and the Liberal Party made it out of the first confidence vote of the fall, with the motion showing 211 votes of confidence and 120 of non-confidence, Blanchet made clear that the Bloc’s support for the Liberals will not come without support in return. 

Blanchet said that the Liberals must pass the Bloc Party’s two motions into law by Oct. 29, saying they will confer with the other opposition parties to trigger a non-confidence vote in the Prime Minister if the motions are not passed. 

The Bloc Party wanted the Liberal government to aid in passing Bill C-319, which implements an increase of 10 per cent to Old Age Security payouts for those aged 65 to 74, and Bill C-282, which implements exemptions for “dairy, egg and poultry farmers” in “future trade negotiations.” 

Though Bill C-319 recently passed, it was not entirely because of support from the Liberals. According to a CBC News report, the motion passed because of support from “the Conservatives, NDP, Greens and five Liberal backbenchers.” 

Bill C-319 requires a “royal recommendation” from the Liberals to become law, which is how they justified keeping the motion as a free vote. The minister of labour and seniors, Steve MacKinnon, says there are “very, very strict criteria” for issues mandating support from all MPs. He concluded that the Bloc’s motion did not meet the requirements to do so. 

Blanchet said that Liberals could have supported the bill but are using government procedure as an excuse to vote against the Bloc’s motion. 

Though Liberals cited the potential expenses of the motion — which would cost “$16 billion over the next five years,” according to reports from CBC News — as reasoning for their overall lack of support, on top of the logistical issues with giving a royal recommendation in this case, Blanchet says that he is sticking to his promise. 

“They have until a few days from now to go on with the royal recommendation. And if they do not, we will start as rapidly as next week to speak with other opposition [parties] to get ready to go into an election,” said Blanchet. 

Blanchet says he wants to use the power he has found in his vote of confidence to make the government consider issues important to the Bloc Party. 

Through his vote, Blanchet said that his party “saw an opportunity to pursue issues that were good for Quebecers and also good for Canadians.” 

Though a collective intention to call an early election has not yet been announced to the public by the opposition parties, Canadians will continue to see how the parties respond to their newfound political power in the coming weeks.