Winnipeg Free Press

Winnipeg Free Press (Newspaper) - November 6, 2025, Winnipeg, Manitoba Official Court Notice If you smoked regularly before Nov. 20, 1998 and were diagnosed with a tobacco-related disease, you may qualify for $14,400-$100,000 from a landmark settlement. As part of a landmark settlement with Canadian tobacco companies, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Commercial List) has approved two compensation plans to provide payments to eligible smokers and ex-smokers diagnosed with certain tobacco-related diseases: ● The Pan-Canadian Claimants’ Compensation Plan (PCC); and ● The Quebec Class Action Administration Plan (QCAP) For those who have died that qualify, payments may be available for their estates. WHAT ARE THE ELIGIBLE DISEASES AND DOLLAR AMOUNTS? This table shows the diseases covered by the plans and the maximum payment amounts: Disease You started smoking before January 1, 1976 You started smoking on or after January 1, 1976 Primary Lung Cancer or Primary Throat Cancer $60,000 PCC $100,000 QCAP $48,000 PCC $80,000 QCAP Emphysema or COPD (GOLD Grade III or IV) $18,000 PCC $30,000 QCAP $14,400 PCC $24,000 QCAP Important: Payments may be reduced depending on the number of eligible claims in each plan. A person will only be entitled to one payment, under one plan, and for one disease. WHAT ARE THE CLAIM DEADLINES? The Claims Submission Periods commenced on September 3, 2025 and the plans have different claim deadlines: ● PCC claim deadline is September 3, 2027 ● QCAP claim deadline is August 31, 2026 Important: QCAP deadline is one year earlier than PCC deadline. HOW MANY CIGARETTES AND WHICH BRANDS? Both plans require the smoker or ex-smoker to have smoked at least 87,600 cigarettes (for example, 20 cigarettes a day for 12 years) between January 1, 1950 and November 20, 1998. The cigarettes must be from brands sold by the tobacco companies. The website has a list of the eligible brands, which include most legal cigarettes sold in Canada. WHAT ARE OTHER PCC REQUIREMENTS? In addition to the disease and smoking requirements, the smoker or ex-smoker under PCC must: (a) reside in Canada (or if deceased, must have resided in Canada at the time of death); (b) have been diagnosed between March 8, 2015 and March 8, 2019, inclusive of those dates; (c) have resided in Canada at the time of diagnosis; and (d) have been alive on March 8, 2019. WHAT ARE OTHER QCAP REQUIREMENTS? In addition to the disease and smoking requirements, the smoker or ex-smoker under QCAP must: (a) reside in Quebec (or if deceased, must have resided in Quebec at the time of death); (b) have been diagnosed before March 12, 2012; (c) have resided in Quebec at the time of diagnosis; and (d) have been alive on November 20, 1998. HOW CAN I GET FREE HELP? Agents are available free of charge to assist claimants under these plans. Agents will help you (a) complete your claim form; (b) commission your signature on the claim form; and (c) provide guidance on how to obtain the necessary information and documents for your claim. PCC Agent is Epiq 1-888-482-5852 PCCAgent@TobaccoClaimsCanada.ca QCAP Agent is Proactio 1-888-880-1844 tabac@proactio.ca If you do not submit a claim by the applicable deadline, you cannot be eligible to get a payment. If you are not sure whether you qualify, the website has a simple questionnaire to help you. The plans have been designed so that you do not need a lawyer to prepare and submit your claim. If you have already registered, you will be notified by an Agent about how to complete your claim. Full information is available at the official website www.TobaccoClaimsCanada.ca and via the QR Code. www.TobaccoClaimsCanada.ca Legal Notices A4 ● WINNIPEGFREEPRESS.COM NEWS I FEDERAL BUDGET THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2025 T HE world, it seems, is disappointed in Prime Minister Mark Carney’s first budget, which promised “generational” change but deliv- ered what appears to be something more modest. What does Carney’s first budget do, and not do? It does not abandon efforts to combat climate change, but does not really advance them. It delivers a dose of austerity, particularly when it comes to the size and scope of government, but does not ruthlessly reduce the federal civil ser- vice or spending. It ramps up spending on hous- ing, infrastructure and defence, but without a credible plan to eliminate the deficit. It provides incentives to the private sector to invest more of its money in Canada, but in a way that may not prove to be that enticing. Put it all together and Carney is currently being hoisted on his own hyperbole. Prior to the tabling of this budget, Carney warned about sacrifices and pledged generation- al change, suggesting this spending plan would lead to a seismic, foundational shift. Before we fully decide whether he failed, perhaps it’s time we talk about what meaningful, long-term change in government would look like. Lasting or generational transformation is dif- ficult to deliver because it needs to be cultivated over a very long time. The government could drastically reduce spending and cut tens of thou- sands of jobs in one year, but the impact on ser- vices and on the economy would be significant and not necessarily positive in net terms. Change such as this is rarely lasting; administrations that cut quickly rarely reinvent government, they just shrink it. What happens if you change too much, too soon? The best example is the 1995 federal budget tabled by former prime minister Jean Chrétien and finance minister Paul Martin. Chrétien and Martin delivered fast, deep and profound cuts to the government. That budget, and those that followed in 1996 and 1997, helped erase a crushing federal deficit and set the stage for years of balanced budgets and tens of billions of dollars in tax cuts. Chrétien and Martin slashed the federal bureaucracy and departmental spending by 20 per cent. The budget also cut funding across a broad array of important, if non-core, programs, including support for Indigenous communities, scientific research and development, housing and infrastructure, climate change mitigation and disaster relief. Most importantly, however, Chrétien and Martin brought down the cleaver on supposedly untouchable programs, including Employment Insurance and transfer payments to the provinc- es for health care, social programs and post-sec- ondary education. The cuts stretched into the tens of billions of dollars. Yes, the budget dramatically reduced spend- ing, but the elimination of the deficit had as much, if not more, to do with the fact it coincided with a period of robust economic growth and — combined with a red-hot U.S. economy and a very low Canadian dollar — record increases in government revenues. The federal deficit was erased two years ahead of schedule, and future surpluses were used quickly to reduce taxes. Although conservative think tanks and busi- ness lobbyists have celebrated the 1995 budget as the “Maple Leaf Miracle,” it was not the unmiti- gated success the private-sector claims it to be. Health care in Canada was badly damaged by the cuts. In fact, many of the problems we see today — wait lists for surgeries and diagnostic tests — can be traced back to the decision to cut transfer payments and the subsequent decisions by provinces to cut their own health-care ex- penditures and slow the training of doctors and nurses. When one wonders how a relatively wealthy nation such as Canada could have such a dire shortage of health-care professionals, or be suffering under the crippling effects of a housing shortage, one might want to at least consider the “generational” impact of the 1995 federal budget. Can Carney’s slower and steadier approach deliver lasting change? It’s impossible to say, given that he will continue to govern on the razor’s edge of a minority Parliament, and he must carry the burden of U.S. tariffs that are constraining economic growth. If there isn’t an election in the next year, then we’ll get to see Carney’s plan in action. There are a lot of metrics that allow us to judge the relative success or failure of the budget — fed- eral government program spending, for example — but the one that might be the most important is private-sector investment. The Carney government wants to unearth $1 trillion in private investment to help Canada build capacity to feed new trade routes that do not go through the United States. One would think that businesses hurt by U.S. President Don- ald Trump’s tariffs would be keen to do that. Unfortunately, there are concerns the en- hanced tax deductions on private investments in priority sectors such as manufacturing and clean energy are not nearly attractive enough to draw large amounts of private money. And, as the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives pointed out in a pre-budget analysis, Canadian business- es have never rallied to Ottawa’s call for more domestic investment, even with robust credits and deductions. Carney’s budget may turn out to be the flop that a lot of commentators think it is. However, it may have to be judged by how much change it delivers over a period of years, rather than the next 12 months. dan.lett@winnipegfreepress.com DAN LETT OPINION Single budget can’t — or shouldn’t — deliver ‘generational change’ Unions vow to fight public service cuts OTTAWA — Federal public service unions vowed Wednesday to “fight” planned job cuts, arguing they will undermine services for Canadians. Tuesday’s federal budget outlined a plan to low- er program spending and administration costs by about $60 billion over the next five years. It also says the government intends to have 10 per cent fewer federal employees by 2029 — a loss of about 40,000 jobs from the public service peak of 368,000 two years ago. About 10,000 jobs were eliminated over the past year. The plan involves a reduction of 1,000 executive positions over the next two years, as well as a 20 per cent cut to spending on management and con- sulting services over three years. Trimming the payroll through attrition remains a goal, the government said, but the budget makes it clear that some positions will be cut. At a news conference Wednesday, Public Ser- vice Alliance of Canada national president Sharon DeSousa said the union will speak to “every MP” and the president of the Treasury Board to stress the impact of cuts. “Make no mistake, we will fight these cuts and protect constitutional rights of workers across this country,” DeSousa said. “(Prime Minister Mark) Carney’s government is choosing cuts over care, profit over people, and everyone in Canada will pay the price.” Larry Rousseau, executive vice-president of the Canadian Labour Congress, told the news confer- ence the labour movement will fight any attack on public services and workers’ rights. “The budget really reads like austerity, and Can- ada’s unions refuse to let workers pay the price,” he said. “The government wants to cut tens of thousands of public service jobs. This will mean longer EI waits, slower passports, fewer safety inspections, food inspections, delays for seniors and families.” The government is trying to boost the rate of at- trition through early retirement by offering a one- time voluntary program to allow workers to retire up to five years early without incurring a pension penalty. It intends to offer an early retirement option for people aged 50 or 55 and older, depending on their start date. The option would be available to those with at least 10 years of employment and at least two years of pensionable service. The program is to begin in January and it’s es- timated to cost $15 million over two years to ad- minister. The budget says the government will lose 16,000 full-time equivalent positions though its expendi- ture review. — The Canadian Press JUSTIN TANG / THE CANADIAN PRESS PSAC president Sharon DeSousa: ‘We will fight these cuts.’ Indigenous leaders say budget falls short on health care, education OTTAWA — The federal budget fails to offer the investments in health and education their communities desperately need, some Indigenous leaders said Wednesday, a day after the Liberals tabled the latest fiscal plan in the House of Com- mons. The budget froze annual base funding for In- digenous health and social services and for treaty work. Ottawa says that freeze amounts to a two per cent cut at a time when most federal agencies face a 15 per cent cut. Assembly of First Nations National Chief Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak said the freeze will affect communities with high birthrates. She also said the budget offers no plan to close the education gap that holds back economic growth in Indigen- ous communities. “Sadly, (Tuesday’s) budget did not include any generational investments to close the First Na- tions education gaps that exist in this country,” she told reporters Wednesday. “Instead of closing the socioeconomic gaps between First Nations and non-Indigenous Can- adians, this budget is going to make things worse.” Woodhouse Nepinak noted that more than half of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s rec- ommendations a decade ago related to education. “This budget was a chance to build some of that trust. Sadly, it has failed, has failed to meet that moment,” she said. Woodhouse Nepinak said she was glad to see the government stick to its Indigenous housing commitments and praised the announcement of $2.3 billion over three years for water access on reserve and $10.1 million over three years for consultations on fast-tracked major projects. But she accused Ottawa of pursuing “trickle-down economics” that don’t set up youth for success. Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami president Natan Obed praised the budget’s promises of investments in the Arctic, and particularly its support for an Inuit university. But he said Inuit are troubled that the document framed Arctic policy in terms of security and na- tional sovereignty without explaining how the re- gion’s original inhabitants fit into that policy. “We want to be partners with the Government of Canada, and all Canadians, in upholding Arctic sovereignty, in defending our borders, in working to do all that we can in this difficult time to make this country prosperous,” he said. “All we’re asking on the other side is for a very clear consideration of the way in which we inter- act with the federal government.” Some Indigenous leaders in Manitoba say there is still time for the federal government to amend Tuesday’s budget in order to get First Nations input and get money where it’s needed. Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs Grand Chief Kyra Wilson said the budget loops First Nations infra- structure into other initiatives. Wilson said that leaves leaders wondering whether cash previously set aside for commun- ities has been allocated elsewhere. The budget introduced by Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne did not break down funding between First Nations, Inuit and Métis. Brokenhead Ojibway Nation Chief Gordon Bluesky said any cuts create further deficits and hardships, while other Indigenous groups like the Manitoba Métis Federation are praising the budget for sticking with past housing and child welfare pledges. “We look forward to meeting with the prime minister to address our priorities and learn what is available to our citizens across the country,” federation president David Chartrand said Wed- nesday in a news release. “As long as Canada continues to invest in us, we can continue to invest in Canada.” Wilson is joining other leaders in arguing that there needs to be more distinction of specific funding for First Nations. She told reporters Wednesday that such a dis- tinction is critical, “given that (First Nations) have a treaty partnership with the Crown in which that is the very foundation of this country.” Wilson said she understands the federal gov- ernment is in a difficult position as it continues to respond to tariff disputes with the United States, but that First Nations leadership needs to be at the table with Canada when financial decisions are made. She did applaud Ottawa’s commitment to re- source development in the country, but only if those conversations include First Nations. — The Canadian Press ;