What they said. What they meant.

“This bill is badly written. The government didn't even write a proper new law - they're trying to change the airplane law to cover rockets too, like that's the same thing. They should throw this out and start over if they want a space law that works.”

“The security part of this bill is basically 'trust us, we'll do the right thing'. That's not good enough for rocket launches over Canada. The law needs real, clear safety rules that everyone can see, not empty promises from ministers working in secret.”

“We want this to be done right. The government's bill is sloppy and incomplete. They should have written a separate bill that shows they understand how complicated space launches are.”

“This bill is too short to be trusted. Investors who want to make money off space launches won't put in their capital unless they're sure of a return.”

“I want to sound like a wise, relatable parent. In this folksy metaphor, crafting a good bill is like doing your homework well. This bill does something, but it doesn't do it well enough to earn top marks from me.”

“I want Canada to pass a good space law. I don't trust this bill because the Liberal minister gets too much power. I want more details and oversight. I want the bill to help Canada's space industry grow and compete. I don't want insiders getting special deals. Let's study the bill carefully and make it better.”

“We agree that the space economy has great potential. Conservatives have always supported that. But this bill has big problems. It gives too much power to the minister. That's concerning because of possible Liberal corruption. The bill isn't transparent. Where are the rules?”

“I want the minister to reassure me. Make sure the right people are checking space payloads. The space people aren't security people. They shouldn't do security checks.”

“The other guy is right. Space people can't do security. We need to see how this big expensive project will really keep out the wrong people. The bill doesn't say.”

“This space bill is bad for taxpayers. Taxpayers pay if it fails, but they won't get the profits if it succeeds. The Liberals' friends will. Why should taxpayers carry all the risk while a few insiders get the rewards?”

“I think the last question was good. I want to ask more questions like that. There should be more rules and oversight. I like the private sector. Conservatives like the private sector. But there needs to be more balance. More rules will make companies want to invest.”

“The member's space bill is full of holes. It has no real plan, just a blank cheque. The private sector won't invest because they need certainty that the government won't change the rules on them. This could drive away investment.”

“I'm asking you a pointed question about a big hole in this bill. The Minister of Transport brushed off my security concerns earlier. He said the Canadian Space Agency has it covered. But the Space Agency has no security role at all! I've read the bill carefully. It says nothing about national security screening. If the Space Agency can't do security and the bill says nothing on it, who does what the US and UK systems do? Who is in charge of stopping dangerous dual-use technology? I don't think this bill covers that. I think you left a big gap.”

“You closed a program to clean up derelict boats. When will you restart it? I want to help my riding.”

“I'm filling time with kind words and saying nothing anyone could pin down later. This space bill is very thin on details. It just makes a new government program and lets the bureaucracy sort it out later. That creates a conundrum. I'm supposed to help the government but they offer very little guidance on where they want to go.”

“The bill wants to launch rockets into space and grow our space program. That's great, but the chosen launch site looks like a gravel pit. We need to examine the economics, because it looks like the government is now leasing back Crown land for a large amount of money. The government is also making it harder for us to examine transactions like this. It's a strange situation at a time when Canadians need transparency. The bill itself is also quite thin and leaves too much to government discretion. We should want crisp adherence to the law, especially with taxpayer dollars. There are intelligence, defense, and procurement implications to this space program that need to be considered. The legislation should be precise and efficient, so Canada gets the most benefit in a responsible way.”

“The bill doesn't say much. I agree there's a chance to make things better, but we need more details. Let's talk about it more in committee and make this bill have more substance.”

“You say this bill aligns with other G7 countries, but it doesn't include their important parts. The U.K. makes sure space activities don't harm national security. The U.S. lets Congress decide on indemnification, not the administration. Why doesn't this bill do those things?”

“I thought space travel was magic when I was a kid. This bill is kind of like that. It says it'll put us on even ground with the G7 and do amazing things. But like my colleague said, it's missing a lot of important stuff.”

“The Liberals want to give more power to the minister. They don't want Parliament to have oversight or debate. Is that a good idea?”