“The carbon tax has been a bad policy from the start. The Liberals got rid of the consumer carbon tax, but they kept a hidden tax on industry. This tax is making everything cost more, which shows the government's poor management.”

“Mr. Speaker, I understand the issue the member has raised. It underscores what a debacle and poorly thought-out policy the carbon tax was from start to finish that the Liberal government kept in place for years, which Conservatives called on it to abolish. Of course, it technically has scrapped the consumer carbon tax, but has maintained a hidden industrial carbon tax that is increasing the cost of everything. Therefore, yes, I agree that it underscores total Liberal incompetence and mismanagement.”

• Off topic
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 0 of 100

  None of this statement addressed the specific topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

“The government is spending 200 million dollars on a spaceport project that we will never own. Norway spent much less to own most of its spaceport. This is a bad deal for taxpayers, and I want an answer about it.”

“Mr. Speaker, when the Liberals talk about the Maritime Launch Services lease they say it is an investment, that somehow it is giving us space sovereignty within Canada. When Norway sought to create its own spaceport, it partnered with the private sector. However, for approximately $60 million of today’s Canadian dollars it was able to own 90% of the asset and partner with a private sector proponent. What we are saying here is that the $200 million going to an asset that we will never own, and for which 60% of the shares are unaccounted for as we do not know who owns them, is a big mistake. It is not a solution, but a bad deal for taxpayers. What does the member have to say with respect to that?”

“The government is spending $20 million a year to lease land taxpayers already own. This deal only helps their friends. I want the House to pass this amendment to stop paying this company until the government answers our questions.”

“Mr. Speaker, when the Liberals say that it is an investment, it is indeed an investment. It is an investment in Liberal insiders, and Mr. Jacob made off like a bandit in a matter of weeks upon the Liberals entering this lease. Why Maritime Launch Services? That is the central question. Only the Liberals could manage to spend $20 million a year on land that is already owned by taxpayers, but that is what we have with this lease. There is a lot of smoke, and where there is smoke there usually is fire. Instead of providing answers and clarity, we have seen nothing but obfuscation. That is why the amendment brought forward by the member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes is necessary, to put a halt on directing more taxpayer dollars to this questionable company until those questions are answered.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“I want the government to release all the details about its $200-million deal for a rocket launch pad in Nova Scotia. A working launch pad was already built in Newfoundland for just $10 million. The government needs to explain why it is spending so much public money here while our national debt keeps growing.”

“Mr. Speaker, “to infinity and beyond”. Am I talking about a space program or our deficit? Perhaps I am talking about both. Kids all over Canada look up to Buzz Lightyear and Chris Hadfield about the stars and what is beyond them. Whether they are real astronauts or fictional astronauts, Canadians look up to these role models. Canada has a great history being a part of our space exploration, such as the Alouette I, which was launched under former Conservative Prime Minister Diefenbaker, making Canada the third country to design and build a satellite; and the Canadarm, an impressive robotic arm used in the space shuttle and the International Space Station. Even Elon Musk, the founder of SpaceX, was educated right here in Canada. We have a lot of achievements to be proud of and Canada is certainly swinging well above its weight, including Newfoundland and Labrador. In my riding, in the town of St. Lawrence, we actually have a launch pad. We have the NordSpace launch pad. Last year, many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and scientists from around the world gathered in St. Lawrence to watch NordSpace have its first test launch. The best part is the inauguration mission was called “Getting Screeched In”. NordSpace is a 100% Canadian-owned company, investing in our province and defence, with a planned expansion opening a new office in St. John’s for mission controls. This is good because Canada needs a strong space force. GPS, Internet, communications and many essential components of society and our military are in space. We need to have the ability to provide those services and protect those services for Canadians. Space is no longer just about exploration and discovery. It is about national security, economic growth, scientific advancement and innovation. The countries that lead in space will help shape the future. Canada was and always should be among those leaders. Our engineers, scientists and entrepreneurs have demonstrated time and time again that they can compete with the best in the world. However, what they need is a government that supports innovation responsibly, spends taxpayer dollars wisely and ensures that invested dollars provide value for Canadians. I have spent a few days researching NordSpace, its company and business models. It seems that it received a mere $10 million. With that money, it built a nice road, a nice spaceport, developed its technology and even had a test launch. Let us compare that to the spaceport on everyone’s mind: Nova Scotia’s Maritime Launch Services. Maritime Launch Services was incorporated in 2016, but things did not get spicy until this year and Canadians are concerned. We have heard that there is a $200-million deal with Maritime Launch Services, but we seem to have very little detail on what that includes. So far, all that seems to be included in this $200-million deal is a concrete pad in the middle of a gravel pit. Being the inquisitive man that I am, I got on a plane and went to Canso, Nova Scotia, to see this launch pad for myself. After a short three‑kilometre walk, it was easy to see some of the concerns. Being only three kilometres away from the town, I could actually see homes from the launch pad. I can see why the people of the town of Canso are raising concerns. There were signs all over town petitioning against the construction of this launch pad so close to their homes. In addition, there was not much there. It was an underwhelming experience. There was a sea can, a work trailer and a small concrete pad. Honestly, it was no larger than my driveway. It is not much of a piece of land. It sure seems to be an expensive piece of land at that. The company is renting the land from Nova Scotia for less than $15,000 per year and then it seems like it is billing the Department of National Defence $20 million a year and National Defence will not even own it when it is completed. To add fuel to this rocket, I am hearing that the federal government backdated this lease for a full year. How does that happen? I would be the happiest landlord in the world if I had tenants who said, “I will backdate my lease and pay for a full year before I move in.” That would be fantastic. Coincidentally, this lucrative lease came just in time to save the day. It is rumoured that this company was on the verge of bankruptcy before receiving this deal. If that is not bad enough, as soon as the deal got signed, some shareholders cashed out and dumped that stock at a ballooned price. Not only did they get bailed out, but they also got rich. They got rich off Canadian taxpayer dollars, and that is exactly why transparency matters. Canadians are not opposed to investing in infrastructure. Canadians are not opposed to investing in innovation. Canadians are not opposed to building a stronger space industry, but Canadians are opposed to writing a blank cheque without being told where the money is going. When governments spend public money, they have a duty to show their work. They have a duty to explain the costs, justify their decisions and demonstrate the results. If this project is truly in the best interest of Canadians, the government should have no problem releasing the details of that lease and letting the facts speak for themselves. I am not here just to complain and point fingers. I am here to ask questions, to raise the issue, to get to the bottom of this for Canadians. Really, I am standing here to give the Liberals a chance to explain themselves, a chance to release the lease, a chance to release the details of this funding, to explain to Canadians how they can justify spending over $200 million on a space pad in Nova Scotia while a nearly identical one was built in Newfoundland for only 5% of the cost. Canadians have a right to know. These are large amounts of money we are talking about here. This is not a $16 orange juice or even a $200,000 luxury airplane room service for the Prime Minister’s private jet. This is $200 million, million with a capital M. This spaceport is costing Canadians over $54,000 a day for the next 10 years, and $54,000 is more than what an average Canadian makes in a year. The median salary for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians is less than $35,000 a year. Conservatives know that Canadians have a right to transparency, a right to know how the Liberal government is spending their dollars. I am sincerely hoping the Liberals can stand up and tell Canadians, convince Canadians, show Canadians that this is not another Liberal green slush fund or another Liberal WE scandal, where Liberal insiders and Trudeau’s family receive millions of taxpayer dollars. However, so far, from this side of the House, things are looking pretty fishy. Many Canadians would even argue that this entire spending is a waste. Why should the Canadian taxpayer pay for a second launch pad in Atlantic Canada, when there is a perfectly functional and nearly identical launch pad already constructed and used in Atlantic Canada? Certainly, it would cost much less than $200 million to transport those rockets to the spaceport in my riding. These are the questions, the simple questions Canadians are asking, and we want to hear good answers, so let us hear it. If there is a sound business case, let us see it. If this is truly a wise investment, then release the details to allow Canadians to judge for themselves. Until then, Canadians will continue to wonder why so much money is being spent with so few answers being provided. Unfortunately, rockets are not the only thing going to infinity and beyond. It is also Canada’s deficit. We spend more money on interest payments than the federal government spends in health care payments. We spend more money servicing the deficit than we receive in GST. This means the 5% we all spend on everything at the store goes straight to the bankers. The Prime Minister’s budget has generational debt. By 2029, over 12% of our budget will be used to service the debt. For every eight dollars we take in, a dollar will be used to service the debt. This is massive. Debt is looming over the next generation of Canadians, risking our entire economy’s future, and it is not because Canadians are not paying taxes. We are paying way more than enough taxes. It is because the taxes are not being used wisely. This, my friends, is why this economy is not flying. It is simply falling with style.”

“I want the Liberals to explain how they spent this money and how it protects Canada's control over its space program. Instead of answering my questions, they attacked me.”

“Mr. Speaker, I just gave the Liberals a chance to get up and explain. I just asked all the questions on Canadians’ minds. I gave them the opportunity on a golden platter, and the member got up on the offence, attacking me as if I do not support the space industry as well, as if I do not support Canadian sovereignty, and as if Conservatives do not support Canadian sovereignty in space. I do not know why the Liberals just never took the opportunity to explain to Canadians what this money was used for and how they are going to actually improve Canadian sovereignty in space.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 45 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“The Liberal government takes tax money from Canadians and gives it to its own favourites. The member across the way is right about this.”

“Mr. Speaker, I think what my friend across the way was describing is almost the same situation, where the Liberal government takes taxpayers’ money, uses it in a way that Canadians do not want it to be used and picks favourites. In this case the member across the way claims that the government took taxpayer dollars from Quebec and then gave that money to Anglo-Canada instead. I think we are on the same page. The member is agreeing that the Liberal government takes money from everybody and then distributes it to its chosen people. It is, quite frankly, very frustrating.”

• Off topic
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 0 of 100

  None of this statement addressed the specific topic under debate.

  See full analysis →
• Little substance
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Signal 37 of 100

  Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

  See full analysis →

“Canada has a proud history in aerospace. I want to know why the government is wasting $200 million on the industry this year.”

“Mr. Speaker, we have to be proud of our history when we talk about aerospace, because, as my colleague highlighted, we were the fourth country to have a satellite, Alouette I, in 1962, and we were the people who built it. We built the lunar modules’ landing gear in Longueuil, Quebec. Six lunar modules are still up there, each resting on four legs that were made in Longueuil. We should be proud of Canada’s aerospace history and legacy. I would like my colleague’s opinion on the following. How is it that, this year, the federal government is unfortunately misspending $200 million on Canada’s aerospace industry?”

“Canada has a great aerospace industry, and investing in it is good. But the government is wasting money on projects that cost way too much and giving that money to Liberal insiders.”

“Mr. Speaker, I agree. Quebec especially has been a leader in the aerospace industry, with Bombardier’s building airplanes. It has been amazing, what we have done in Canada. We have so much to be proud of. Again, I do not think the mistake is investing. I think the mistake is wasting that money. We built a launch pad that is almost identical to the pictures I have seen and to what I have seen when I have been there. It is an almost identical launch pad, for 5% of the price, in Newfoundland and Labrador. This is not about what we are spending money on. It is how you are wasting the money, giving it to Liberal insiders. I apologize, Mr. Speaker. It was not you who wasted the money. It was the Liberals. I made a mistake.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“The member is not talking about the topic we are debating. I want him to follow the rules and talk about the defence department and Maritime Launch Services.”

“Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The member opposite is not being relevant, neither he personally nor with respect to anything in particular regarding the motion. I would ask that he come to order and maybe talk about Maritime Launch Services, the lease, and the Department of National Defence—”

“The government spent $200 million on an empty site in Nova Scotia for the aerospace industry. I want to know if the member really thinks that money was well spent, because nothing has been built there for years.”

“Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my loquacious colleague. He is very eloquent. He always has something to say, even when he has nothing to say. The reason we have concerns about this is that $200 million is being spent in a very unusual way on a place that is not developed at all. It has been like that for years now. Does he think that the $200 million spent on what has been done so far should be commended, or would he say, conversely, that we are off to a bad start? Out of respect for the Canadian aerospace industry, which has roots in our country dating back 60 years and which is part of the future of Canada’s economic development, does he think that the site in Nova Scotia is off to a good start?”

“Maritime Launch Services was losing millions of dollars and almost out of money before the government gave it $20 million. A shareholder then cashed out nearly $2 million. Did the government just rescue a failing company that was about to go bankrupt?”

“Mr. Speaker, I want to look at Maritime Launch Services’ financials. I think this is very revealing because its condition appeared to be extremely weak before the government’s injection of money. In its 2025 financial statements, the company had $47 million in losses, $14,980 in revenue and approximately $70,000 in cash on hand at the end of 2024. We have heard numerous times tonight that a shareholder actually cashed in what were effectively worthless shares after the $20-million injection, which gave him $1.8 million. Is it not true that the government effectively rescued a failing company and subsidized an enterprise on the verge of bankruptcy?”

“The government is wasting $200 million on a failing spaceport in Nova Scotia. The project makes no sense and only gets public money because its leaders have close ties to the Liberal Party.”

“Mr. Speaker, I would like to note that I will be sharing my time with the member for Richmond—Arthabaska. First of all, let me say what a thrill it was to meet Kevin White’s brother-in-law today, astronaut Jeremy Hansen, here on Parliament Hill. Kevin White is the fire chief in the city of Barrie, and he is married to Jeremy’s sister. I thought I would mention that for Kevin’s benefit. During World War II, when Allied aircraft would be flying over the targets, ready to bomb, they would be hit with flak. In this place, we know we are over the target when Liberals start justifying and making excuses for things that absolutely make no sense, and they speak in a louder tone to try to make their point. What is important about this debate tonight is that Canadians are watching the government spend $200 million on a politically connected spaceport project in rural Nova Scotia. The more we learn about it, the less sense it makes. As the finance minister suggested in committee of the whole two weeks ago, this is not a story about innovation or economic stewardship. It is a story, in fact, about Liberal insiders, political connections, well-connected insiders and taxpayers who, once again, are being asked to foot the bill for a project that should have never received this level of government backing in the first place. Canadians are effectively paying $50,000 every single day for this project. What exactly are they getting for that money? They are getting a gravel road, two sea cans and a concrete slab that has launched exactly two rockets, neither of which have reached space. One of those launches was conducted by a York University student rocketry club. Canadians are effectively paying $50,000 a day for what amounts to be the most expensive science fair project in the country, and yet somehow, despite this lack of infrastructure, lack of revenue, lack of launches and lack of any proven commercial success, the federal government decided to give this company $20 million a year for the next 10 years. The debate and argument tonight is that Canadians deserve to know why the numbers alone make absolutely no sense. Maritime Launch Services reported less than $15,000 in annual revenue. At the same time, the company reported tens of millions of dollars in losses and had only about $70,000 in cash on hand. Independent auditors openly warned that there was material uncertainty about whether the company could even continue operating. In plain English, this company was on the verge of financial collapse. Instead of walking away, what the Liberal government did was attach itself to this project even more aggressively. Canadians have seen this pattern before. When ordinary Canadians struggle financially, the Liberals tell them to budget better, but when politically connected companies struggle financially, the Liberals suddenly open up their wallets. The insider connections surrounding this project are impossible to ignore. Former Liberal premier Stephen McNeil publicly supported the project before the environmental review had even been completed. Then later, after championing the project politically, he conveniently joined the company’s advisory board. Canadians are tired of this revolving door where Liberal politicians help projects while in office and then later somehow attach themselves to the same companies benefiting from that government support. MLS’s chief lobbyist was reportedly a former senior staffer to the justice minister, and the company reportedly lobbied the justice minister 14 separate times, more than the current or former local MP for the area. Canadians do not need a conspiracy theory to see what is happening. The pattern is clear. Former Liberal politicians, former Liberal staffers and well-connected political insiders are all orbiting around a company that is now receiving hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer support. Despite all of these political connections, the project itself still makes no practical sense. The original business model was based around launching the Cyclone-4M rocket. The problem is that the rocket has never actually been built. Imagine spending $200 million to build an airport for planes that do not exist yet. Canadians would never, ever tolerate that level of incompetence in any other sector, yet somehow the government saw no proven rocket, no proven market, no regulatory framework, no meaningful revenue and massive financial instability and still thought this is exactly where 200 million hard-earned taxpayer dollars should go. The government did not just ignore the warning signs. It practically sprinted past them. The company’s founding partner became tied to a NASA false claims case involving allegations of false billing and ignored safety protocols. The chair of the board faced sanctions from Canada’s investment regulator over failures involving compliance and supervision. The Ukrainian aerospace partner behind the project had already been surrounded by allegations of corruption, failed international projects and major financial disputes. Any one of these should have triggered caution, but instead, Liberal insiders continued to attach themselves to this project. The most unbelievable part of it all is the land arrangement that is in place. Maritime Launch Services does not even own the land. It leases Crown land from the Province of Nova Scotia for less than $13,000 a year, and somehow, through this federal government agreement, taxpayers are paying massively inflated amounts connected to the exact same land, resulting in a 1,300% profit margin. Canadians are struggling. They cannot get mortgages approved. Young people cannot afford homes, families are cutting back on groceries and seniors are struggling with bills, but somehow, the Liberal government found a way to guarantee politically connected insiders with what appears to be a 1,300% return tied to publicly owned land. That is not to mention that effectively worthless shares of what was an effectively bankrupt company were sold for a profit of $1.8 million. That is not economic development, nor is it innovation, as the finance minister would say. It is absolute cronyism. Why is the federal government attaching itself so aggressively to a project that still lacks even the most basic foundations for success? Canada does not even have a fully developed regulatory framework for commercial orbital launches. The environmental assessment was minimal. The project dramatically changed its entire business model. The site itself is underdeveloped. There were two launches, and both were unsuccessful. Still, the government wants to invest $200 million in it. At some point, Canadians will stop seeing this as a business decision and start seeing it for what it looks like: a politically protected project kept alive by well-connected Liberal insiders using taxpayer money. Canadians deserve governments that invest based on merit, viability and public interest, not on who knows which minister, former premier or Liberal staffer. Right now, Canadians are paying $50,000 a day for a failed science fair, while the only things truly taking off appear to be the profits and connections of Liberal insiders.”

“We keep talking about Liberal corruption because insiders keep getting rich while Canadians suffer. Conservatives want clear answers and honest oversight on this project before we can support it.”

“Mr. Speaker, the reason corruption, cronyism, well-connected Liberal insiders and well-connected lobbyists come up all the time is that we see them all the time, and they benefit while Canadians are suffering at great cost because of the Liberal government. This is why they are brought up all the time. The second part of the member’s question was on the support of this project. What Conservatives are looking for, and I think what most Canadians would want, are some accountability and transparency over this project. As I mentioned earlier, there are a lot of questions that need to be raised. We are trying to highlight some of those concerns, not just to make Canadians more aware, but also to make sure that we are providing accountability and transparency on this project.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 45 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“Businesses in my riding are hurting because of tariffs and government rules. We should cut this red tape and let businesses succeed on their own.”

“Mr. Speaker, my riding is in the same boat. Many businesses are suffering right now because of the tariffs, but also because of the rules and laws imposed during this Liberal government’s 11 years in power. I think we should support businesses. We need to support businesses in our ridings. There is no question about it. One of the ways we can greatly support businesses is by ensuring that with much of the legislation, many of those regulations and policies that are in place right now and the red tape that exists among businesses, we get the government out of the way and let these businesses flourish on their own. Of course, we should always be there to support businesses as well, but the government creates the environment for success. It does not actually create that success—”

• Off topic
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 0 of 100

  None of this statement addressed the specific topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

“The government is spending $200 million on a space launch pad. A sawmill in my riding just closed, and 190 people lost their jobs. That money should have helped them instead. I want the member to compare this project to Cape Canaveral.”

“Mr. Speaker, $200 million is what we are talking about with this launch pad. In my riding, a sawmill was recently shut down, with 190 jobs lost. That $200 million would have gone a long way there. The member for Taiaiako’n—Parkdale—High Park and I were debating this earlier, and he talked about how we needed a Canadian Cape Canaveral. I wonder if the hon. member could do a bit of a comparison between Maritime Launch Services and Cape Canaveral.”

“The government gave a lot of taxpayer money to a failing company that only built a gravel road and concrete pad. We need real answers and accountability about this spending, and we will keep pushing for them.”

“Mr. Speaker, there is really not much to compare, because we have, as I said, a gravel road with a concrete pad. Compare that to Cape Canaveral. Members can see it if they fly over it. If anybody has been there, it is very well established. There is no question about it. The issues here are transparency, accountability and the fact that so many taxpayer dollars were given to this company that was on the verge of bankruptcy. There are a lot more questions than we are getting answers to right now. We need to keep pushing on this.”

“The government is wasting public money by paying a private company $20 million a year to rent a small piece of land with almost nothing on it. The minister refuses to answer basic questions about who approved this deal or why it was signed. I want the government to explain this bad contract and take better care of taxpayers' money.”

“Mr. Speaker, what is our role here as elected officials? We have a legislative role when it comes to bills. We must ensure the sound management of public finances. We represent the people of our ridings. We are the eyes, voice and ears of the people. Earlier, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House said that we were against the development of the aerospace industry. We are not against the development of the aerospace industry; we are against the mismanagement of public finances. We are dealing a financial scandal involving Maritime Launch Services, a private company that leases 135 hectares of land from the Nova Scotia provincial government. This private company took its contract and decided to lease the land to the federal Liberal government for $20 million a year for 10 years, for a total of $200 million. My question for the Liberal government is simple. If it had been their own money, would they have signed this contract? The answer is clear. Of course, no one here would have done that. No Canadian would have signed a contract like that. Why did the Liberal government sign a contract like that? The Maritime Launch Services site is on a gravel road. There are two shipping containers and a concrete pad measuring 25 feet by 35 feet. That is the infrastructure that the government is renting for $20 million a year for the next 10 years. Over the past few days, I asked the Minister of Finance some questions. Who signed the contract? Who read the contract? When was the minister informed of this contract? I asked him if he had met with officials from Maritime Launch Services. He did not recall. I reminded him of the exact date he met with them. I asked him if his chief of staff had ever met with officials from Maritime Launch Services. He did not know. When he was industry minister, his chief of staff met with them 14 times, seven times in 2023 and seven times in 2024. Again, he met with them 14 times. How is it possible that the minister does not remember that he had these important meetings with his chief of staff? The minister is currently taking Canadians’ concerns so lightly that he offered to introduce me to some astronauts. I do not want to meet astronauts. I want to meet with experienced stewards who will sign contracts that meet the expectations of Canadians, the people who elected us to ensure the sound management of public finances. This is unacceptable to us. Canadians work hard every day to earn a living, to be able to pay for a place to live, a vehicle to drive and food to eat. They send a portion of their wages to us here as taxes. Our role is to be good stewards and to serve Canadians. That is our role. It is to be good stewards. Right now, the federal government is being a very poor steward. This is just one example. Then people wonder why the country’s deficit, which was $700 billion when the Liberals took office 10 years ago, is now at $1.4 trillion. Bad decisions like this add up. I can say that Canadians are extremely frustrated right now. A lot of people are telling me that. Frédéric told me that the government never answers questions and that I will definitely never get any answers. Nathalie wonders why they do not answer and adds that ministers are all the same when they have to be accountable. Mathieu says it is not easy to answer such a simple question. Stéphane says that he has rarely seen someone dodge such a simple question. Patrick says that he cannot get over how some people never answer questions. Sébastien says that the minister never manages to answer and that he always runs out the clock. Guylaine said that he stalls for time and never answers my questions. Sylvie says that his total disregard for us and the way he treats us like idiots is unbelievable. This is what people are writing to tell me about this matter. Faced with such a case, how are Canadians supposed to trust a Liberal government? On August 13, 2024, the Minister of Finance and National Revenue met with representatives of Maritime Launch Services. The former Nova Scotia Liberal minister sits on the advisory board of Maritime Launch Services. I remember that Maritime Launch Services had signed an agreement with the Nova Scotia provincial government and, lo and behold, the former premier of Nova Scotia also sits on its advisory board. According to the Halifax Examiner, the former premier of Nova Scotia had written a letter of support on the company’s behalf even before the project had been submitted for an environmental assessment. Mr. McNeil was appointed to the Maritime Launch Services advisory board in 2023 after announcing his resignation in 2021. It is only natural to ask questions. How can anyone agree to a deal like that? Who signed that agreement? Someone accepted it; someone put their signature to it. There had to have been a point when the minister knew this agreement was going to be signed. When was he made aware of it? As MPs who are mandated to be the eyes, voice and ears of our constituents, we cannot accept this situation. It is our role to strongly call this out. What would make me happy is if the Liberal MPs who also just found out about this in recent weeks were as outraged as we are and said that this is unacceptable. After all, this money is coming from their constituents too, and they are suffering as a result. Canadians have worked hard for the money they send to us. They want us to recognize the value of every single dollar they send to us. The minister finds this funny. The minister just walked into the House and he finds this funny. We are talking about a land lease, minister, which you arranged for $20 million a year—”

• Off topic
  ?

  Speech on a motion

  Relevance 14 of 100

  None of this speech addressed the specific motion under debate.

  See full analysis →

“This space project is a scandal. The site was picked in a Liberal riding, and people with close ties to the Liberals lobbied for it and work on it. The head of the Canadian Space Agency was never even asked about the location. We will stand up for Canadians.”

“Personally, Mr. Speaker, I do not see the humour in the situation. What is funny, however, is that the site is located in a Liberal riding. The former aide to the Minister of Justice was a lobbyist for the project. The former Liberal premier of Nova Scotia sits on the advisory board. Furthermore, the president of the Canadian Space Agency has stated that she was never consulted about the choice of site. The minister told me this week that he wanted to introduce me to some astronauts so that I could understand why he had chosen this site. The president of the Canadian Space Agency was not consulted. I think that says it all. Everything is in place. This is a financial scandal, and on this side of the House, we will stand up for Canadians.”

• Off topic
  ?

  Speech on a motion

  Relevance 54 of 100

  Only 10% of this speech directly addressed the motion under debate.

  See full analysis →

“We support the aerospace industry, but we oppose financial scandals. The government is trying to defend this scandal, and I will stand up for my constituents.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is pathetic to hear the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader speak. The parliamentary secretary is doing the Liberal government’s dirty work, which is indefensible. It is indefensible. We are not against aerospace development. We are against financial scandals. Now the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader is trying to defend them. I commend the parliamentary secretary for courageously doing his party’s dirty work. That is to his credit, but it does not reflect well on his party because, right now, this is a financial scandal, and we are going to stand up for our constituents.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 12 of 100

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

  See full analysis →
• Little substance
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Signal 35 of 100

  Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

  See full analysis →

“The government refuses to answer our questions in committee and in the House. This is especially true about financial scandals. It makes Canadians lose trust in politics.”

“Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague, whom I hold in particularly high regard and who lives in an incredible part of the country. This is sad. It is something we often say, for example during oral question period, which is aptly named. It is a question period, not an answer period. It is the same in committee. We ask questions, and sadly, we get no answers. There are Canadians who listen to question period and committee hearings. Unfortunately, all this does is fuel their cynicism about politics. People can clearly see that we are not getting any answers from the government. This applies even more in the case of financial scandals like this one.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →