Main Estimates, 2026-27

The House debated the Main Estimates for 2026-27, including a motion to approve roughly $18 billion in capital spending for National Defence. Government members said the plan shifts money from day-to-day operations to priorities like defence, housing and infrastructure, pointing to reaching NATO’s 2% spending target early and a pay raise for Armed Forces members. Much of the debate centred on a $20 million payment to Maritime Launch Services for space launch work in Nova Scotia: government members said it builds Canadian space sovereignty and aerospace jobs instead of relying on foreign providers, while Conservatives said the company was financially weak before the payment and asked for documentation, arguing money was going to insiders. Bloc Québécois members criticized cuts to science and research funding, carbon rebate money paid by Quebec, and bills they said give ministers power to bypass other laws, and asked for a military reserve unit in Lac-Saint-Jean. NDP and some members also raised fraud affecting small businesses and banks’ responsibility for it, and some members used the debate to speak about their own ridings.Written by AI from the debate. Updated .

Official text (opens in a new tab)

106 statements

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“We should support this project because it protects our sovereignty and could create 225,000 jobs. The $200 million will build infrastructure so Canada can launch its own satellites into space.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it is a part of the future for Canada and our economy. As I said, it is estimated that in terms of direct jobs, we could be looking at somewhere in the neighbourhood of 225,000, if we can do this right. I believe we will get it right. As for the $200 million that keeps on being brought up, it is not for the raw land. The company has to build the infrastructure that enables us to ultimately see satellites put into orbit. That is what it is when we talk about the $200 million. It enables Canada to be able to say, “This is an important satellite, and we want it launched as a priority.” Right now, we do not have that capability. Many would argue that that is not right. That is why we have to continue to push this thing forward. It is about sovereignty.

Rhéal Éloi Fortin, Rivière-du-Nord

Bloc Québécois
“The government gives more money to seniors aged 75 and older than to seniors aged 65 to 74. I want the government to treat them equally and increase pensions by 10 percent for seniors under 75. Why did the government leave them out?”
  • Question or comment in debate

    Relevance 0 of 100

    None of this question addressed the preceding speech or the topic under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, listening to my colleague, I can hear how enthusiastic he is about his government’s budget measures. I am listening to him tell us how great things are going and how wonderful life is. However, there is one thing I do not understand, so maybe my colleague can explain it to me. If his government is having so much success with the economy, why is it happening at our seniors’ expense? Why did the Liberal government decide a few years ago that seniors aged 65 to 74 should be treated less well than those aged 75 and over? It would not cost a fortune to fix this. The Bloc Québécois has been calling for a fix for years. As a gesture of solidarity, could this government recognize how much these seniors have contributed to the Canadian economy and boost their purchasing power to match that of seniors aged 75 and over? Could it increase old age security at the same time? The Bloc Québécois has been calling for seniors’ pensions to be increased by 10%, which is not that much. I would love to hear my colleague’s thoughts. Can he tell me why the government did that?

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“Our government promised to increase old age pensions for people 75 and older, and we kept that promise. Older seniors run out of savings and have higher medical costs. We should keep the promises we make during elections.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 0 of 100

    None of this statement addressed the specific topic under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, Canada’s former prime minister Justin Trudeau made a commitment, an election platform commitment, that we were going to increase OAS for those individuals aged 75 and over. We fulfilled that commitment. The argument that was used was that as people age, generally speaking, they use up their retirement funds and their medical costs continue to go up. There are other issues there. The idea of having a significant increase for those who are 75 and above was justified to the degree that Justin Trudeau made the commitment during an election, in an election platform. The member is criticizing Justin Trudeau and the government at the time for fulfilling an election platform issue. Whenever possible, we should try to live up to election platform commitments.

Marilyn Gladu, Sarnia—Lambton—Bkejwanong

Liberal
“Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador are the only places in Canada where we can launch these rockets. Launching them is critical for protecting our country. I want the member to speak about why Canadian sovereignty matters.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I know the Conservatives have brought this amendment to talk about the launching of these rockets from Nova Scotia and from Newfoundland and Labrador. My understanding is that those are the only two locations in Canada that would be acceptable for this purpose, and it is critical for our sovereignty. I wonder if the member could talk about the importance of things that matter for Canadian sovereignty.

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“I want the Conservatives to support the $200 million launch pad project in Nova Scotia. The ocean makes it a great location, and the province's Conservative premier supports it.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, if only the Conservatives had a member of Parliament from Nova Scotia, I suspect it might actually change their opinions on this issue. The hon. member is right in her overall assessment. My plea to members of the Conservative Party of Canada is that they look at it as an Atlantic Canada initiative. It is the best place to have a launch pad because the Atlantic Ocean is right there, which would be great to have for re-entry and so forth. This $200 million is not just for raw land. As I indicated earlier, one of the biggest supporters, alongside my colleague, is the Premier of Nova Scotia, who happens to be a Progressive Conservative.

John Brassard, Barrie South—Innisfil

Conservative
“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?”
Official Hansard

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?

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“The member should ask the premier of Nova Scotia about this. Working with Maritime Launch Services will help Canada control its own space industry. We are working with Manitoba and other partners on this project, and it is good for the country.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I would encourage the member opposite to, maybe, write that question and see how the Premier of Nova Scotia would respond to it. Here is an opportunity. Maritime Launch Services can provide, through a contract, a service that would provide Canada the opportunity to have space sovereignty. It is a viable opportunity that we are working on with the province of Manitoba and other stakeholders that is going to enhance our industry here in Canada to the benefit of all Canadians. I see that as a positive thing. The member should write the premier.

Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Lac-Saint-Jean

Bloc Québécois
“The government promised in the last two budgets to make stronger laws against forced labour. Now that plan is gone, and this budget does not have money for it. I want the member across the way to explain why he supports this change.”
  • Question or comment in debate

    Relevance 17 of 100

    None of this question addressed the preceding speech or the topic under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, my colleague on the opposite side of the House comes from a city that is home to the Canadian Museum for Human Rights, which is an extraordinary museum, by the way. The problem is that, in the 2023 budget, this government announced its intention to introduce much tougher anti-forced labour legislation. That same intention was included in the 2024 budget, but, suddenly, since the new Prime Minister took office, this intention does not appear in the 2025 budget. It has been abandoned. That means that today, we are voting on appropriations that do not include funds earmarked for strengthening anti-forced labour legislation. How can my colleague, who has the Canadian Museum for Human Rights in his own city, accept such an about-face by his government?

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“The Prime Minister stands up for human rights almost every day.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister supports and advocates for human rights on virtually a daily basis.

Iqra Khalid, Mississauga—Erin Mills

Liberal
“I want the member to explain why Canada needs its own way to launch into space, do research, and work with other countries.”
  • Question or comment in debate

    Signal 43 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
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity to go and see how we can work collaboratively in Houston with our own astronaut Jeremy Hansen. The member mentioned this in his speech, but I would like it if he could comment, perhaps, as to why we need the independent capability to launch, to work on research and development and to have access to space, as well as working collaboratively with other countries across the world.

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“Canada should control its own space program instead of relying on Elon Musk. Building our own space industry creates hundreds of thousands of jobs and lets us set our own goals.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate the question, because it is a great way to, hopefully, end the discussion on this particular issue. We have a choice. That is, do we rely on Elon Musk to establish Canadian priorities in sending satellites into orbit, or should Canada have its own space sovereignty, where the Government of Canada can establish the priorities and, at the same time, build on industries, whether it is our aerospace or space industry, which generates hundreds of thousands of direct and indirect jobs? I choose the latter.

John Brassard, Barrie South—Innisfil

Conservative
“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.”
Official Hansard

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.

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“Conservatives use the word corruption in almost every speech. I want to know if the member thinks the Conservative premier of Nova Scotia is also wrong for backing this project.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I often wonder if there is someone in the Conservative backroom who gives out a gold star every time someone on the other side mentions the word “corruption”. The Conservatives consistently try to incorporate that word into every speech they give. My question for the member opposite is this: Does he believe that the Premier of Nova Scotia, who is, as I pointed out, a Progressive Conservative, is wrong in supporting this project too?

John Brassard, Barrie South—Innisfil

Conservative
“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.”
  • 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
Official Hansard

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.

Yves Perron, Berthier—Maskinongé

Bloc Québécois
“Small businesses need fast government help so they do not close down. We helped save one business, but many others are still struggling. I want to know if the member supports our plan for a wage subsidy to help them.”
  • Question or comment in debate

    Relevance 0 of 100

    None of this question addressed the preceding speech or the topic under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I do not know whether my colleague was here earlier when I asked my question about businesses, but the Bloc Québécois believes that small businesses in Quebec and, of course, across the rest of Canada need direct, rapid, effective support to avoid going under. Over the past few weeks, we have seen furniture businesses closing down. I mentioned earlier that a very happy event took place this morning in Berthier—Maskinongé. The Duchesne et Fils plant in Yamachiche reopened after the company sought protection under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act. Thanks to the collaborative efforts of elected officials, we succeeded in applying pressure and making sure the company that took over had favourable conditions to make it work. I want to take this opportunity to recognize them and thank them again, along with the people at the business support centre, who had a major impact on this file. We succeeded in saving one business, but we are worried about other businesses that are closing down and about businesses that have not gone under yet but that are struggling. I would like to know whether my colleague supports our proposal for a wage subsidy to keep the economic fabric of our regions from unravelling.

John Brassard, Barrie South—Innisfil

Conservative
“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.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 0 of 100

    None of this statement addressed the specific topic under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

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—

Arnold Viersen, Peace River—Westlock

Conservative
“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.”
Official Hansard

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.

John Brassard, Barrie South—Innisfil

Conservative
“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.”
Official Hansard

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.

Eric Lefebvre, Richmond—Arthabaska

Conservative
“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.”
  • Speech on a motion

    Relevance 14 of 100

    None of this speech addressed the specific motion under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

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—

Eric Lefebvre, Richmond—Arthabaska

Conservative

Linked statement

“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.”
  • Speech on a motion

    Relevance 54 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

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.

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 131

  1. Private Members' Business The Criminal Code 6 statements
  2. Government Orders Business of Supply 68 statements
  3. Oral Questions The Economy 12 statements
  4. Oral Questions Canadian Identity and Culture 6 statements
  5. Oral Questions The Economy 14 statements
  6. Oral Questions Health 4 statements
  7. Oral Questions The Economy 10 statements
  8. Oral Questions Youth 2 statements
  9. Oral Questions The Economy 10 statements
  10. Oral Questions Health 8 statements
  11. Oral Questions Public Safety 6 statements
  12. Oral Questions Indigenous Affairs 2 statements
  13. Oral Questions Employment 4 statements
  14. Oral Questions The Economy 2 statements
  15. Government Orders Business of Supply 38 statements
  16. Government Orders Business of Supply 28 statements
  17. Government Orders Main Estimates, 2026-27 106 statements
  18. Government Orders Supplementary Estimates (A), 2026‑27 7 statements
  19. Government Orders Government Orders 5 statements
  20. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  21. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements