MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT

Buckley Belanger

Follow by RSS

Belanger champions federal support for Saskatchewan, defending programs like the groceries and essentials benefit while promoting local industries such as canola and uranium. He often addresses unrelated political records, arguing that “For 11 long years, we have seen no progress made by the Saskatchewan Conservative caucus” rather than answering the question.Written by AI from their statements. Updated .

Average grade
D–
44 / 100 over 33 statements
Signal 51 / 100
Relevance 19 / 100
Respect 98 / 100
Clarity 88 / 100
Loses points more than most for Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.2.4 times as often as most members.What the tags mean ×2.4 A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible.1.7 times as often as most members.What the tags mean ×1.7 Loses points less than most for Thanks and tributes.Less often than most members.What the tags mean Something stated as certain with nothing to back it.Less often than most members.What the tags mean Averaged over the 33 of 36 statements graded so far.

Statements 36

Oral Questions ·

Employment

In response to a question from Brad Redekopp

“A few years ago, the member for Saskatoon West started a petition to fast-track foreign students. He needs to tell the truth about his stance on immigration, because he is misleading either his voters or the rest of Canada.”
  • Government answer in Question Period

    Relevance 0 of 100

    None of this answer addressed the specific question that was asked.

    See full analysis
  • Government answer in Question Period

    Respect 73 of 100

    This statement targeted a person rather than their actions or views: “the member, he must clarify whom he is misleading”.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I want to point out that a couple of years ago the headline was that the Canadian Conservative Party had launched a petition to fast-track students. That was the member for Saskatoon West. He has to come clean regarding the immigration piece. When it comes to the issue for the member, he must clarify whom he is misleading. Is it the voters back in Saskatoon, or the people of Canada?

Oral Questions ·

The Economy

In response to a question from Rosemarie Falk

“Conservatives need to stop being negative and support Canada. Saskatchewan Conservative MPs did nothing for ten years. Our Liberal government has done more in one year than they did in ten.”
  • Government answer in Question Period

    Relevance 10 of 100

    None of this answer addressed the specific question that was asked.

    See full analysis
  • Government answer in Question Period

    Signal 24 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, it is very important that we protect and defend our country. All we hear from the Conservatives is negative. They need to stop talking down our country and start backing up Canada. The rest of Canada is doing that. We have seen, in Saskatchewan, for 10 long years, that those Conservative MPs sat on their hands, doing nothing. That is why the people of Saskatchewan are angry. At the end of the day, we come to Ottawa to work; the Conservatives have done nothing in 10 years. I have seen this Liberal government move more things in one year than in their 10 years.

In response to a question from Rosemarie Falk

“Canadian industries like canola, potash, uranium, and farming are doing well. The government will keep supporting these industries, protecting our workers from tariffs, and defending our sovereignty.”
  • Government answer in Question Period

    Relevance 45 of 100

    None of this answer addressed the specific question that was asked.

    See full analysis
  • Government answer in Question Period

    Clarity 29 of 100

    Much of this statement used imprecise wording, lacked details on timing or responsibility, or made broad claims without support.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it is time that we celebrate Canada. We have more good news. Canadian canola sales continue moving to supply the world, Canadian potash is needed everywhere and Canada will deliver. Canadian uranium sales to India are steady, and Canadian agribusiness is booming. We will continue doing what Canada needs. We will stand up for our industries impacted by tariffs. We will protect our workers. We will stand up for our sovereignty. We have a job to do, and we will get it done.

Government Orders ·

Business of Supply

“What qualifications does the member have to talk about the world economy? I want him to show me his degrees or studies. I also want him to show me a copy of the Conservatives' economic plan today. I do not think they have one.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I want to ask one very specific question. What are the member’s qualifications that determine his world economic view? I would like it if he could perhaps provide me with a list of studies that he has undertaken or degrees he has achieved. It is important that we take advice from folks who have a lot of knowledge, as our Prime Minister does, on world trading trends. We have often heard, for the last several months, about the Conservatives’ plan. Can the member give me a copy of their plan today that they have been talking about for the last two months? I do not think they have a plan. It is a made-up plan with voodoo economics attached to it. Can he give me a copy of their economic plan today?

Oral Questions ·

National Defence

In response to a question from Jeremy Patzer

“We will not take lessons from the Conservatives. They did nothing for 10 years. Since then, Saskatchewan farm revenue has doubled to a record $8.4 billion.”
  • Government answer in Question Period

    Relevance 1 of 100

    None of this answer addressed the specific question that was asked.

    See full analysis
  • Government answer in Question Period

    Signal 28 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
  • A repeated line

    “We will take no lessons from the Conservatives.”

    Said 9 times by 4 members since April 23.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, more Liberals from Saskatchewan are coming, so the cavalry is on its way. We will take no lessons from the Conservatives over there. Why? Because they did nothing for 10 long years. Since their absence from Saskatchewan to come over here and do nothing, what has happened back home? This headline reads, “Saskatchewan Value Added Agricultural Revenue Reaches Record $8.4 Billion”, which is twice as much as 10 years ago when you guys left Saskatchewan, so we will not take any lessons from you guys—

Oral Questions ·

Taxation

In response to a question from Rosemarie Falk

“Our economy is doing well. We are selling canola to China and uranium to India, and we are cutting trade barriers between provinces. We are also supporting Saskatchewan's economy.”
  • Government answer in Question Period

    Relevance 0 of 100

    None of this answer addressed the specific question that was asked.

    See full analysis
  • Government answer in Question Period

    Clarity 36 of 100

    Much of this statement used imprecise wording, lacked details on timing or responsibility, or made broad claims without support.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, there is more good news, as the Minister of Finance likes to point out. The good news is that canola sales to China are happening. Uranium sales to India are happening. Canada is eliminating interprovincial barriers. We are building a great Canadian economy. The best news is that we are standing alongside Saskatchewan to continue building the Saskatchewan economy.

Government Orders ·

Business of Supply

In response to a question from Caroline Desrochers

“The Conservatives need to stop trying to divide our country. We should work to bring Canadians together instead. Many First Nations leaders are already working to strengthen Canada, and we should follow their lead.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 0 of 100

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

    See full analysis
  • Reply to a debate question

    Signal 29 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, that is exactly the point. Why do the Conservatives bring up the issue in their effort to divide Canadians? I think it is more crucial at this time that we unite our country in as many ways as we possibly can. Somewhere along the line, somebody has to start talking about Canada’s interests, and I notice, as an example, with the Alberta northern chiefs, that first nations leaders have come forward and are defending Canada as a country. That is another example I would share with the assembly, because they are doing their part to strengthen Canada through treaties. There are a lot of great champions. The opposition should stop trying to divide Canada.

In response to a question from Alexis Deschênes

“The courts should handle this issue, not the House of Commons. The opposition needs to stop twisting the Prime Minister's words about private property rights.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 9 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the court system, not the House of Commons, should be dealing with this matter. All I am saying today, as a result of some of the discussions we are having, is to not misrepresent what the Prime Minister has stated in the House of Commons. That is why I have read, very slowly, three or four times, his exact quote about private property rights. It is not fair for the opposition members to start off their presentations trying to divide Canadians, misrepresenting what the Prime Minister is saying and not listening to nor defending Canadian interests over all.

In response to a question from Cathay Wagantall

“We should never make our military members fly in old airplanes that might be unsafe. We need to upgrade our military planes to keep our service members safe and protect Canada.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 0 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, we spoke about the value of Canada, and of course I spoke about my family’s service to Canada in the Snowbird response. With my brother having been a flight engineer with the Royal Canadian Air Force for 26 years, I think we should never put any pilots or any of our service members in older aircraft that may not be safe. I would also dare say, with all the information that we have agreed to in terms of strengthening and protecting Canada more, to pay attention to that perspective as well. The Snowbirds have the opportunity to showcase more of what they can do. The minister is absolutely correct. They have a great history, and they are going to always make sure they do Canada proud in many ways, shapes and forms. Modernizing—

“The Conservatives are trying to divide Canadians by saying this bill threatens private property. It does not. The government will protect private property rights and Indigenous rights at the same time.”
  • Speech on a motion

    Signal 32 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
  • A repeated line

    “We have always defended private property rights; we always will, and we will always defend the rights of indigenous peoples to build a Canada that is stronger, fairer and more independent.”

    Said 3 times by 3 members since May 5.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I have the incredible pleasure of serving as MP for a northern Saskatchewan seat. As an indigenous person within the House of Commons, I feel compelled to make sure we correct the record, in terms of what the opposition motion is suggesting. I want to point out I will be sharing my time with the member for Winnipeg North. Before I get into my presentation, I want to say that somewhere along the lines of discussion, it is important to call upon all our intentions when we talk about the country of Canada. I want to briefly expand on that notion before I do my critique of the Conservatives’ presentation. First of all, to clarify to all of Canada, and to the folks who might be paying attention to this particular debate, on May 5 the Prime Minister said, “The government will always defend private property rights. We immediately appealed the Cowichan decision. We have always defended private property rights; we always will, and we will always defend the rights of indigenous peoples to build a Canada that is stronger, fairer and more independent.” That is the Prime Minister of Canada being very clear as to the whole notion around private property rights as the Cowichan decision impacts some of those statements. I listened to the presentation by the Leader of the Opposition, and I reject the premise of his presentation because it is not intended to provide solutions to the problems. It is really intended to divide Canadians, in my opinion, for cheap political theatrics, and that is something that should never happen in the House of Commons. I want to point out that, from the whole perspective of Canada as a country, those who helped build this nation were the first nations, the Métis people, the Innu and many other indigenous groups throughout the land. We stood side by side through centuries of conflict and through centuries of negotiations but more so through centuries of sharing the land. From our perspective, I ask, “What is our responsibility to the country as a whole?” as we grapple through some of these issues that impact not only B.C. but Saskatchewan and Alberta. We see many good examples of how Canadians, first nations Canadians, non-indigenous Canadians, Innu Canadians, Inuit Canadians, Métis Canadians and non-status Canadians, many from my own communities, are trying to keep this country together. All of the discussions we are having here are about strengthening and uniting Canada, and that is an important point that I want to raise during this discussion. I listened to the presentation by the Leader of the Opposition, and all I see is division from some of the points he raised. On one hand, he is suggesting that we do not look at any other agreements of this sort. That is what I understood from his presentation. On the other hand, the member for Edmonton Northwest said we need to strengthen the treaties. How does that work? They cannot give the same speech with a contrasting view like that, trying to be everything to everybody, because, quite frankly, they will be nothing to nobody if they do not make up their minds on which perspective they want to support. I see a huge divide within the Conservative caucus. They say one thing on one hand, and they say something extremely different on the other hand. Sooner or later, Canadians are going to catch on to that. As I stand here today, I ask Canadians, who is looking after Canada’s interests, and why is it important to me as an indigenous person and to indigenous folks, whether we are from B.C., Saskatchewan or Alberta? It is very clear, as the member from B.C. mentioned earlier, that there is no threat to private property ownership in this bill. Why do the Conservatives want to make it out to be a threat to Canadians? It is because it is in their political interests. We can look at the Canadian perspective, as I mentioned before. I was raised in a household with a father who was a World War II veteran. He was Métis, and his mom was an indigenous woman. Every day when my dad came home from his service to Canada during the Second World War, he spoke about the value of Canada as a whole. As an indigenous person, he was proud to serve his country. Somewhere along the line, Canada’s interests need to be maintained in all of these discussions, through respectful dialogue and discussions among the many provinces that are impacted. I look at modern examples today of who is strengthening Canada. I reject the member for Edmonton Northwest’s notion that we are creating division. We absolutely are not. This government is working very hard to deal with economic reconciliation and to engage the indigenous community on many fronts. I dare say that I would compare our record on any day of the week to the Conservative record when it comes to indigenous rights, indigenous opportunities and the indigenous right to sit with us as partners in developing this great country. At the end of the day, there are many indigenous people across this country who are trying to strengthen our country in all kinds of ways. Many times I talk to the people in my riding about social and economic justice for the indigenous people, and we will achieve that as long as we have respectful dialogue between all parties engaged. In the Cowichan decision, as I mentioned, we will respect private property ownership. Now, I will go back to my father’s service to this country. It is a beautiful country. We had a number of family members serve in the military. They include my older brother who served as a warrant officer in the air force and my younger brother who served as a warrant officer in the army. I had a sister who also served in the air force, and my daughter almost joined the navy until her mother talked her out of it. The fact of the matter is that we come from a proud military history within my family. How did we get that service-to-Canada perspective? It came from our father, who was a World War II veteran who spoke about the value of keeping Canada together. He was one solid, strong patriot, and yet he was indigenous. If he saw the discussion here today, and the talk about dividing the country over indigenous rights versus private property rights, he would say to us that it is important to keep our country strong and together. Again, our Prime Minister has been very clear. For the record, I am going to read to the opposition his quote: “The government will always defend private property rights. We immediately appealed the Cowichan decision. We have always defended private property rights; we always will, and we will always defend the rights of indigenous peoples to build a Canada that is stronger, fairer and more independent.” Those are the exact same words that I think my father would say to us all. Let us make Canada stronger, let us make Canada fairer, and let us make Canada more independent.

“The Leader of the Opposition is wrong about our position. Our government will always protect private property rights and Indigenous rights, which is why we appealed the Cowichan court decision.”
  • Question or comment in debate

    Respect 76 of 100

    This statement targeted a person rather than their actions or views: “Why does the Leader of the Opposition try to divide Canadians and misrepresent our Prime Minister?”.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, we absolutely reject the premise of the Leader of the Opposition’s argument. I want to quote what the Prime Minister said several days ago: “The government will always defend private property rights.” I will say it again: “The government will always defend private property rights. We immediately appealed the Cowichan decision. We have always defended private property rights; we always will, and we will always defend the rights of indigenous peoples to build a Canada that is stronger, fairer and more independent.” Why does the Leader of the Opposition try to divide Canadians and misrepresent our Prime Minister?

Oral Questions ·

Finance

In response to a question from Kevin Waugh

“Compare our government to the Conservatives, not to perfection. We can build up Canada and Saskatchewan. Conservative MPs from Saskatchewan have done nothing for eight years.”
  • Government answer in Question Period

    Relevance 0 of 100

    None of this answer addressed the specific question that was asked.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I ask Canadians to not compare the new government to perfection but to compare us to the opposition. Our Prime Minister and our government have the ability, the credibility and the capability to build the country up, and Saskatchewan is in. In terms of comparison, I checked with what the Saskatchewan Conservative MPs have done. Year one, they did nothing. Year two, they did nothing. Year three, they did nothing. Year four, they did nothing. Year five, they did nothing. Year six, they did nothing. Year seven, they did nothing. Year eight, they did nothing.

In response to a question from Cathay Wagantall

“Saskatchewan has many resources and people to help build Canada. Do not expect our government to be perfect, but compare us to our opponents.”
  • Government answer in Question Period

    Relevance 25 of 100

    None of this answer addressed the specific question that was asked.

    See full analysis
  • Government answer in Question Period

    Signal 39 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, Saskatchewan is proud to be part of Canada, and Canadians know that Saskatchewan offers much: oil, gas, potash, gold, uranium, copper, people, energy and ideas. Now that we know we can all build Canada together, I remind Canadians not to compare us to perfection, but to compare us to the other guys. I have done some research on whether—

In response to a question from Cathay Wagantall

“I want to talk about what happened because of the spring economic update.”
  • Government answer in Question Period

    Relevance 0 of 100

    None of this answer addressed the specific question that was asked.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I want to point out that as a result of the spring economic update— Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

Oral Questions ·

Finance

In response to a question from Fraser Tolmie

“Our government has funded many projects for Saskatchewan, including housing, energy, and farming. Saskatchewan would be further ahead if it had not elected Conservative MPs for the past 10 years.”
  • Government answer in Question Period

    Relevance 0 of 100

    None of this answer addressed the specific question that was asked.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, there is more good news for Saskatchewan. Funding for the RCMP Heritage Centre is done. SMR research at the University of Regina is done. Defence procurement for Yorkton is done. Nuclear power opportunities and procurement services for Estevan are done. Housing opportunities in Saskatoon are done. Canola crushing in rural Saskatchewan is done. Let us imagine for a moment, if we had not wasted 10 years of sending Conservative MPs to Ottawa, how much further ahead Saskatchewan could be. That ends now.

Oral Questions ·

Finance

In response to a question from Rosemarie Falk

“Our government is getting results for Saskatchewan after 10 years of nothing. We made a uranium deal with India, we are selling more canola to China, and we are building new mines.”
  • Government answer in Question Period

    Relevance 0 of 100

    None of this answer addressed the specific question that was asked.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I want to point out that, again, from Saskatchewan’s perspective, it has been 10 long years with 14 members. It has been 10 long years, and there is nothing to show for it. We signed the uranium deal with India. Canola sales are improving and moving to China. We are building mines. We are building opportunity. Saskatchewan is finally here in Ottawa.