MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT

Jonathan Rowe

Follow by RSS

Rowe presses for relief on the cost of living and for Newfoundland and Labrador fisheries: seven-day recreational cod fishing, permanent fuel-tax cuts, and a stop to French snow crab quotas off the coast. He argues by wandering into asides and stories, from “to infinity and beyond” to a family that could never dream of paying $300 for a meal. He also presses the government on spending, deficits and waste.Written by AI from their statements. Updated .

Average grade
B+
84 / 100 over 32 statements
Signal 75 / 100
Relevance 77 / 100
Respect 97 / 100
Clarity 95 / 100
Loses points more than most for A remark off to the side of the point.2.5 times as often as most members.What the tags mean ×2.5 A story that illustrates instead of making a point.2.3 times as often as most members.What the tags mean ×2.3 Greetings and pleasantries.2 times as often as most members.What the tags mean ×2.0 Loses points less than most for Thanks and tributes.Less often than most members.What the tags mean A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible.Less often than most members.What the tags mean Averaged over the 32 of 36 statements graded so far.

Statements 36

Government Orders ·

Main Estimates, 2026-27

In response to a question from Gérard Deltell

“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.”
  • 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, 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.

In response to a question from Rhéal Éloi Fortin

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

    Relevance 0 of 100

    None of this statement addressed the specific topic under debate.

    See full analysis
  • 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
Official Hansard

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.

In response to a question from Kevin Lamoureux

“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.”
  • 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, 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.

In response to a question from Dan Albas

“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.”
Official Hansard

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.

Oral Questions ·

The Economy

“Many people have lost their jobs, debt is high, and money is leaving Canada. The government needs to admit its economic plans are not working.”
  • Opposition question in Question Period

    Respect 65 of 100

    This statement targeted a person rather than their actions or views: “whatever the Prime Minister is pretending to do”.

    See full analysis
  • A repeated line

    “Canadian households now carry the highest debt in the G7.”

    Said 4 times by 2 members since June 2.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I do not think those words are very comforting to the apprentices or to the 112,000 people who lost their job in the past three months. Mortgage defaults are growing year over year. Canadian households have the highest debt in the G7. Insolvencies hit their highest level since 2009. Twenty billion dollars has fled this country. How much more data does the government need before it realizes that whatever the Prime Minister is pretending to do is not working?

“Canada's economy has shrunk for three quarters, which means we are in a recession. More small businesses are closing than opening. I want the government to admit its policies caused this recession.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, a recession is two consecutive quarters of economic decline. The Prime Minister has had three of his four quarters in decline. That puts Canada as the only G7 country in recession. While the Liberals are in denial, the facts do not lie. There are more small businesses in Canada closing than opening. More than half of small business owners do not recommend opening a business. When will the Liberals at least admit that their policies put Canada into a recession?

Government Orders ·

Business of Supply

“These rules would apply to YouTube, which regular people and artists use to share videos. Where does the government draw the line? Will adult video sites be ignored while YouTube gets regulated and taxed?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, if I understand correctly, these rules would even apply to YouTube, a website that provides one of the easiest avenues for Canadian artists to put their skills, talents and content on display. It is basically a website on which common folks can post their content. Where would the bill start, and where would it end? Where would the Liberals draw the lines? Are we going to start taxing all websites that have videos on them? This is my question: Where would the porn streaming sites fall under the bill? Would adult films be left out, unregulated and untaxed, while YouTube is regulated and taxed?

“People talk a lot about Donald Trump and tariffs. Does the member think this is meant to fight back against Trump's tariffs, or not?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, there is a lot of talk about Donald Trump and tariffs. There was a lot of talking during the campaign about potential retaliation tariffs. Do the NDP and the member across the way view this as a retaliation tariff to Trump, or is this simply something that we are doing that is not a retaliation tariff?

Oral Questions ·

Fisheries and Oceans

“The Prime Minister made a bad deal with China. It only protected two types of seafood from high taxes, leaving other Canadian seafood workers at risk. I want him to meet these workers and explain his deal to them.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, after the Prime Minister took office, China announced a 25% tariff on Canadian seafood. A few months later, I was sitting right here listening to the Liberals brag about how they sold out the automotive industry, allowing thousands of Chinese spy cars onto our streets, to save the seafood industry, but that deal covered only two species. Other seafoods, including sea cucumber, are still at 25% tariffs. Will the Prime Minister go to the wharves and speak with the Canadians whose jobs are at risk to justify this fishy deal?

Oral Questions ·

Finance

“The Liberals spend too much money, and it causes inflation. Food and rent keep getting more expensive. The government cannot fix the economy by borrowing more money.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I was talking about deficits, not fish, but spend, spend, spend is all the Liberals want to do. They cannot spend their way out of inflation. We would think the Prime Minister would have learned that when he wrongfully predicted that COVID spending would actually lead to deflation, but reports are showing that households are still spending more, year over year, on food. Rent is going up year over year. Everything in this country has doubled in the costly Liberal decade. How many more reports do the Liberals need to see before they realize they cannot build a country, an affordable economy, on credit card debt?

“The new budget spends too much money and doubles the deficit. People want life to be affordable. When will the government control its spending?”
  • Opposition question in Question Period

    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
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, there is nothing worse than going to the post office and looking forward to a friendly letter but getting nothing but a dreaded credit card bill. That is exactly how the federal budget went. Canadians thought they were going to get a responsible budget from a new government. Instead, they were hit with a costly credit card bill. The only thing new was that they doubled Justin Trudeau’s deficit. Canadians do not want a double-double deficit. They want to be able to afford a double-double coffee. When will the Liberals get spending under control?

Adjournment Proceedings ·

Adjournment Proceedings

“The government spends too much and taxes too much, which makes life more expensive. We should cut taxes on diesel by 25 cents to lower costs for Canadians. We can pay for this cut with the money Canada makes from selling oil and gas.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, the government cannot tax itself into prosperity and it cannot spend its way out of inflation. That is what is very frustrating, because both of these approaches seem to be what this government keeps trying to do. It is so upside down and backwards. Four cents on diesel is almost a joke. The government is probably getting more than four cents on the GST because of the price increase. It is almost a joke. Diesel is what ships our food. It is what ships all the products in Canada. In a lot of ways, it is almost the core of the Canadian economy. The Conservatives wanted to take 25¢ off, to take it all off and reduce all those taxes to give people at home a break. We could offset those costs with all the royalties that Canada is getting from our oil and gas while supplying our allies with some of the best oil and gas in the world.

“The government is spending too much money. This spending causes high inflation, higher interest rates, and higher rents. The Liberals blame outside events instead of taking responsibility for making life less affordable.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I am thankful for the privilege to speak here today. A few weeks ago, I asked a question in the House about affordability. The premise of that question was that under Trudeau, there was a lot of spending, and inflation went up, and then a new Prime Minister came along, promised to run on affordability, had a banker’s resume and was going to fix the country and bring down inflation. Unfortunately, we actually see a budget that is spending more than Justin Trudeau. It is so disappointing to see that. I think some Canadians are starting to feel duped now that these budgets are out. Inflation is caused by printing money, essentially. The more money there is in the system, and the goods remain the same, the more cost it is per good. This is what our Conservative leader was talking about. Just before COVID, and during Trudeau’s big spending frenzy, our Conservative leader kept talking over and over about how the more we spend, the more inflation goes up and the more interest goes up. What happened? Interest went up. People’s mortgages have gone up because of it. Rents have gone up because of it. Rents have gone up in Newfoundland 10% year over year, partially because interest rates are going up, and then we have inflation going up as well. It is very disappointing because people in Canada are making relatively the same wage. They are working harder but not getting ahead. They are working more and not getting ahead, because this government is spending more, and it is so disappointing. There is a graph in the budget on page 11 that shows how the deficit-to-GDP ratio actually increased after the current Prime Minister was elected. It has been a full year from when he was elected until now, and it increased significantly. It just blows my mind, as that is the opposite of what the Prime Minister campaigned on. A third of Atlantic Canadians are saying they cannot even afford to pay their bills now. Every time we point to the Harper decade and point to how Canadians could afford food back then, they could get by and perhaps even afford a trip throughout the world for vacation at that point, the excuse is always, “Well, oil prices were high. Times were good, oil prices were high, and things were great.” They do not mention that we were in the 2008 economic crisis. No, oil prices saved Canada. Okay, maybe that is true, but what is interesting is that now when we mention inflation, the Liberals will say, “Well, inflation is because of the war in Iran. With the war in Iran, the price of oil is going up, and so things are becoming more expensive, and inflation is going up.” Which is it? I mean, it is so frustrating. Canada does better when the price of oil goes up. We get revenues. The Canadian economy should be predicted to do better because of that. It is so frustrating to see this double, two-way argument. It seems like the Liberals are trying to blame everybody and anybody they can. First they blamed Trudeau, and then they axed him. Then they blamed Trump. Now that things are, “Oh, you know, who cares? We can’t talk to Trump,” they get to blame the war with Iran. This is what I want to know. When will the Liberals stop looking out their window trying to find a scapegoat to blame this inflation on, rather than looking in a mirror, holding themselves accountable and asking who was running this country for the past decade when inflation got out of hand?

Oral Questions ·

Finance

“Canada's debt has grown quickly under this Prime Minister. We now pay more on interest than on health care. I want the government to adopt a Conservative plan that spends less on debt interest and more on doctors.”
  • A repeated line

    “He is just another costly Liberal.”

    Said 6 times by 5 members since April 29.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, bankers make their money by having their clients enslaved to death, and the banker Prime Minister is no different. He is just another costly Liberal. They even said the quiet part out loud. On their graph, they show that Canada’s deficit-to-GDP ratio begins to skyrocket after the Prime Minister was appointed. Canadians now spend more money servicing the interest on Canada’s credit card than all of our federal health care payments. Will the Liberal government commit to a real Conservative fiscal plan that spends less on bankers and more on doctors?

Adjournment Proceedings ·

Adjournment Proceedings

“My bill does not create new fees for fishing. Recreational fishers take very few fish compared to commercial fishing and seals. The government is ignoring the seal problem and hurting local fishers instead of talking to them.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I guess I know why the parliamentary secretary was the one reading the answer, because I do not think any Newfoundlander would be brave enough to read that and then go home and face their constituents. It almost seems like the member completely ignored what I just said about my bill not introducing new fees. It is right here. It says the minister must “examine the possibility”. It was even in the minister’s hands. I put that in there. It is so frustrating. We talk about consultation. Poor old Uncle Joe and his little fish hooks are going to ruin the whole fishery. There are 2,500 tonnes that come out of the recreational food fishery and over 40,000 tonnes from the fishery. More fish are dying due to natural causes. One seal eats three tonnes. Way more fish are being eaten by seals, and that problem is something that the Liberal Party refuses to even talk about, let alone handle. It is so frustrating. I would like to know if the parliamentary secretary even went to Newfoundland and asked someone involved in the recreational food fishery on a wharf outside of St. John’s what they wanted to do.

“I want the government to let people in Newfoundland and Labrador fish seven days a week. Many families fish to feed themselves and lower their grocery bills, but bad weather makes it hard to go out on the only three days currently allowed. The Liberals voted against my bill because they claimed it would add new fees and fish tags, which is not true.”
Official Hansard

Speaker, it is a privilege to be here today and to represent the members of Terra Nova—The Peninsulas. I asked a question in the House about affordability. It seems that I come into the House and ask a lot of questions about affordability, oil and gas, and a lot of other issues, and the Minister for Fisheries seems to be the one to answer, so I was surprised she is not answering the questions I have tonight. I guess I will pose them to the parliamentary secretary. My question was about affordability. I was very disappointed that the Liberal government, including the four Liberals from Newfoundland and Labrador, turned down my private member’s bill to allow Newfoundlanders to fish seven days a week. It was very surprising and disappointing, because the proposed policy was not blue or red, Conservative or Liberal, but a policy for Newfoundland and Labrador. The situation in Newfoundland and Labrador is that our recreational food fishery is not just for recreation. We do not all go out just for the sport of it, although many do. It actually feeds a lot of our families. It feeds a lot of our struggling seniors and a lot of our young people. People with big families go out to participate in it. Right now, a lot of the time, because of safety issues due to wind, people with small boats such as 17-foot ones struggle to go out. It is hard to find nice days to go out to get fish when the wind is blowing, because our season is open only three days a week: Saturday, Sunday and Monday. It is very challenging to find good weather to get out to get the fish. What is frustrating to Newfoundlanders is that people in other parts of Atlantic Canada are allowed to fish cod seven days a week. We have the same limit of five fish a day, but they are allowed to get fish seven days a week. What Newfoundlanders want is fairness. In achieving that fairness, we would actually to be able to achieve affordability for the Newfoundland and Labrador folks who want to lower their grocery bills. What is interesting is that the Liberals voted against my bill because they said it would introduce new fees. I do not understand why they said the monitoring system would require tags, so I want to read part of my bill into the record. It states: Within one year after the day on which this Act comes into force, the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans must, in consultation with key stakeholders, develop a monitoring system to record, by species, the number of fish that are caught, as well as the time at which and place where they are caught. The minister had the choice to make a monitoring system, and she could have made it the way she wanted. The bill did not say “tags”. It never implied tags. What I had in mind, if the Liberals had listened to my speeches or brought this to committee, was to have it be very similar to a moose hunting licence. A person would fill out an application, voluntarily showing where and when they caught the fish. The Liberals also said that the new bill would impose new fees. I just want to read this: In developing the monitoring system, the Minister must (a) take into consideration existing models and best practices across Canada; (b) examine the possibility of covering the administrative costs of the monitoring system by fees and penalties that are required to be paid under the Fisheries Act; It would not introduce new fees but actually use the fees and penalties under the Fisheries Act that are currently there. It was very frustrating to hear these excuses. I am not sure why the Liberals were telling constituents and other people in Newfoundland and Labrador this. I do not know if it was because they were intentionally trying to deceive or if they just used AI in an attempt to find some excuses to convince the public that the bill was a bad one. I wonder why we cannot at least work together. Why did the bill not get sent to committee? Why could we not work together on the bill with respect to affordability? My final question is this: This summer, will the government open up the fisheries seven days a week so Newfoundlanders and Labradorians can have fish in their freezer?