Steven Bonk · TranslatePolitics.ca

Government Orders

Government Business No. 12—Proceedings on Bill C-30

2026-06-15

“Government borrows too much. This drives up inflation. High inflation is bad. I want you to say why the government keeps borrowing.”

“The government's taxes on every step of the value chain are driving up costs. People in your riding are struggling. Do the Liberals not understand this burden they're causing?”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, my colleague gave an excellent speech highlighting some of the affordability challenges that are affecting people in her riding and across all of Canada. I would just like to read a quote from Dr. Sylvain Charlebois, the food professor. He said: ...Canada does not have a food security problem. We are one of the world’s largest agri-food exporters. Canadian farmers produce far more food than Canadians consume. Our challenge is not food availability. It is competitiveness. Do the Liberals not understand that the taxes they put on every step of the value chain when it comes to production, when it comes to processing and when it comes to retail are driving up costs for Canadians? Maybe my colleague could expand a bit on how that is affecting people in her riding.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“The Liberals keep redefining fiscal anchors to make their debt look better. First they changed it to 'deficit-to-GDP ratio'. Now they want a sovereign wealth fund based on debt, so they can borrow more without hurting that ratio. I want my colleague to explain how this is just another case of Liberals moving the goalposts midway.”

“The government's own actions make food cost more, but I want them to feel bad about creating a program to help people afford to eat. I think the program should not exist.”

Oral Questions

The Economy

2026-06-10

“Hey, you're the one who's been attacking Saskatchewan for 11 years, not us. Under your watch, everything in your riding has gotten worse. You can't blame Conservatives for that. Food costs more, people can't afford to live, and now they're even getting scurvy! Your expensive policies are making people's lives miserable. When will you finally admit you're wrong and change course?”

“I'm pointing out that the economy is bad. People are having a hard time buying food. Even farmers are struggling. I think the government's expensive policies are making it worse.”

Government Orders

Business of Supply

2026-05-28

“I want to look serious about trade. I talk about these trade deals to sound smart. But really, why is the government risking a trade fight now?”

Statements by Members

Fuel Taxes

2026-05-28

“I want the government to remove fuel taxes, so farmers and truckers in my riding can afford to do their jobs and buy groceries.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, families across Souris—Moose Mountain are feeling the pressure every single day. As farmers work through seeding and ranchers care for their cattle, the costs of fuel, fertilizer, transportation and groceries continue to rise. After 11 years of Liberal taxes and antidevelopment policies, Canadians are paying more at the pump and more at the checkout counter. In rural Saskatchewan, fuel is not a luxury. Farmers need diesel to seed their crops. Truckers need fuel to move food and goods across the country. Things have become so expensive that even some farmers, the very people who feed and produce food for this country, are now being forced to turn to food banks. Food bank usage has doubled since 2019, and more Canadians are being forced to dip into savings just to afford the basic necessities. Conservatives are calling for immediate relief by removing Liberal taxes on fuel and permanently scrapping the clean fuel standard. The good people of Souris—Moose Mountain work hard. They produce the food that feeds this country, and they deserve a government that makes life more affordable, not more expensive.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Government Orders

Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act

2026-05-25

“You should say sorry for laughing.”

“I want to put the government on the spot about its accounting. Canada is the only G7 country that doesn't count provincial debt in its debt-to-GDP ratio. What would Canada's debt-to-GDP ratio be if we did it like everyone else? They're dodging.”

“I think the other guy's speech was bad. He talked about rights. I don't think he is doing a good job. Many people have problems. He should open his office. He hasn't opened his office yet. That's bad.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, we heard a lot in that speech. A lot of it did not make sense. A lot of it nobody on this side could relate to or understand. The member talked a lot about the rights of his citizens, and we know the citizens in his area are suffering an affordability crisis. We know they are suffering a drug crisis, a housing crisis, an affordability crisis, a revenue crisis and an income crisis. In his speech, he even managed to disparage Christians in this country. I have a simple question for him. If he is talking about the rights of the citizens in his riding, I think it is a right of every citizen to have access to their MP. When will he open his office? We are a quarter of the way through the mandate. He has been here a year and his office is still closed.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I want the government to debate our bill properly. The Liberals are not transparent. They shut down debates and go off camera. Even a reporter said they eroded transparency. Why are they afraid of scrutiny?”

Oral Questions

International Trade

2026-05-06

“I want to pump up how great our cattle ranchers are. I don't want a trade deal that makes them compete with cheaper beef. The government should protect them from imports.”

Government Orders

Canadian Space Launch Act

2026-04-28

“I want less power for ministers. More power for ministers is bad. It lets them pick winners and losers. It's bad for predictability. Predictability is what private investors want most. Democracy is in danger. The government is giving more power to ministers and taking away scrutiny. Canada had a good reputation. Now it's being eroded.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, we will even take a further step back from that. There are two things that private industry or private investors want more than anything. The number one thing they want is predictability. We have a system now where the government is not following its strict processes. It is allowing the ministers to pick winners and losers. We know that something is wrong. We have a democracy and we have a country like Canada that has had such a great reputation. I have had the great privilege of working all over the world and there was an open door wherever we went because we were Canadian and others knew that our system worked. We are seeing that eroded every day by giving the ministers more power and less scrutiny. This is a terrible slide in our democracy, as far as I am concerned.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“The government is spending way too much taxpayer money on this. The launch site should cost $13,000 a year. The government is paying $20 million! Someone made a lot of money off this deal. The taxpayer is paying way too much.”

“This bill gives too much power to ministers.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, they say that the best indicator of future behaviour is past behaviour. Let us go through a few examples. We will not talk about the space industry for right now, but let us talk about the oil and gas industry, for example. We passed Bill C-5 this year, which gave the government extraordinary powers to circumvent its own bills that it put in place that stopped oil and gas exploration in this country. That is another example of where projects could not get done. Nothing could happen without the government ministers hand-picking projects. We are seeing the exact same thing when it comes to this bill. We are seeing that the Liberals do not want to go through a proper process; they want the ministers to have all the power.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“The government's space bill gives too much power to ministers with too little oversight. It lets them make closed-door decisions that might help insiders instead of picking space projects on merit. We should be transparent and defend against foreign interference, not concentrate power or reward insiders while taxpayers take the risk.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, Canada stands at a crossroads in the global space economy. This is no longer just about exploration or scientific curiosity. It is about sovereignty. It is about national security. It is about economic opportunity in a rapidly growing sector where other countries are moving decisively to protect their own interests. Canadians expect leadership in moments like this, leadership that is transparent, accountable and grounded in the national interest. Instead, what we have before us is Bill C-28, and it raises serious concerns about who will control Canada's future in space and who will make those decisions. Canada has a proud and remarkable history in space. Under the leadership of John Diefenbaker, our country launched Alouette I, becoming the third nation in the world to design and build a satellite. We developed world-class technology such as Canadarm, and we inspired generations through astronauts like Chris Hadfield, Roberta Bondar and Jeremy Hansen. That legacy was built on trust and accountability, and it was built for all Canadians, not for the insiders behind closed doors. Bill C-28 would move us in the wrong direction. It would give sweeping powers to the ministers, who could decide who can launch, what can be launched and under what conditions. It would do so with vague definitions, limited oversight and broad discretion. In fact, it does not even clearly define what constitutes a launch. Instead of clarity, we get ambiguity. Instead of accountability, we get the concentration of power. When power is concentrated, transparency becomes essential. I want to share something from my own life. When I was a kid growing up on the farm, we had an old coach house, a small barn, that we had to move. I remember one day working with my father and his good friend. We jacked up that building and took off the siding. We had to replate it so we could slide some telephone poles underneath to make some skids. We had those telephone poles there and put another one across the front, chained it up and pulled the building with a tractor, moving it across our farm and setting it down in its new location. What I remember is that when I looked back at where the barn had originally stood, there was nothing more than a simple concrete pad. When I look at what is being described today as a spaceport in Nova Scotia, a gravel road, two sea cans and a small concrete pad, I cannot help but think of that farmyard. What Canadians are being told is a launch facility looks, by all accounts, strikingly similar to what was left behind when we moved that barn, yet we are talking about a reported $200-million lease over 10 years, a lease that was backdated, an agreement that describes the site as being capable of supporting orbital launches. Canadians are asking a very simple question: What launch site are we talking about? According to detailed reporting and first-hand accounts, all that exists is a gravel road, a couple of containers and a concrete slab. Nonetheless, this same project is being presented to investors as capable of supporting more than 150 launches per year. That is not just a gap between promise and reality. That is a credibility gap. Let us look deeper. The company involved has reported losses exceeding $47 million and revenue of just $15,000. The executive compensation for that company is approaching $1 million. What makes it worse is that the land it is on is Crown land, leased for roughly $13,500 annually, yet it is being presented as a multi-million-dollar asset, $14.8 million being the book value, I believe, if my memory serves me correctly. On any farm, in any small business and in any household across the country, those numbers do not pass the smell test, yet somehow in the House they do. Why is that? The concerns go much further beyond the numbers. The residents in the area, more than a thousand people within a few kilometres, have raised serious concerns about safety, environmental impact and the economic consequences to fisheries and to local livelihoods. They have spent years filing access to information requests, reviewing thousands of pages of documents and trying to be heard. What did they find? They found an environmental assessment process that many believe is inadequate and repeated requests for federal impact assessments rejected. They found that, even after years, key requirements for the project had still not been completed, and the regulatory framework for launches was not even in place, yet approvals and funding continued anyway. Let us think about that. We would be committing hundreds of millions of dollars to a project in a sector where the regulatory framework does not even exist. That is not leadership or competence, and Canadians have the right to question it. When we look at the broader picture, a troubling pattern emerges: a company with questionable financials, a project approved through a process many consider deeply flawed, lobbying and political connections appearing at multiple levels, and a massive federal commitment to taxpayer dollars despite all of these red flags. Canadians look at this and ask whether this is about the space sector or something else. Bill C-28 would take this kind of situation and make it easier, not harder, for this to happen. It would give even more powers to ministers to make decisions behind closed doors, reduce transparency, limit oversight and increase the risk that decisions are driven not by merit, but by access. Space is strategic. It affects our Arctic sovereignty, national defence and communications, yet this bill would not provide strong safeguards against foreign interference or influence or ensure robust national security screening. At the same time, Canada has a real opportunity in this sector. We have the talent, expertise and geography, but success requires clear rules, transparent decisions and investor confidence. Bill C-28 would risk undermining all of those. Conservatives support a strong Canadian space sector, innovation, investment and defending Canada's sovereignty. We cannot support giving the government a blank cheque, legislation that concentrates power without accountability or a system that appears to reward insiders while asking taxpayers to carry all the risk. Canadians believe in ambition and building, but they also believe in common sense. When we see $200 million tied to what looks like a concrete pad at the end of a gravel road, we know something is wrong. From Alouette 1 to today, Canada's space legacy has been built on trust. Let us not replace that with secrecy, insider arrangements and unchecked power. Let us build a space future that is transparent, accountable and truly in the national interest. Conservatives will stand for a strong Canada in space, a transparent government here on earth and a future that belongs to all Canadians.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Government Orders

Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing Orders

2026-04-27

“I don't like the other party. They've done bad things. I want my friend to talk more about why we shouldn't let them have more power.”