Madam Speaker, when families in Beauce sit down to make their budget, they naturally begin with the essentials: groceries, housing, electricity, car payments, school supplies, clothing and all the other basic necessities. Then they look at what is left in their wallet and, unfortunately, they are forced to make choices. There are always choices to be made. They may have to postpone a repair, delay a purchase or cut back in one area simply to make ends meet in another.
Meanwhile, in Ottawa, the Liberals are asking Parliament to approve a costly space launch bill that will grant the minister broader powers that could ultimately increase the burden on taxpayers. The Liberals talk about ambition. I want to talk about accountability. Before asking Canadians to finance its ambitions in space, the government should first confront the realities here on Earth. The people of Beauce work hard for every dollar they earn. They have a right to know how their money is being spent. More importantly, they have a right to ask questions before they are handed the bill.
Bill C-28 seeks to establish a legislative framework for space launch and re-entry activities in Canada. I believe that Canada has amazing engineers, researchers and businesses that are capable of doing great things. We can be proud of their work, and we do want to develop our capabilities, but an ambitious project must be based on sound rules. It has to pass a very simple test: Will taxpayers get good value for their money? Is the Liberal government managing the money properly?
Take the case of Maritime Launch Services in Nova Scotia, which I have mentioned here before. The government announced a $200-million agreement over 10 years to lease a specialized launch site and related services before even introducing Bill C-28. I repeat: It committed $200 million.
To understand why this announcement raises questions, let us come back to the issue that my colleagues from Richmond—Arthabaska—des-Sources and Montmorency—Charlevoix and I raised here in the House before.
The situation we described is based on observations made on March 21 by Marie Lumsden, a resident of Canso who went to the area with her camera. There is a gravel road, two shipping containers and a 25-foot-by-35-foot concrete pad. For reference, that is just about big enough to put a 21-foot trailer on. That is a striking image. Then there are the numbers. Maritime Launch Services, a company in which a former Liberal holds shares, is leasing the land from the Province of Nova Scotia for $13,500 a year. Those are the facts.
The federal government approaches this company with the great idea of leasing the property from it for $20 million a year. That is a fact, not a joke. Let me repeat, a company that leased the property for $13,500 is leasing it back to the government for $20 million. I see one of my colleagues laughing, but the worst part is that someone had the bright idea to sign a 10-year, $200-million lease for a bit of land with a 25- by 35-foot concrete pad on it. That tells us everything we need to know about the Liberals' financial management. Not a single business person in Beauce manages their money like that. If they did, they would soon go out of business.
Why are the Liberals more careless with taxpayers' money than a business person would be with theirs? Why are they not being transparent? We want to know the contract terms. Who set the price and evaluated the alternatives? Who signed the contract? Who is responsible? Was the minister aware? We all asked these questions. Who is responsible for this horrific expenditure of funds?
A minister can call it a historic investment if they want, but every dollar still has to be justified, and $200 million is a lot of money.
Ottawa has announced millions of dollars, while families in Beauce are counting every penny. That is why we are so keen to make sure public funds are managed properly. When families are having to defer necessary spending, they expect their government to exercise sound judgment before making new commitments. Families are not asking for handouts. They just want their efforts to be respected. People work hard. They are asking the government to respect their efforts and invest their tax dollars wisely.
Bill C-28 raises another question. What other financial risks could taxpayers be expected to bear in the future? The bill gives the minister the power to indemnify certain owners and operators for their liability to third parties for damage, when the minister deems it in the public interest to do so. It also makes it possible to grant certain exemptions and reduce the minimum amount of liability insurance an operator is required to carry. It is a bit technical, but behind these provisions lie two very practical questions: If things do not go according to plan, who will foot the bill and how much could they have to pay? Will taxpayers end up footing the bill yet again? Are we going to put yet another expense on our grandchildren's credit card?
Canadians need to know the bounds of the commitments made on their behalf. They are the ones footing the bill, after all. They need to know how much of the risk falls on the company and how much may fall on them. If government protection is necessary, the minister must be able to justify it. He must share the terms and conditions and be accountable for his decision. He also needs to explain how the risk is assessed before offering such protection. If the government intends to make taxpayers foot the bill when things go wrong, then it needs to explain the risks to them before signing the agreement. Exercising this kind of caution is a normal part of everyday life for Canadians, Quebeckers and residents of Beauce. It should be normal for cabinet too.
We also need to think about the businesses that would like to get involved in this industry. In Beauce, we are no strangers to taking risks. Sometimes business owners have to buy machinery, expand a plant, develop a product or seek out new markets. Before investing, they need to calculate their operating costs, purchases and expenses. Most importantly, they need to understand the rules.
My colleague from Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna raised this concern. When financial protections depend on a minister's discretionary decisions, different companies may find themselves in very different situations. What criteria will be used to determine whether protection is granted to one company and denied to another? How can a new operator verify whether it is being treated fairly compared to another company? The government must make these rules and criteria clear. A company must be able to plan its project knowing what requirements it will need to meet. Its competitors must be subject to comparable criteria. This is essential for attracting investment and enabling new players to establish themselves on an equal footing.
An entrepreneur should succeed through hard work and good ideas. He or she should not need a contact at the minister's office to secure contracts. Predictable rules instill confidence in businesses. Well-explained decisions and transparency instill confidence in citizens. The government has a responsibility to instill confidence in both of these groups.
The Liberals also talk about sovereignty. We agree this is a serious issue. Space technologies can be used for communications, research and, above all, defence. The Conservatives are calling for more explicit guarantees when it comes to national security.
Our demands are simple. First, the terms of the $200-million agreement must be made public. Second, clear limits on the financial risks borne by taxpayers need to be established. Third, the government needs to lay out the same criteria for all businesses so they can invest with confidence and be treated fairly. These are basic requirements when spending Canadians' money.
Personally, I would approach this issue with the same common sense that the people of Beauce apply to their own finances. Before spending money, we do the math. Before making a commitment, we read the terms. When using someone else's money, we have to answer for how it is spent.