Commons debates pay equity report as environment row erupts in question period

Other moments

Question Period, exchange by exchange

AI-rated Each answer’s rating (answered, partly answered, deflected, answered something else) is a model’s reading of the exchange. How the AI rates this

1. deflected
   Canada-EU SummitBill Graham (Liberal) asked Stephen Harper (Conservative). loaded question.The answer discusses unrelated travel plans instead of the summit agenda or climate change issue raised.I met with the leadership of the European Union earlier this summer and I hope to do so again at the next available opportunity.
2. deflected
   Canada-EU SummitBill Graham (Liberal) asked Stephen Harper (Conservative). loaded question.The answer restates travel plans and shifts to a different meeting without addressing the cancellation or trust issues.I am travelling to NATO for a NATO summit and I do not plan to extend that travel.
3. deflected
   Canada-EU SummitBill Graham (Liberal) asked Stephen Harper (Conservative). loaded question.The answer again focuses on travel and future meetings without explaining the cancellation or confusion on the environment.I do not plan to extend my travel in Europe.
4. partly answered
   The EnvironmentLucienne Robillard (Liberal) asked Rona Ambrose (Conservative). substantive question.The answer addresses the carbon market principle but does not clarify who is in charge or confirm Montreal's role.our government believes that any such system must be based on market forces for trading of credits with respect to greenhouse gas emissions and other pollutants.
5. deflected
   The EnvironmentLucienne Robillard (Liberal) asked Rona Ambrose (Conservative). loaded question.The answer points to legislation sections without addressing the contradictions or credibility concerns raised.I invite the opposition to read sections 27, 29 and 33 of Canada's clean air act, which allow for a North American trading system.
6. partly answered
   The EnvironmentMr. Gilles Duceppe (Bloc) asked Stephen Harper (Conservative). substantive question.The answer clarifies the emissions exchange possibility via the act but does not resolve the internal contradiction on who speaks for the government.The government is clear on this: industries, not taxpayers, will have to cover these costs.
7. partly answered
   The EnvironmentMr. Gilles Duceppe (Bloc) asked Stephen Harper (Conservative). substantive question.The answer addresses targets and timelines but does not fully reconcile the 2007 vs 2011 discrepancy.By 2011, we will have a system for the entire Canadian economy.
8. deflected
   The EnvironmentMr. Bernard Bigras (Bloc) asked Rona Ambrose (Conservative). loaded question.The answer refers to the act and North American focus without addressing international competition or lack of targets.I invite the opposition to read clauses 27, 29 and 33 of Canada's clean air act which provides for a North American trading system.
9. deflected
   The EnvironmentMr. Bernard Bigras (Bloc) asked Rona Ambrose (Conservative). substantive question.The answer discusses general market policy instead of addressing the promise about a single Montreal exchange.our government believes that any system must be based on market forces for trading in rights to emit greenhouse gases and air pollution.
10. partly answered
    National DefenceJack Layton (NDP) asked Stephen Harper (Conservative). substantive question.The answer addresses the equipment request and mission purpose but ignores the claim that it cannot be won militarily.Its view is that this equipment is necessary for the military to complete its mission, which as we know is not simply a peace and security mission but is also aimed at development in Afghanistan.
11. deflected
    National DefenceJack Layton (NDP) asked Stephen Harper (Conservative). substantive question.The answer avoids the cost discrepancy and instead attacks the NDP while restating support for troops.Whether the NDP is there or not, Canadians will always be behind our men in uniform.
12. misdirected
    Fisheries and OceansRobert Thibault (Liberal) asked Loyola Hearn (Conservative). loaded question.The answer blames Liberals for past inaction rather than addressing the 2050 timeline mismatch with fish stock collapse.a report put out recently certainly put everybody on notice that if we had kept going the way the Liberals were going, we probably would not have any fish left 50 years down the road.
13. misdirected
    Fisheries and OceansRobert Thibault (Liberal) asked Loyola Hearn (Conservative). loaded question.The answer insults the questioner about mixing portfolios and blames Liberals instead of addressing the 2050 action delay.it is quite evident that the minister is mixed up considerably between the environment and the fisheries.
14. deflected
    Fisheries and OceansMr. Pablo Rodriguez (Liberal) asked Loyola Hearn (Conservative). loaded question.The answer pivots to past Liberal failures and current leadership without addressing the risk of firing the minister.We saw absolutely no leadership, but we are seeing it now.
15. partly answered
    Fisheries and OceansMr. Pablo Rodriguez (Liberal) asked Rona Ambrose (Conservative). substantive question.The answer states targets and timelines but does not reconcile the minister's differing statements on urgency.We have set a very ambitious target. In fact, it is the same target that the Liberal leadership candidate he is supporting has said, of up to a 65% reduction by 2050.
16. deflected
    Canada-EU SummitMrs. Vivian Barbot (Bloc) asked L'hon. Rona Ambrose (Conservative). substantive question.The answer restates Kyoto compliance without addressing the summit absence or ambassador's statement.we will be meeting all of Canada's Kyoto protocol obligations, except for the Liberals' unrealistic targets.
17. deflected
    Canada-EU SummitMrs. Vivian Barbot (Bloc) asked Rona Ambrose (Conservative). loaded question.The answer ignores the summit postponement and climate accusation, pivoting to unrelated meetings and legislation.In fact, Mr. Speaker, we look forward to meeting with our European counterparts.
18. partly answered
    National DefenceMr. Claude Bachand (Bloc) asked Gordon O'Connor (Conservative). substantive question.The answer states disagreement with the British officer but provides no assessment from Canadian defence staff.that it may be the British officer's opinion, it is not necessarily ours.
19. misdirected
    National DefenceMr. Claude Bachand (Bloc) asked Gordon O'Connor (Conservative). loaded question.The answer dismisses the question by mocking the asker and the officer rather than addressing the NATO timeline.If the hon. member is around in 10 years he will find out that the colonel's opinion was wrong.
20. deflected
    Government AccountabilityMr. Mark Holland (Liberal) asked John Baird (Conservative). loaded question.The answer avoids the 44 violations by shifting to a demand that Liberals pass the bill retroactively.Would the Liberal Party agree to that?
21. deflected
    Government AccountabilityMr. Mark Holland (Liberal) asked John Baird (Conservative). loaded question.The answer ignores the apology and repayment demand, instead attacking Liberal senators for delaying the bill.Will the Liberal Party call upon the Liberal Senate to end the 140 day delay that we have seen in the other place?
22. deflected
    Government AccountabilityMarlene Jennings (Liberal) asked John Baird (Conservative). substantive question.The answer sidesteps reimbursement by again calling on Liberals to pass the bill in the Senate.The Liberal Party can ask the Liberal Senate to pass the accountability bill.
23. deflected
    Government AccountabilityMarlene Jennings (Liberal) asked John Baird (Conservative). substantive question.The answer refuses to repeat the promise or address repayment, pivoting to making the bill law retroactively.Let us make this bill law today.
24. deflected
    Canadian HeritageMr. Charlie Angus (NDP) asked Bev Oda (Conservative). loaded question.The answer claims compliance with existing rules but evades the conflict-of-interest accusation by pushing the accountability act.I have observed every rule existing right now.
25. deflected
    Canadian HeritageMr. Charlie Angus (NDP) asked John Baird (Conservative). loaded question.The answer pivots entirely to campaign finance reform instead of addressing the fundraiser or access issue.this Parliament has an amazing opportunity to change the way this city operates, to change politics and to eliminate the influence and the role of big money in politics
26. deflected
    Income TrustsJohn McKay (Liberal) asked Jim Flaherty (Conservative). substantive question.The answer reads supportive letters rather than responding to the constituent complaint or policy reversal.there are many letters and we have heard many of them, for example, from Thomas in Victoria
27. deflected
    Income TrustsJohn McKay (Liberal) asked Jim Flaherty (Conservative). loaded question.The answer again reads supportive letters and avoids the accusation of broken promises or constituent harm.Sue from Calgary wrote, "I am writing to applaud your decisive action in taxing income trusts
28. misdirected
    Income TrustsKaren Redman (Liberal) asked Jim Flaherty (Conservative). loaded question.The answer attacks the Liberal Party instead of addressing the reconversion policy or impact on ordinary Canadians.only one party in the House supports the notion that large companies in this country should not pay their fair share of corporate taxes and that is the Liberal Party of Canada
29. partly answered
    Guaranteed Income SupplementKaren Redman (Liberal) asked Diane Finley (Conservative). loaded question.The answer defends procedures and notes prior government rules but does not address guaranteeing cheques this week.I am surprised that the hon. member would be criticizing the department for following the same procedures that the hon. member's own government put in place
30. answered
    AgricultureMr. André Bellavance (Bloc) asked Chuck Strahl (Conservative). substantive question.The answer directly addresses program funding levels, changes, and total amounts being delivered to farmers.We have changed the way that the CAIS program is administered to get more money out
31. answered
    AgricultureMr. André Bellavance (Bloc) asked Chuck Strahl (Conservative). substantive question.The answer addresses the scale of investment and federal-provincial efforts in response to the subsidy and support concerns.During the last election, we campaigned on adding an extra half a billion dollars a year to the agricultural portfolio
32. partly answered
    Aboriginal AffairsMr. Gary Merasty (Liberal) asked Jim Prentice (Conservative). substantive question.The answer explains the agreement status and court process but does not address when or whether an apology will be offered.the agreement, as structured, did not call for an apology
33. deflected
    The EnvironmentMr. Wayne Marston (NDP) asked Rona Ambrose (Conservative). substantive question.The answer promotes general policy on industry regulations without addressing the specific funding request for the Stelco project.Our government feels that industry should take the lead on this, which is why we are introducing regulations that will push industry in the direction to make investments in their own technology.
34. deflected
    The EnvironmentMr. Wayne Marston (NDP) asked Rona Ambrose (Conservative). substantive question.The answer reiterates the call to support regulations instead of committing to funding the Stelco project.I would ask the hon. member to support real regulations for industry, which is what we are putting forward, to ensure that industry invests in the kind of technology that will reduce air pollution
35. misdirected
    Foreign AffairsKeith Martin (Liberal) asked Peter MacKay (Conservative). substantive question.The answer claims the prior government cut the program and ends by attacking the questioner rather than explaining the current decision.Why did the member opposite have his government cut the programs?
36. answered
    Points of OrderMs. Libby Davies (NDP) asked Jay Hill (Conservative). substantive question.The answer directly addresses the concerns about televised meetings and committee scheduling powers.committees are masters of their own destiny.
37. answered
    Points of OrderJean Lapierre (Liberal) asked Jay Hill (Conservative). substantive question.The answer explains the rationale for recognizing the guest despite the objection raised.I believe that Mr. Cherry is a distinguished Canadian.