Liberals defend carbon tax plan against Conservative attacks 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
   The EnvironmentMr. David McGuinty (Liberal) asked Peter Van Loan (Conservative). substantive question.The answer ignores the question about Conservative plans and instead attacks the Liberal carbon tax.the way we are going to help Canadians cope with avoiding massive increases in energy costs is by ensuring that the Liberal Party does not get elected with its carbon tax plan.
2. deflected
   The EnvironmentMr. David McGuinty (Liberal) asked Peter Van Loan (Conservative). loaded question.The answer evades the question on European carbon taxes by repeating accusations of a Liberal flip-flop.the Liberal leader promised his party that he would not bring in a carbon tax, but that is not what we saw yesterday.
3. deflected
   The EnvironmentMr. David McGuinty (Liberal) asked Peter Van Loan (Conservative). substantive question.The answer sidesteps the question on economic leadership by criticizing the Liberal plan's details instead.in the tax plan the Liberal leader released yesterday, a tax plan he said he would never have, he does not mention one single ounce of reductions in greenhouse gases.
4. deflected
   The EnvironmentJudy Sgro (Liberal) asked Peter Van Loan (Conservative). loaded question.The answer avoids addressing Mintz's quote by claiming he is embarrassed and repeating the flip-flop attack.all I know is that Jack Mintz went on television last night to say that he had nothing to do with the construction of the Liberal plan.
5. deflected
   The EnvironmentJudy Sgro (Liberal) asked Peter Van Loan (Conservative). substantive question.The answer ignores the question on carbon tax efficiency by again focusing on the Liberal leader's past statements.It is nothing but a carbon tax trick and Canadians know that.
6. answered
   EthicsMr. Pierre Paquette (Bloc) asked Peter Van Loan (Conservative). substantive question.The answer directly addresses the question by explaining the minister's resignation and accountability.on the contrary, the member for Beauce , in this particular circumstance when he was found to have left documents in an unsecured place, tendered his resignation and took responsibility for that act.
7. misdirected
   EthicsMr. Pierre Paquette (Bloc) asked Peter Van Loan (Conservative). loaded question.The answer turns to attacking the Bloc and Liberals instead of addressing the listed ethics affairs.after listening to the Bloc member's question, it is now clear that the Bloc Québécois and the Liberals have decided to join forces.
8. partly answered
   EthicsMrs. Carole Lavallée (Bloc) asked Mr. Pierre Poilievre (Conservative). substantive question.The answer addresses the in-and-out investigation by claiming Conservatives wanted a broader study but does not confirm they will testify.in fact, it was the Conservatives who wanted a study of the election expenses of all the parties.
9. deflected
   EthicsMrs. Carole Lavallée (Bloc) asked Mr. Pierre Poilievre (Conservative). loaded question.Answer avoids the question on amending the act by attacking the Bloc's past position instead.Would my friend like to extend the application of the Access to Information Act to members' offices? I do not think so.
10. deflected
    The EnvironmentMr. Thomas Mulcair (NDP) asked Peter Van Loan (Conservative). substantive question.Answer endorses the existing plan but never addresses shifting from intensity targets to a carbon cap.It is a plan that is going to work and it is going to ensure that we see real reductions.
11. misdirected
    The EnvironmentMr. Thomas Mulcair (NDP) asked Peter Van Loan (Conservative). substantive question.Answer pivots to attacking Liberals on taxes rather than responding to the question on future generations and intensity targets.All the Liberals put forward yesterday is a tax plan.
12. misdirected
    The EnvironmentMr. Michael Savage (Liberal) asked Peter Van Loan (Conservative). loaded question.Answer attacks the Liberal carbon tax plan instead of addressing whether Suzuki and Drummond are correct.what is crazy is telling Canadians that the way we are going to solve the environment problem is with a plan that includes a raft of taxes
13. misdirected
    The EnvironmentMr. Michael Savage (Liberal) asked Peter Van Loan (Conservative). loaded question.Answer shifts to mocking ordinary Canadians' behaviour instead of engaging the cited experts on carbon tax.It is ordinary Canadians who are being insulted because the Liberal leader has decided that they need to change their behaviour.
14. misdirected
    The EnvironmentMarlene Jennings (Liberal) asked Peter Van Loan (Conservative). loaded question.Answer cites an old Liberal quote to attack the asker rather than addressing Quebec environmentalists' views.On November 25, 2006, a quote in The Toronto Star reads, it is "simply bad policy", he says of a carbon tax.
15. misdirected
    The EnvironmentMarlene Jennings (Liberal) asked Peter Van Loan (Conservative). loaded question.Answer attacks Liberals on taxes and past mistakes instead of defending the government's environmental plan validity.Once again they think the answer to solving Canadians' economic challenges is to massively increase taxes on everything
16. deflected
    Aerospace IndustryMr. Mario Laframboise (Bloc) asked Mr. James Moore (Conservative). substantive question.Answer claims rules were followed but does not address the specific issue of separating procurement and maintenance or Quebec spinoffs.all contracts awarded by our government, from the very first day it took office right up until the present, have followed all the rules and been in the best interests of all Canadian industries and all of the country's regions.
17. deflected
    Aerospace IndustryMr. Mario Laframboise (Bloc) asked Mr. Colin Carrie (Conservative). substantive question.The answer lists overall regional funding totals instead of addressing specific spinoffs or future tenders.The aerospace industry is doing very well in Quebec. To date, the following regional amounts have been announced by Boeing and Lockheed Martin: for Atlantic Canada, more than $294 million; for Ontario, more than $341 million; but for Quebec, more than $660 million; for western Canada, more than $341 million; and that is only the beginning.
18. deflected
    Regional Economic DevelopmentMs. Pauline Picard (Bloc) asked Mr. Jacques Gourde (Conservative). substantive question.The answer restates general policy goals without confirming any reversal of funding decisions.I can assure my colleague that all the changes made to Economic Development Canada are in the interest of the agency's mandate to encourage economic development.
19. misdirected
    Regional Economic DevelopmentMs. Pauline Picard (Bloc) asked Mr. Jacques Gourde (Conservative). substantive question.The answer attacks the Bloc's economic credibility rather than addressing the aerospace funding question.the economy remains the Bloc's bête noire.
20. misdirected
    Foreign AffairsMr. Mario Silva (Liberal) asked Peter Van Loan (Conservative). substantive question.The answer dismisses the question as silly and pivots to attacking Liberals on carbon tax instead of addressing transparency.Now we are back to where the Liberals love being, in the gutter asking silly questions about people's private lives.
21. deflected
    Foreign AffairsMr. Mario Silva (Liberal) asked Peter Van Loan (Conservative). loaded question.The answer reframes the inquiry as interest in private lives and avoids confirming any public inquiry.With the greatest of respect, this government does not believe that is what Canadians are interested in.
22. misdirected
    Canadian Wheat BoardWayne Easter (Liberal) asked Mr. Guy Lauzon (Conservative). substantive question.The answer questions the asker's consistency on unrelated issues instead of addressing the court ruling.During our throne speech, when we reiterated support for duel marketing for the Wheat Board, the member voted for it.
23. misdirected
    Canadian Wheat BoardWayne Easter (Liberal) asked Mr. Guy Lauzon (Conservative). substantive question.The answer counters with a question about the member's constituency focus rather than addressing rule-of-law concerns.The constituents of Malpeque want to know why their member has asked 32 questions on the Wheat Board and only 2 questions on any issue that has anything to do with P.E.I.
24. answered
    NAFTAMr. Peter Julian (NDP) asked Peter Van Loan (Conservative). substantive question.The answer directly confirms endorsement of NAFTA and explains its benefits without evasion.what we endorse is NAFTA because we believe it has been very good for Canadians as well as for Americans.
25. deflected
    NAFTAMr. Peter Julian (NDP) asked Mr. Gerald Keddy (Conservative). substantive question.The answer praises NAFTA benefits but ignores the call to reopen it for energy policy.NAFTA has been a great benefit to all three NAFTA partners, to Canada, to the United States and to Mexico.
26. misdirected
    National DefenceMr. Rodger Cuzner (Liberal) asked Mr. Laurie Hawn (Conservative). substantive question.The answer attacks the Liberal record and the asker instead of addressing the announcement timing or accountability.If he wants to talk about the dead of night, let us talk about the decades of darkness under the Liberal government.
27. misdirected
    National DefenceMr. Rodger Cuzner (Liberal) asked Mr. Laurie Hawn (Conservative). substantive question.The answer provides figures but pivots to shaming Liberals rather than addressing spending plan changes or damage control.The Liberals should be ashamed of themselves.
28. deflected
    Official LanguagesJohn Godfrey (Liberal) asked Mr. Pierre Lemieux (Conservative). substantive question.The answer boasts of the investment then attacks Liberals on carbon tax instead of explaining the funding source.The Liberals made their announcement on the famous carbon tax yesterday morning.
29. answered
    Official LanguagesJohn Godfrey (Liberal) asked Mr. Pierre Lemieux (Conservative). loaded question.The answer directly explains the program's focus on language rights protected under the Charter.our new language rights protection program focuses on basic language rights, the rights that are protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and our constitutional texts.
30. deflected
    Official LanguagesMr. Richard Nadeau (Bloc) asked Mr. Pierre Lemieux (Conservative). loaded question.The answer highlights funding and attacks the Bloc but does not engage the premise about French being under threat.This is a 45% increase, and we will continue to reiterate our support for official languages.
31. deflected
    Court Challenges ProgramMs. Nicole Demers (Bloc) asked Mr. Pierre Lemieux (Conservative). loaded question.The answer restates the language focus and other programs without addressing exclusions or the tone of the question.our government is proud of its new plan to support language rights.
32. misdirected
    Economic DevelopmentMr. Ken Boshcoff (Liberal) asked Mr. Guy Lauzon (Conservative). substantive question.The answer attacks the Liberal leader and pivots to past achievements and carbon tax instead of addressing FedNor cuts.it is interesting that this is the very first question, since I have been here on this side of the House in over two years, that has ever been posed about the situation in northern Ontario.
33. deflected
    JusticeMr. Pat Martin (NDP) asked Mr. Rob Moore (Conservative). loaded question.Answer avoids the Nortel case and white-collar question by shifting to general crime record.What I will comment on, as the session comes to a close, are the tremendous gains we have made as a government in protecting law-abiding, innocent Canadians
34. misdirected
    JusticeMr. Pat Martin (NDP) asked Mr. Rob Moore (Conservative). loaded question.Answer attacks NDP and Liberals instead of addressing white-collar enforcement or Sarbanes-Oxley comparison.it is really funny. Right now and around election time the NDP and the Liberals like to talk tough on crime, but when it comes time to actually take action
35. partly answered
    Citizenship and ImmigrationMr. Glen Pearson (Liberal) asked Mr. Ed Komarnicki (Conservative). substantive question.Answer explains the humanitarian process exists but declines to address the specific DePrato family case.there is no doubt I will not comment on a particular case, but I can say we have the refugee protection system that is a model for all of the world.
36. answered
    Points of OrderMr. Ken Boshcoff (Liberal) asked Mr. Guy Lauzon (Conservative). substantive question.Answer directly provides the requested apology for the earlier misstatement.I can apologize for misleading the House because it has been brought to my attention that in my absence, while I was gone one weekend on a Friday, apparently the House leader did answer two questions regarding northern Ontario, so I do apologize to the House for misleading it.
37. deflected
    PrivilegeMr. Charlie Angus (NDP) asked Mr. Ken Epp (Conservative). rhetorical question.The exchange is a point of order about committee speaking rights rather than a question that can be answered.the chair at this point made a decision that, even though I was going to speak, and I do not know how he knew what I was going to say and say something that he did not like, he was going to shut me off.
38. deflected
    PrivilegeMr. Charlie Angus (NDP) asked Mr. Pierre Poilievre (Conservative). rhetorical question.Privilege point raises committee conduct but does not pose an answerable question.I have before me some information that will be very troubling to you concerning the conduct of the chair of the Standing Committee on Ethics.
39. deflected
    PrivilegeMr. Richard Nadeau (Bloc) asked Mr. Pierre Poilievre (Conservative). rhetorical question.Statement calls for Speaker intervention on committee chair but offers no question to answer.it is the duty of the Speaker of the House in extraordinary circumstances like these to intervene with the chair and indicate to him that he has neither the right nor the responsibility to silence members of the committee with whom he disagrees.
40. deflected
    PrivilegeNavdeep Bains (Liberal) asked Mr. Luc Harvey (Conservative). rhetorical question.Member raises committee speaking rights issue without posing a question that can be answered.I had indicated to the clerk and the chair that I intended to speak on the debate, on the motion and on the various amendments that had been proposed.