House approves committee travel motions for studies on poverty, crime and Arctic sovereignty

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
   AfghanistanBob Rae (Liberal) asked Peter MacKay (Conservative). substantive question.The answer attacks the credibility of the testimony instead of addressing the request for a public inquiry.what is being relied upon here is nothing short of hearsay, second- or third-hand information, or that which came directly from the Taliban.
2. deflected
   AfghanistanBob Rae (Liberal) asked Peter MacKay (Conservative). substantive question.The answer continues to question the evidence's credibility rather than responding to the call for an inquiry.It is based on second- and third-hand information and Taliban information.
3. deflected
   AfghanistanBob Rae (Liberal) asked Peter MacKay (Conservative). substantive question.The answer focuses on discrediting sources and Colvin instead of engaging with the inquiry request.We are being asked to accept testimony from people who throw acid in the faces of schoolchildren and who blow up buses of civilians in their own country.
4. misdirected
   AfghanistanUjjal Dosanjh (Liberal) asked Peter MacKay (Conservative). loaded question.The answer pivots to quoting a third party to undermine Colvin rather than addressing the claim that the PM knew of the cover-up.I think what set me back is how serious the allegations are and how flimsy the evidence is
5. deflected
   AfghanistanUjjal Dosanjh (Liberal) asked Peter MacKay (Conservative). substantive question.The answer criticizes the opposition for seeking an inquiry beyond existing processes without addressing the call for one.members opposite clearly have no faith in the parliamentary process itself because they are calling for another process to get under way in addition to the Military Police Complaints Commission
6. deflected
   AfghanistanMr. Gilles Duceppe (Bloc) asked Peter MacKay (Conservative). loaded question.The answer promotes government actions and labels the inquiry call a witch hunt instead of addressing the reports to the PMO.
7. deflected
   AfghanistanMr. Gilles Duceppe (Bloc) asked Peter MacKay (Conservative). loaded question.The answer defends inherited arrangements and investments while dismissing the torture claim without addressing the PM's knowledge.To suggest that every single Taliban prisoner was tortured is not credible.
8. deflected
   AfghanistanMr. Claude Bachand (Bloc) asked Peter MacKay (Conservative). substantive question.The answer highlights gaps in Colvin's testimony rather than addressing the Geneva Convention point or inquiry call.Mr. Colvin himself admitted he had no first-hand evidence to give.
9. deflected
   AfghanistanMr. Claude Bachand (Bloc) asked Peter MacKay (Conservative). substantive question.The answer denies restriction but immediately shifts to attacking Colvin's credibility instead of resolving the testimony impasse.We are not restricting him from doing so.
10. deflected
    AfghanistanJack Layton (NDP) asked Peter MacKay (Conservative). substantive question.The answer highlights past actions and claims transparency but refuses to address the call for a public inquiry.To suggest somehow that this is being covered up, we have been responding to questions in the House, in parliamentary committees, in the media, at the Military Police Complaints Commission.
11. deflected
    AfghanistanJack Layton (NDP) asked Peter MacKay (Conservative). substantive question.The answer repeats past actions and dismisses Colvin while ignoring the explicit request for an inquiry into who knew what.Mr. Colvin's accusations are completely unsubstantiated.
12. misdirected
    AfghanistanJack Layton (NDP) asked Peter MacKay (Conservative). substantive question.The answer ignores the factual question on detainee numbers and instead attacks the asker for relying on Taliban evidence.quite frankly what is insulting is the hon. member continuing to take at face value evidence that comes, in most circumstances in this context, from the Taliban itself.
13. partly answered
    AfghanistanRalph Goodale (Liberal) asked Peter MacKay (Conservative). substantive question.The answer identifies the prior transfer agreement as the issue addressed two years earlier, directly responding to the evidence question.The short answer, Mr. Speaker, is the inadequate failed transfer agreement that was left in place by the previous government.
14. deflected
    AfghanistanRalph Goodale (Liberal) asked Peter MacKay (Conservative). loaded question.The answer claims action on multiple sources but evades why Colvin was promoted and attacks the opposition instead.
15. misdirected
    AfghanistanMarlene Jennings (Liberal) asked Peter MacKay (Conservative). loaded question.The answer refuses the briefing notes request and pivots to attacking opposition members and the Taliban.What is shocking is we have members opposite who are lawyers who want to completely ignore due process
16. deflected
    AfghanistanMarlene Jennings (Liberal) asked Peter MacKay (Conservative). substantive question.The answer discusses general encouragement of testimony but avoids any guarantee against retaliation toward Colvin.we encourage people to come forward when they have evidence to give.
17. deflected
    The EnvironmentMr. Bernard Bigras (Bloc) asked Jim Prentice (Conservative). loaded question.The answer corrects the premise and restates the plan without addressing good-faith negotiation at Copenhagen.what the hon. member is saying is incorrect.
18. misdirected
    The EnvironmentMr. Bernard Bigras (Bloc) asked Jim Prentice (Conservative). loaded question.The answer attacks the former Liberal government instead of addressing Quebec consensus or Alberta influence.We will never do what the former Liberal government did, supported by the Bloc, which was to fly over to an international conference, pull out of the air a target on the way
19. deflected
    Political Party FinancingMr. Michel Guimond (Bloc) asked John Baird (Conservative). loaded question.The answer highlights the Accountability Act and refers the matter elsewhere without addressing condoning the violation.it is this government that brought in the Federal Accountability Act, which brought more transparency, more accountability to government, to our agencies, to our boards and commissions.
20. deflected
    Political Party FinancingMr. Michel Guimond (Bloc) asked John Baird (Conservative). loaded question.The answer again refers the matter to the ethics officer without addressing complicity or double standards.Senator Housakos has sent this matter to the Senate ethics officer, an independent officer of the Senate.
21. misdirected
    The EnvironmentMr. David McGuinty (Liberal) asked Jim Prentice (Conservative). loaded question.The answer attacks Liberal inconsistencies on Kyoto and carbon tax rather than addressing Canada's Copenhagen stance.I will tell the House who not to expect anything from, and that is the Liberal Party.
22. misdirected
    The EnvironmentMr. David McGuinty (Liberal) asked Jim Prentice (Conservative). loaded question.The answer dismisses Liberal lectures and repeats past failures instead of addressing green stimulus or Copenhagen role.I am not going to stand in this chamber and take lectures from the Liberals on Kyoto and on Copenhagen and climate change, because they did nothing.
23. partly answered
    The EnvironmentScott Brison (Liberal) asked Jim Prentice (Conservative). loaded question.The answer corrects facts on China dialogue and states Canadian investments but does not fully explain the missed deal.We signed a clean energy dialogue with the United States shortly after President Obama came to office.
24. deflected
    International TradeScott Brison (Liberal) asked Peter Kent (Conservative). loaded question.The answer cites export growth and infrastructure spending without addressing China engagement failures or canola ban.Between 2006 and 2008 Canada's exports to China grew by over 33%.
25. deflected
    AfghanistanMr. Paul Dewar (NDP) asked Peter MacKay (Conservative). loaded question.The answer restates official positions on law and no proven cases but avoids addressing the cover-up claims or public inquiry request.First, there has never been a single, solitary proven allegation of abuse involving a transferred prisoner from Canadian Forces.
26. misdirected
    AfghanistanMr. Jack Harris (NDP) asked Peter MacKay (Conservative). loaded question.The answer attacks the questioner's legal credentials and changes focus to prisoner numbers rather than addressing the inquiry request.What is a charade, Mr. Speaker, is someone who purports to be a lawyer standing and saying that we should just accept evidence without any test, any process whatsoever that questions what is happening.
27. deflected
    Forestry IndustryMr. Robert Bouchard (Bloc) asked Denis Lebel (Conservative). substantive question.The answer quotes local figures on the mill closure but does not address why federal assistance comparable to the auto sector is refused.Produits forestiers Saguenay will monitor developments in the market in the coming months and may resume operations if there is a significant improvement in demand and prices.
28. deflected
    Forestry IndustryMr. Robert Bouchard (Bloc) asked Denis Lebel (Conservative). substantive question.The answer dismisses the question as disinformation and shifts responsibility to Quebec while avoiding loan guarantees.this is more disinformation, as usual.
29. deflected
    Government AppointmentsWayne Easter (Liberal) asked Mr. Pierre Poilievre (Conservative). loaded question.The answer highlights Transparency International rankings but does not address the broken promise on the appointments commission or specific patronage counts.It found that Canada, under this government, since we took office, has moved up from 14th to 8th place in the world.
30. deflected
    Government AppointmentsMr. Marcel Proulx (Liberal) asked John Baird (Conservative). loaded question.The answer pivots to campaign finance reforms instead of addressing the specific cross-funding and patronage appointment allegations.It was the Prime Minister who promised to eliminate the influence of big money in politics.
31. deflected
    Tax HarmonizationMr. David Christopherson (NDP) asked Jim Flaherty (Conservative). loaded question.The answer notes historical provincial decisions on HST but avoids admitting any federal role in pushing Ontario's tax increase.the harmonization initiative with the provinces started in the 1990s with Newfoundland and Labrador, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
32. deflected
    Tax HarmonizationMr. David Christopherson (NDP) asked Jim Flaherty (Conservative). loaded question.The answer again emphasizes provincial choice and history without engaging the request to free MPs to vote against the HST.This is an issue that is up to the provinces.
33. deflected
    Air TransportationJoseph Volpe (Liberal) asked John Baird (Conservative). loaded question.The answer avoids the accusation of duplicity by attacking the prior Liberal government instead of addressing current passenger rights policy.I noticed that the member who asked the question was a member of the Liberal government that was in power for 13 long years.
34. partly answered
    Business of the HouseRalph Goodale (Liberal) asked Jay Hill (Conservative). substantive question.The answer outlines the business schedule but inserts partisan criticism of opposition delays rather than fully addressing the NAFO debate request.I would point out to my colleagues that this bill has already received more than 30 hours of debate in the House and yet the NDP and the Bloc continue to delay the proceedings
35. misdirected
    PrivilegeIrwin Cotler (Liberal) asked Peter Kent (Conservative). loaded question.The curt reply dismisses the detailed privilege complaint by insulting the asker instead of engaging the substance.
36. answered
    PrivilegeIrwin Cotler (Liberal) asked Mr. Pierre Poilievre (Conservative). loaded question.The answer directly rebuts the privilege claims by presenting counter-facts on the Durban conference participation.The Liberal Party was in government in 2001 and willingly partook in the Durban conference at that time
37. partly answered
    PrivilegeStéphane Dion (Liberal) asked Jay Hill (Conservative). loaded question.The answer stresses the relevance of facts in the privilege debate but does not fully address the misrepresentation claim.it is important that some balance be brought to this discussion