Commons debates Conservative motion for Alberta pipeline to Pacific

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
   Natural ResourcesPierre Poilievre (Conservative) asked Mark Carney (Liberal). loaded question.Answer lists unrelated policy items instead of addressing the vote or flip-flop claim.The Conservatives need to eat the whole meal, not just the meat.
2. answered
   Carbon PricingPierre Poilievre (Conservative) asked Mark Carney (Liberal). substantive question.Answer directly rebuts the carbon tax on farms and food prices with specific data.there is no carbon tax on Canadian farms that emit less than 50 kilotonnes of greenhouse gas emissions.
3. deflected
   Natural ResourcesPierre Poilievre (Conservative) asked Mark Carney (Liberal). loaded question.Answer uses cricket metaphor to insist on unrelated policies rather than addressing the pipeline vote.as the Canadian national cricket team knows, we have to play the whole T20.
4. deflected
   Natural ResourcesPierre Poilievre (Conservative) asked Mark Carney (Liberal). loaded question.Answer pivots to claim credit on consultation while avoiding the motion and pipeline commitment.I would like to welcome the fact that to my hearing, for the first time ever in the House, the Leader of the Opposition has acknowledged the constitutional right of indigenous people to full, free and fair consultation.
5. deflected
   Natural ResourcesPierre Poilievre (Conservative) asked Mark Carney (Liberal). loaded question.Answer restates MOU components without addressing the alleged caucus rebellion or broken promise.the MOU between the Government of Canada and the Province of Alberta is about a pipeline.
6. deflected
   Natural ResourcesPierre Poilievre (Conservative) asked Mark Carney (Liberal). loaded question.Answer mocks motion size instead of addressing the pipeline versus carbon tax contrast.I do not think there is a limit on the size of motions.
7. partly answered
   The EnvironmentYves-François Blanchet (Bloc) asked Mark Carney (Liberal). substantive question.Answer states a choice for jobs and economy but does not specify environment versus oil shareholders.the government is choosing Canadians and the future of Canadians, which means good jobs and a sustainable and prosperous economy
8. partly answered
   JusticeYves-François Blanchet (Bloc) asked Mark Carney (Liberal). substantive question.Answer identifies the bill but does not state personal agreement with the justice minister on religious exemption.the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights is currently discussing possible changes to this legislation.
9. deflected
   TransportationYves-François Blanchet (Bloc) asked Mark Carney (Liberal). loaded question.The answer ignores the specific query on Charkaoui and lobbying, pivoting instead to general statements on truckers.We are working, and we will always protect truckers.
10. deflected
    Carbon PricingPierre Poilievre (Conservative) asked Steven MacKinnon (Liberal). loaded question.The answer sidesteps the carbon tax and grocery prices by mocking a prior topic and shifting to unrelated praise of farmers and projects.We were all bracing ourselves on this side for another one of the Leader of the Opposition 's lectures on wood.
11. deflected
    Carbon PricingPierre Poilievre (Conservative) asked Julie Dabrusin (Liberal). loaded question.The answer begins to simplify but cuts off without addressing the tax or prices, avoiding the question entirely.
12. misdirected
    TaxationPierre Poilievre (Conservative) asked Patty Hajdu (Liberal). loaded question.The answer attacks the questioner's climate stance and lists unrelated programs instead of addressing the taxes or grocery prices.the Leader of the Opposition has said he does not want to do anything about climate change and he wants to talk about imaginary taxes
13. misdirected
    TaxationPierre Poilievre (Conservative) asked Patty Hajdu (Liberal). loaded question.The answer accuses the asker of imagining taxes and pivots to listing government programs while denying the premise.There are no taxes on food, and there are no taxes on farms.
14. deflected
    FinancePierre Poilievre (Conservative) asked Wayne Long (Liberal). loaded question.The answer ignores the deficit and grocery inflation query, listing unrelated tax cuts and programs instead.We cut the tax for first-time homebuyers and continue to lean in on affordability, school food programs and automatic federal benefits
15. misdirected
    FinancePierre Poilievre (Conservative) asked Tim Hodgson (Liberal). loaded question.The answer changes the subject to a trade war and Alberta MOU, failing to address the deficit or food prices.
16. deflected
    Natural ResourcesPierre Poilievre (Conservative) asked Steven MacKinnon (Liberal). loaded question.The answer avoids the pipeline and caucus criticism by restating general support for projects and unity.The 170 Liberal members on this side of the House support a strong Canada, a compassionate Canada, and we are completely united on all of that.
17. deflected
    TransportationXavier Barsalou-Duval (Bloc) asked Steven MacKinnon (Liberal). loaded question.Answer lists government actions but ignores the specific accusation about Tej Dulat and donor influence.this Prime Minister is the one who called on the Canada Revenue Agency to crack down on Driver Inc. truckers.
18. misdirected
    TransportationXavier Barsalou-Duval (Bloc) asked Steven MacKinnon (Liberal). loaded question.Answer attacks the Bloc's request as interference in provincial jurisdiction instead of addressing inaction or donations.the Bloc Québécois is asking the federal government to interfere in an area under Quebec's jurisdiction to resolve this problem.
19. deflected
    Natural ResourcesMark Strahl (Conservative) asked Tim Hodgson (Liberal). loaded question.Answer pivots to carbon pricing and MOU elements without addressing the call to endorse a pipeline or cancel the tanker ban.The Conservative motion conveniently ignores strengthening industrial carbon pricing.
20. misdirected
    Natural ResourcesMark Strahl (Conservative) asked Taleeb Noormohamed (Liberal). loaded question.Answer attacks BC Conservative MPs and accuses them of ignoring their province rather than clarifying the pipeline position.for every single member from British Columbia on the other side of the House, I ask how they can support a motion that ignores British Columbia and British Columbians completely.
21. misdirected
    Natural ResourcesStephanie Kusie (Conservative) asked John Zerucelli (Liberal). loaded question.Answer shifts to listing infrastructure investments and attacks Conservative voting record instead of addressing the pipeline motion.They voted against building houses, voted against major projects and voted against opportunities for youth.
22. misdirected
    Natural ResourcesStephanie Kusie (Conservative) asked Maninder Sidhu (Liberal). loaded question.Answer attacks the Conservative leader's record and accuses him of dividing Canadians rather than addressing the pipeline commitment.He continues to divide Canadians and continues to play political games.
23. deflected
    Natural ResourcesBilly Morin (Conservative) asked Mandy Gull-Masty (Liberal). loaded question.Answer questions the motion's consistency on consultations but does not confirm support for the MOU or pipeline.Are they consulting or pushing projects forward?
24. misdirected
    The EconomyMelissa Lantsman (Conservative) asked Anna Gainey (Liberal). loaded question.Answer highlights Conservative votes against programs instead of addressing grocery prices or food bank use.They voted against meals for children at school.
25. deflected
    The EconomyMelissa Lantsman (Conservative) asked Anna Gainey (Liberal). loaded question.Answer corrects the tax premise then pivots to attacking opposition voting record instead of addressing food bank or grocery cost solutions.
26. misdirected
    The EconomyRachael Thomas (Conservative) asked Patty Hajdu (Liberal). loaded question.Answer attacks Conservative philosophy and reframes as sink-or-swim rather than responding to the call for a real solution beyond programs.if we listen to the Conservatives over there, there is no solution.
27. deflected
    The EconomyRachael Thomas (Conservative) asked Julie Dabrusin (Liberal). loaded question.Answer repeats support programs and shifts to climate change as cause of beef prices instead of addressing tax removal or dignity request.The cost of food is going up because of climate change.
28. misdirected
    FinanceJacob Mantle (Conservative) asked Ryan Turnbull (Liberal). loaded question.Answer ignores the grocery cost question and attacks the member for not supporting unrelated health infrastructure and homebuyer tax cuts.He should be ashamed of himself.
29. deflected
    The EconomyLuc Berthold (Conservative) asked Joël Lightbound (Liberal). loaded question.Answer dismisses the question as repeated talking points and lists programs voted against without addressing the Prime Minister's grocery judgment or food bank growth.To answer his question, it is even sadder to see my colleague vote against measures like the Canada child benefit or the national school food program
30. deflected
    The EconomyLuc Berthold (Conservative) asked Joël Lightbound (Liberal). loaded question.Answer repeats the list of voted-against measures and pivots to job creation stats instead of addressing food insecurity or inflationary spending.In November, 54,000 jobs were created.
31. deflected
    The EconomyRichard Martel (Conservative) asked Steven MacKinnon (Liberal). loaded question.Answer praises the member's coaching then claims no one wants program cuts, avoiding any response on grocery prices or food bank demand.What he may not realize is that no one in Saguenay is asking the government to eliminate the school food program
32. deflected
    The EconomyRichard Martel (Conservative) asked Steven MacKinnon (Liberal). loaded question.Answer again questions the meaning of inflationary spending and lists programs rather than addressing the food price report or family food access.After all these months, can someone tell us what inflationary spending means?
33. misdirected
    The EconomyLianne Rood (Conservative) asked Adam van Koeverden (Liberal). loaded question.The answer ignores the grocery cost question entirely and instead attacks the Conservative leader's record and attitudes.He is proud to vote against child care; he is proud to vote against school food programs, and he is so proud to vote against affordable housing.
34. deflected
    The EconomyLianne Rood (Conservative) asked Adam van Koeverden (Liberal). loaded question.The answer denies a tax on groceries but then pivots to mocking Conservatives rather than addressing food bank visits or policy impacts.Conservatives are very proud to vote against all the programs that support Canadians, but they could provide Canadians with just one solution to help them at the grocery store over this holiday season.
35. misdirected
    Carbon PricingKevin Waugh (Conservative) asked Buckley Belanger (Liberal). loaded question.The answer lists supposed opposition failures and ends with a personal threat instead of addressing the carbon tax or food bank question.However, their negative attitude towards Canada must stop, because if the Conservatives do not stop attacking Canada, I am saying today that I am going to take every single one of them off my Christmas card list.
36. misdirected
    Carbon PricingKerry Diotte (Conservative) asked Stephanie McLean (Liberal). loaded question.The answer reviews Conservative electoral losses and invents a Spotify analogy instead of responding to carbon tax or food affordability.In 2025, the Conservatives lost their fourth election in a row, spent Alberta's money on a by-election so they could say they created at least one job, invented imaginary taxes and presented a platform with no plan to support seniors or families.
37. partly answered
    Natural ResourcesDon Davies (NDP) asked Julie Dabrusin (Liberal). substantive question.The answer directly restates the Prime Minister's position on required agreements but does not clarify the conflicting statements across jurisdictions.the Prime Minister was very clear in the House.
38. answered
    The BudgetElizabeth May (Green) asked Ryan Turnbull (Liberal). substantive question.The answer explains the regulatory sandbox provisions in the bill as a means to reduce red tape for innovation.As part of that process, we are reducing red tape to broaden the use of something called regulatory sandboxes to help foster and spur research and development and innovation.