Analysis · Question Period answer · beta

Patty Hajdu

Liberal on Finance 2026-04-27

95 words · 7 sentences · 8 clauses

Replying to Melissa Lantsman (Conservative)

“Mr. Speaker, nobody thought it was possible to outspend Justin Trudeau, but here we are, with the same cast of characters sitting in the exact same seats saying the same thing. The Prime Minister doubled last year’s deficit and sent the bill to Canadian kitchen tables: the worst grocery prices, the highest household debt, the worst housing costs in the G7. Those are the actual facts. When Liberals doubled the debt, they doubled the food bank lineups and they doubled the rent, passing on the balance from the credit card to every Canadian family. Will the Prime Minister stop the credit card budgeting, or does he think Canadians can also just apply for a higher limit?”

Statement grade

30 / 100, held down by Relevance

A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.

Claims 17%Procedure 22%The question 54%Positioning 7%

This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.

Mr. Speaker, Claims · 16 wordsall across Canada, Canadians have been pulling together to make sure that we build Canada strong.Off point Procedure · 13 wordsI would challenge the member from the opposite party to ask herself this: ProcedureThe question · 51 wordsWhy is she voting against kids getting food in school?¹ Why is she voting against affordable child care?² Why does she vote against skilled tradespeople having the opportunity to fill their apprenticeship and actually get those great jobs?³ Why is she voting against investments in infrastructure, in housing and in water?⁴Off point Procedure · 8 wordsIt does not matter what solution we propose.Procedure Positioning · 7 wordsThose guys are against Canada and Canadians.PositioningOff point

At a glance

Lost points for
Didn't answerNone of this answer addressed the specific question that was asked.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 64

3 of 9 deductions are Signal

Signal checks whether every part makes a point, gives a reason, or asks for action. A low score means the speaker filled time with fluff, pleasantries, or attacks.

Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “I would challenge the member from the opposite party to ask herself this:”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “It does not matter what solution we propose.”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “Those guys are against Canada and Canadians.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 0

6 of 9 deductions are Relevance

Relevance checks whether the speaker stays on topic and answers the question asked. A low score means the speaker dodged the issue. Measured against the question asked.

Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “all across Canada, Canadians have been pulling together to make sure that we build Canada strong.”Praise of the government’s ‘Canada strong’ agenda, not an answer on the deficit spending asked about.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “Why is she voting against kids getting food in school?”An attack on the questioner’s voting record, not an answer on deficit levels.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “Why is she voting against affordable child care?”Another attack on the questioner’s votes, not on the spending asked about.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “Why does she vote against skilled tradespeople having the opportunity to fill their apprenticeship and actually get those great jobs?”Another attack on the questioner’s votes, not on the deficit question.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “Why is she voting against investments in infrastructure, in housing and in water?”Another attack on the questioner’s votes, not on the deficit question.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “Those guys are against Canada and Canadians.”An attack on the opposition as against Canadians, not an answer on the deficit.

Respect · 100

0 of 9 deductions are Respect

Respect checks whether the speaker argued with people’s positions and records rather than attacking the people: insults, mockery, or bad motives assigned to them. Criticism of what someone did, however strong, is not marked.

Nothing lost points.

Clarity · 100

0 of 9 deductions are Clarity

Clarity checks for plain speaking, clear ownership of actions, and honest limits on certainty. A low score means vague promises or evasive language.

Nothing lost points.

Claims · 4

This list shows the factual statements you can check for yourself: the words as said, and the claim restated to stand on its own.

1“Why is she voting against kids getting food in school?”Melissa Lantsman has voted against the school food program (a Liberal measure providing kids with food in school).search
2“Why is she voting against affordable child care?”Melissa Lantsman has voted against the Liberal affordable child care measure.search
3“vote against skilled tradespeople having the opportunity to fill their apprenticeship”Melissa Lantsman has voted against the Liberal measure on apprenticeships for skilled tradespeople.search
4“voting against investments in infrastructure, in housing and in water”Melissa Lantsman has voted against Liberal investments in infrastructure, housing and water.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20