Analysis · Question Period answer · beta

Gregor Robertson

Liberal on Finance 2026-04-29

79 words · 6 sentences · 6 clauses

Replying to Mark Strahl (Conservative)

“Mr. Speaker, I understand why that minister would not want to talk about the past, given his horrendous record on housing in the city of Vancouver. It is the same old story with these same old Liberals. Even Liberal-friendly columnists like Andrew Coyne have finally taken notice, saying, “Canada’s New Government is no more interested in arresting our economic decline than Canada’s Old Government”. Canadians are maxed out. They cannot afford the same reckless Liberal policies of the last decade. Why have the Liberals doubled Justin Trudeau’s deficit, doubled down on costly credit card budgeting and forced Canadians to pay more for gas, groceries and housing?”

Statement grade

D–

42 / 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 67%Positioning 33%

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

Mr. Speaker, Claims · 12 wordsonce again, Conservatives are attacking former mayors like they attack current mayors. Positioning · 26 wordsThey have no respect. For leaders of our cities and towns, leaders of our provinces and territories, leaders of our indigenous communities, they have zero respect.Positioning Claims · 41 wordsIn my first seven years as a mayor in Vancouver, how much support did we get from the Harper Conservative government?¹ Zero.Off point This government is focused on partnering with cities, towns and indigenous communities and delivering the affordable housing we need.Partly on pointVague promise

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 · 62

2 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.

Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “They have no respect.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “For leaders of our cities and towns, leaders of our provinces and territories, leaders of our indigenous communities, they have zero respect.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 12

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 “once again, Conservatives are attacking former mayors like they attack current mayors.”An attack on the Conservatives over mayors, not the deficit or budgeting 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 “They have no respect.”A further remark about the opposition’s respect, not the question’s subject.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “For leaders of our cities and towns, leaders of our provinces and territories, leaders of our indigenous communities, they have zero respect.”Continues the accusation about respect for leaders, not the deficit or budgeting.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “In my first seven years as a mayor in Vancouver, how much support did we get from the Harper Conservative government?”Turns to the speaker’s own record as mayor under the Harper government, not 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 “Zero.”Continues the claim about past federal support, not the question asked.
Staying near the subject without addressing the matter at hand: what was asked, or what the bill, motion or speech is about.What the tags mean “This government is focused on partnering with cities, towns and indigenous communities and delivering the affordable housing we need.”About partnering on affordable housing, not the deficit or credit card budgeting asked about.

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 · 71

1 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.

A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible.What the tags mean “delivering the affordable housing we need”A commitment to deliver housing that names no measure, date or success condition.

Claims · 1

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“In my first seven years as a mayor in Vancouver, how much support did we get from the Harper Conservative government?”During Gregor Robertson’s first seven years as mayor of Vancouver, the Harper Conservative federal government provided the city zero support.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20