Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Lena Metlege Diab

Liberal on Business of Supply 2026-05-28

24 words · 2 sentences · 2 clauses

Replying to Melissa Lantsman (Conservative)

“Mr. Chair, the minister did not answer the question, so I am going to ask her one more time. Why was Mehdi Taj, the FIFA official, to whom she granted, or her department granted, a visa, allowed to come to Canada? It is a very simple question.”

Statement grade

–

Not graded

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

Claims 100%

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

Mr. Chair, Claims · 24 wordsthe IRCC and Public Safety Canada review each and every application at multiple stages.¹ As I have said, IRGC officials are inadmissible to Canada.²Partly on point

At a glance

Lost points for
Didn't answerNone of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 100

0 of 2 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.

Nothing lost points.

Relevance · 49

2 of 2 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 point put to the member, and the motion under debate.

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 “the IRCC and Public Safety Canada review each and every application at multiple stages.”About the application review process generally, not why this visa was granted.
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 “As I have said, IRGC officials are inadmissible to Canada.”Restates the general inadmissibility rule without addressing why Taj was allowed in.

Respect · 100

0 of 2 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 2 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 · 2

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“the IRCC and Public Safety Canada review each and every application at multiple stages”IRCC and Public Safety Canada review visa applications at multiple stages.search
2“IRGC officials are inadmissible to Canada”IRGC officials are inadmissible to Canada.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20