Analysis · Question Period answer · beta

François-Philippe Champagne

Liberal on Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship 2026-05-29

93 words · 5 sentences · 6 clauses

Replying to Gabriel Hardy (Conservative)

“Mr. Speaker, Canadians like Noelle, Richard, Christiane and Aaron all ask me the same question: Why do asylum seekers, even those whose applications have been rejected and who should no longer be in the country, have access to free health care when taxpayers do not even have a family doctor? The interim federal health program has grown from $211 million a year to $1.5 billion in less than 10 years. Does the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship think it is acceptable to give free health care to non-residents while some Quebeckers do not even have access to a doctor?”

Statement grade

36 / 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.

Promise 39%Claims 22%Positioning 28%Reasoning 12%

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

Mr. Speaker, Promise · 12 wordswe are always willing to review the various programs currently in place.Partly on pointVague promise Claims · 20 wordsMy colleague should be reassured by the fact that we found $60 billion in savings across various federal government departments.¹ Positioning · 15 wordsWe understand that Quebeckers and Canadians have been tightening their belts for some time now, PositioningReasoning · 11 wordsand we need to do the same in the federal government. Promise · 24 wordsWe are always willing to find a way, to find savings within the government, to do more with technology and to improve our processes.Vague promise Positioning · 11 wordsCanadians know that we will always be there to help them.PositioningOff pointVague promise

At a glance

Lost points for
Didn't answerNone of this answer addressed the specific question that was asked.
VagueMuch of this statement used imprecise wording, lacked details on timing or responsibility, or made broad claims without support.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 66

2 of 11 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 “We understand that Quebeckers and Canadians have been tightening their belts for some time now,”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 “Canadians know that we will always be there to help them.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 6

6 of 11 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.

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 “we are always willing to review the various programs currently in place.”Offers openness to reviewing programs in general, but gives no answer on whether the health coverage is acceptable.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “My colleague should be reassured by the fact that we found $60 billion in savings across various federal government departments.”About government-wide departmental savings, not the interim federal health program or the coverage 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 “We understand that Quebeckers and Canadians have been tightening their belts for some time now,”About Canadians tightening their belts generally, not about asylum seekers’ health coverage.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “and we need to do the same in the federal government.”About the government’s own belt-tightening, not the health care question put.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “We are always willing to find a way, to find savings within the government, to do more with technology and to improve our processes.”About finding savings and improving processes generally, not the coverage 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 “Canadians know that we will always be there to help them.”General reassurance about helping Canadians, not the question on health care for asylum seekers.

Respect · 100

0 of 11 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 · 44

3 of 11 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 “always willing to review the various programs”A commitment to review with no actor, date, measure or success condition.
A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible.What the tags mean “always willing to find a way, to find savings”Commitment to find savings with no measure, date or success condition named.
A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible.What the tags mean “we will always be there to help them”An open-ended commitment with no actor, measure 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“we found $60 billion in savings across various federal government departments”The federal government has found $60 billion in savings across various federal government departments.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20