Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Marc Miller

Liberal on Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2 2026-06-01

39 words · 3 sentences · 4 clauses

Replying to Jean-Denis Garon (Bloc Québécois)

“Madam Speaker, I understand that members want to debate the content of Bill C‑31, but I want to remind everyone that we are in fact debating a time allocation motion on this bill and the decision to allocate a specific amount of time for debate on it. I have a question for the minister. Why did we have to spend more than three weeks asking officials from the Department of Finance for a technical briefing on a 300-page bill of which certain divisions, like division 17 on air passengers, have nothing to do with budgetary policy? Can the minister please explain why, for three weeks, we were unable to ask officials questions in order to do our parliamentary homework? There was radio silence. The minister’s response was essentially that we should just read the bill ourselves, since we are a bunch of lazy bums. That level of arrogance is typical of this government. Personally, I am acting in good faith. I do read the budget document. We spend a ton of time on it. It is highly technical and legislative. We did receive a briefing from officials, but we only received it a few hours before the government imposed time allocation. I am therefore asking the minister whether he considers it acceptable that it took three weeks before we received a response to our request for a briefing and that his government imposed time allocation right after that. I am also asking him whether, for future bills, he thinks it would be appropriate to provide the opposition with a timely response so that it can perform its work constructively and properly debate all the legislative issues involved in bills.”

Statement grade

A+

Average 100 / 100

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

Claims 69%Reasoning 31%

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

Madam Speaker, Claims · 27 wordsI would say that the answer is generally yes, but everyone has to be prepared for the briefing. All I was saying is that people can read. Reasoning · 12 wordsHonestly, three weeks to read 300 pages is not asking too much.¹

At a glance

AnsweredOf this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 100

Nothing lost points on 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.

Relevance · 100

Nothing lost points on 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.

Respect · 100

Nothing lost points on 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.

Clarity · 100

Nothing lost points on Clarity.

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

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“three weeks to read 300 pages”Bill C-31, the Budget 2025 Implementation Act, No. 2, is about 300 pages long, and the opposition’s request for a technical briefing from Department of Finance officials went unanswered for roughly three weeks.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20