Analysis · Question Period answer · beta

Sean Fraser

Liberal on Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship 2026-06-18

120 words · 4 sentences · 6 clauses

Replying to Michelle Rempel Garner (Conservative)

“Mr. Speaker, after a year, how can she put that falsehood forward in the House? People are getting sweetheart sentences in order to avoid deportation. There is a story every week. Section 34 of a law that she maintains, the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, requires them to be deported, yet she voted against a law that would close a loophole that prevents people who have been convicted of serious crimes from being deported. Why will she not stand up for people? Why will she not maintain an orderly system? She should be closing this loophole now.”

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 58%Reasoning 42%

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

Mr. Speaker, Claims · 51 wordsone thing that I think all members of the House will agree upon is that when a dangerous person commits a serious crime, they should face serious penalties. When that includes someone who has a temporary status, they could be rendered inadmissible in this country and should face deportation where appropriate.¹ Reasoning · 38 wordsThe Supreme Court of Canada has held that immigration consequences could be factored into decisions, ²but at the end of the day, the courts must maintain discretion to ensure that there is a fit penalty for the crime. Claims · 19 wordsWith the legislation we have put on the table, violent repeat offenders would face stiffer penalties in this country, ³Reasoning · 12 wordsand I hope all members can agree that is a good thing.

At a glance

AnsweredOf this answer, 100% addressed the question that was asked.

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 question asked.

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 · 3

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“could be rendered inadmissible in this country”Under Canada’s immigration law, a temporary resident who commits a serious crime could be rendered inadmissible to Canada.search
2“immigration consequences could be factored into decisions”The Supreme Court of Canada has held that immigration consequences could be factored into sentencing decisions.search
3“violent repeat offenders would face stiffer penalties”The government has tabled legislation under which violent repeat offenders would face stiffer penalties.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20