Analysis · Question Period answer · beta

Mélanie Joly

Liberal on International Trade 2026-09-21

82 words · 5 sentences · 7 clauses

Replying to Jason Groleau (Conservative)

“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister was elected on a promise to reach an agreement with the Americans. Today, that promise is in ruins. The unjustified escalation of the tariffs and retaliatory tariffs is causing our companies’ operating costs to soar. Norgate Metal in Beauce is already projecting $7 million in additional costs for its current contracts alone. Ultimately, Canadians are the ones who are going to pay the price. Can the Prime Minister tell us how much the retaliatory tariffs will really cost businesses in Quebec and Beauce?”

Statement grade

C–

56 / 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.

Positioning 43%Procedure 2%Promise 30%Claims 24%

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

Mr. Speaker, Positioning · 35 wordson all of these issues, what my colleagues’ questions clearly show is that they really think the government’s strategy should be to drop the retaliatory tariffs, admit defeat, accept a bad deal or give up.PositioningOff point Procedure · 2 wordsGuess what?Procedure Promise · 7 wordsWe are never going to give up, Vague promiseClaims · 20 wordsbecause these tariffs are illegal and unjustified, ¹and they directly target the industrial base in my colleague’s riding of Beauce.² Promise · 18 wordsWe are going show up for our workers and businesses.Vague promise In the meantime, we are going to fight.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 · 50

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 “on all of these issues, what my colleagues’ questions clearly show is that they really think the government’s strategy should be to drop the retaliatory tariffs, admit defeat, accept a bad deal or give up.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “Guess what?”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 26

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.

Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “on all of these issues, what my colleagues’ questions clearly show is that they really think the government’s strategy should be to drop the retaliatory tariffs, admit defeat, accept a bad deal or give up.”It attacks the Conservatives’ supposed strategy instead of giving the cost asked for.
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 never going to give up,”States the government will not give up, on the tariff issue but not the cost 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 “because these tariffs are illegal and unjustified,”Characterizes the U.S. tariffs, not what the tariffs will cost businesses.
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 “and they directly target the industrial base in my colleague’s riding of Beauce.”Says the tariffs target Beauce’s industrial base, but gives no cost to businesses.
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 going show up for our workers and businesses.”Pledges support for workers and businesses without addressing the cost question.
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 “In the meantime, we are going to fight.”Says the government will fight, on the tariff issue but not the cost asked.

Reasoning · 87

0 of 11 deductions are Reasoning

Reasoning checks for sound logic and solid support for any conclusion. A low score means the speaker made unsupported leaps or used weak arguments.

Nothing lost points.

Conclusions found · 1

Conclusion“We are never going to give up,”

Because“because these tariffs are illegal and unjustified,”

“and they directly target the industrial base in my colleague’s riding of Beauce.”

Reason given

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 · 63

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 “We are never going to give up”A commitment to persist with no actor, measure, date or success condition named.
A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible.What the tags mean “We are going show up for our workers and businesses”A commitment whose action is a metaphor with no measure or concrete step named.
A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible.What the tags mean “we are going to fight”A commitment to fight with no actor’s measure, date or success condition specified.

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“these tariffs are illegal and unjustified”The speaker claims that the current tariffs are illegal and unjustified.search
2“they directly target the industrial base in my colleague’s riding of Beauce”The speaker stated that the tariffs directly target the industrial base in the riding of Beauce.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20