Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Ryan Turnbull

Liberal on Adjournment Proceedings 2026-09-24

463 words · 26 sentences · 36 clauses

Replying to Warren Steinley (Conservative)

“Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to join in and ask for more with respect to the answer I received back in the previous session on affordability. I know my colleague from Whitby is going to respond to the question I am going to ask him. We have had a lot of good, partisan sparring back and forth over the years, for a long time. I am going to bring this down to a constituent level because I just received an email from a senior lady in my riding at 2:03 p.m. this afternoon. I am going to read this and talk about the affordability issues people are facing so we can have a conversation, on a real constituent basis, about what is going on in people’s daily lives. It says, “I’m 74. My husband is 75. We get nothing extra from the federal government. When I say ‘we’, I mean the seniors who have paid income taxes on all the money we’ve scrimped and saved over our working years while paying for our children’s child care and food. This money was to see us through our retirement years. All that hard work so we can enjoy our golden years was for what? We still have to scrimp and save so we can afford food and shelter. “The Liberals keep going on about how much they’ve done for everyone, including the seniors, so they can afford to pay for food. This is a lot of poppycock. They say, ‘Look at how many are registered for the seniors dental program.’ That is all fine and dandy, but how many of those registered actually qualify? This is the number that really matters. My husband and I are registered, but our combined income means we don’t qualify. If it was not for investments we saved for over 40 years, we would not be able to afford to retire. To make matters worse, the investment income is all taxable. “Sorry for the long rant. I just get so frustrated when the Liberals keep saying that they’re helping us but everything keeps going up and our income stays the same. Keep up the good work. Janet.” What I am wondering for Janet is— Some hon. members: Oh, oh! Warren Steinley: There is heckling from the other side, which is interesting. Mr. Speaker, she said they do not qualify for the dental program, if the Liberal members would listen to what I say. This is what the Liberals do. They dismiss what everyday Canadians are talking about and the issues they are facing. I want to ask this of my friend from Whitby, who I think is here for the right reasons, though we have different opinions. Every day in question period, the Liberals get up and say, “Oh, but there’s a dental program.” For seniors like Janet and her husband, because of their retirement income, they do not qualify, so they do not get anything. They are frustrated seniors who are not really seeing any of the benefit of these programs, but their income is being taxed, and that is going to pay for programs for other people. They are in a really tough situation. What would Ryan say to Janet right now?”

Statement grade

B–

Average 73 / 100

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

Aside 11%Thanks 1%Positioning 19%Claims 52%Procedure 3%The question 11%Reasoning 3%

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

Mr. Speaker, Aside · 51 wordsthe member for Regina—Lewvan and I have enjoyed some good partisan sparring, which is part of the sport of the House. I know that the member opposite is a good sport in that regard. We have had many disagreements, but we both respect one another at the end of the day, AsidePartly on pointThanks · 6 wordsand I appreciate him for that.Thanks Positioning · 51 wordsOur government understands that we are strongest when we take care of one another and we ensure that everyone has a chance to get ahead. That includes our seniors, but it also includes all of the population, and our government is really working to make life more affordable for all Canadians.PositioningVague promise Claims · 126 wordsI cite the groceries and essentials benefit that is helping 12 million Canadians with payments.¹ It was the GST rebate, as members will note, but it has been significantly increased. It pays out an average of $1,890 for a dual-income family, the average family, ²so that is not insignificant support. It is actually quite significant for many families. The amount to be paid is going to increase 25% over five years, beginning in July, ³and the top-up is indexed to inflation.⁴ This means payments will go out every year to match future increases in the consumer price index. This is just one of many things we have done. There is also the Canada child benefit, the Canada disability benefit, the guaranteed income supplement and many more. Procedure · 6 wordsThe member opposite mentioned dental care.Procedure Claims · 36 wordsWe also increased OAS by 10% for our seniors in a previous iteration of our party.⁵ Those are significant changes that have improved the social safety net in Canada and helped families right across the country. Procedure · 6 wordsLet us talk about tax cuts.Procedure Claims · 65 wordsThe first thing the government did under the current Prime Minister was an income tax cut for 22 million Canadians.⁶ We eliminated the consumer carbon tax.⁷ We suspended the fuel excise tax over the summer, ⁸and just recently we tabled legislation to extend that for another five months until January 2027.⁹ I am sure the member opposite can agree that those are tangible, cost-saving measures. Positioning · 39 wordsI know that his constituents did not send him here to vote against those types of measures and then stand up the next moment and claim that the Liberals are not doing enough for vulnerable people in this country.Positioning The question · 38 wordsCan the member opposite explain to his constituents why he votes against every affordability measure that enhances support for seniors, for families, for single mothers and for all Canadians, with broad-based measures that are cutting taxes for Canadians? Reasoning · 14 wordsIt seems to me that tax relief is something the Conservatives have advocated for. Claims · 14 wordsWe have only eliminated, suspended, cut and reduced taxes under the Prime Minister’s leadership. The question · 11 wordsWhy would the member opposite oppose tax relief for his constituents?Off point

At a glance

Lost points for
Echo ×7“Is it the Canada child benefit?” Said 7 times by 3 members.Every time it was said
Echo ×7“We cut the consumer carbon tax.” Said 7 times by 2 members.Every time it was said

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 49

13 of 25 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.

A remark off to the side of the point.What the tags mean “the member for Regina—Lewvan and I have enjoyed some good partisan sparring,”An aside: no claim, reason or ask.
A remark off to the side of the point.What the tags mean “which is part of the sport of the House.”An aside: no claim, reason or ask.
A remark off to the side of the point.What the tags mean “I know that the member opposite is a good sport in that regard.”An aside: no claim, reason or ask.
A remark off to the side of the point.What the tags mean “We have had many disagreements,”An aside: no claim, reason or ask.
A remark off to the side of the point.What the tags mean “but we both respect one another at the end of the day,”An aside: no claim, reason or ask.
Thanks and tributes.What the tags mean “and I appreciate him for that.”Thanks: no claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “Our government understands that we are strongest when we take care of one another and we ensure that everyone has a chance to get ahead.”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 “That includes our seniors,”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 “but it also includes all of the population,”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 “and our government is really working to make life more affordable for all Canadians.”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 “The member opposite mentioned dental care.”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “Let us talk about tax cuts.”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “I know that his constituents did not send him here to vote against those types of measures and then stand up the next moment and claim that the Liberals are not doing enough for vulnerable people in this country.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 52

11 of 25 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 on notice, as the member's speech raises it.

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 member for Regina—Lewvan and I have enjoyed some good partisan sparring,”About the friendly rivalry between the two members, not the question on seniors’ affordability.
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 “which is part of the sport of the House.”About the sport of the House, not 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 “I know that the member opposite is a good sport in that regard.”A personal aside about the member, not the affordability 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 “We have had many disagreements,”About the members’ disagreements, not 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 “but we both respect one another at the end of the day,”About mutual respect between the members, not the affordability issue.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “I am sure the member opposite can agree that those are tangible, cost-saving measures.”A challenge to the member’s agreement rather than a point on the affordability measures themselves.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “I know that his constituents did not send him here to vote against those types of measures and then stand up the next moment and claim that the Liberals are not doing enough for vulnerable people in this country.”An attack on the member’s voting record and conduct in place of an answer.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “Can the member opposite explain to his constituents why he votes against every affordability measure that enhances support for seniors, for families, for single mothers and for all Canadians, with broad-based measures that are cutting taxes for Canadians?”A demand that the member explain his votes, attacking his record rather than answering the question.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “It seems to me that tax relief is something the Conservatives have advocated for.”About the Conservatives’ advocacy on taxes, not what the member would say to Janet.
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 have only eliminated, suspended, cut and reduced taxes under the Prime Minister’s leadership.”Praise of the government’s tax record framed against the member, not an answer to the question.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “Why would the member opposite oppose tax relief for his constituents?”A further rhetorical challenge to the member’s position rather than the question asked.

Respect · 100

0 of 25 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 · 92

1 of 25 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 “our government is really working to make life more affordable for all Canadians”A commitment with no measure, date or success condition, in contrast to the specific programs cited elsewhere.

Echo · 2 repeated lines

Words members of Parliament keep repeating, found by the same rule for every member. No score depends on it.

“Is it the Canada child benefit?”Said 7 times by 3 members.Every time it was said
“We cut the consumer carbon tax.”Said 7 times by 2 members.Every time it was said

Claims · 9

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“helping 12 million Canadians with payments”The groceries and essentials benefit is helping 12 million Canadians with payments.search
2“pays out an average of $1,890 for a dual-income family”The groceries and essentials benefit pays out an average of $1,890 for a dual-income family.search
3“The amount to be paid is going to increase 25% over five years, beginning in July”The groceries and essentials benefit amount is set to increase 25% over five years beginning in July.search
4“the top-up is indexed to inflation”The top-up to the groceries and essentials benefit is indexed to inflation, matching future increases in the consumer price index.search
5“increased OAS by 10% for our seniors”The Liberal government increased Old Age Security by 10% for seniors.search
6“an income tax cut for 22 million Canadians”The government’s first action under the current Prime Minister was an income tax cut for 22 million Canadians.search
7“eliminated the consumer carbon tax”The government eliminated the consumer carbon tax.search
8“suspended the fuel excise tax over the summer”The government suspended the fuel excise tax over the summer.search
9“tabled legislation to extend that for another five months until January 2027”The government recently tabled legislation to extend the fuel excise tax suspension for another five months, until January 2027.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20