“The Conservatives say they want us to fund our military and meet our NATO targets, but then they complain about the deficit created by that military spending. Canadians pay taxes and expect us to invest in our armed forces. The Conservatives should be thanking us for doing what they asked for.”

“I do not know which Trudeau the Conservatives are more obsessed with, Madam Speaker. Maybe it is a tie. What is clear here is that the member opposite seemed to suggest that he supported investments in the defence industry, yet his leader stands up consistently and talks about the deficit related to the spending in our defence policy. Which is it? Is it more money into the defence industry that does not come from the government? That does not make sense, because Canadians expect us to invest in our defence. People pay taxes just so we can invest in our armed forces, which we are going to do. The Conservatives have spent weeks complaining about a deficit the vast majority of which is invested in our armed forces and to hit our NATO targets, which they have been asking us to do for 10 years. I would think the least the member could do is stand up and thank us.”

“Yes, we can do the briefing, but members must be ready. Three weeks is enough time to read 300 pages.”

“Madam Speaker, I 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. Honestly, three weeks to read 300 pages is not asking too much.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“People should stop playing politics with language. Doing that makes it harder to protect French as Quebec's main language. Our government supports language minorities across Canada without using them to score political points.”

“Madam Speaker, what I made very clear when I was appointed to this position is that I was fed up with the politicization of the language debate. It is true. The reality is that politicizing this debate makes it impossible to get to the heart of the matter to ensure that the common language in Quebec is and remains French. As a government, we support minority languages both outside and within Quebec. We do so with a clear-eyed perspective, without seeking to gain political capital at the expense of indigenous peoples, immigrants, English-speaking minority communities, and French-speaking minority communities outside Quebec. That was the point. I think this is a very important point to make, because right now, the member is going off in all sorts of directions to raise a very ridiculous point about today’s debate.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 22 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

“The member has asked me the same question three times. He has had three weeks to read the bill. If he wants to talk about it, he can ask me real questions about it right now.”

“Madam Speaker, it is not arrogant to point out that this is the third time he has asked me the same question. If he is interested in the bill, now is the time for him to ask me questions about it. He will also be able to ask me questions in the coming hours. I agreed with him that, yes, as a member of Parliament—and this applies to all members—he must be able to receive a proper briefing. I also told him that he had had three weeks to read the bill, but that I would be surprised if all members had taken that much time to read it.”

“I want to congratulate the member for working hard to learn French and speaking it well. She is a good example for other English speakers across Canada.”

“Madam Speaker, I want to congratulate the member opposite on the quality of her French and the efforts she has made to learn the language. I believe she is setting an example for many unilingual English speakers in this place and across Canada who are making the effort to learn French. I want to take this brief moment to congratulate her.”

“June is Filipino Heritage Month, and many people will celebrate across Canada. I want the minister to explain how the budget helps recognize our country's diversity.”

“Madam Speaker, the minister is responsible for heritage in Canada, and I want to recognize that June 1 is day one of Filipino Heritage Month. Winnipeg North is the centre of the heart of the Filipino community in Canada. It does not matter where. From coast to coast to coast, we will witness all forms of celebration of Filipino heritage. Given that the minister represents heritage, I wonder if he could provide his thoughts on how important it is to recognize Canada’s diversity, from the perspective of the budget. I would ask him to share his thoughts on the importance of recognizing our diversity.”

“I want to wish everyone a happy Filipino Heritage Month. Filipino Canadians have contributed a lot to our country, and their community is now over one million people.”

“Madam Speaker, first and foremost, I would like to wish a great Filipino Heritage Month to everyone celebrating and to all Canadians, whether they are Filipino or not. This is a community that has grown, I think, to well over a million strong over the last few years: a million and one, if we count the member for Winnipeg North, who appears to be an honorary member of the Filipino community and certainly behaves as such. He has been a fierce defender of their rights and has magnified their struggle to be in Canada and to thrive as Canadian citizens. I wish all of those celebrating a great Filipino Heritage Month as we celebrate this month of June, recognizing their contributions to Canada, present and future.”

• Little substance
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Signal 15 of 100

  Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

  See full analysis →

“I want to remind the Conservatives that they shut down Parliament from 2024 to 2025. It is my turn to speak.”

“Madam Speaker, not that this is an example for anyone, but I would remind the Conservatives that they shut down Parliament from 2024 to 2025. Some hon. members: Oh, oh! Hon. Marc Miller: Madam Speaker, last time I checked, I was the guy standing. Members opposite would like to talk about the current economy, but I would note that—”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 49 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →
• Little substance
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Signal 29 of 100

  Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

  See full analysis →

“Canada has one of the strongest economies in the G7. In the last quarter, our economic growth per person went up.”

“Madam Speaker, I am glad to answer it. I would note for members opposite that when they are talking about one of the strongest economies in the G7, and it is a good point what they are saying, I would ask them to look at the issue they talked about for years, which is GDP per capita, and they will note that it has jumped in the last quarter.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“That is not true. Our tax credit plan gives a lot of money to TV and radio newsrooms. The news group the member mentioned is happy about it.”

“Madam Speaker, that is not true. I would encourage the member opposite to look at the journalism tax credit proposals that are going to be examined and applied in the audiovisual sector. They represent a significant investment in audiovisual newsrooms. He should just ask the news group he mentioned. They will tell him that this news has been extremely well received.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“If the member wanted more time to debate the bill, why did he try to kill it?”

“Madam Speaker, if the member opposite thought he needed more time, why would he put forward an amendment to kill it?”