The present study was designed to investigate the social processes that influenced the creation of the recommendation statements produced during a public deliberation event on funding for cancer drugs in Canada. Twenty-four ordinary citizens were recruited to participate in this deliberative mini-public through a process of random sampling that maximized diversity. Discourse analysis was used to analyze transcripts from the two-day event. The analysis indicates that participants who made direct wording suggestions may have had greater influence than those who did not when building collective recommendation statements. This analysis also illustrates some of the processes through which facilitators and principal investigators are co- producers of the outputs of the deliberation, and how deliberative voting can effectively work as a communication tool. Following the presentation of these results, several considerations that may be helpful for those who are designing and facilitating future deliberation events are discussed.