Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Steven MacKinnon

Liberal on Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing Orders 2026-04-27

104 words · 4 sentences · 5 clauses

Replying to Ted Falk (Conservative)

“Mr. Speaker, this is incredibly shameful. What we are seeing here is the Liberal government, immediately upon swearing in three new members today, calling for a closure motion on a very important debate that Canadians expect this Parliament to hold. The Liberals were not given a majority by Canadians. They stole a majority. Now, they are immediately abusing the power of a majority government to bring in this motion to give themselves a supermajority at committees so that they can ram through their legislation without proper debate. Canadians expect more from this Parliament than what the Liberals are offering today, and presenting a motion of closure is just inappropriate at this time.”

Statement grade

D–

Average 41 / 100

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

Reasoning 17%Claims 58%Positioning 15%Promise 10%

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

Mr. Speaker, Reasoning · 18 wordswith all respect to my hon. friend, I need to challenge this notion that anything has been stolen. Claims · 60 wordsIn fact, many Canadians appear to agree that much has been gained.Unearned certainty One thing that has been gained is that the government can move quickly on getting things built in Canada and move to implement an economic agenda that seeks to insulate ourselves against world events, trade shocks, trade wars and all of the major developments happening in the world.Vague promise Positioning · 16 wordsThis will represent a government that is resolute, strong and there for Canadians and their jobs, PositioningVague promisePromise · 10 wordsand that makes sure that our economy keeps moving forward.Off pointVague promise

At a glance

Lost points for
VagueMuch of this statement used imprecise wording, lacked details on timing or responsibility, or made broad claims without support.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 80

1 of 8 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 “This will represent a government that is resolute, strong and there for Canadians and their jobs,”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 27

3 of 8 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 point put to the member, and the motion under debate.

Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “One thing that has been gained is that the government can move quickly on getting things built in Canada and move to implement an economic agenda that seeks to insulate ourselves against world events, trade shocks, trade wars and all of the major developments happening in the world.”Shifts to a general economic agenda of getting things built and insulating against trade shocks, not the motion or the accusation about closure and committees.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “This will represent a government that is resolute, strong and there for Canadians and their jobs,”Praise of the government’s resoluteness is a political point, not an answer to the question about the closure motion.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “and that makes sure that our economy keeps moving forward.”Talks about the economy moving forward rather than the motion under debate or the premise challenged.

Respect · no score

Not checked: graded before this measurement existed. Excluded from the average.

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 · 16

4 of 8 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.

Something stated as certain with nothing to back it.What the tags mean “In fact”The formula asserts agreement without citing any source or evidence for how many Canadians agree.
A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible.What the tags mean “move quickly on getting things built”No project, date, measure, or success condition is attached to this commitment.
A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible.What the tags mean “a government that is resolute, strong and there for Canadians”The commitment names no actor’s action, date, or measure by which it could be checked.
A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible.What the tags mean “makes sure that our economy keeps moving forward”No specific action, date, or success condition is given for keeping the economy moving forward.

Claims · 0

This list shows the factual statements you can check for yourself: the words as said, and the claim restated to stand on its own.

No checkable claims.

Analysed on 2026-09-16