Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Steven MacKinnon

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

117 words · 5 sentences · 9 clauses

Replying to Elizabeth May (Green)

“Mr. Speaker, I am speaking now from a spot that has a chair with no arms, which means I can stand up and address the hon. government House leader. The purpose of this debate is to bring closure on the debate on Motion No. 9. I hope I will have a chance to speak more substantively to Motion No. 9 later this day. On an unprecedented matter and doing something unusual, which is taking the matter of changing House committees from their normal process to a motion debated in the House that will be carried by what we now know is a majority of Liberal members, would the hon. government House leader explain why it is urgent that we close down debate?”

Statement grade

C+

Average 66 / 100

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

Claims 42%Reasoning 35%Positioning 23%

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

Mr. Speaker, Claims · 49 wordswe believe there is a very fundamental, yet incredibly simple principle at play here, which is that the institutions of our Parliament, including the committees of the House of Commons and obviously the committees we share with the Senate, be reflective of the composition of the House of Commons. Reasoning · 41 wordsThis is a reasonably simple debate. We appreciate that there can be different perspectives, different arguments. We have heard those articulated during the first portion of this debate.¹ I am sure we will hear them articulated throughout the course of today, Off pointPositioning · 27 wordsbut we believe that this is a reasonably simple principle and that Canadians expect us to get on with our normal work, Unearned certaintywhich is building Canada strong.PositioningOff pointVague promise

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 71

2 of 9 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 “but we believe that this is a reasonably simple principle and that Canadians expect us to get on with our normal work,”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 “which is building Canada strong.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 55

5 of 9 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 “This is a reasonably simple debate.”Merely asserts the debate is simple rather than explaining why debate must close now.
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 appreciate that there can be different perspectives, different arguments.”A general acknowledgment of other views that answers nothing about urgency.
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 heard those articulated during the first portion of this debate.”Procedural observation about what has been heard, not a response 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 “I am sure we will hear them articulated throughout the course of today,”Speculation about future speeches that does not address why debate should be closed.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “which is building Canada strong.”A generic slogan about the government’s work that does not answer the urgency question.

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 · 71

2 of 9 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 “Canadians expect us to get on with our normal work”A claim about what all Canadians expect is asserted without any source or evidence.
A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible.What the tags mean “building Canada strong”A slogan-like commitment with no actor, measure, date or success condition.

Claims · 1

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“We have heard those articulated during the first portion of this debate”During the earlier portion of the debate on Motion No. 9 in the House of Commons on April 27, 2026, members articulated differing arguments and perspectives.search

Analysed on 2026-09-16