Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Steven MacKinnon

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

128 words · 7 sentences · 9 clauses

Replying to Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault (Liberal)

“Mr. Speaker, my colleague put it well when he said that in Canada, our political system is based on respect for traditions and principles. This ensures that the system is stable and the government is able to function properly. If we look at the last 10 majority governments in our history, whether they were Liberal or Conservative, we see that there has never been a case where a committee chair had to cast the deciding vote in the event of a tie. This morning, I heard some opposition members taking issue with the proposed composition of committees. I would like to ask the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons whether the government’s proposed composition better reflects the traditions of our parliamentary system than the suggestions put forward by the opposition during this morning’s debates.”

Statement grade

A–

Average 89 / 100

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

Greeting 19%Procedure 9%Reasoning 41%Claims 32%

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

Mr. Speaker, Greeting · 24 wordsthat is an excellent question from my hon. colleague, who comes from a region of this great country that is very special to me.Greeting Procedure · 11 wordsThe committee composition that the government is proposing does two things.Procedure Reasoning · 52 wordsIt ensures that the chair of each committee will not have to routinely cast tie-breaking votes, ¹because committee chairs, like the Speaker of the House, should not be settling debates. They should be called upon to do so only in exceptional circumstances. That is why we proposed the membership that we did. Claims · 41 wordsIt is also because the other option would be to remove an opposition member from each committee, ²and we did not want to do that. We wanted the opposition parties to have the same level of representation as they do now.

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 66

2 of 2 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.

Greetings and pleasantries.What the tags mean “that is an excellent question from my hon. colleague, who comes from a region of this great country that is very special to me.”A greeting: 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 committee composition that the government is proposing does two things.”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 100

0 of 2 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.

Nothing lost points.

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 · 100

0 of 2 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.

Nothing lost points.

Claims · 2

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“ensures that the chair of each committee will not have to routinely cast tie-breaking votes”The government’s proposed committee composition ensures that each committee chair will not have to routinely cast tie-breaking votes.search
2“the other option would be to remove an opposition member from each committee”The only alternative way to prevent tie-breaking votes by chairs, given the committee composition, would be to remove an opposition member from each committee.search

Analysed on 2026-09-16