Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Kelly DeRidder

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

107 words · 4 sentences · 5 clauses

Replying to Kevin Lamoureux (Liberal)

“Mr. Speaker, tomorrow will be the one-year anniversary of the last federal election. Canadians responded very favourably to our new Prime Minister when he talked about working together as a team to build a stronger, healthier Canada that is strong for all and looking for collaboration, for people to work with. If we have individuals who want to be a part of that team, I see that as a positive. Yes, we got a majority through three by-elections where a majority of Canadians voted for those three candidates. Having said that, the very substance of the motion we are dealing with today is to have a majority, as we have in the House, in our standing committees. That is a parliamentary tradition. Does the member support parliamentary tradition?”

Statement grade

A+

Average 100 / 100

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

Claims 100%

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

Mr. Speaker, Claims · 107 wordsyes, a year ago Canadians elected a minority Liberal government that promised it would be collaborative with the members of the opposition and make changes in a collaborative manner.¹ What we are seeing now is another broken promise from the Prime Minister because in no way is it collaborative to stack committees so that we cannot hold the government to account and be able to properly scrutinize legislation. Not only is that a power grab, ensuring it is stacking the committees. The government would have the majority with one additional member, ²but instead of going with that, it wants two to really ensure that our voices are—

At a glance

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

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 100

Nothing lost points on 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.

Relevance · 100

Nothing lost points on 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.

Respect · 100

Nothing lost points on Respect.

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

Nothing lost points on Clarity.

Clarity checks for plain speaking, clear ownership of actions, and honest limits on certainty. A low score means vague promises or evasive language.

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“a year ago Canadians elected a minority Liberal government”Canadians elected a minority Liberal government in the federal election held in April 2025.search
2“The government would have the majority with one additional member”The Liberal government would hold a majority on House of Commons standing committees with one additional member beyond parity.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20