Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Mark Gerretsen

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

134 words · 7 sentences · 11 clauses

Replying to Ted Falk (Conservative)

“Mr. Speaker, my friend across the way gave a very passionate speech. He implored us to speak to the issues and not about people, so I want to do that. I want to know in what realm he thinks it is reasonable to ask for a 60% majority on committees when the majority that the government has is closer to 50%.”

Statement grade

Average 94 / 100

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

Reasoning 76%Claims 24%

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

Mr. Speaker, Reasoning · 75 wordsif we could split people into fractions, we might be able to get the percentage to work out more easily, but the reality is that a governing party that has a majority in the House of Commons needs to have a majority on committee.Unearned certainty If a majority is 5.2 people, obviously we have to go to six people, because we cannot split people in half. This is pretty simple. I think it is pretty understandable. Claims · 32 wordsNot only that, but if we look at 2015, we see that it was the same situation.¹ If we go back and look at Stephen Harper’s majority, it was the same thing.² Reasoning · 27 wordsWe are never going to get the fraction to perfectly line up with the fraction in the House, but it has to be representative as a whole.

At a glance

Lost points for
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

0 of 1 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.

Nothing lost points.

Relevance · 100

0 of 1 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 · 100

0 of 1 deductions are 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.

Nothing lost points.

Clarity · 76

1 of 1 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 “the reality is”Asserts a conclusion by framing it as objective reality rather than offering a source or argument.

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“if we look at 2015, we see that it was the same situation”In 2015 the governing party’s committee seats were allocated the same way as under the current arrangement being debated.search
2“Stephen Harper’s majority, it was the same thing”When Stephen Harper’s government had a majority, the governing party held a majority on committees.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20