Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Shannon Stubbs

Conservative on Business of Supply 2026-04-30

145 words · 6 sentences · 8 clauses

Replying to Xavier Barsalou-Duval (Bloc Québécois)

“Mr. Speaker, I must say that I was rather impressed by the intensity of my colleague’s speech. It was very substantial. There was so much to it that I could not take it all in. I would like to hear more about the merits of creating a so-called sovereign wealth fund to fund major projects, when apparently the Canada Infrastructure Bank is already being used for that purpose. Why launch a new fund when we already have a tool that does the same thing?”

Statement grade

B–

Average 74 / 100

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

Positioning 48%Claims 37%The ask 15%

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

Mr. Speaker, Positioning · 27 wordswe entirely agree. The Liberals have created constant chaos, uncertainty and confusion with fund after fund that is not delivering any positive results in any way whatsoever.Positioning Claims · 11 wordsLife just keeps getting more and more expensive for everyday Canadians. The ask · 22 wordsI think all opposition parties need to unite in pushing the Liberals to tell them exactly what they are going to do. Positioning · 43 wordsI think they are going to pick winners and losers in every part of this country, this society and the economy according to their own total-control agenda, which they are showing is what they want to do here in the House of Commons.Positioning Claims · 42 wordsIn addition, related to another comment, do members know that there are 71 proponents in front of three Canadian regulators right now, ¹and that they are all stuck, waiting around and not getting fast-tracked in any way whatsoever, no matter what the—Partly on point

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 45

4 of 10 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 “we entirely agree.”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 “The Liberals have created constant chaos, uncertainty and confusion with fund after fund that is not delivering any positive results in any way whatsoever.”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 “I think they are going to pick winners and losers in every part of this country, this society and the economy according to their own total-control agenda,”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 they are showing is what they want to do here in the House of Commons.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 52

6 of 10 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.

Staying near the subject without addressing the matter at hand: what was asked, or what the bill, motion or speech is about.What the tags mean “Life just keeps getting more and more expensive for everyday Canadians.”About the cost of living generally, not about whether a new fund duplicates the Infrastructure Bank.
Staying near the subject without addressing the matter at hand: what was asked, or what the bill, motion or speech is about.What the tags mean “I think all opposition parties need to unite in pushing the Liberals to tell them exactly what they are going to do.”A call on the Liberals to explain themselves, without addressing the duplication question asked.
Staying near the subject without addressing the matter at hand: what was asked, or what the bill, motion or speech is about.What the tags mean “I think they are going to pick winners and losers in every part of this country, this society and the economy according to their own total-control agenda,”About the government’s alleged agenda of picking winners, not the question of why a new fund is needed.
Staying near the subject without addressing the matter at hand: what was asked, or what the bill, motion or speech is about.What the tags mean “which they are showing is what they want to do here in the House of Commons.”About the government’s conduct in the House, not the fund-versus-Infrastructure Bank question.
Staying near the subject without addressing the matter at hand: what was asked, or what the bill, motion or speech is about.What the tags mean “In addition, related to another comment, do members know that there are 71 proponents in front of three Canadian regulators right now,”About permitting delays before regulators, raised as being about another comment, not the fund question.
Staying near the subject without addressing the matter at hand: what was asked, or what the bill, motion or speech is about.What the tags mean “and that they are all stuck, waiting around and not getting fast-tracked in any way whatsoever, no matter what the—”Continues on permitting delays rather than the duplication of funds asked about.

Respect · 100

0 of 10 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 · 100

0 of 10 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 · 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“there are 71 proponents in front of three Canadian regulators right now”As of April 2026, there are 71 proponents before three Canadian regulators.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20