Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Kody Blois

Liberal on Business of Supply 2026-04-30

186 words · 10 sentences · 12 clauses

Replying to Warren Steinley (Conservative). The question was off topic, so this reply is judged against the motion.

“Mr. Speaker, generally, I enjoy the speeches from my colleague from Kings—Hants. We worked on the agriculture committee together. However, I think he has been listening to the member for Winnipeg North too much, because he made a lot of misleading comments toward Canadians throughout his whole speech, specifically around the sovereign debt fund. He talked about the Norway sovereign fund. It is unbelievable that he did not mention that Norway’s fund was built on surpluses. That fund is not allowed to be invested in outside Norway. There is no comparison between the Canadian debt fund and the sovereign fund of Norway. The second comment I would leave with the member, something about which I am truly disappointed, is that yesterday I was able to get to my feet, because of our leadership team, and I asked a very important question about the Humboldt Broncos crash. The member made light of that, and I think he should apologize, because we are allowed to bring forward things that are important to our communities.”

Statement grade

D+

51 / 100, held down by Relevance

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

Aside 12%Claims 69%The ask 15%Reasoning 5%

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

Mr. Speaker, Aside · 22 wordsI will start on the way back. I have respect for my hon. colleague as well. We have done great work together.Aside Claims · 29 wordsAt no point in my speech did I make light of anything, as that member just said, related to the Humboldt Broncos. I absolutely respect the statement he made. The ask · 13 wordsIn fact, I would like to hear the Conservatives make more of them. Claims · 48 wordsThat was the point I was making in my entire remarks because, notwithstanding a few occasions, whether it was the member for Regina—Lewvan or a few others of a similar nature, we had just heard 33 straight questions in the House of Commons on the exact same comment. The ask · 14 wordsI would like to see more mixing in of local, regional and riding priorities. Claims · 51 wordsThe member should not suggest at all that I am trying to disrupt what he said the other day in the House.Off point On Norway, again, whether or not it is surplus, whether or not it is a government choosing to make the investment, that is what we are continuing to do, Vague promiseReasoning · 9 wordsand that is the principle we are focused on.

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 82

3 of 11 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.

A remark off to the side of the point.What the tags mean “I will start on the way back.”An aside: no claim, reason or ask.
A remark off to the side of the point.What the tags mean “I have respect for my hon. colleague as well.”An aside: no claim, reason or ask.
A remark off to the side of the point.What the tags mean “We have done great work together.”An aside: no claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 21

7 of 11 deductions are Relevance

The question was off topic, so this reply is judged against the motion.

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 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 “At no point in my speech did I make light of anything,”About a personal exchange over the Humboldt Broncos, not the motion on the sovereign wealth fund.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “as that member just said, related to the Humboldt Broncos.”About the Humboldt Broncos remark attributed to the speaker, not the motion.
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 absolutely respect the statement he made.”About respect for the member’s statement on the Broncos, not the motion.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “In fact, I would like to hear the Conservatives make more of them.”About wanting more statements like the member’s, not the motion.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “That was the point I was making in my entire remarks because, notwithstanding a few occasions, whether it was the member for Regina—Lewvan or a few others of a similar nature, we had just heard 33 straight questions in the House of Commons on the exact same comment.”About the pattern of questions in the House, not the motion on the fund.
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 would like to see more mixing in of local, regional and riding priorities.”About mixing riding priorities into questions, not the motion.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “The member should not suggest at all that I am trying to disrupt what he said the other day in the House.”About not intending to disrupt the member’s statement, not the motion.

Respect · 100

0 of 11 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 11 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.

A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible.What the tags mean “that is what we are continuing to do”The commitment names no measure, date or success condition for what is being continued.

Claims · 0

This list shows the factual statements you can check for yourself: the words as said, and the claim restated to stand on its own.

No checkable claims.

Analysed on 2026-10-20