Analysis · Question Period answer · beta

Kevin Lamoureux

Liberal on Health 2026-05-01

51 words · 4 sentences · 4 clauses

Replying to Helena Konanz (Conservative)

“Madam Speaker, at a recent health committee, Conservatives moved a motion calling for a full investigation into the Liberals’ wasteful, $300-million PrescribeIT boondoggle. The Liberals immediately responded by moving that meeting behind closed doors. As a result, under House rules, I am forbidden from telling Canadians what happened in that meeting for the next 30 years. Does silencing MPs on committee work for 30 years show transparency from this majority Liberal government?”

Statement grade

77 / 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.

Claims 51%Reasoning 27%Promise 22%

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

Madam Speaker, Claims · 10 wordsour standing committees of Parliament play a very important role. Reasoning · 14 wordsI think it is important that we encourage collaboration as much as we can. Claims · 16 wordsMany would argue that what happens in standing committees is very beneficial for the entire House. Promise · 11 wordsLet us look forward to seeing more collaboration at standing committees.Partly on point

At a glance

Lost points for
Didn't answerNone of this answer addressed the specific question that was asked.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 100

0 of 4 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 · 47

4 of 4 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 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 “our standing committees of Parliament play a very important role.”About the general importance of committees, not the transparency of the in camera decision asked about.
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 it is important that we encourage collaboration as much as we can.”A call for collaboration at committees, not an answer on whether the move shows transparency.
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 “Many would argue that what happens in standing committees is very beneficial for the entire House.”General praise of committees’ benefit to the House, not the transparency question raised.
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 “Let us look forward to seeing more collaboration at standing committees.”A hope for future collaboration at committees, not an answer on the question of transparency.

Respect · 100

0 of 4 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 4 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 · 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