Analysis · Reply to a comment · beta

Melissa Lantsman

Conservative on Report Stage 2026-05-04

107 words · 6 sentences · 6 clauses

Replying to Kevin Lamoureux (Liberal)

“Mr. Speaker, it is disappointing that the Conservative Party of Canada is determined to fight this legislation, and not recognize the phenomenal work that former Chief Justice Arbour did. It is only over the last couple of weeks that the Conservative Party has come out against the legislation as much as it has. At the end of the day, we have a government that is pushing forward a number of agenda items dealing with the Canadian Forces, whether it is the 2% GDP or the increase in the overall interest in joining the forces, which is at a 30-year high. We are improving the conditions of the military and Bill C-11 is a part of that. I wish the Conservatives would get onside.”

Statement grade

A+

Average 95 / 100

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

Procedure 16%Claims 84%

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

Mr. Speaker, Procedure · 17 wordsI am going to speak directly to the men and women in uniform who are watching this.Procedure Claims · 90 wordsThey had the committee change this bill with the amendments that they, themselves, asked for, both the survivors of sexual violence and the veterans of our military.¹ I want those at home to witness that the Liberals are paving over all the amendments their own members made to this legislation. Justice Arbour did not even come to committee.² They waited 11 years to bring this legislation forward.³ I want them to witness that the Liberals are ignoring the will of this House and the will of the members in uniform.

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 80

1 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.

Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “I am going to speak directly to the men and women in uniform who are watching this.”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.

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 comment put to the member, and the bill 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 · 100

0 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.

Nothing lost points.

Claims · 3

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“the committee change this bill with the amendments”The committee considering Bill C-11 adopted amendments to the bill.search
2“Justice Arbour did not even come to committee”Justice Arbour did not appear as a witness before the committee studying Bill C-11.search
3“waited 11 years to bring this legislation forward”The government brought forward Bill C-11 roughly 11 years after the events or reports that prompted military justice reform.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20