Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Alex Ruff

Conservative on Report Stage 2026-05-04

149 words · 11 sentences · 12 clauses

Replying to Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay (Bloc Québécois)

“Mr. Speaker, I am a member of the committee that conducted the study for weeks and that succeeded, with our Conservative colleagues, in getting a majority to adopt amendments. These amendments were informed by witness testimony and greatly improved the bill. We worked patiently for weeks. We heard from witnesses who told us where we needed to go. I believe that we managed to move this bill in the right direction. What does my colleague call a government that does not respect the verdict of parliamentary democracy, when a majority of members have decided to move the bill in one direction, but this government is trying to overturn that by moving the bill in the other direction?”

Statement grade

A–

Average 88 / 100

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

Aside 7%Positioning 9%Reasoning 43%Claims 41%

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

Mr. Speaker, Aside · 11 wordsI could use a really derogatory term, but I will not.Aside Positioning · 13 wordsMy point is that it is the government that is making a mistake.Positioning Reasoning · 14 wordsUltimately, I think we need to get this right. This is about the victims.Partly on point Claims · 10 wordsThe committee did so much hard work. The witnesses testified. Reasoning · 12 wordsI am not taking anything away from what Justice Arbour brought forward. Claims · 51 wordsThis is a tough position for the CAF and the senior leadership of the CAF.Partly on point However, I dare say that if we go back and review the testimony put forward at committee by the Canadian Forces provost marshal and the Canadian director of military prosecutions, they weighed their concerns on this.¹ Reasoning · 38 wordsAgain, this is ultimately about taking care of the victims.Partly on point I do not think the government is going to get it right if it removes the hard work of the committee and what it put forward as recommendations.

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 78

3 of 8 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 could use a really derogatory term,”An aside: no claim, reason or ask.
A remark off to the side of the point.What the tags mean “but I will not.”An aside: no claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “My point is that it is the government that is making a mistake.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 76

5 of 8 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 bill 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 “Ultimately, I think we need to get this right.”It speaks of getting the bill right but does not address the point about overriding the committee.
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 “This is about the victims.”It points to victims as the bill’s concern without engaging the point about the government and the committee’s work.
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 am not taking anything away from what Justice Arbour brought forward.”It is about Justice Arbour’s contribution rather than the point about the government and the committee’s amendments.
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 “This is a tough position for the CAF and the senior leadership of the CAF.”It is about the position of Canadian Armed Forces leadership, not the point about overriding the committee.
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 “Again, this is ultimately about taking care of the victims.”It returns to victims as the bill’s concern without addressing the point about the government and the committee.

Respect · 100

0 of 8 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 8 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“the testimony put forward at committee by the Canadian Forces provost marshal and the Canadian director of military prosecutions”During committee study of Bill C-11, the Canadian Forces provost marshal and the director of military prosecutions testified and raised concerns about the transfer of jurisdiction over sexual misconduct offences.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20