Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Tamara Kronis

Conservative on Report Stage 2026-05-04

64 words · 3 sentences · 3 clauses

Replying to John-Paul Danko (Liberal)

“Mr. Speaker, I, too, was at the commemoration of the Battle of the Atlantic over the weekend, at HMCS Star, speaking to the commander about the generational investments our government is making in the military, increasing recruiting, and seeing the youth, the recruits, the men and women in the reserves and the veterans. This bill is all about supporting those in the military and ensuring that the victims are supported and trusted. Justice Arbour’s recommendations mentioned civilian courts. Could the member expand on what more needs to be done at the provincial level to make sure that prosecutions done at the provincial level are successful?”

Statement grade

–

Not graded

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

Thanks 19%Claims 34%Reasoning 47%

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

Mr. Speaker, Thanks · 12 wordsI commend my hon. colleague for his desire to support the military.Thanks Claims · 22 wordsAs he was in committee, he would have heard that people in the military need this choice in order to be supported.¹ Reasoning · 30 wordsWhile Madam Justice Arbour’s recommendations were right for the time at which they were made, the government took so long to act that there are better ways to address this.Partly on point

At a glance

Lost points for
Didn't answerNone of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 78

1 of 3 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.

Thanks and tributes.What the tags mean “I commend my hon. colleague for his desire to support the military.”Thanks: no claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 48

2 of 3 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 “As he was in committee, he would have heard that people in the military need this choice in order to be supported.”Recalls committee discussion about choice for military members without saying what more is needed provincially.
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 “While Madam Justice Arbour’s recommendations were right for the time at which they were made, the government took so long to act that there are better ways to address this.”Argues the Arbour recommendations are now outdated and better ways exist, but does not say what should be done at the provincial level.

Respect · 100

0 of 3 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 3 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“he was in committee”John-Paul Danko was a member of the committee that studied Bill C-11.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20