Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Garnett Genuis

Conservative on Report Stage 2026-05-04

102 words · 6 sentences · 7 clauses

Replying to Kevin Lamoureux (Liberal)

“Mr. Speaker, Madam Justice Arbour did an extensive consultation with victims, with members of CAF, with many other stakeholders, and came up with an incredible report with 48 recommendations in order to deal with the complexities of the issue. Thirty-six of those have already been implemented. The Government of Canada has been listening and has taken action. This very piece of legislation is an enactment of recommendation 40. Taking a look at the bigger picture and the support over the last year with this Prime Minister, whether it is 2% of the GDP, or whether it is a record number of people applying to join the forces last year, I believe we are on the right track. When was the last time the Conservative Party—”

Statement grade

75 / 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.

Positioning 11%Claims 69%Reasoning 21%

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

Mr. Speaker, Positioning · 11 wordsthat was a question that went madly off in all directions.Positioning Claims · 10 wordsThis is a bill about protecting victims of sexual violence. Reasoning · 21 wordsWe can have a conversation about military spending, capabilities and all of these other issues, but, fundamentally, here is the point. Claims · 60 wordsThe committee heard directly during its deliberations from victims and from experts.¹ For those who know this process best, a majority of that committee, representative of the House of Commons that Canadians elected, chose amendments to strengthen the bill and respond to the testimony they heard.² Then Liberals used an undemocratic, stolen majority to try to undo all that work.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 · 86

1 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.

Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “that was a question that went madly off in all directions.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 45

7 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 “that was a question that went madly off in all directions.”On the subject of the question, but no answer to what was asked can be drawn from it.
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 bill about protecting victims of sexual violence.”States the bill’s subject, but does not address when the Conservatives last acted on the forces.
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 “We can have a conversation about military spending, capabilities and all of these other issues,”Names other subjects for another conversation, but does not answer the record 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 “but, fundamentally, here is the point.”On the subject of the question, but no answer to what was asked can be drawn from it.
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 “The committee heard directly during its deliberations from victims and from experts.”About the committee’s witnesses, not the Conservative record the 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 “For those who know this process best, a majority of that committee, representative of the House of Commons that Canadians elected, chose amendments to strengthen the bill and respond to the testimony they heard.”About the committee’s amendments, not the question of when the Conservatives last acted.
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 “Then Liberals used an undemocratic, stolen majority to try to undo all that work.”About the Liberals’ handling of the bill’s amendments, not the record the question asked about.

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 · 2

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 heard directly during its deliberations from victims and from experts”The committee studying Bill C-11 heard testimony from victims and experts during its deliberations.search
2“a majority of that committee”A majority of the committee reviewing Bill C-11 voted to adopt amendments to the bill.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20