Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Parm Bains

Liberal on Business of Supply 2026-05-07

130 words · 7 sentences · 8 clauses

Replying to Wade Grant (Liberal)

“Mr. Speaker, I know that my colleague, the member for Richmond East—Steveston, has been very involved with the issue. He is very concerned as well, because he does take this very seriously with his residents and his constituents. I have seen him working on the ground, not only with them but also with the parties appealing the decision along with the federal government. There is the municipality. There are other first nations. There is the province of British Columbia. There is a unified approach to make sure the decision is appealed. I want to ask the member what he has been hearing from the other parties, so we know they are all working together to ensure that it is appealed.”

Statement grade

D–

42 / 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.

Thanks 12%Claims 68%Positioning 20%

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

Mr. Speaker, Thanks · 15 wordsI want to thank the member for his hard work on this issue as well.Thanks Claims · 89 wordsWith respect to the other members who are involved, the concerns are there. What they have shared is about having an opportunity to be involved in the case.Partly on point I would like to mention that the member for Richmond Centre—Marpole, who has been talking quite a bit about this, sat as a Richmond city councillor when this issue was in court.¹ He did not inform residents but is now bringing this issue forward. He also ran for the NDP provincial government that was responsible for the issue at the time, ²Positioning · 26 wordsand now we are hearing contradictory information from the other side. Again, it begs the question about why misinformation is being brought forward into the House.PositioningOff 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 · 62

3 of 10 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 want to thank the member for his hard work on this issue as well.”Thanks: no claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “and now we are hearing contradictory information from the other side.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “Again, it begs the question about why misinformation is being brought forward into the House.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 12

7 of 10 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 motion 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 “With respect to the other members who are involved, the concerns are there.”It notes concerns exist among those involved but does not say what has been heard from the parties on the appeal.
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 “What they have shared is about having an opportunity to be involved in the case.”On the subject of the question, but no answer to what was asked can be drawn from it.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “I would like to mention that the member for Richmond Centre—Marpole, who has been talking quite a bit about this, sat as a Richmond city councillor when this issue was in court.”It is about another member’s past role as a city councillor, not what the parties have been saying about the appeal.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “He did not inform residents but is now bringing this issue forward.”It is an accusation against another member’s conduct toward residents, not an answer about the other parties.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “He also ran for the NDP provincial government that was responsible for the issue at the time,”It concerns another member’s past candidacy for a provincial government, not the question about the parties.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “and now we are hearing contradictory information from the other side.”It is about contradictory information from the opposition, not what the other parties have been hearing on the appeal.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “Again, it begs the question about why misinformation is being brought forward into the House.”It raises misinformation in the House generally, not what the parties involved have shared about the appeal.

Respect · 100

0 of 10 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 10 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“I would like to mention that the member for Richmond Centre—Marpole, who has been talking quite a bit about this, sat as a Richmond city councillor when this issue was in court.”The member for Richmond Centre—Marpole sat as a Richmond city councillor while the Cowichan issue was in court.search
2“ran for the NDP provincial government”The member for Richmond Centre—Marpole ran as a candidate for the BC NDP in a provincial election.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20