Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Leah Gazan

NDP on Business of Supply 2026-05-07

66 words · 5 sentences · 5 clauses

Replying to Kevin Lamoureux (Liberal)

“Mr. Speaker, I do take some exception to the member’s belief that the government is somehow feeding misinformation, I believe that the government has been very straightforward, whether it has been the Prime Minister, in the statements that he made earlier this week, or the minister responsible, who stood up today and articulated, in great detail, a number of points that the member opposite just raised. I believe that the government is working in collaboration with other jurisdictions, first nations and the provinces. What does the hon. member believe about the importance of working in collaboration? What is the NDP’s position on the motion itself? Will they be voting in favour of it?”

Statement grade

B+

81 / 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.

Claims 27%The question 56%Positioning 17%

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

Mr. Speaker, Claims · 18 wordsI disagree with the member opposite. Amnesty International confirmed the backsliding of indigenous rights by the Liberal government.¹ The question · 37 wordsI want to know if he agrees with me that the Prime Minister should do his duty and uphold the Constitution. Why is his government choosing to put forward litigation against constitutionally enshrined rights in section 35?² Positioning · 11 wordsThat is not respecting the Constitution or the rule of law.PositioningPartly on point

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 80

1 of 5 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 is not respecting the Constitution or the rule of law.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 51

4 of 5 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 “Amnesty International confirmed the backsliding of indigenous rights by the Liberal government.”About Amnesty International’s view of the government’s record, not the member’s questions on collaboration or the vote.
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 want to know if he agrees with me that the Prime Minister should do his duty and uphold the Constitution.”A counter-question about the Prime Minister’s duty, not a reply on collaboration or the member’s position on the motion.
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 “Why is his government choosing to put forward litigation against constitutionally enshrined rights in section 35?”Raises the government’s litigation against section 35 rights but does not state the NDP’s position on the motion or on collaboration.
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 is not respecting the Constitution or the rule of law.”A general claim about respecting the Constitution, not an answer on the vote or collaboration.

Respect · 100

0 of 5 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 5 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“Amnesty International confirmed the backsliding of indigenous rights by the Liberal government”Amnesty International published a finding or report describing backsliding on indigenous rights by the Liberal government of Canada.search
2“put forward litigation against constitutionally enshrined rights in section 35”The Liberal government has put forward litigation against rights enshrined in section 35 of the Constitution.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20