Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Kevin Lamoureux

Liberal on Business of Supply 2026-05-07

129 words · 4 sentences · 5 clauses

Replying to Grant Jackson (Conservative)

“Mr. Speaker, the only result of the last two Liberal speakers who gave those speeches is, unfortunately, that any Canadian who had to listen to them will likely have a hard time tying their shoes tonight, but I digress. I just wonder where the B.C. Liberal caucus is. The last speaker was from Manitoba. The one before that was from Saskatchewan. They are under the numbered treaties. It is a very different legal context when it comes to land claims and fee simple property. Our Conservative B.C. MPs have been out speaking about this issue, which matters to British Columbians. Why are the B.C. Liberal MPs in hiding? Where are they? Why will they not get up and defend the disastrous Liberal record on this issue?”

Statement grade

Average 78 / 100

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

Claims 77%Positioning 23%

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

Mr. Speaker, Claims · 99 wordsas we know, it is against the rules for me to say whether the member has been in the House or not, ¹Unearned certaintybut I can guarantee that he has not been listening because there have been many members of Parliament from the government caucus addressing this issue today.² If he would have been listening, he would have seen good representation from B.C. However, I can tell the member opposite that this is more than just a British Columbia issue. This is an issue for which, from coast to coast to coast, Canadians as a whole want to see reconciliation.Partly on point Positioning · 30 wordsThey want to see us move forward in making sure that, unlike what the Conservatives want, there is more unity in the country as opposed to the division they promote.PositioningOff point

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 71

1 of 4 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 “They want to see us move forward in making sure that, unlike what the Conservatives want, there is more unity in the country as opposed to the division they promote.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 62

2 of 4 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 “This is an issue for which, from coast to coast to coast, Canadians as a whole want to see reconciliation.”About reconciliation nationally, not whether B.C. Liberal MPs have been speaking to the issue.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “They want to see us move forward in making sure that, unlike what the Conservatives want, there is more unity in the country as opposed to the division they promote.”About the Conservatives promoting division, not the whereabouts or record of the B.C. Liberal caucus.

Respect · 100

0 of 4 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 · 78

1 of 4 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.

Something stated as certain with nothing to back it.What the tags mean “as we know”Asserts shared knowledge as a premise without offering any source or evidence.

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“it is against the rules for me to say whether the member has been in the House or not”House of Commons rules prohibit members from commenting on the presence or absence of another member in the House.search
2“there have been many members of Parliament from the government caucus addressing this issue today”Many Liberal members of Parliament spoke on the Cowichan/fee simple property issue in the House on May 7, 2026.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20