Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Kurt Holman

Conservative on Business of Supply 2026-05-26

60 words · 2 sentences · 4 clauses

Replying to Kevin Lamoureux (Liberal)

“Mr. Speaker, I think, as we wind up debate on this issue, it is important to highlight the fact that the Prime Minister was elected just over a year ago, and his first action was to take away the carbon tax. It had a wonderful and positive impact on the price of gas; I believe it was somewhere around 15¢ a litre. We can fast-forward to today, where we had, I believe effective April 1, a 10-cent reduction on the excise tax on gasoline. We have seen a significant drop because of the tax break provided by the government. What I have a tough time with is the hypocrisy that comes from the Conservative benches. They talk about affordability. When we introduce affordability measures like the groceries and essentials benefit, the Conservatives vote against it, and that is not the lone example. Why the hypocrisy from the Conservative Party of Canada when it comes to the issue of affordability?”

Statement grade

B–

74 / 100, held down by Signal

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

Positioning 53%Claims 47%

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

Mr. Speaker, Positioning · 12 wordsI am a little confused with regard to the definition of “hypocrisy”, PositioningClaims · 28 wordsbecause the Liberal solution was tax relief on fuel all the way to September 1, ¹yet our solution is tax relief to the end of the calendar year.² Positioning · 20 wordsWith regard to that, I see the Conservative solution as helping Canadians more than what the Liberal government is doing.Positioning

At a glance

Lost points for
Little substanceMuch of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.
AnsweredOf this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 44

2 of 2 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 “I am a little confused with regard to the definition of “hypocrisy”,”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 “With regard to that, I see the Conservative solution as helping Canadians more than what the Liberal government is doing.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 100

0 of 2 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.

Nothing lost points.

Respect · 100

0 of 2 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 2 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“tax relief on fuel all the way to September 1”The Liberal government’s fuel tax relief runs until September 1, 2026.search
2“tax relief to the end of the calendar year”The Conservative motion before the House proposes ending federal taxes on gas and diesel until the end of 2026.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20