Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Chak Au

Conservative on Business of Supply 2026-05-28

106 words · 8 sentences · 9 clauses

Replying to Kevin Lamoureux (Liberal)

“Mr. Speaker, it has been an interesting learning process in terms of what the Conservative members have been speaking about this morning. There is definitely a reaffirmation in terms of a lack of commitment to the CBC, as an example, and reaffirming their commitment to take away financing. When I asked the former speaker about their position on the CRTC and its future here in Canada, that question was sidestepped. I am very much interested in trying to flush out the Conservative position on the CRTC as an arm’s-length organization of the Government of Canada. Does the member or does the Conservative Party support the CRTC in general?”

Statement grade

76 / 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.

Greeting 7%Claims 19%Positioning 16%Procedure 9%Reasoning 25%The question 25%

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

Mr. Speaker, Greeting · 7 wordslet us see who is sidestepping here.Greeting Claims · 20 wordsFrom 2021 up to now, we have seen numerous occasions where the government intervened with decisions made by the CRTC.¹ Positioning · 17 wordsNow the Liberals are trying to hide behind the argument that the CRTC is an arm’s-length organization.PositioningPartly on point Procedure · 4 wordsLet us be clear.ProcedureUnearned certainty Reasoning · 26 wordsWe are not talking about the CRTC’s mandate here today. We are talking about affordability and the burden on the people with this increase in levy.Partly on point Procedure · 6 wordsLet me ask a simple question: ProcedureThe question · 26 wordsDoes the government agree that this increase would impose an additional burden on the people? Also, will the government support this additional burden on the people?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 · 62

4 of 11 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.

Greetings and pleasantries.What the tags mean “let us see who is sidestepping here.”A greeting: no claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “Now the Liberals are trying to hide behind the argument that the CRTC is an arm’s-length organization.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “Let us be clear.”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “Let me ask a simple question:”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 46

6 of 11 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 “From 2021 up to now, we have seen numerous occasions where the government intervened with decisions made by the CRTC.”About the government’s past interventions with the CRTC, not the support for the CRTC that was asked.
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 “Now the Liberals are trying to hide behind the argument that the CRTC is an arm’s-length organization.”Charges the Liberals with hiding behind the arm’s-length argument without stating the member’s own position on the CRTC.
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 are not talking about the CRTC’s mandate here today.”Declines to discuss the CRTC’s mandate, which is what the point put was 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 “We are talking about affordability and the burden on the people with this increase in levy.”Redirects to the streaming levy and affordability, not the question about support for the CRTC.
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 “Does the government agree that this increase would impose an additional burden on the people?”About the levy’s burden on the public, not the CRTC support asked.
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 “Also, will the government support this additional burden on the people?”Puts a question back to the government instead of answering whether the Conservatives support the CRTC.

Respect · 100

0 of 11 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

1 of 11 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 “Let us be clear”A certainty formula that frames the following assertion as self-evident rather than argued.

Claims · 1

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“From 2021 up to now, we have seen numerous occasions where the government intervened with decisions made by the CRTC”From 2021 to May 2026, the Liberal government intervened on numerous occasions in decisions made by the CRTC.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20