Analysis · Reply to a comment · beta

Kevin Lamoureux

Liberal on Adjournment Proceedings 2026-05-28

132 words · 9 sentences · 11 clauses

Replying to Mel Arnold (Conservative)

“Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member opposite for attempting to change the channel, but he really needs to go back to his drawing board. I was asking about the Cowichan agreement, not the Musqueam agreement that he referred to. His denial response is exactly what I predicted. He was going to try and blame Conservatives for stoking fear. It is real fear that is coming from Canadians, like homeowners in the Richmond area who do not know what the value of their home is. He asked whether we had specific cases of people who had lost their homes. They have not lost their homes, but they have lost all value in their homes. We have ranch properties around British Columbia that simply cannot find any interested buyers because of this situation that the government has created.”

Statement grade

Average 92 / 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 · 78 wordsthe point is that there are many different agreements. The Conservatives are very much aware of the issue of private property. I was quoting what the minister responded to the member the other day. That was the quote I referenced, the opposition day motion where that agreement was referenced. I posed the very same question that I posed to the member, and Conservative members could not come up with one individual case.¹ There are many treaties out there. Positioning · 22 wordsWe need to look at the harm that is done by the Conservatives stoking an issue that they know is not true.Positioning Claims · 24 wordsThey have been provided assurances on the issue, whether it is from the Prime Minister, other ministers or members who participated in the debate. Positioning · 8 wordsI find it, as I said before, unfortunate.PositioningPartly on point

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 71

3 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 “We need to look at the harm that is done by the Conservatives stoking an issue that they know is not true.”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 “I find it,”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 “as I said before, unfortunate.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 96

2 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 comment put to the member, and the question on notice.

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 find it,”An expression of regret that does not engage the comment’s points.
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 “as I said before, unfortunate.”Restates earlier displeasure without addressing the claims raised.

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 · 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“Conservative members could not come up with one individual case”During the House debates on the indigenous litigation directive issue, when Kevin Lamoureux challenged Conservative members to give one example where treaties have led to private property being taken away, no Conservative member provided such a case.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20