Analysis · Floor speech · beta

Elizabeth May

Green on Adjournment Proceedings 2026-05-28

573 words · 26 sentences · 32 clauses

Statement grade

Average 91 / 100

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

Procedure 6%Claims 61%Positioning 2%Reasoning 20%Anecdote 6%The question 5%

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

Mr. Speaker, Procedure · 34 wordsI rise tonight to pursue a question I initially asked on February 12 of this year, ¹and it is one about which, regardless of party, I think most people in this House are concerned.Procedure Claims · 138 wordsThe question I asked related to knowing the concern we have in this place of foreign interference in elections and, particularly, the experience we have had on many issues that were brought to light by Madam Justice Hogue. I raised the issue of what would happen if there were efforts, potentially from the United States and other countries, to manipulate a potential Alberta referendum. The response I got from the hon. minister was not out of sympathy with the issue I raised. Of course, there is not a complete answer for any of us at this point. We know that Elections Alberta would be in charge of any potential referendum. Since I asked the question on February 12, we now know that the Alberta premier has said she is going to put forward a question about a question, ²Positioning · 11 wordswhich is murky, confusing and opening up a can of worms.Positioning Reasoning · 81 wordsI think a lot of us are holding our breath and hoping she will not do the same thing that David Cameron did when he fatefully and idiotically appeased a small group of his own caucus by deciding to hold a referendum on the U.K. leaving the European Union, and did so absolutely confident that it could not possibly carry because the public opinion showed the vast majority of the people of England and Wales liked being part of the EU. Claims · 24 wordsThat was before we heard names like Cambridge Analytica and found out how effectively algorithms and data mining could be used to convince people. Anecdote · 33 wordsThere is an extremely good film that explains all this in Hollywood fashion, but it is rooted in facts and very well done. It is called Brexit: The Uncivil War with Benedict Cumberbatch.Anecdote Reasoning · 34 wordsIt is absolutely terrifying to watch because it reminds us of what we watched in real time as Britain was divided and people believed absolute nonsense because they were convinced it was the truth. Claims · 87 wordsWe now have a situation where we know for a fact that David Parker, one of the leaders of the Centurion Project, is behind a major data breach.³Unearned certainty Alberta voter information was put up on public websites.⁴ Our former colleague in this place and former premier of Alberta, Jason Kenney, is very concerned, and for very good reason. This information included a lot of private information put up in public places. As I mentioned, David Parker is one of the leaders of the separatist movement in Alberta. The question · 16 wordsWould he be concerned, I ask, about advice from Elections Alberta on how to conduct himself? Claims · 17 wordsHe is not going to be concerned. He has already described Elections Alberta as an “evil” institution.⁵ Positioning · 3 wordsThis is extraordinary.Positioning Claims · 82 wordsThe privacy breaches that have occurred in Alberta should make everyone very concerned. We have heard from a Canadian leading expert in national security, Wesley Wark, whose name is known to all of us. From 2005 to 2009, he was a two-term adviser to the prime minister on national security.⁶ He has expressed significant concern about what could happen in an Alberta referendum and how we can ensure there is not foreign interference and also domestic interference, such as happened in Brexit. The question · 13 wordsWhat will the government do to be prepared and hold this country together?

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 81

8 of 9 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.

Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “I rise tonight to pursue a question I initially asked on February 12 of this year,”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 “and it is one about which, regardless of party, I think most people in this House are concerned.”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “which is murky, confusing and opening up a can of worms.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “There is an extremely good film that explains all this in Hollywood fashion,”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “but it is rooted in facts and very well done.”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “It is called Brexit:”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “The Uncivil War with Benedict Cumberbatch.”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “This is extraordinary.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · no score

Not applicable: nothing to answer. Excluded from the average.

Relevance checks whether the speaker stays on topic and answers the question asked. A low score means the speaker dodged the issue.

Respect · 100

0 of 9 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 · 92

1 of 9 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 “we know for a fact”The phrase asserts certainty as settled knowledge in place of citing a source for the claim about the data breach.

Claims · 6

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“a question I initially asked on February 12 of this year”Elizabeth May asked a question in the House about foreign interference in elections on February 12, 2026.search
2“the Alberta premier has said she is going to put forward a question about a question”Since February 12, 2026, the Alberta premier has said she will put forward a question about a question regarding a potential referendum.search
3“David Parker, one of the leaders of the Centurion Project, is behind a major data breach”David Parker, a leader of the Centurion Project, is behind a major data breach.search
4“Alberta voter information was put up on public websites”Alberta voter information was posted on public websites in the data breach.search
5“He has already described Elections Alberta as an “evil” institution”David Parker has described Elections Alberta as an ‘evil’ institution.search
6“From 2005 to 2009, he was a two-term adviser to the prime minister on national security”Wesley Wark served as a two-term adviser to the prime minister on national security from 2005 to 2009.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20