Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Roman Baber

Conservative on Protecting Victims Act 2026-06-04

74 words · 4 sentences · 5 clauses

Replying to Kevin Lamoureux (Liberal). The question was off topic, so this reply is judged against the bill.

“Mr. Speaker, we often hear from the far right, and when we talk about the far right on Bill C-16, they are part of the problem. They really and truly are. Think about this. Not only would Bill C-16 reinstate some of those mandatory minimums that the member says he is concerned about, but let us talk about lawful access. The Conservative Party of Canada has made the determination that lawful access is bad. They do not want to support it. They are fighting it tooth and nail, yet lawful access will help in dealing with issues such as child exploitation and child pornography. Listen to what the member opposite said, and their actions speak louder than words. Does this member support lawful access or not?”

Statement grade

C–

57 / 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 72%Claims 15%Promise 14%

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

Mr. Speaker, Positioning · 10 wordsthe member should stop yelling and start protecting children instead.Positioning Claims · 11 wordsThe member believes that preserving mandatory minimum sentences is far right.Partly on point Positioning · 43 wordsThe Liberal Party has gone so completely insane to the left that anybody who disagrees with it on anything is deemed to be of the far right.Off point I am proud of the fact that the Conservative Party wants to preserve mandatory minimum sentences, PositioningPromise · 10 wordsand we will do so when we form Conservative government.

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.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 27

3 of 6 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 “the member should stop yelling and start protecting children instead.”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 “The Liberal Party has gone so completely insane to the left that anybody who disagrees with it on anything is deemed to be of the far right.”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 am proud of the fact that the Conservative Party wants to preserve mandatory minimum sentences,”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 46

3 of 6 deductions are Relevance

The question was off topic, so this reply is judged against the bill.

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 bill 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 “the member should stop yelling and start protecting children instead.”A jab about conduct with a nod to protecting children, not a position on the bill’s provisions.
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 “The member believes that preserving mandatory minimum sentences is far right.”Touches the mandatory minimums the bill deals with, but its point is the member’s labelling, not the bill.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “The Liberal Party has gone so completely insane to the left that anybody who disagrees with it on anything is deemed to be of the far right.”About the Liberal Party’s labelling of opponents, not any provision or effect of the bill.

Respect · 100

0 of 6 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 6 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 · 0

This list shows the factual statements you can check for yourself: the words as said, and the claim restated to stand on its own.

No checkable claims.

Analysed on 2026-10-20