Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Adam van Koeverden

Liberal on Government Orders 2026-06-04

132 words · 5 sentences · 9 clauses

Replying to Roman Baber (Conservative)

“Mr. Speaker, I am wondering, at a time when Canadians are experiencing record violence from criminal enterprises, whether it makes sense to narrow or water down mandatory minimum sentences by creating the safety valve. Does the member have any concern that we are going to have many more situations in which courts do not follow the mandatory minimum sentences?”

Statement grade

75 / 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.

Procedure 4%Reasoning 56%Claims 40%

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

Mr. Speaker, Procedure · 5 wordsI understand the member’s concerns.Procedure Reasoning · 34 wordsI am a strong believer that our job in this House is not to play judge and jury; our job is to create the framework legal system to protect people and to protect victims. Claims · 24 wordsThat is what the bill seeks to do: protect victims, expedite the justice system, and ensure that justice is served and victims are protected. Reasoning · 40 wordsI also strongly believe that we need to invest more in upstream solutions, because simply suggesting that everything is in place for a safe society and we could not do anything to prevent crime is also not a responsible approach. Claims · 29 wordsWe are taking a balanced approach, investing in upstream solutions while also ensuring that the legal system has everything it needs in order to ensure that justice is served.Partly on pointVague promise

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 · 95

1 of 10 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 understand the member’s concerns.”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 45

8 of 10 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 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 “I am a strong believer that our job in this House is not to play judge and jury;”States a general view of Parliament’s role, not a position on the safety valve or mandatory minimums.
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 “our job is to create the framework legal system to protect people and to protect victims.”Speaks to the bill’s protective purpose generally, not the mandatory minimum question raised.
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 “That is what the bill seeks to do:”Describes what the bill seeks to do overall without addressing the safety valve concern.
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 “protect victims, expedite the justice system,”Restates the bill’s aims of protecting victims and speeding justice, not the point put.
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 “and ensure that justice is served and victims are protected.”Restates the bill’s aims again without answering whether the safety valve is a concern.
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 also strongly believe that we need to invest more in upstream solutions,”Turns to upstream investment in prevention, not the mandatory minimum question.
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 “because simply suggesting that everything is in place for a safe society and we could not do anything to prevent crime is also not a responsible approach.”Argues for prevention as a responsible approach, not the safety valve raised.
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 taking a balanced approach, investing in upstream solutions while also ensuring that the legal system has everything it needs in order to ensure that justice is served.”Describes a balanced approach of prevention and legal tools, without a position on the safety valve or mandatory minimums.

Respect · 100

0 of 10 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 · 71

1 of 10 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.

A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible.What the tags mean “investing in upstream solutions”A commitment to investment with no actor, measure, date, or success condition named.

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