Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Jenny Kwan

NDP on Build Canada Homes Act 2026-06-05

127 words · 7 sentences · 8 clauses

Replying to Kevin Lamoureux (Liberal)

“Madam Speaker, I think it is important to recognize, within the legislation and the commitment of the government, the issue, in one word, of collaboration. It is not going to be the federal government itself that resolves the housing crisis. We have to work with many different stakeholders: provinces, indigenous communities, territories, municipalities, housing co-ops and others. Habitat for Humanity is one of the non-profits I constantly bring up. That is what this government has committed to do: increase the housing stock. The member made reference to two things that I would like her to provide a bit of further comment on. She said to build one million public homes. How would she define public homes? Would the government build them in their entirety and then provide an ongoing subsidy of 30%, as the member said? Today, there are non-profit government-run houses where there is a percentage based on income. Is that what she is proposing for the one million homes?”

Statement grade

A–

Average 88 / 100

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

Claims 87%Positioning 13%

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

Madam Speaker, Claims · 101 wordsthe NDP has been a strong advocate of the federal government’s getting back to building social housing and co-op housing like it used to, before the Liberals cancelled the national affordable housing program prior to 1993.¹ That is what I want to see in place. The build Canada homes act fails in its blueprint and the details on how it would actually deliver affordability, social housing and co-op housing for Canadians. By the way, my amendment called for accountability, to set baselines, to set targets and to set reported measures of what the government actually achieves.² The Liberals voted against it, ³Positioning · 17 wordsbecause they do not want Canadians to know the truth. They want to hide it from Canadians.Positioning Claims · 9 wordsThere would be no accountability measures under the act.Partly on point

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 82

2 of 7 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 “because they do not want Canadians to know the truth.”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 “They want to hide it from Canadians.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 72

5 of 7 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 “By the way, my amendment called for accountability, to set baselines, to set targets and to set reported measures of what the government actually achieves.”About her amendment’s accountability measures, not the definition of public homes asked for.
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 Liberals voted against it,”About the Liberals’ vote on her amendment, not the question on public homes.
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 they do not want Canadians to know the truth.”About the Liberals’ motives on her amendment, not the question on public homes.
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 “They want to hide it from Canadians.”About the Liberals’ alleged concealment, not the question on public homes.
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 “There would be no accountability measures under the act.”About accountability measures in the act, not the question on public homes.

Respect · 100

0 of 7 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 7 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 · 3

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“the Liberals cancelled the national affordable housing program prior to 1993”The Liberals cancelled the national affordable housing program before 1993.search
2“my amendment called for accountability, to set baselines, to set targets and to set reported measures”Jenny Kwan tabled an amendment to Bill C-20 calling for accountability, baselines, targets and reported measures.search
3“The Liberals voted against it”Liberal members voted against Jenny Kwan’s amendment to Bill C-20.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20