Analysis · Debate question · beta

Mark Gerretsen

Liberal on Business of Supply 2026-06-08

42 words · 2 sentences · 4 clauses

Following a speech by Ryan Turnbull (Liberal)

“Madam Speaker, her party voted against the national housing strategy. It did not support those organizations. What about the national school food program? Our government put in $1 billion over five years and then made that program permanent. I have gone and seen that program deliver food to kids who badly need it in her riding—”

Statement grade

30 / 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.

Claims 69%The ask 31%

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

Madam Speaker, Claims · 29 wordswe have seen twice now that the member is refusing to recognize your authority, because she is once again adding a caveat to it and saying, “I apologize, ¹but”. The ask · 13 wordsShe has to unreservedly remove the comment and apologize for what she said.Off point

At a glance

Lost points for
Off topicNone of this question addressed the preceding speech or the topic under debate.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 100

0 of 4 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.

Nothing lost points.

Relevance · 0

4 of 4 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 speech it follows, and the motion under debate.

Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “we have seen twice now that the member is refusing to recognize your authority,”About the member’s compliance with the Chair’s ruling on a withdrawn remark, not the motion’s economic subject.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “because she is once again adding a caveat to it and saying, “I apologize,”About the wording of the member’s apology, not the motion’s economic subject.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “but”.”About the required withdrawal and apology, not the motion’s economic subject.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “She has to unreservedly remove the comment and apologize for what she said.”About the member’s refusal to apologize unreservedly, not the motion’s economic subject.

Respect · 100

0 of 4 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 4 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“because she is once again adding a caveat to it and saying, “I apologize, ”During the exchange on June 8, 2026, Rhonda Kirkland attached a caveat to her withdrawal, saying ‘I withdraw saying, “That is a lie,” but it was categorically untrue.’search

Analysed on 2026-10-20