Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Branden Leslie

Conservative on Business of Supply 2026-06-08

173 words · 11 sentences · 11 clauses

Replying to Grant Jackson (Conservative)

“Madam Speaker, the analogy, I think, is just perfect. The Liberals are spinning their tires so hard in the mud, trying to prove to Canadians that they are improving the economic situation when they are in fact failing it, that they are actually going backward and making things worse. They are doing this instead of being stuck stationary and, certainly, instead of moving forward, which is exactly what people in this country need, particularly Manitobans and young Canadians across this country, from coast to coast to coast. I wonder if the member, who has been here a bit longer than I have, could provide a little more context about what it might take to finally get the Liberals to do a bit of self-reflection, eat a bit humble pie and maybe make a change so that Canadians are better off.”

Statement grade

62 / 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 62%Claims 10%The ask 28%

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

Madam Speaker, Positioning · 108 wordsI want to believe the Liberals have that in them. The last 10 years have not shown me that they have an ability to accept things as they are. It is like they do not talk to people who live in the real world and see the cost pressures they are facing. One thing that really bothers me is that in government, just like in life, it is okay to sometimes say, “We were wrong. We messed up.” We do not have to continuously hide behind the fact that things are not going okay and try to blame everybody else. The government should take a bit of responsibility.Positioning Claims · 17 wordsThe other day, I heard a minister try to blame Stephen Harper.¹ It is 11 years later.²Partly on point The ask · 48 wordsIt is time to accept that things have not been going well because of the policies and accept the ideas that are coming collaboratively from the Conservatives to try to move this country forward. Change the policies and change course so that we can all be better off.

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.
AnsweredOf this reply, 90% addressed the question or point raised.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 32

7 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.

Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “I want to believe the Liberals have that in them.”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 last 10 years have not shown me that they have an ability to accept things as they are.”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 “It is like they do not talk to people who live in the real world and see the cost pressures they are facing.”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 “One thing that really bothers me is that in government, just like in life, it is okay to sometimes say, “We were wrong.”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 “We messed up.””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 “We do not have to continuously hide behind the fact that things are not going okay and try to blame everybody else.”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 government should take a bit of responsibility.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 92

2 of 9 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 motion 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 other day, I heard a minister try to blame Stephen Harper.”About a minister blaming Stephen Harper, which supports the point but strays from what the question asked.
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 “It is 11 years later.”About how long ago the Harper era was, not what would prompt the Liberals to change.

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 · 100

0 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.

Nothing lost points.

Claims · 2

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“I heard a minister try to blame Stephen Harper”A Liberal government minister recently blamed Stephen Harper for problems facing Canada.search
2“It is 11 years later”It has been about 11 years since Stephen Harper’s time as prime minister.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20