Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Warren Steinley

Conservative on Build Canada Homes Act 2026-06-09

104 words · 6 sentences · 7 clauses

Replying to Gord Johns (NDP)

“Mr. Speaker, my colleague made some good points. The number one project in my riding for Build Canada Homes is a project to serve some individuals with intellectual disabilities. We know that many people with intellectual disabilities are served by L’Arche Canada, L’Arche Comox Valley in my riding. I am sure it is L’Arche in Regina—Lewvan. Right now, Build Canada Homes is holding the project up. It is saying that it does not meet the criteria for supportive and transitional needs. How can people with intellectual disabilities not meet the criteria for transitional needs? This is a project that is supported by L’Arche Canada. Build Canada Homes is saying that it cannot do anything right now. The minister’s office says it cannot talk to Build Canada Homes and cannot get involved. These people have nowhere to go right now. They are the most vulnerable people in our society. They count on us. Maybe my colleague can speak about how this is such a disaster right now.”

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.

Claims 30%Reasoning 70%

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

Mr. Speaker, Claims · 11 wordsmy NDP colleague’s comments go to the heart of my argument. Reasoning · 61 wordsThe federal government should not be picking winners and losers. The provincial government and municipalities can put programs forward to make sure that the people who most need homes can get them. The government can supply some of the funding, but the people on the ground doing the building should be able to get that money and help build those homes. Claims · 20 wordsI was proud to be part of the Saskatchewan government that brought forward the Saskatchewan assured income for disability program.¹ Reasoning · 12 wordsWe have to look after the most vulnerable people in our society.Partly on point

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 · 100

0 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.

Nothing lost points.

Relevance · 45

7 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 “my NDP colleague’s comments go to the heart of my argument.”It acknowledges the concern but offers no answer about the project or its criteria.
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 federal government should not be picking winners and losers.”It states a general view on federal picking of winners and losers, not the project or criteria asked about.
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 provincial government and municipalities can put programs forward to make sure that the people who most need homes can get them.”It proposes provinces and municipalities delivering programs instead of answering what was 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 “The government can supply some of the funding,”It is a general point about funding, not the L’Arche project’s hold-up.
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 “but the people on the ground doing the building should be able to get that money and help build those homes.”It is a general point about who should build homes, not the question’s subject.
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 was proud to be part of the Saskatchewan government that brought forward the Saskatchewan assured income for disability program.”It is about the member’s past role in a Saskatchewan disability income program, not the project or criteria 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 have to look after the most vulnerable people in our society.”It is a general statement about caring for vulnerable people, not an answer on the project.

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 · 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“the Saskatchewan government that brought forward the Saskatchewan assured income for disability program”The Saskatchewan government brought forward the Saskatchewan assured income for disability program.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20