Analysis · Reply to a comment · beta

Larry Brock

Conservative on Protecting Victims Act 2026-06-09

59 words · 2 sentences · 5 clauses

Replying to Gurbux Saini (Liberal)

“Mr. Speaker, my colleague opposite talks about the notwithstanding clause. Your government has said publicly that it would use the notwithstanding clause to take away the rights of Canadians, whether it is religious freedom or any others. This is why your party voted in favour of Bill C‑21, which would take rights away from Canadians.”

Statement grade

A+

Average 96 / 100

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

Positioning 14%Promise 86%

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

Mr. Speaker, Positioning · 8 wordsthe member is completely wrong in that assessment.Positioning Promise · 51 wordsWe have always said, as a party, and our leader has been very clear, that we will use the notwithstanding clause when it comes to absurd criminal law and absurdity that has flowed from the Supreme Court of Canada when dealing with child sexual abuse material, ¹which is a classic example.

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 84

1 of 1 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 “the member is completely wrong in that assessment.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 100

0 of 1 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 comment put to the member, and the bill under debate.

Nothing lost points.

Respect · 100

0 of 1 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 1 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“our leader has been very clear, that we will use the notwithstanding clause when it comes to absurd criminal law and absurdity that has flowed from the Supreme Court of Canada when dealing with child sexual abuse material”The party leader has clearly stated that they will use the notwithstanding clause for absurd criminal law and absurdity resulting from the Supreme Court of Canada’s decisions regarding child sexual abuse material.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20