Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Kevin Lamoureux

Liberal on Protecting Victims Act 2026-06-09

137 words · 3 sentences · 5 clauses

Replying to Mike Lake (Conservative)

“Mr. Speaker, it was interesting to hear the hon. member, in response to a question from our side, very clearly distance himself from the 10 years of government that he was a part of. Here are some facts on those 10 years. Since 2015, human trafficking has increased by 84%, sexual assaults increased by 76% and violent crime increased by 55%. I wonder if the hon. member might want to take this opportunity to express his regret for the role he played in passing laws that led to those horrific results.”

Statement grade

D+

54 / 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 74%The ask 26%

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

Mr. Speaker, Positioning · 101 wordswhat often happens with the Conservatives is that they do a great deal of research to try to justify a behaviour, which does nothing but downgrade and be disrespectful in terms of Canada and the way Canada is moving.Off point I can tell the member that he needs to get ahead and start looking at what has taken place over the last 13 to 14 months since Canadians made the wise decision, I would argue, to elect a new prime minister and a new government with a totally different agenda, ¹and part of that agenda is making the communities we represent safer.PositioningVague promise The ask · 36 wordsI wish that members of the Conservative Party of Canada would, to use their words, get out of the way and allow the legislation, these initiatives, to become law so that our constituents would be safer.Off point

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.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 24

4 of 8 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 “what often happens with the Conservatives is that they do a great deal of research to try to justify a behaviour,”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 “which does nothing but downgrade and be disrespectful in terms of Canada and the way Canada is moving.”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 “I can tell the member that he needs to get ahead and start looking at what has taken place over the last 13 to 14 months since Canadians made the wise decision, I would argue, to elect a new prime minister and a new government with a totally different agenda,”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 “and part of that agenda is making the communities we represent safer.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 40

3 of 8 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.

Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “what often happens with the Conservatives is that they do a great deal of research to try to justify a behaviour,”An attack on the Conservatives’ research habits, not an answer to the question about his own role.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “which does nothing but downgrade and be disrespectful in terms of Canada and the way Canada is moving.”A characterization of the Conservatives as disrespectful to Canada, not a response to the question.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “I wish that members of the Conservative Party of Canada would, to use their words, get out of the way and allow the legislation, these initiatives, to become law so that our constituents would be safer.”A demand that the Conservatives step aside, not an answer to the question about his own record.

Respect · 100

0 of 8 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 · 88

1 of 8 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.

A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible.What the tags mean “part of that agenda is making the communities we represent safer”A commitment to safety with no actor, measure, date or success condition named.

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“elect a new prime minister and a new government”Canadians elected a new prime minister and a new government at the federal election in 2025, within the 13 to 14 months before this June 2026 debate.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20