Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Arielle Kayabaga

Liberal on Government Orders 2026-06-10

52 words · 5 sentences · 5 clauses

Replying to Martin Champoux (Bloc Québécois)

“Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the parliamentary secretary on her speech. From the outset, I want to say that the Bloc Québécois will support Bill C-25 for a number of reasons. In her speech, my colleague mentioned some of the provisions that Bill C-25 would introduce, including prohibiting individuals from falsely representing themselves to be someone they are not. The current Prime Minister got elected by claiming to be the only one capable of standing up to Donald Trump in negotiations with the United States. The record of the past year suggests that is totally far-fetched, it is false, and we can see that. According to my colleague, does that mean that, under the provisions of Bill C-25, the Prime Minister himself would be in violation of the law?”

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.

Thanks 29%Claims 25%Aside 46%

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

Mr. Speaker, Thanks · 15 wordsI often appreciate the questions asked by my colleague opposite. He usually seems quite reasonable.Thanks Claims · 13 wordsWe have been staying here later than usual for the past few days.Partly on point Aside · 24 wordsI think that a bit of fatigue is setting in. I am sure he will have other opportunities to ask rather more serious questions.Aside

At a glance

Lost points for
Didn't answerNone of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.
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 5 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.

Thanks and tributes.What the tags mean “I often appreciate the questions asked by my colleague opposite.”Thanks: no claim, reason or ask.
Thanks and tributes.What the tags mean “He usually seems quite reasonable.”Thanks: no claim, reason or ask.
A remark off to the side of the point.What the tags mean “I think that a bit of fatigue is setting in.”An aside: no claim, reason or ask.
A remark off to the side of the point.What the tags mean “I am sure he will have other opportunities to ask rather more serious questions.”An aside: no claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 49

1 of 5 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 “We have been staying here later than usual for the past few days.”On the subject of the question, but no answer to what was asked can be drawn from it.

Respect · 100

0 of 5 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 5 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 · 0

This list shows the factual statements you can check for yourself: the words as said, and the claim restated to stand on its own.

No checkable claims.

Analysed on 2026-10-20