Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Andrew Lawton

Conservative on Government Orders 2026-06-11

159 words · 6 sentences · 9 clauses

Replying to Ellis Ross (Conservative)

“Mr. Speaker, the member was knowledgeable in his comments and his speech on Bill C-9. I spoke to this bill. As an indigenous person, coming from the Indian Act and knowing that natives did not have rights until the last 50 years, I was shocked at this. The issue is the potential attack not only against faith leaders but also against the fundamental principle of freedom of all manners. I cannot understand why the House has not taken the charter seriously. We are actually playing politics with it. With respect to the motion that my colleague has put on the floor, is there any chance the Liberal government will come to its senses and support it? If not, what are the options for us as Conservatives on behalf of Canadians?”

Statement grade

C+

66 / 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 36%Aside 22%The ask 13%Reasoning 29%

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

Mr. Speaker, Thanks · 27 wordsit is such an honour to work alongside my colleague from Skeena—Bulkley Valley. I have been such an admirer of his work for a great many years.Thanks Aside · 35 wordsI look across the aisle, Partly on pointand the eye rolls I see and the giggles I hear make me think that perhaps we do not have a huge amount of faith that the motion will succeed, AsideThe ask · 20 wordsbut I hope that the Liberals who are not perhaps listening to this right now will do the right thing. Thanks · 31 wordsMy colleague has made some tremendous observations, in and out of the chamber, about the government’s history with indigenous peoples, and this is something I value learning more and more about.Thanks Reasoning · 46 wordsI think the takeaway is that regardless of someone’s beliefs, regardless of their identity, the very worst thing the government can do is impose its value system and its belief system on them. That is what we need to stand up against quite firmly and irrevocably.Partly on 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 · 36

6 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.

Thanks and tributes.What the tags mean “it is such an honour to work alongside my colleague from Skeena—Bulkley Valley.”Thanks: no claim, reason or ask.
Thanks and tributes.What the tags mean “I have been such an admirer of his work for a great many years.”Thanks: no claim, reason or ask.
A remark off to the side of the point.What the tags mean “I look across the aisle,”An aside: no claim, reason or ask.
A remark off to the side of the point.What the tags mean “and the eye rolls I see and the giggles I hear make me think that perhaps we do not have a huge amount of faith that the motion will succeed,”An aside: no claim, reason or ask.
Thanks and tributes.What the tags mean “My colleague has made some tremendous observations, in and out of the chamber, about the government’s history with indigenous peoples,”Thanks: no claim, reason or ask.
Thanks and tributes.What the tags mean “and this is something I value learning more and more about.”Thanks: no claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 62

3 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 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 “I look across the aisle,”Sets up the observation about the Liberals’ reaction but addresses nothing on its own.
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 think the takeaway is that regardless of someone’s beliefs, regardless of their identity, the very worst thing the government can do is impose its value system and its belief system on them.”Argues against the government imposing values, staying on the bill’s subject without 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 “That is what we need to stand up against quite firmly and irrevocably.”Restates the argument against the bill’s approach without addressing the motion’s fate or the options asked about.

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 · 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