Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Tamara Jansen

Conservative on Government Business No. 12—Proceedings on Bill C-30 2026-06-15

131 words · 9 sentences · 9 clauses

Replying to Kevin Lamoureux (Liberal)

“Mr. Speaker, one of the biggest expenditures that the government is making, which is relatively new, is in the area of the military. The Liberal government has actually elevated military spending to 2% of Canada’s GDP, something the Conservative government in the past had at 1%. When the Leader of the Opposition was a part of the government caucus, 1% of Canada’s GDP went to the military. Does the member support the Government of Canada’s expenditure of 2% of GDP to the military?”

Statement grade

B–

74 / 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.

Reasoning 67%Claims 33%

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

Mr. Speaker, Reasoning · 55 wordsI actually want to talk about the fact that what we are opposing is a process that weakens accountability and a fiscal plan that seems to be planned out on the back of a napkin. Parliament exists to examine legislation, improve it and hold the government accountable for taxpayer dollars. That should not be controversial. Claims · 32 wordsThe amendment moved by my Conservative colleague would allow committee work to continue and would remove the parts of the motion that cut off debate and scrutiny.¹ That is a reasonable position. Reasoning · 33 wordsIf the government’s legislation is strong, it should survive committee review. If its spending is justified, ministers should be able to defend it. If the plan is working, Canadians should be seeing results. Claims · 11 wordsInstead, Canadians are seeing higher costs, weak growth and more debt.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 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.

Nothing lost points.

Relevance · 44

9 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 motion 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 actually want to talk about the fact that what we are opposing is a process that weakens accountability and a fiscal plan that seems to be planned out on the back of a napkin.”About the motion’s process and the fiscal plan, not the military spending 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 “Parliament exists to examine legislation, improve it and hold the government accountable for taxpayer dollars.”About Parliament’s role in scrutiny, not the military spending 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 “That should not be controversial.”Continues the point about scrutiny, not the military spending 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 amendment moved by my Conservative colleague would allow committee work to continue and would remove the parts of the motion that cut off debate and scrutiny.”About the Conservative amendment to the motion, not the military spending 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 “That is a reasonable position.”Comment on that amendment’s merits, not the military spending 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 “If the government’s legislation is strong, it should survive committee review.”About committee review of the legislation, not the military spending 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 “If its spending is justified, ministers should be able to defend it.”About defending spending generally, not the military spending 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 “If the plan is working, Canadians should be seeing results.”About whether the fiscal plan is working, not the military spending 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 “Instead, Canadians are seeing higher costs, weak growth and more debt.”About costs, growth and debt generally, not the military spending 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 · 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 amendment moved by my Conservative colleague would allow committee work to continue and would remove the parts of the motion that cut off debate and scrutiny”The Conservative amendment to the motion on Bill C-30 would allow committee work to continue and would remove the parts of the motion that cut off debate and scrutiny.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20