Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Jeff Kibble

Conservative on An Act to Authorize Certain Payments to be Made out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund 2026-06-16

115 words · 11 sentences · 14 clauses

Replying to Kurt Holman (Conservative)

“Mr. Speaker, my Conservative colleague brought up concerns with regard to Bill C-26 and also the spending of $1.7 billion. My concern with this spending is the lack of accountability. Over the last 11 years, there have been various scandals provided by this Liberal government, such as the WE Charity scandal, the arrive scam scandal and the PrescribeIT scandal. With the lack of accountability, there could be opportunities for another scandal with this bill. I would like my colleague to possibly comment on that and tell us what he thinks.”

Statement grade

B+

Average 80 / 100

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

Claims 54%Positioning 37%Reasoning 10%

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

Mr. Speaker, Claims · 14 wordsmy hon. colleague spoke of accountability and scandal. He listed some of these scandals, Positioning · 9 wordsand the list goes on and on and on.Positioning Reasoning · 11 wordsMy concern is both the lack of accountability and the illusion. Claims · 13 wordsWe heard in an earlier statement from the members opposite claims of rejoicing. Positioning · 4 wordsThat is an illusion.PositioningPartly on point Claims · 24 wordsWe have heard claims, for example, of 2% NATO spending when SIPRI, the global standard for reporting NATO spending, reports it is only 1.6%.¹ Positioning · 5 wordsIt is all an illusion.PositioningOff point Claims · 11 wordsThere were 500,000 homes pledged per year, ²and only 260,000 starts.³ Positioning · 24 wordsAgain, that is another illusion. Canadians are tired of the illusions. They are tired of the scandals, and they are tired of this government.Positioning

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 58

7 of 11 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 “and the list goes on and on and on.”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 “That is an illusion.”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 “It is all an illusion.”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 “Again, that is another illusion.”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 “Canadians are tired of the illusions.”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 “They are tired of the scandals,”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 they are tired of this government.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 61

4 of 11 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 heard in an earlier statement from the members opposite claims of rejoicing.”About earlier claims by members opposite of rejoicing, not the accountability point put.
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 an illusion.”Calls those earlier rejoicing claims an illusion, without addressing the accountability concern raised.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “We have heard claims, for example, of 2% NATO spending when SIPRI, the global standard for reporting NATO spending, reports it is only 1.6%.”About NATO spending figures, a different subject from Bill C-26’s housing accountability.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “It is all an illusion.”Continues the NATO spending point, not the bill or the point put.

Respect · 100

0 of 11 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 11 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 · 3

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“2% NATO spending when SIPRI, the global standard for reporting NATO spending, reports it is only 1.6%”SIPRI reports NATO spending is 1.6%, compared to claims of 2% NATO spending.search
2“500,000 homes pledged per year”500,000 homes were pledged per year.search
3“only 260,000 starts”Only 260,000 homes were started.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20