Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Ryan Turnbull

Liberal on Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act 2026-06-18

99 words · 7 sentences · 7 clauses

Replying to Elizabeth May (Green)

“Mr. Speaker, the hon. parliamentary secretary is a friend, so when I say a friend, it is not just rhetoric, but I am disappointed. When Bill C-30 was first tabled, I asked the hon. parliamentary secretary for finance if it would not be wise to remove division 8 from an omnibus budget bill, so that the pesticide provisions would not just be studied by the finance committee, but go to the appropriate committee of environment or health. At the time, he said he would get back to me. I do not blame him that he did not have time and, certainly, I know those decisions are not necessarily made by the parliamentary secretary for finance at all. However, does he now not regret, having heard how significant the concerns are from across this country that this bill was not properly studied, that division 8 received no expert review at all?”

Statement grade

76 / 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.

Thanks 7%Claims 83%Procedure 10%

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

Mr. Speaker, Thanks · 7 wordsI definitely sympathize with the member’s predicament.Thanks Claims · 23 wordsThe motion that was used to program our time at the finance committee came from the Conservatives. We agreed to a programming motion.Partly on point An hon. member: Oh, oh! Ryan Turnbull: Procedure · 10 wordsNo, Mr. Speaker, what I am saying is the truth, ProcedureClaims · 59 wordswhich is that the motion that we agreed to to program our time at the finance committee to study Bill C-30 was proposed by the Conservatives.¹ The committee came to consensus on how many hours it was going to spend on how much witness testimony, what ministers were going to come.² That is exactly what we followed through with.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 · 79

2 of 7 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 definitely sympathize with the member’s predicament.”Thanks: no claim, reason or ask.
Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “No, Mr. Speaker, what I am saying is the truth,”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 46

5 of 7 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 “The motion that was used to program our time at the finance committee came from the Conservatives.”About who moved the committee’s programming motion, not whether he regrets the lack of expert review.
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 agreed to a programming motion.”Notes agreement to the programming motion but does not answer the regret 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 “which is that the motion that we agreed to to program our time at the finance committee to study Bill C-30 was proposed by the Conservatives.”Repeats the claim about the programming motion’s origin, not whether he regrets the study arrangements.
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 committee came to consensus on how many hours it was going to spend on how much witness testimony, what ministers were going to come.”Describes the committee’s study arrangements, not the absence of expert review he was asked to regret.
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 exactly what we followed through with.”Says the agreed study plan was followed, without addressing whether he regrets the lack of expert review.

Respect · 100

0 of 7 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 7 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 · 2

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 motion that we agreed to to program our time at the finance committee to study Bill C-30 was proposed by the Conservatives”The programming motion for the finance committee’s study of Bill C-30 was proposed by the Conservatives.search
2“The committee came to consensus on how many hours it was going to spend on how much witness testimony, what ministers were going to come”The finance committee reached consensus on the hours of study, witness testimony and minister appearances for its consideration of Bill C-30.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20