Analysis · Debate question · beta

Jacob Mantle

Conservative on Adjournment Proceedings 2026-06-18

181 words · 10 sentences · 12 clauses

Following a speech by Ryan Turnbull (Liberal)

“Mr. Speaker, it is good to be here in the very last moments before the House rises for the summer. I know that there are a large number of farms in the member opposite’s riding. There are farm succession plans all across this country, and farmers do struggle with succession, so I understand the issue the member is speaking about. We have done some things recently, in the spring economic update implementation act, on this front with capital gains exemption. It applies only to employee ownership trusts and worker co-operatives, but I think it highlights where the government is open to looking at options for succession to make it easier to hand down businesses. In this case, the one I am referencing is employee ownership trusts, which is a model I have advocated for. Worker-owned co-operatives will get the same tax treatment. It is a measure I have supported from day one because it offers owners of businesses that are small- to medium-sized, or they could be larger, the opportunity, when they want to sell the business, to protect those businesses and also to hand them down to workers. This creates wealth-building opportunities for frontline workers in a grocery chain, for example. There are many examples in the U.K. For example, Waitrose is a company run by John Lewis Partnership. It is a good example of how employee ownership trusts can create a shared equity model where frontline workers get to participate in the proceeds of the company. I think it is similar to a model that could be applied to farms in this country, although I do not know of any workup of the details on that at this point. I thank the member for bringing this up. I think it is an important consideration.”

Statement grade

34 / 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.

Promise 7%Procedure 9%Positioning 7%Claims 46%Reasoning 31%

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

Mr. Speaker, Promise · 12 wordsI look forward to hearing what the government proposes in the fall.Partly on point Procedure · 17 wordsIn the last minute I have, I would like to comment on the Speaker’s ruling from yesterday.¹Procedure Positioning · 12 wordsI appreciated the Speaker’s ruling but I was deeply disappointed by it.Positioning Claims · 32 wordsFirst, on a factual basis, the Speaker indicated in the ruling that there was only supposition that certain members of the government may have had privileged information about the timing of amendments.⁴ Reasoning · 21 wordsI would suggest to the Speaker that the fact that they submitted amendments is evidence enough that they had that information.² Claims · 51 wordsSecond, the Speaker made this point: “Both the minority and the majority have rights; ³however, primacy cannot be given to both.” That was the quote the Speaker used. That was not the issue. The issue was the level playing field and primacy being given by the Speaker’s ruling to the majority. Reasoning · 36 wordsI am troubled by the precedent that the Speaker’s ruling may have set for giving the government the ability to deny members of the House, of any party, their participatory rights in the submission of amendments.Off point

At a glance

Lost points for
Off topicNone of this question addressed the preceding speech or the topic under debate.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 77

2 of 13 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.

Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “In the last minute I have, I would like to comment on the Speaker’s ruling from yesterday.”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “I appreciated the Speaker’s ruling but I was deeply disappointed by it.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 4

11 of 13 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 speech it follows.

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 forward to hearing what the government proposes in the fall.”It stays on the farm succession issue but offers no reply to the question or the government’s answer, only anticipating future proposals.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “I appreciated the Speaker’s ruling but I was deeply disappointed by it.”It comments on the Speaker’s ruling, not the farm succession question on notice.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “First, on a factual basis, the Speaker indicated in the ruling that there was only supposition that certain members of the government may have had privileged information about the timing of amendments.”It disputes the Speaker’s ruling on privileged information, a subject unrelated to the farm succession question.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “I would suggest to the Speaker that the fact that they submitted amendments is evidence enough that they had that information.”It argues about members’ knowledge of amendments, not the farm succession question on notice.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “Second, the Speaker made this point:”It introduces a quotation from the Speaker’s ruling, unrelated to the farm succession question.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean ““Both the minority and the majority have rights;”It is part of the quoted ruling about minority and majority rights, not the farm succession question.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “however, primacy cannot be given to both.””It continues the quoted ruling on primacy of rights, unrelated to the farm succession question.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “That was the quote the Speaker used.”It identifies the source of the quotation from the ruling, not the farm succession question.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “That was not the issue.”It disputes what the ruling addressed, a subject apart from the farm succession question.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “The issue was the level playing field and primacy being given by the Speaker’s ruling to the majority.”It argues about the ruling’s effect on the level playing field, not the farm succession question.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “I am troubled by the precedent that the Speaker’s ruling may have set for giving the government the ability to deny members of the House, of any party, their participatory rights in the submission of amendments.”It concerns the precedent set by the Speaker’s ruling on participatory rights, unrelated to the farm succession question.

Respect · 100

0 of 13 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 13 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 · 4

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 Speaker’s ruling from yesterday”The Speaker of the House of Commons issued a ruling on June 17, 2026, the day before this adjournment debate.search
2“they submitted amendments”Members of the government submitted amendments (at the stage covered by the Speaker’s ruling).search
3““Both the minority and the majority have rights; ”The Speaker’s June 17, 2026 ruling contained the words ‘Both the minority and the majority have rights; however, primacy cannot be given to both.’search
4“only supposition that certain members of the government may have had privileged information about the timing of amendments”The Speaker’s June 17, 2026 ruling stated there was only supposition that certain government members may have had privileged information about the timing of amendments.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20