Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Kevin Lamoureux

Liberal on Government Orders 2026-04-23

102 words · 3 sentences · 6 clauses

Replying to James Bezan (Conservative)

“Mr. Speaker, we always have the same indignation coming from the member for Winnipeg North. He wants to talk about marginalization. He is marginalizing victims because he is not paying attention to what they actually said at the national defence committee in their testimony. They bravely stood in front of the committee, shared their experiences and demanded to have more freedom regarding which justice system they were able to get charges prosecuted under and move forward with. The member talks about Madam Arbour. We thank her for her report, which includes the 48 recommendations. However, the current government, for 11 years, sat on the report from Madam Justice Deschamps without touching it or lifting it. The Liberals never even dusted it off as it sat in the corner of the desk of defence ministers, going back to former Minister Sajjan back in the day. If they had acted upon that, we may not be in this situation now. The director of military prosecutions said if it were not for the directive coming from the government, he would have rescinded the orders and gone back to a concurrent system.”

Statement grade

C–

Average 59 / 100

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

Positioning 67%Claims 33%

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

Mr. Speaker, Positioning · 20 wordsI suggest not only that the member has an obligation to listen to what was said at the standing committee, PositioningClaims · 8 wordsas the standing committee dealt with the legislation, Positioning · 33 wordsbut that there is also an obligation to look at what has been taking place over the last few years, based on a recommendation by Justice Arbour with regard to this very issue.Positioning Claims · 26 wordsI can assure the member that she, Unearned certaintyas a justice, had access to and referenced far more members of the Canadian Forces than the member did. Positioning · 15 wordsQuite frankly, I have more confidence in her recommendation than I do in his suggestion.PositioningOff 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 · 31

3 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.

Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “I suggest not only that the member has an obligation to listen to what was said at the standing committee,”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 “but that there is also an obligation to look at what has been taking place over the last few years, based on a recommendation by Justice Arbour with regard to this very issue.”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 “Quite frankly, I have more confidence in her recommendation than I do in his suggestion.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 55

3 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.

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 can assure the member that she,”A personal comparison about access rather than the bill or the point put.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “as a justice, had access to and referenced far more members of the Canadian Forces than the member did.”A jab about how many forces members the member referenced, not about the legislation.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “Quite frankly, I have more confidence in her recommendation than I do in his suggestion.”A political point about whose advice to trust in place of addressing the victims’ testimony point or the bill.

Respect · no score

Not checked: graded before this measurement existed. Excluded from the average.

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.

Clarity · 91

1 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.

Something stated as certain with nothing to back it.What the tags mean “I can assure the member”A personal assurance is offered in place of any evidence for the comparison that follows.

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 2026-09-16