Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Cheryl Gallant

Conservative on Government Orders 2026-04-23

80 words · 3 sentences · 6 clauses

Replying to Kevin Lamoureux (Liberal)

“Mr. Speaker, the legislation does have substance and it does meet the reality. What is absent is any sort of Conservative rationale for what the Conservatives are doing to the bill. Justice Arbour’s recommendation five is the essence of the legislation. Justice Arbour worked with literally hundreds, going into thousands, of people, either directly or indirectly, with CAF to ensure that we had the right recommendation. Even the standing committee that the member was referencing earlier came up with another recommendation supporting it. I have never heard the Conservatives, prior to today, question Justice Arbour. Why has the Conservative Party flipped its position and is not listening—”

Statement grade

A+

Average 97 / 100

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

Claims 99%Procedure 1%

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

Mr. Speaker, Claims · 8 wordswe respect the recommendations made by Justice Arbour. Procedure · 1 wordsHowever, ProcedureClaims · 71 wordswhile Justice Arbour listened to the victims of sexual assault, she did not have as much breadth as we did in listening to the testimonies of law enforcement, of people who are in the military and of people who had direct involvement in those proceedings, such as former judges and former lawyers in the system. We heard more testimony, ¹and that is why we proposed some amendments, which have been rejected.²Hidden agency

At a glance

Lost points for
AnsweredOf this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 98

1 of 2 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 “However,”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 100

0 of 2 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.

Nothing lost points.

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 · 94

1 of 2 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.

Wording that hides who did something, or who will.What the tags mean “which have been rejected”The passive names no actor for the rejection, so the reader cannot tell who voted the amendments down.

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“We heard more testimony”The Conservative Party says it heard more testimony than Justice Arbour did in the course of its review of the military justice system.search
2“which have been rejected”The Conservative Party’s proposed amendments to Bill C-11, the military justice system modernization act, were rejected.search

Analysed on 2026-09-16