Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Kevin Lamoureux

Liberal on Government Business No. 9—Changes to Standing Orders 2026-04-23

127 words · 7 sentences · 7 clauses

Replying to Yves Perron (Bloc Québécois)

“Mr. Speaker, there are so many points to raise after listening to the speech by the hon. member opposite that I am struggling to choose. He spoke to us of parliamentary heritage and tradition while putting on a show of virtue. According to parliamentary heritage and tradition, the composition of committees must reflect the composition of the House—something the Liberals are failing to respect today—and it must be negotiated and adopted by consensus. They tell us they have won a majority thanks to the by-elections. That is not true. Liberals were elected in those three by-elections that were already held by Liberal MPs. The majority was therefore secured thanks to defectors. The last truly appalling thing my colleague told us was when he spoke of a bill and a study was that his government listens to the opposition when it suits them, but that, now that they have a majority, they will be able to do as they please, because his government is listening to the victims. He said this as though the opposition parties did not listen. Give me a break.”

Statement grade

Average 61 / 100

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

Procedure 12%Claims 35%Promise 31%Positioning 22%

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

Mr. Speaker, Procedure · 15 wordswhile I appreciate the member’s question, I do not necessarily agree with his overall assessment.Procedure Claims · 45 wordsIf members look at the legislative agenda of the government, there is a very limited amount of time for debate under government business. There is no programming in place.¹ Over the last 15-plus years, there may have been an argument to start talking about programming.Off point Promise · 39 wordsI would like to see changes to the Standing Orders. I would be happy to work with members of the Bloc and others, in a co-operative way, to look at ways in which we can improve upon the system.Vague promise Positioning · 28 wordsWhat we have been afforded, I think, is a good opportunity today to reset the dial and, hopefully, to see more people working to build a stronger Canada.Positioning

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 60

2 of 6 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 “while I appreciate the member’s question, I do not necessarily agree with his overall assessment.”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 “What we have been afforded, I think, is a good opportunity today to reset the dial and, hopefully, to see more people working to build a stronger Canada.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 54

3 of 6 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 motion 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 “If members look at the legislative agenda of the government, there is a very limited amount of time for debate under government business.”This shifts to the government’s legislative agenda and debate time, a different subject from the committee composition 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 “There is no programming in place.”A point about programming that was not raised in the question and does not speak to the committee membership motion.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “Over the last 15-plus years, there may have been an argument to start talking about programming.”This discusses programming debates over 15 years, another topic in place of the question asked.

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 · 69

1 of 6 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.

A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible.What the tags mean “happy to work with members of the Bloc and others, in a co-operative way, to look at ways in which we can improve upon the system”A commitment to co-operate with no specific action, date or success condition attached.

Claims · 1

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“There is no programming in place.”There is currently no programming in place limiting debate time for government business in the House of Commons.search

Analysed on 2026-09-16