Analysis · Debate question · beta

Ellis Ross

Conservative on Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation Act 2026-09-21

106 words · 4 sentences · 5 clauses

Following a speech by Jamie Schmale (Conservative)

“Madam Speaker, I hope the member opposite had a restful summer. It is always good to see our Bloc friends back in the House holding the government to account. I do agree that this piece of legislation does not have the teeth necessary to see changes within the way government deals with such things as modern treaties. We have pointed it out time and time again. In fact, in the committee process, it came out that this piece of legislation would produce a report that would name and shame a government department not living up to its word. The Auditor General already does that, but after that, there is still that lingering question of what actually happens. Does a government department get restructured? Does anyone lose their job? Are we seeing consequences in any meaningful form? The answer is no. What we found out at committee is that this might actually cause more court cases, and that is the opposite of what the government should be doing. That is not reconciliation.”

Statement grade

A+

Average 100 / 100

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

Claims 97%The question 3%

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

Madam Speaker, Claims · 103 wordsI was a treaty chairman for eight years for my band.¹ In all those years I was there, and even after my time being an MLA, these issues kept coming up in B.C. Given the chaos in B.C. for the last 10 years or 15 years, Canada has blown an opportunity to have a true partnership with the first nations that signed treaties. From what we understand, the government is going to create another bureaucratic body that is going to cost tens of millions of dollars, with no obligation to follow up on any of the reports coming out of this new office.² The question · 3 wordsAm I correct?

At a glance

Nothing lost points.

Choose a measurement above to see how it scored.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 100

Nothing lost points on 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.

Relevance · 100

Nothing lost points on 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, and the bill under debate.

Respect · 100

Nothing lost points on 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.

Clarity · 100

Nothing lost points on Clarity.

Clarity checks for plain speaking, clear ownership of actions, and honest limits on certainty. A low score means vague promises or evasive language.

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“I was a treaty chairman for eight years for my band”Ellis Ross served as treaty chairman for his band for eight years.search
2“the government is going to create another bureaucratic body that is going to cost tens of millions of dollars”The new Office of the Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation is expected to cost tens of millions of dollars.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20