Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Ellis Ross

Conservative on Business of Supply 2026-10-06

88 words · 7 sentences · 7 clauses

Replying to Elizabeth May (Green)

“Mr. Speaker, I want to point out, though, that the idea of shipping bitumen with diluent to other countries, bypassing Canadian refineries, is primarily because we have not had a Canadian-owned refinery industry. We had 40 refineries in 1960. They were all owned outside of Canada for the most part, and they did not have, as corporations, the incentive to keep them running in Canada. They were already owned in the United States. They did not want to compete with themselves, so they kept running refineries there and shipping our product there. I just wonder if the hon. friend from Skeena—Bulkley Valley happens to know the one product in Canada for which we do have a strategic reserve, for fun. I will not put him on the spot, but it is maple syrup in Quebec. That is the one resource with a strategic reserve.”

Statement grade

61 / 100, held down by Clarity

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

Anecdote 58%Claims 14%Promise 28%

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

Mr. Speaker, Anecdote · 51 wordsI am glad to hear we have a reserve for our maple syrup. Haisla had the same question. We are just a small native band. We were wondering the same thing about why Canadian investors would not invest in major projects. The simple answer came back that they cannot afford it.Anecdote Claims · 12 wordsOnly the largest multinational corporations can afford to do business in Canada.Partly on point Promise · 25 wordsWhat we are trying to do on this side of the House is to change that, to make life affordable and make it more investable.Vague promise

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.
VagueMuch of this statement used imprecise wording, lacked details on timing or responsibility, or made broad claims without support.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 39

5 of 9 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.

A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “I am glad to hear we have a reserve for our maple syrup.”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “Haisla had the same question.”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “We are just a small native band.”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “We were wondering the same thing about why Canadian investors would not invest in major projects.”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “The simple answer came back that they cannot afford it.”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 82

3 of 9 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.

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 “We were wondering the same thing about why Canadian investors would not invest in major projects.”About why Canadian investors will not fund major projects, not the strategic reserve question.
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 “The simple answer came back that they cannot afford it.”Offers a claim about investors’ ability to pay rather than the strategic reserve question.
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 “Only the largest multinational corporations can afford to do business in Canada.”About who can afford to do business in Canada, not the question asked.

Respect · 100

0 of 9 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 · 31

1 of 9 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 “What we are trying to do on this side of the House is to change that”The commitment names no measure, date, or condition for making Canada more investable or affordable.

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 2026-10-19