Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Jamil Jivani

Conservative on Building Canada Strong Act 2026-10-07

136 words · 6 sentences · 9 clauses

Replying to Kevin Lamoureux (Liberal). The question was off topic, so this reply is judged against the bill.

“Madam Speaker, since the last federal election, which was about 18 months ago, Canadians have been genuinely concerned about Trump, trade and tariffs. They have been on the front burner virtually from day one, and Canada needs to be able to adjust as we build a team Canada approach that involves many different stakeholders, led by the Prime Minister. The member opposite went down to the United States, and he had a meeting that upset a lot of Canadians. He told Canadians, as a mouthpiece, many would suggest, of President Trump, that we needed to stop having a “hissy fit”. I am wondering if the member would take this opportunity to provide clarity on that and apologize to Canadians for making that statement on behalf of President Trump.”

Statement grade

38 / 100, held down by Signal

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

Positioning 84%Procedure 7%Claims 9%

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

Madam Speaker, Positioning · 54 wordsit is shameful for the member opposite to suggest that I speak for anyone but my constituents. I have fought very hard for a better relationship between us and the United States at a time when I believe the governing party is exploiting bad relationships between the two countries for its own political benefit.PositioningOff point Procedure · 10 wordsThe conversation we are having today is a perfect example.Procedure Claims · 12 wordsI just spoke for 10 minutes about the Liberals’ airport privatization agenda, ¹Positioning · 60 wordsand instead of responding to any of the legitimate concerns Canadians are noting, they want to draw attention to the United States. This is their political strategy in a nutshell: advance policies that under no other circumstances would have public support, but hope that if they fearmonger enough, they will get their agenda done.Partly on point I am not falling for it.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 · 8

8 of 14 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 “it is shameful for the member opposite to suggest that I speak for anyone but my constituents.”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 “I have fought very hard for a better relationship between us and the United States at a time when I believe the governing party is exploiting bad relationships between the two countries for its own political benefit.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “The conversation we are having today is a perfect example.”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 “and instead of responding to any of the legitimate concerns Canadians are noting, they want to draw attention to the United States.”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 “This is their political strategy in a nutshell:”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 “advance policies that under no other circumstances would have public support,”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 hope that if they fearmonger enough, they will get their agenda done.”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 “I am not falling for it.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 35

6 of 14 deductions are Relevance

The question was off topic, so this reply is judged against the bill.

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 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 “it is shameful for the member opposite to suggest that I speak for anyone but my constituents.”Responds to the member’s accusation about whom he speaks for, not the bill.
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 have fought very hard for a better relationship between us and the United States at a time when I believe the governing party is exploiting bad relationships between the two countries for its own political benefit.”About Canada-US relations and the parties’ conduct on them, which the bill does not touch.
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 “This is their political strategy in a nutshell:”Sets up a general characterization of the Liberals’ strategy without addressing the bill itself.
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 “advance policies that under no other circumstances would have public support,”Accuses the government of advancing unsupported policies generally, without naming the bill or its measures.
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 “but hope that if they fearmonger enough, they will get their agenda done.”Claims the government uses fearmongering to pass its agenda, not the bill’s contents.
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 am not falling for it.”A closing remark about not being swayed, not about the bill.

Respect · 100

0 of 14 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 · 100

0 of 14 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.

Nothing lost points.

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“I just spoke for 10 minutes”Jamil Jivani spoke for 10 minutes in the debate on Bill C-39 before this reply.search

Analysed on 2026-10-19