Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Martin Champoux

Bloc Québécois on Business of Supply 2026-10-22

151 words · 8 sentences · 15 clauses

Replying to Todd Doherty (Conservative). The question was off topic, so this reply is judged against the motion.

“Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for bringing this forward. For 11 years, we have seen broken promise after broken promise. Another promise the government made, with regard to an industry that is, I know, as important to Quebec as it is to British Columbia, is that it has, for 11 years, promised to secure a softwood lumber agreement. Today, over 30 mills have closed in my riding. Thousands of British Columbians are out of work. Why should Quebeckers feel that the Liberal government would deliver on this promise when it has broken every other promise it has made to Quebec, and to the nation, over the last 11 years?”

Statement grade

Average 93 / 100

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

Greeting 11%Reasoning 32%Claims 57%

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

Greeting · 16 wordsThat is a very good question, Madam Speaker, and I thank my colleague for asking it.Greeting Reasoning · 49 wordsMy colleague is obviously generalizing; he is really broadening the scope of the issue, but fundamentally, I understand that we are talking about broken promises.Partly on point In our motion today, we are addressing a promise that, while not yet broken, has not yet been kept, and that is very concerning. Claims · 86 wordsI am talking about the $600 million. This $600 million is not a request from Quebec.¹ It is an amount intended for Canada’s entire cultural sector.² As a result, it is not just about a request from Quebec. Of course, the Bloc Québécois is more focused on Quebec’s demands, that is well known, but in this case, it is a promise to all Canadians and to Canada’s entire cultural sector, which, I would like to remind you, generates hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue annually.³

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 85

2 of 5 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.

Greetings and pleasantries.What the tags mean “That is a very good question, Madam Speaker,”A greeting: no claim, reason or ask.
Greetings and pleasantries.What the tags mean “and I thank my colleague for asking it.”A greeting: no claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 87

3 of 5 deductions are Relevance

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

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 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 “My colleague is obviously generalizing;”Comments on the colleague’s framing of the question rather than the motion’s subject.
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 “he is really broadening the scope of the issue,”Comments on the scope the colleague gave the issue, not the motion 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 “but fundamentally, I understand that we are talking about broken promises.”Engages the point about broken promises generally, which is not the motion under debate.

Respect · 100

0 of 5 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 5 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 · 3

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“This $600 million is not a request from Quebec.”The $600 million payment is not a request originating solely from Quebec.search
2“It is an amount intended for Canada’s entire cultural sector.”The $600 million amount is intended for Canada’s entire cultural sector.search
3“generates hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue annually.”Canada’s cultural sector generates hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue annually.search

Analysed on 2026-10-24