Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Michael Guglielmin

Conservative on Business of Supply 2026-10-27

127 words · 4 sentences · 6 clauses

Replying to Kevin Lamoureux (Liberal)

“Mr. Speaker, I think today’s official opposition underestimates the value of accountability through the different ministers and parliamentary secretaries. Stephen Harper was here for question period but never showed up at the finance committee to address budget issues. There is no change there. Every day we sit, the Conservative Party gets to ask literally dozens of questions, whatever questions they want. There are always ministers here to field those questions. The Minister of Finance presents the budget and will be held to account for the government budget. Does the member believe that the Minister of Finance has an obligation to be the one held accountable for the finance budget?”

Statement grade

A+

Average 96 / 100

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

Claims 68%Reasoning 10%The ask 22%

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

Mr. Speaker, Claims · 86 wordsabsolutely we would love to see the finance minister at the finance committee as well. I know he will be coming to the finance committee when the budget is introduced.³Unearned certainty However, given the state of the fiscal position we are in, the PBO’s own assessment that was released recently and the fact that the Prime Minister of this country is a trained economist who ran on his image as a banker, ¹²as somebody who understands the fiscal conditions of this country, these conditions are deteriorating rapidly. Reasoning · 13 wordsIf he is the man, he is the man to answer the questions, The ask · 28 wordsso he should come to the finance committee, address the committee and let Canadians know exactly what is going on with this fiscal position and the government’s record.

At a glance

Lost points for
AnsweredOf this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 100

0 of 1 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.

Nothing lost points.

Relevance · 100

0 of 1 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.

Nothing lost points.

Respect · 100

0 of 1 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 · 84

1 of 1 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.

Something stated as certain with nothing to back it.What the tags mean “I know”Asserts certainty about a future event with no source offered for the knowledge.

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“the PBO’s own assessment that was released recently”The Parliamentary Budget Officer released an assessment of the government’s fiscal position.search
2“the Prime Minister of this country is a trained economist who ran on his image as a banker”The Prime Minister of Canada is a trained economist who campaigned using an image as a banker.search
3“I know he will be coming to the finance committee when the budget is introduced”The Finance Minister will appear at the finance committee when the budget is introduced.search

Analysed on 2026-10-29