Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Helena Konanz

Conservative on Strong and Free Elections Act 2026-04-24

81 words · 3 sentences · 7 clauses

Replying to Sherry Romanado (Liberal)

“Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the member opposite if there is anything else she feels that perhaps we should be including in this bill to strengthen it and if she would like to elaborate on anything she feels we should also include.”

Statement grade

B–

Average 70 / 100

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

Promise 32%Claims 63%The ask 5%

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

Mr. Speaker, Promise · 26 wordsI think quite a bit needs to be discussed at the committee level, Vague promiseand I look forward to our party collaborating with all parties on this.Vague promise Claims · 45 wordsI think there should be a discussion, Off pointand not everyone agrees with me on this, of course, on whether someone needs to be a citizen to vote in the nomination process. I think it is a really interesting and important issue that should be discussed, The ask · 4 wordsand voted on also, Claims · 6 wordsbecause obviously, it does affect elections.Unearned certainty

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 100

0 of 6 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 · 55

3 of 6 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 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 “I think quite a bit needs to be discussed at the committee level,”This defers to committee process rather than identifying anything to include in 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 “and I look forward to our party collaborating with all parties on this.”This speaks to cross-party collaboration generally, not the content of 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 think there should be a discussion,”This says only that a discussion should happen, offering nothing about what the bill should include.

Respect · no score

Not checked: graded before this measurement existed. Excluded from the average.

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 · 56

3 of 6 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 “quite a bit needs to be discussed at the committee level”It names no specific item, actor, date or measure for the discussion.
A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible.What the tags mean “I look forward to our party collaborating with all parties on this”A commitment to collaborate with no concrete step, date or success condition.
Something stated as certain with nothing to back it.What the tags mean “obviously, it does affect elections”The word ‘obviously’ asserts certainty in place of any source or evidence.

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 2026-09-16