Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Aaron Gunn

Conservative on Government Business No. 9—Changes to the Standing Orders 2026-04-27

110 words · 7 sentences · 8 clauses

Replying to Xavier Barsalou-Duval (Bloc Québécois)

“Mr. Speaker, as my colleague has rightly pointed out, there has been a shift in the balance of power in Parliament, which is simply the result of a wave of defections. People have been lured by the prospect of power. We do not know what was promised to them, but I know there have been specific discussions regarding one MP who left the Conservatives to join the Liberals. Does my colleague have any details to share with us regarding the procedures or methods used by the Minister of Housing and Infrastructure, in particular, to make phone calls and promise people gifts in exchange for switching sides?”

Statement grade

75 / 100, held down by Relevance

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

Claims 49%Reasoning 51%

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

Mr. Speaker, Claims · 43 wordsthe truth is that this is a question Canadians would like to have answered.Unearned certainty I do not have the answers. We do not know what conversations were happening behind closed doors. We do not know what was offered or what enticements were made. Reasoning · 56 wordsThat is the very essence of the problem. Is the balance of power in this chamber, in this House, about to be upset because of conversations that Canadians were not subject to, did not have a say in and did not have a vote on? I wish I had the answers to my hon. colleague’s questions, Claims · 11 wordsand I think Canadians wish they had those answers as well.Partly on point

At a glance

Lost points for
Didn't answerNone of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 100

0 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.

Nothing lost points.

Relevance · 45

8 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 “the truth is that this is a question Canadians would like to have answered.”About Canadians wanting answers to the question, without offering any answer to what was asked.
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 “I do not have the answers.”States plainly that the member cannot answer the question asked.
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 do not know what conversations were happening behind closed doors.”States that the conversations asked about are unknown, giving a reason for not answering.
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 do not know what was offered or what enticements were made.”States that what was offered is unknown, giving a reason for not answering.
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 “That is the very essence of the problem.”Comments on the secrecy raised by the question without providing the details asked for.
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 “Is the balance of power in this chamber, in this House, about to be upset because of conversations that Canadians were not subject to, did not have a say in and did not have a vote on?”Raises the balance-of-power concern behind the question but does not address the methods asked about.
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 “I wish I had the answers to my hon. colleague’s questions,”Restates that the member cannot answer the question asked.
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 “and I think Canadians wish they had those answers as well.”Reiterates that no answers are available without addressing what was 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 · 83

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.

Something stated as certain with nothing to back it.What the tags mean “the truth is”The formula asserts certainty about what Canadians want without offering a source.

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 2026-10-20