← Back to the statement
Statement grade
The average of Signal, Relevance, Respect and Clarity. Average 74 / 100
Signal
95 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Relevance
48 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Respect
100 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Clarity
52 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.
Claims 50% Positioning 5% Reasoning 45%
Structure · 4 steps
Claims · 0
Echo · said 5 times
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Madam Chair, Claims · 22 words what I would say is that affordability is top of mind for the government, and it is top of mind for Canadians. Positioning · 2 words We understand. Positioning Reasoning · 20 words That is why we are acting on the price of homes, the price of food and the price of gas . Partly on point Vague promise
At a glance
Lost points for Partly on point ×4 Positioning Vague promise Didn't answer None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate. Echo ×5 “The price of food and the price of gas.” Said 5 times by 2 members. Every time it was said →
Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.
What the tags mean →
Signal · 95
1 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.
Positioning Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it. What the tags mean → “We understand.” Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Relevance · 48
4 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 motion under debate.
Partly on point 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 → “what I would say is that affordability is top of mind for the government,” It says affordability is a priority without saying whether it agrees it is the best in a decade.
Partly on point 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 it is top of mind for Canadians.” It affirms concern about affordability but does not address whether affordability has improved.
Partly on point 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 understand.” It only acknowledges understanding of the issue, not the question put.
Partly on point 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 why we are acting on the price of homes, the price of food and the price of gas.” It names areas the government is acting on but does not say whether affordability is the best in a decade.
Respect · 100
0 of 6 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 · 52
1 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.
Vague promise A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible. What the tags mean → “we are acting on the price of homes, the price of food and the price of gas” The speaker asserts action without naming any measure, actor, date or success condition.
Echo · 1 repeated line
Words members of Parliament keep repeating, found by the same rule for every member. No score depends on it.
“The price of food and the price of gas.” Said 5 times by 2 members. Every time it was said →
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.
