Analysis · Debate reply · beta

François-Philippe Champagne

Liberal on Business of Supply 2026-05-26

66 words · 1 sentences · 4 clauses

Replying to Michael Barrett (Conservative)

“Mr. Chair, this evening the minister has the opportunity to inform Canadians and the House about the conflict of interest he said he would be in if he participated in votes, decisions, discussions or debates on Alto. This is why the minister put in place a conflict of interest screen. Is that not correct?”

Statement grade

A–

87 / 100, held down by Signal

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

Procedure 39%Claims 61%

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

Mr. Chair, Procedure · 26 wordsI would like to quote an excerpt from the letter written by the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner on April 7, 2026: ProcedureClaims · 40 wordsAlto is a Crown corporation accountable to Parliament through the Minister of Transport, ¹and as Minister of Finance, you have no decision-making authority over matters of human resources at Alto; ²you do not have the opportunity to further the interest—

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 57

1 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.

Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “I would like to quote an excerpt from the letter written by the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner on April 7, 2026:”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.

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 · 100

0 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.

Nothing lost points.

Claims · 2

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“Alto is a Crown corporation accountable to Parliament through the Minister of Transport”A letter dated April 7, 2026 from the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner stated that Alto is a Crown corporation accountable to Parliament through the Minister of Transport.search
2“you have no decision-making authority over matters of human resources at Alto”The Ethics Commissioner’s April 7, 2026 letter stated that the Minister of Finance has no decision-making authority over matters of human resources at Alto.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20