← Back to the statement
Statement grade
The average of Signal, Relevance, Respect and Clarity is 84. The grade is held to 77, 30 above Relevance. 77 / 100, held down by Relevance
Signal
91 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Relevance
47 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Respect
100 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Clarity
100 / 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.
Procedure 7% Claims 93%
Structure · 3 steps
Claims · 2
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Mr. Chair, Procedure · 5 words I will continue my quote: Procedure Claims · 64 words “...you have no decision-making authority over matters of human resources at Alto; 1 you do not have the opportunity to further the interest of any specific Alto employee”. I was also told that there is no risk of conflict of interest and that a screen is not required.2 That is what I was told by the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner. Partly on point
At a glance
Lost points for Partly on point ×4 Procedure Didn't answer None 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 · 91
1 of 5 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.
Procedure Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business. What the tags mean → “I will continue my quote:” Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Relevance · 47
4 of 5 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 → ““...you have no decision-making authority over matters of human resources at Alto;” Continues the Ethics Commissioner quote about Alto decision-making, not whether the minister cast the vote asked about.
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 → “you do not have the opportunity to further the interest of any specific Alto employee”.” Continues the same quote about Alto employees’ interests, not the vote on Motion No. 44.
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 → “I was also told that there is no risk of conflict of interest and that a screen is not required.” About being told no conflict-of-interest screen is required, not whether the minister voted on Motion No. 44.
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 what I was told by the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner.” Attributes the conflict-of-interest information to the Ethics Commissioner’s office, but does not address the vote asked about.
Respect · 100
0 of 5 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 5 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 “you have no decision-making authority over matters of human resources at Alto” The Office of the Conflict of and Ethics Commissioner stated in an April 7, 2026 message that the Minister of Finance has no decision-making authority over matters of human resources at Alto. search 2 “there is no risk of conflict of interest and that a screen is not required” The Minister of Finance says he was told by the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner that there is no risk of conflict of interest and that a screen is not required. search
