Analysis · Debate reply · beta

François-Philippe Champagne

Liberal on Business of Supply 2026-05-26

80 words · 4 sentences · 6 clauses

Replying to Michael Barrett (Conservative)

“Mr. Chair, the contractor worked for Alto and then worked on the budget presentation that included details about Alto, and money and implementation legislation for Alto. Does the minister recognize that this is a conflict of interest, and were measures taken to prevent that? Was the Ethics Commissioner informed that this contractor was also concurrently employed by Alto?”

Statement grade

B–

72 / 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.

Positioning 30%Reasoning 25%Claims 38%Promise 8%

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

Mr. Chair, Positioning · 24 wordslike all my colleagues here, in the years I have served in the House, I have always treated my colleagues with the utmost respect.Positioning Reasoning · 14 wordsI believe that all members of the House are entitled to the same respect.Off point Claims · 18 wordsI have already stated on several occasions that I have complied with all the rules required by law. Promise · 6 wordsI will continue to do so, Reasoning · 6 wordsas I am required to do, Claims · 12 wordsand as all my colleagues in the House are required to do.Partly on point

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 66

1 of 4 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.

Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “like all my colleagues here, in the years I have served in the House, I have always treated my colleagues with the utmost respect.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 42

3 of 4 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.

Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “like all my colleagues here, in the years I have served in the House, I have always treated my colleagues with the utmost respect.”About the minister’s personal conduct toward colleagues, not the conflict-of-interest question put.
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 believe that all members of the House are entitled to the same respect.”About respect owed among members, not the contractor question.
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 as all my colleagues in the House are required to do.”Shifts to the obligation all members share, not the minister’s own compliance with the rules.

Respect · 100

0 of 4 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 4 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 · 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