Analysis · Debate reply · beta

François-Philippe Champagne

Liberal on Business of Supply 2026-05-26

38 words · 2 sentences · 2 clauses

Replying to Jasraj Hallan (Conservative)

“Mr. Chair, can the finance minister confirm that he will not be involved in the process of appointing board members for this new debt fund?”

Statement grade

–

Not graded

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

Claims 42%Promise 58%

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

Mr. Chair, Claims · 16 wordswe understand very well that governance is essential when it comes to the sovereign wealth fund. Promise · 22 wordsWe have been saying very clearly, very specifically, that it is going to be at arm’s length from the Government of Canada.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 100

Nothing lost points on 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.

Relevance · 100

Nothing lost points on 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.

Respect · 100

Nothing lost points on 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.

Clarity · 100

Nothing lost points on Clarity.

Clarity checks for plain speaking, clear ownership of actions, and honest limits on certainty. A low score means vague promises or evasive language.

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