← Back to the statement
Statement grade
The average of Signal, Relevance, Respect and Clarity. Average 74 / 100
Signal
100 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Relevance
48 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Respect
100 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Clarity
47 / 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 100%
Structure · 2 steps
Claims · 1
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Mr. Chair, Claims · 31 words this matter falls under provincial jurisdiction. At the federal level, as I said, we are working closely with the Province of Quebec, with the Quebec minister, 1 Vague promise and with the members here. Partly on point
At a glance
Lost points for Partly on point ×4 Vague promise Didn't answer None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate. Vague Much of this statement used imprecise wording, lacked details on timing or responsibility, or made broad claims without support.
Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.
What the tags mean →
Signal · 100
0 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.
Nothing lost points.
Relevance · 48
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 → “this matter falls under provincial jurisdiction.” It raises jurisdiction over the services in question but does not say whether their cost or availability is acceptable.
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 → “At the federal level,” On the subject of the question, but no answer to what was asked can be drawn from it.
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 → “as I said, we are working closely with the Province of Quebec, with the Quebec minister,” It describes federal cooperation with Quebec on the issue without addressing whether the spending and services are acceptable.
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 with the members here.” It continues the point about cooperation with members here without addressing the acceptability question put.
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 · 47
1 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.
Vague promise A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible. What the tags mean → “we are working closely with the Province of Quebec” The speaker commits her side to an ongoing effort without naming any measure, date or success condition.
Claims · 1
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 “we are working closely with the Province of Quebec, with the Quebec minister” The federal government says it is working closely with the Province of Quebec and the Quebec minister on the matter at issue in the 2026-05-28 supply debate on Citizenship and Immigration estimates. search
