Analysis · Debate question · beta

Marie-Hélène Gaudreau

Bloc Québécois on Strong and Free Elections Act 2026-06-11

114 words · 5 sentences · 6 clauses

Statement grade

A+

Average 98 / 100

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

Procedure 4%The question 55%Claims 40%

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

Mr. Speaker, Procedure · 5 wordsmy question is very simple.Procedure The question · 34 wordsI would like to know if my colleague opposite, the government leader, has seen or read the remarks by the National Assembly’s cybersecurity lead, Stéphane Le Bouyonnec, ¹and if he noticed any red flags. Claims · 46 wordsIn committee, Mr. Le Bouyonnec talked about the risks associated with insufficient digital sovereignty.² In the case before us, the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs held 70 meetings before finally securing an independent public inquiry that confirmed there has been interference in our elections.³⁴ The question · 29 wordsIf Quebec says it is not sufficiently equipped, how can we think we have nothing to worry about here when 85% of the infrastructure is owned by south-of-the-border interests?⁵

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 94

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 “my question is very simple.”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · no score

Not applicable: nothing to answer. Excluded from the average.

Relevance checks whether the speaker stays on topic and answers the question asked. A low score means the speaker dodged the issue.

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 · 5

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“the remarks by the National Assembly’s cybersecurity lead, Stéphane Le Bouyonnec”Stéphane Le Bouyonnec, the National Assembly’s cybersecurity lead, made remarks on election security.search
2“Mr. Le Bouyonnec talked about the risks associated with insufficient digital sovereignty”In committee, Stéphane Le Bouyonnec spoke about the risks of insufficient digital sovereignty.search
3“the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs held 70 meetings”The Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs held 70 meetings before an independent public inquiry was secured.search
4“an independent public inquiry that confirmed there has been interference in our elections”An independent public inquiry confirmed there has been interference in Canada’s elections.search
5“85% of the infrastructure is owned by south-of-the-border interests”85% of the (election) infrastructure is owned by United States interests.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20