Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Cheryl Gallant

Conservative on Combatting Hate Act 2026-06-16

91 words · 4 sentences · 5 clauses

Replying to Costas Menegakis (Conservative)

“Madam Speaker, the bill would basically strip away the right of a person to quote from their holy text. It would open the door to criminalizing people for uttering words that they are reading from their holy text. I wonder if the member can share with us why the Liberal government did not consult with faith communities across the country to see what the impact would be of taking away these statutory rules that have been in place for so long now, that protect people and allow people to have freedom of speech and freedom of faith. There is a difference between state and faith. I wonder if the member could comment on that.”

Statement grade

48 / 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.

Claims 100%

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

Madam Speaker, Claims · 91 wordsI can say that since the bill has been introduced, I have received more mail with reference to the bill and that particular amendment and the removal of religious freedom than for any other bill.¹Partly on point In fact, it almost comes to the level of the firearms registry back in the late 1990s, Bill C-68.² There was such upheaval that it changed the course of the election in my riding, where lawful firearms owners felt that the legislation the Liberals were bringing in was unjust. They feel the same way about this.Off point

At a glance

Lost points for
Didn't answerNone 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 · 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 · 18

5 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 bill under debate.

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 can say that since the bill has been introduced, I have received more mail with reference to the bill and that particular amendment and the removal of religious freedom than for any other bill.”On the subject of the question, but no answer to what was asked can be drawn from it.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “In fact, it almost comes to the level of the firearms registry back in the late 1990s, Bill C-68.”It compares the volume of mail to the 1990s firearms registry, not the lack of consultation with faith communities asked about.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “There was such upheaval that it changed the course of the election in my riding,”It is about the firearms registry’s effect on a past election, not the question on the bill and faith communities.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “where lawful firearms owners felt that the legislation the Liberals were bringing in was unjust.”It is about firearms owners’ views on past Liberal legislation, not the lack of consultation asked about.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “They feel the same way about this.”It draws an analogy to firearms owners’ feelings, not to consultation with faith communities or the bill’s effect on holy texts.

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“I have received more mail with reference to the bill and that particular amendment and the removal of religious freedom than for any other bill”Since Bill C-9 was introduced, Cheryl Gallant has received more mail about the bill and its removal of the Attorney General consent requirement than about any other bill.search
2“the firearms registry back in the late 1990s, Bill C-68”Bill C-68, the firearms registry legislation, was enacted in the late 1990s.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20