Analysis · Question Period question · beta

Jonathan Rowe

Conservative on Natural Resources 2026-06-17

112 words · 5 sentences · 6 clauses

Statement grade

Average 92 / 100

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

Claims 45%Positioning 18%The question 38%

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

Mr. Speaker, Claims · 14 wordsI do not think Saint Pierre and Miquelon was even mentioned in that answer. Positioning · 20 wordsI do not think that answer is very good for the next generation or very comforting to the next generation.Positioning Claims · 36 wordsCritical minerals, for example, are critical to the country’s development and future. It seems that the Liberal government claims to spend millions of dollars in hard-to-reach places that require huge construction of roads, ports and highways.¹ The question · 42 wordsIf these are national building projects, why does the government not invest in critical minerals in Newfoundland and Labrador, including in Port Hope Simpson, which is already at tidewater, already has highways and already has the infrastructure and everything needed to succeed?²

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 76

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.

Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “I do not think that answer is very good for the next generation or very comforting to the next generation.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. 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.

Reasoning · 93

0 of 1 deductions are Reasoning

Reasoning checks for sound logic and solid support for any conclusion. A low score means the speaker made unsupported leaps or used weak arguments.

Nothing lost points.

Conclusions found · 2

Conclusion“I do not think that answer is very good for the next generation or very comforting to the next generation.”

Because“I do not think Saint Pierre and Miquelon was even mentioned in that answer.”

Reason given
Conclusion“If these are national building projects, why does the government not invest in critical minerals in Newfoundland and Labrador, including in Port Hope Simpson,”

Because“Critical minerals, for example, are critical to the country’s development and future.”

“which is already at tidewater, already has highways and already has the infrastructure and everything needed to succeed?”

Reason given

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 · 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“claims to spend millions of dollars in hard-to-reach places that require huge construction of roads, ports and highways”The Liberal government claims to spend millions of dollars on the construction of roads, ports and highways in hard-to-reach places.search
2“already at tidewater, already has highways and already has the infrastructure and everything needed to succeed”Port Hope Simpson is already at tidewater, already has highways, and already has the infrastructure needed to succeed.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20