Analysis · Debate reply · beta

John Brassard

Conservative on Canadian Fuel Affordability Act 2026-09-22

65 words · 4 sentences · 8 clauses

Replying to Elizabeth May (Green)

“Madam Speaker, not to be too pointed about it, but does it ever occur to the Conservatives that they should sue the Liberals for plagiarism? The Conservative platform is now being implemented point by point by the current government. I would add another one, and I do not agree with these changes. I know the Conservative caucus would have reason to cheer, but why would the Conservatives promise to cut overseas development assistance? The Liberals promised they would not, and then they did by $2.7 billion. There have been many promises. Certainly the Liberals promised to meet our Paris agreement targets. They are clearly not meeting them. I ask my hon. colleague from Barry South—Innisfil if the Conservatives have considered getting a lawyer.”

Statement grade

A–

Average 88 / 100

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

Thanks 8%Claims 75%Promise 17%

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

Madam Speaker, Thanks · 5 wordsthat is a great question.Thanks Claims · 49 wordsThe Prime Minister has proven himself to plagiarize. It is a well-documented fact that he has plagiarized many things, ¹Unearned certaintyso it is no surprise to me, as a Conservative, that he is plagiarizing our platform, because our platform is what Canadians needed. Unfortunately, they did not vote for it, Promise · 11 wordsbut we will continue to propose solutions that make lives better.Vague promise

At a glance

Lost points for
AnsweredOf this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 91

1 of 3 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.

Thanks and tributes.What the tags mean “that is a great question.”Thanks: no claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 100

0 of 3 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.

Nothing lost points.

Respect · 100

0 of 3 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 · 60

2 of 3 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.

Something stated as certain with nothing to back it.What the tags mean “It is a well-documented fact”The clause asserts documentation as a formula without citing any source for the plagiarism claim.
A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible.What the tags mean “we will continue to propose solutions that make lives better”A commitment to future action with no measure, date or success condition named.

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“he has plagiarized many things”The Prime Minister has plagiarized things on multiple documented occasions.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20