Analysis · Reply to a comment · beta

Kelly DeRidder

Conservative on Canadian Fuel Affordability Act 2026-09-22

119 words · 8 sentences · 9 clauses

Replying to Jacques Ramsay (Liberal)

“Mr. Speaker, after listening to the Conservatives, the perception is that this government has been slow to react. I would like to remind my friend on the other side of the aisle that the Iranian war started on February 28 and by April, this government came up with the fuel tax suspension. It is not adequate to say that we have been slow to react. I think we have actually been quite quick to react. The Conservatives would like to make this measure permanent. If they want us to make this permanent, then I must assume the Conservatives feel they can confidently predict oil prices over the next six to 12 months. I certainly have not heard any expert saying that, so I am curious to know how they can.”

Statement grade

Average 94 / 100

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

Procedure 6%Claims 40%Positioning 13%The ask 25%Reasoning 16%

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

Mr. Speaker, Procedure · 7 wordsI want to set the record straight.Procedure Claims · 37 wordsI did not say the government was slow to react.¹ I said that the Conservatives have applied pressure for 10 years advocating for that.² We said the carbon tax was going to be detrimental to our economy. Positioning · 15 wordsThat is the debate that we won and the debate we are moving forward with.Positioning The ask · 21 wordsWe are asking the government now to completely eliminate it, not just a half-measure or little pieces but completely eliminate it. Reasoning · 19 wordsIt should not put in question the prices of oil or exponential circumstances that we have no control over. Claims · 11 wordsWe have control to reduce the cost of living for Canadians, The ask · 9 wordsand that is what we should be implementing today.

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 76

2 of 2 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 “I want to set the record straight.”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “That is the debate that we won and the debate we are moving forward with.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 100

0 of 2 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 comment put to the member, and the bill under debate.

Nothing lost points.

Respect · 100

0 of 2 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 2 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 did not say the government was slow to react”In this debate on Bill C-38, Kelly DeRidder said she did not say the government was slow to react.search
2“applied pressure for 10 years”The Conservatives have advocated against the carbon tax for 10 years.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20