Analysis · Debate reply · beta

William Stevenson

Conservative on Canadian Fuel Affordability Act 2026-09-22

178 words · 7 sentences · 11 clauses

Replying to Corey Hogan (Liberal)

“Mr. Speaker, recently I came back from a G20 meeting held by the world’s largest crude oil producer, the United States, where there is a combined excise tax in Texas of 38¢ a gallon. Countries everywhere are struggling with the global effects of this war. They are exploring different ways to do this. Most have not eliminated excise taxes or even reduced them. The only two I am aware of in addition to Canada are Norway, which brought its tax back at the end of summer, on August 31, and Germany, which has reduced its tax until December. I am wondering if you consider those lessons and you think about them and the implication of these policies. When you look further abroad, are there other affordability policies you think we can learn from or that Canada should consider?”

Statement grade

B–

73 / 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.

Aside 12%Promise 17%Claims 47%Reasoning 24%

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

Mr. Speaker, Aside · 21 wordsI have made that mistake many a time tonight, I know, and eventually I will break that habit, I am sure.Aside Promise · 31 wordsThe Conservatives will continue to scrutinize measures and continue to raise the concerns we have heard from Albertans and Canadians, who continue to ask the government where their temporary reliefs are.Vague promise Claims · 84 wordsComparing ourselves to many of the other countries is quite difficult when we compare our tax system, especially when we look at, as the member opposite brought up, Norway. Norway may have an excise tax that it has changed, but Norway has a completely different system, in which their personal individual tax and their corporate taxes are much higher than what we have in Canada.¹ Their system is going to be looking at quite a difference in terms of what they actually spend on. Reasoning · 42 wordsHowever, this goes back to our choices, which is what we are debating here in the House. It is about the choices that we are going to make, going forward, on what we are spending and how we are taxing our citizens.Partly on 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 · 83

2 of 12 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.

A remark off to the side of the point.What the tags mean “I have made that mistake many a time tonight, I know,”An aside: no claim, reason or ask.
A remark off to the side of the point.What the tags mean “and eventually I will break that habit, I am sure.”An aside: no claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 43

9 of 12 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 “The Conservatives will continue to scrutinize measures and continue to raise the concerns we have heard from Albertans and Canadians, who continue to ask the government where their temporary reliefs are.”A pledge to keep scrutinizing affordability, not an engagement with the lessons of other countries asked about.
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 “Comparing ourselves to many of the other countries is quite difficult when we compare our tax system, especially when we look at,”On the subject of the question, but no answer to what was asked can be drawn from it.
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 “as the member opposite brought up, Norway.”On the subject of the question, but no answer to what was asked can be drawn from it.
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 “Norway may have an excise tax that it has changed,”On the subject of the question, but no answer to what was asked can be drawn from it.
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 “but Norway has a completely different system, in which their personal individual tax and their corporate taxes are much higher than what we have in Canada.”On the subject of the question, but no answer to what was asked can be drawn from it.
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 “Their system is going to be looking at quite a difference in terms of what they actually spend on.”On the subject of the question, but no answer to what was asked can be drawn from it.
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 “However, this goes back to our choices,”Turns to general spending and taxing choices without drawing any lesson from other countries.
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 “which is what we are debating here in the House.”Points to the debate’s general subject rather than the country comparisons asked about.
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 “It is about the choices that we are going to make, going forward, on what we are spending and how we are taxing our citizens.”Restates the theme of taxing and spending choices, not the policies abroad that the question asked about.

Respect · 100

0 of 12 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 · 74

1 of 12 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.

A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible.What the tags mean “will continue to scrutinize measures and continue to raise the concerns”The commitment names no concrete measure, date or success condition, so nothing specific can be checked later.

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“their personal individual tax and their corporate taxes are much higher than what we have in Canada”Norway’s personal income tax rates and corporate tax rates are much higher than Canada’s.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20