Analysis · Question Period question · beta

Eric Duncan

Conservative on Public Safety 2026-10-08

106 words · 8 sentences · 10 clauses

Statement grade

Average 93 / 100

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

Claims 59%Positioning 15%The question 25%

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

Mr. Speaker, Claims · 8 wordsthe minister has talked about there being gaps. Positioning · 16 wordsThe biggest gap is in the minister’s credibility.Insult The more he talks, the worse it gets.Positioning Claims · 55 wordsFor months, the minister promised to “get to the bottom of what happened”, ¹yet he cannot even answer basic questions. This majorly embarrassing failure compromises Canadian security and, critically, the trust of our allies. The Liberals will not even confirm media and source reports that it was a spy working for the CCP in Beijing.² The question · 27 wordsWhat are the Liberals hiding? Can they answer the basic question of which country this spy was working for, or are they too worried about upsetting Beijing?

At a glance

Lost points for
Personal attackThis statement targeted a person rather than their actions or views: “The biggest gap is in the minister's credibility”.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 89

1 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.

Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “The more he talks, the worse it gets.”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.

Respect · 89

1 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.

An insult aimed at a person.What the tags mean “The biggest gap is in the minister’s credibility”It targets the minister personally by attacking his credibility rather than a specific decision or statement.

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“For months, the minister promised to “get to the bottom of what happened””The Public Safety minister promised for months to get to the bottom of what happened.search
2“media and source reports that it was a spy working for the CCP in Beijing”Media and source reports said the individual was a spy working for the CCP in Beijing.search

Analysed on 2026-10-19