← Back to the statement
Statement grade
The average of Signal, Relevance, Reasoning, Respect and Clarity is 62. The grade is held to 30, 30 above Relevance. 30 / 100, held down by Relevance
Signal
70 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Relevance
0 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Reasoning
38 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Respect
100 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Clarity
100 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.
Procedure 10% Claims 76% Positioning 14%
Structure · 4 steps
Claims · 4
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Mr. Speaker, Procedure · 10 words let us talk about the Bloc Québécois’s outrage over everything. Procedure Claims · 80 words All summer long, the Bloc criticized us for doing too much for Quebec: Logical leap too much for infrastructure, with $10 billion in investments; 1 too much for the Davie shipyard in Lévis, with 5,000 jobs in Quebec; 2 too much for Alstom in La Pocatière and Saint‑Bruno‑de‑Montarville. The Bloc Québécois criticized us for supporting the Churchill Falls project, 3 which will ensure prosperity for generations of Quebeckers. No reason given It is criticizing us for going ahead with the high-speed rail project, 4 which will help build Quebec. No reason given Positioning · 15 words The Bloc Québécois is busy stoking division and outrage. Our government is busy building Quebec. Positioning Off point
At a glance
Lost points for Off point ×10 No reason given ×2 Positioning ×2 Procedure Logical leap Didn't answer None of this answer addressed the specific question that was asked. Unsupported This statement drew 4 conclusions, but gave no reasons for 2 of them.
Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.
What the tags mean →
Signal · 70
3 of 16 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.
Procedure Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business. What the tags mean → “let us talk about the Bloc Québécois’s outrage over everything.” Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Positioning Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it. What the tags mean → “The Bloc Québécois is busy stoking division and outrage.” Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Positioning Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it. What the tags mean → “Our government is busy building Quebec.” Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Relevance · 0
10 of 16 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 question asked.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “All summer long, the Bloc criticized us for doing too much for Quebec:” The clause initiates a defense of government spending in Quebec, which does not address the summit invitation.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “too much for infrastructure, with $10 billion in investments;” The clause mentions specific investment figures unrelated to the question of the summit.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “too much for the Davie shipyard in Lévis, with 5,000 jobs in Quebec;” The clause details support for a specific shipyard project, deviating from the diplomatic question asked.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “too much for Alstom in La Pocatière and Saint‑Bruno‑de‑Montarville.” The clause provides another example of government economic support in Quebec.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “The Bloc Québécois criticized us for supporting the Churchill Falls project,” The clause focuses on government support for a domestic project rather than the international relations question.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “which will ensure prosperity for generations of Quebeckers.” The clause provides a justification for a specific domestic project’s benefit.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “It is criticizing us for going ahead with the high-speed rail project,” The clause refers to a domestic infrastructure project, which is separate from the diplomatic matter questioned.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “which will help build Quebec.” The clause provides a justification for supporting high-speed rail within Quebec.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “The Bloc Québécois is busy stoking division and outrage.” The clause is a political commentary on the opposition’s actions, not an answer to the question asked.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “Our government is busy building Quebec.” The clause is a general statement about the government’s focus, which does not address the specific diplomatic request.
Reasoning · 38
3 of 16 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.
Logical leap A conclusion that does not follow from the reasons given for it. What the tags mean → “All summer long, the Bloc criticized us for doing too much for Quebec:” A list of the Bloc’s criticisms is taken to show it is deliberately stoking division, but criticising government spending does not itself show that intent.
No reason given A conclusion stated with no reason given for it. What the tags mean → “which will ensure prosperity for generations of Quebeckers.” The only nearby words say the Bloc criticized the project’s support, which does not show it will bring prosperity.
No reason given A conclusion stated with no reason given for it. What the tags mean → “which will help build Quebec.” The claim that the government is proceeding with the project is the same point restated, with nothing said about what the project would do for Quebec.
Conclusions found · 4
Conclusion “which will ensure prosperity for generations of Quebeckers.”
Because No reason given
No reason given The only nearby words say the Bloc criticized the project’s support, which does not show it will bring prosperity.
Conclusion “which will help build Quebec.”
Because No reason given
No reason given The claim that the government is proceeding with the project is the same point restated, with nothing said about what the project would do for Quebec.
Conclusion “The Bloc Québécois is busy stoking division and outrage.”
Because “All summer long, the Bloc criticized us for doing too much for Quebec:”
Reason flawed A list of the Bloc’s criticisms is taken to show it is deliberately stoking division, but criticising government spending does not itself show that intent.
Conclusion “Our government is busy building Quebec.”
Because “too much for infrastructure, with $10 billion in investments;”
“too much for the Davie shipyard in Lévis, with 5,000 jobs in Quebec;”
“too much for Alstom in La Pocatière and Saint‑Bruno‑de‑Montarville.”
“It is criticizing us for going ahead with the high-speed rail project,”
Respect · 100
0 of 16 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 16 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 · 4
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 “$10 billion in investments” The federal government made $10 billion in infrastructure investments in Quebec. search 2 “the Davie shipyard in Lévis, with 5,000 jobs in Quebec” Federal support for the Davie shipyard in Lévis is associated with 5,000 jobs in Quebec. search 3 “supporting the Churchill Falls project” The federal government is supporting the Churchill Falls project. search 4 “going ahead with the high-speed rail project” The federal government is proceeding with a high-speed rail project that includes Quebec. search
