← Back to the statement
Statement grade
The average of Signal, Relevance, Reasoning, Respect and Clarity is 80. The grade is held to 74, 30 above Relevance. Reasoning rests on one conclusion, too few to hold the grade down. 74 / 100, held down by Relevance
Signal
92 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Relevance
44 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Reasoning
87 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Respect
100 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Clarity
78 / 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.
Claims 66% Procedure 5% Reasoning 29%
Structure · 5 steps
Claims · 2
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Madam Speaker, Claims · 10 words I did not say that I fully support Bill C‑34.1 Partly on point Procedure · 8 words I want to be very clear about that. Procedure Claims · 95 words As I said, certain aspects of Bill C‑34 are noteworthy. There are provisions that we can support, but other parts concern me, particularly the broad powers being granted to the commission. The commission would be empowered to do a great number of things that are not specified in the bill and would be determined at a later date without coming back to the House.2 That is a major concern for me. I therefore cannot answer my colleague’s hypothetical question. There are a number of matters in the bill that remain undefined. That, too, is troubling. Reasoning · 46 words That is why the bill must be studied in committee. We need to shed light on those undefined provisions so that we can then take a position on the matter my colleague has raised, Vague promise as well as on several others. Quite simply, too much remains unclear. Partly on point
At a glance
Lost points for Partly on point ×13 Procedure Vague promise Didn't answer None 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 · 92
1 of 15 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 → “I want to be very clear about that.” Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Relevance · 44
13 of 15 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.
Partly on point 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 → “I did not say that I fully support Bill C‑34.” Clarifies his position on the bill but does not address what would encourage business compliance.
Partly on point 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 I said, certain aspects of Bill C‑34 are noteworthy.” Speaks to noteworthy aspects of the bill, not the incentive question asked.
Partly on point 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 → “There are provisions that we can support,” States which provisions can be supported rather than what would get companies on board.
Partly on point 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 other parts concern me, particularly the broad powers being granted to the commission.” Raises concerns about the commission’s powers, not the question on business compliance.
Partly on point 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 commission would be empowered to do a great number of things that are not specified in the bill and would be determined at a later date without coming back to the House.” Describes the commission’s unspecified powers, not what was asked about incentives for companies.
Partly on point 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 → “That is a major concern for me.” Restates his concern about the commission without addressing the question asked.
Partly on point 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 → “I therefore cannot answer my colleague’s hypothetical question.” Plainly declines to answer the question, giving the bill’s undefined matters as the reason.
Partly on point 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 → “There are a number of matters in the bill that remain undefined.” Points to undefined matters in the bill instead of what would encourage compliance.
Partly on point 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 → “That, too, is troubling.” Expresses concern about unclear provisions, not the question about getting companies on board.
Partly on point 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 → “That is why the bill must be studied in committee.” Calls for committee study rather than answering what would encourage business compliance.
Partly on point 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 → “We need to shed light on those undefined provisions so that we can then take a position on the matter my colleague has raised,” Defers taking a position on the question raised until committee study, offering no answer now.
Partly on point 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 well as on several others.” Adds that other matters would also await a position, without addressing the question asked.
Partly on point 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 → “Quite simply, too much remains unclear.” Restates that too much remains unclear, not what was asked about business compliance.
Reasoning · 87
0 of 15 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.
Nothing lost points.
Conclusions found · 1
Conclusion “That is why the bill must be studied in committee.”
Because “The commission would be empowered to do a great number of things that are not specified in the bill and would be determined at a later date without coming back to the House.”
“There are a number of matters in the bill that remain undefined.”
“Quite simply, too much remains unclear.”
Respect · 100
0 of 15 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 · 78
1 of 15 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.
Vague promise A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible. What the tags mean → “We need to shed light on those undefined provisions” The speaker commits to an investigative process without defining the specific actions, timeline, or success criteria necessary to achieve clarity.
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 that I fully support Bill C‑34” During the October 29, 2026 debate on Bill C-34, Luc Berthold said he did not say that he fully supported Bill C-34. search 2 “empowered to do a great number of things that are not specified in the bill and would be determined at a later date without coming back to the House” Under Bill C-34, the Digital Safety Commission of Canada would be granted powers not specified in the bill that would be determined later without coming back to the House. search
