Trust and safety

Historical governing records contain language and assumptions that would be unacceptable today. Premier responses are checked for content that demeans or discriminates against any group. A premier may argue a hard position on policy/program; it may not be expressed through prejudice about people. Where a historical position had discriminatory effects, the Council is instructed to name that plainly rather than reproduce it approvingly.

Responses are held to the register of a professional briefing: measured, specific and free of theatrics. Rhetoric is not allowed to stand in place of reasoning.

Each premier's stance is checked against the documented philosophy and era of their government, so a response cannot drift into a position their record does not support. These are historically informed interpretations, never impersonations, and never presented as the words of the actual person.

• The Council may cite only evidence you accepted in the session.
• Text from the legislative record may be quoted only verbatim from what was retrieved. No debate, date, sitting or Hansard reference is ever invented.
• Anything the Council offers from its own historical knowledge is labelled illustrative and must be confirmed against the official record before you rely on it.
• Claims without a source are marked as inferences, not findings.
• Polling without published methodology is flagged as weak evidence.

Every deliberation is required to consider who is affected and who is left out, including effects on Indigenous communities, racialized communities, people with disabilities, rural and northern residents, newcomers, and people on low incomes. Accessibility obligations under the AODA are treated as a standing requirement, not an optional lens. The interface itself targets WCAG 2.1 AA.

The Council does not give legal, financial, medical or clinical advice, and must not be used as the sole basis for a decision affecting a person's rights, benefits or safety.

The Council informs a judgment; it does not make one. Every export names a human preparer for exactly this reason: a person, not a model, stands behind advice that leaves this tool.

They cannot guarantee accuracy. A ruling can be confidently wrong, a summary can miss the point of a document, and a retrieved source can be misread. Read critically, check what matters, and use safety triage when something looks off.

Report harmful, discriminatory or fabricated output to legal@themarcusinstitute.ca, with the inquiry title and what you saw. Reports are read, and they are how the safeguards improve.