“Madam Speaker, for the most part, we agree on implementing such a system, as we said earlier. However, my concern is that there seems to be a tendency to waive application of the law every time new measures are introduced. It is tiresome. As we all know, Bill C‑5 became an act that enables the government to designate projects of national interest. It allows the government to override all existing laws. We also know that Bill C‑15 took away citizens’ rights with respect to expropriation. The government also got rid of the environmental assessment for the high-speed rail project. Now it is pushing to exempt certain launch-related decisions from Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada review. I would like my colleague to comment on this. The government seems to view laws as obstacles to progress, but laws are the legislative framework we have established over decades to provide the public with safety and stability.”
Statement grade
A–
The average of Signal, Relevance, Respect and Clarity is 89. The grade is held to 86, 30 above Signal.
86 / 100, held down by Signal
A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Madam Speaker, Positioning · 28 wordsI certainly appreciate this member’s intervention here today because it highlights that the government has a penchant for giving itself ultimate discretion at the expense of someone else.PositioningClaims · 16 wordsThere is no greater sign of this than the government’s actually removing access to a tribunal.Reasoning · 6 wordsTribunals are there for administrative fairness.Procedure · 5 wordsLet me give an example.ProcedureReasoning · 88 wordsIf a space firm that is operating legally in Canada is not favoured by the government for whatever reason, maybe they used the wrong lobbyist, had an application come in with a tight time window, or has a spelling or technical error that could easily be rectified, the minister could simply say, “Sorry”.That launch would then be scuttled at great cost to that individual company.Being able to go to a tribunal to be able to rectify these things gives people confidence that they can move forward.Claims · 22 wordsIf they have to take the government to court over something as simple as an error on a permit, that is ridiculous.Positioning · 36 wordsOne might ask why the government would want it this way.That is what we are asking.Why would the government be giving itself unfettered discretion unless it had a plan to do something with that?Positioning
