Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay

103 words · 8 sentences · 10 clauses

Replying to Natilien Joseph (Liberal)
“Mr. Speaker, I listened to my colleague’s wonderful speech. I can see that he is really upset, that he is angry. Here is the question I would like to ask my colleague. Would he be prepared to sacrifice Quebec’s economy in order to hurry up and sign any agreement, without thinking it through?”
Statement grade
A+
Average 97 / 100
A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.
Claims 51%Procedure 10%Reasoning 39%

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

Mr. Speaker, Claims · 1 wordsno. Procedure · 6 wordsI think that goes without saying.Procedure Reasoning · 19 wordsI have always said that we agree with trade agreements in principle, but that our support is not unconditional. Claims · 52 wordsIn fact, the sovereigntist movement in Quebec was initially a major driving force behind the shift towards free trade and opening up the economy.1 It was Jacques Parizeau and Bernard Landry who worked very hard in the 1980s to convince Quebeckers to embark on this venture.2 It has been beneficial to us. Reasoning · 21 wordsIf an agreement is flawed, if it contains aspects that will have negative repercussions, we will not agree to it, obviously. Procedure · 4 wordsThat goes without saying.Procedure

Analysed on