Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Marianne Dandurand

Liberal on Spectrum Policy Framework for Canada Act 2026-05-05

127 words · 7 sentences · 10 clauses

Replying to Paul Connors (Liberal)

“Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to thank my colleague for her commitment and dedication to getting this issue solved. In my riding of Avalon and in many ridings throughout our country, as was just highlighted so many times, cellular connectivity is very poor and in most cases does not exist. There are instances in Avalon when police officers, firefighters and other emergency responders cannot be contacted. It is a huge issue. Families also cannot communicate with each other. In today’s society, people use connectivity in order to make sure we are well connected and that everyone is connected with us. How would the bill address the connectivity gaps that exist in my riding of Avalon and in other rural areas throughout Canada?”

Statement grade

B+

Average 83 / 100

A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.

Claims 46%Thanks 19%Reasoning 35%

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

Mr. Speaker, Claims · 14 wordsI have been working with my colleague, who is chair of the rural caucus.²Partly on point Thanks · 11 wordsHe is a member who is really engaged on this issue.Thanks Claims · 44 wordsWe have been talking a lot about it, and not only talking but taking action as well.Vague promise We met with Bell and Rogers to talk about how they are helping with this, what their challenges are and where they want to go with it.¹Partly on point Thanks · 13 wordsI thank the member for his involvement and commitment on this important issue.Thanks Reasoning · 45 wordsYes, the bill would help in Avalon. We would have a better map of the situation, and then we could then address the situation by prioritizing rural places that are a bit outside the scope, so the people in the member’s riding can be connected.

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 76

2 of 7 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.

Thanks and tributes.What the tags mean “He is a member who is really engaged on this issue.”Thanks: no claim, reason or ask.
Thanks and tributes.What the tags mean “I thank the member for his involvement and commitment on this important issue.”Thanks: no claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 67

4 of 7 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.

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 have been working with my colleague, who is chair of the rural caucus.”About working with a colleague on the issue, not how the bill would help Avalon.
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 have been talking a lot about it,”About discussions on the issue, not how the bill would address the gaps.
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 “and not only talking but taking action as well.”About their own actions on the issue, not how the bill would help Avalon.
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 met with Bell and Rogers to talk about how they are helping with this, what their challenges are and where they want to go with it.”About meetings with carriers on connectivity, not how the bill would address the gaps.

Respect · 100

0 of 7 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 · 89

1 of 7 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.

A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible.What the tags mean “taking action as well”The claim of acting names no measure, actor or outcome beyond the word ‘action’.

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“We met with Bell and Rogers”The member for the reply and the chair of the rural caucus met with Bell and Rogers to discuss cell coverage issues.search
2“who is chair of the rural caucus”Paul Connors is the chair of the Liberal rural caucus.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20