Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Chi Nguyen

84 words · 6 sentences · 6 clauses

Replying to Maxime Blanchette-Joncas (Bloc Québécois)
“Mr. Speaker, my colleague spoke to us about the importance of Toronto, which receives a large number of visitors. She mentioned $28 million per year. However, the problem in Toronto, aside from the housing crisis, is the mobility crisis. People can no longer even afford to buy houses right downtown. They have to move to the suburbs, yet the federal government cut $5 billion from the Canada public transit fund in its latest budget. Moreover, in the most recent economic update, the $3 billion that had been allocated is no longer earmarked for the Canada public transit fund, but has instead been folded into the generalized funding pot for infrastructure. I would like my colleague to tell us frankly, for the benefit of the people she represents, whether she truly believes her government is supporting public transit when it cuts funding and reallocates dedicated public transit funding to infrastructure in general.”
Statement grade
B–
70 / 100, held down by Clarity
A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.
Positioning 19%Claims 43%Reasoning 38%

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

Mr. Speaker, Positioning · 16 wordsI believe our government is stepping up in the ways that it is best suited to.PositioningVague promise Claims · 36 wordsWe can invest the capital that is required to build these massive projects. I spoke about waterfront east transit. That is a project that I am very excited to see come online. It is years overdue.Partly on point Reasoning · 32 wordsIn this work, our role as a federal government is to work alongside other levels of government to ensure that we are investing in and building out the transit that we need.Vague promise

Analysed on