“Mr. Speaker, the minister is right. There is not anything in the Criminal Code. That is why we put forward a bill to put something in the Criminal Code to stop this. When she had an opportunity to sway the justice minister to support the bill, the man who created the massive Liberal dumpster fire that she is perpetuating, she said, “No, it is fine.” Today, the Liberals are defending this abysmal practice. This is divisive post-nationalism that the Liberals have put forward for years. The respect for the rule of law is a minimum requirement for anybody in our country, and when they erode that, they erode our national identity. Every normal Canadian would agree with this. Why do the Liberals not agree?”
Statement grade
B
The average of Signal, Relevance, Respect and Clarity is 79. The grade is held to 78, 30 above Relevance.
78 / 100, held down by Relevance
A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.
Claims 75%Reasoning 25%
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Mr. Speaker, Claims · 94 wordsthe issue that the member raises has been an issue in Canada for a number of years.Partly on pointShe should know well that the Supreme Court of Canada, in 2013, actually ruled on this specific issue.1What is interesting about the timeline of that decision is that she was sitting in the federal cabinet at the time and chose to do absolutely nothing about it.2Off pointFor our part, we are in the midst of launching the most serious set of criminal law reforms to strengthen the Criminal Code that this country has seen in generations.Vague promiseReasoning · 31 wordsRegardless of one’s immigration status, if they commit a serious crime, they should be met with a serious penalty and, where a court deems appropriate, that can and should include deportation.
