Replying to Leah Gazan (NDP). The question was off topic, so this reply is judged against the motion.
“Mr. Speaker, the Permanent Peoples’ Tribunal concluded that Canada’s ongoing policies amount to genocide, pointing specifically to the government’s seized value of indigenous lands, territories and resources. The tribunal noted that part of the issue is related to the failure of the government to obtain the free, prior and informed consent of indigenous peoples. Will the government begin to uphold its constitutional obligations and uphold section 35(3) rights? Will it take this finding very seriously and respect the right to self-determination of indigenous peoples, or is it going to continue building a pipeline to the court?”
Statement grade
F
The average of Signal, Relevance, Respect and Clarity is 66. The grade is held to 30, 30 above Relevance.
30 / 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 68%Promise 32%
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Mr. Speaker, Claims · 36 wordsUNDRIP and indigenous rights, as well as doing economic development with indigenous peoples, I think, are foundational principles of this government.We have seen it reflected through some of the recent deals that have been announced.1Promise · 17 wordsI hope to continue to work on it from this side, along with colleagues who are interested.Off pointVague promise
