“Mr. Speaker, the member talked about a record. Just over a year ago, Canadians went to the polls and elected a new Prime Minister and 70‑plus new Liberal members of Parliament. A substantial aspect of the agenda is to make our communities safe. We have brought forward a substantive suite of legislative bills to support our provinces in making our communities safer. The member made reference to extortion three or four times— Mr. Speaker, if you give me time, I will explain it to my colleague across the way. It is funny, I guess. Ha ha. The serious issue is dealing with the member when he says “extortion” three or four times in his speech. On the one hand, the Conservatives talk tough on extortion, but they oppose lawful access. Lawful access would deal with the extortion issue. Why does the Conservative Party oppose lawful access?”
Statement grade
B
The average of Signal, Relevance, Respect and Clarity is 86. The grade is held to 76, 30 above Relevance.
76 / 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 93%Promise 7%
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Mr. Speaker, Claims · 85 wordsthe member opposite understands that crime is a problem in our communities, in our neighbourhoods and on our streets.Brampton families are living through a real extortion crisis, and that is why I mentioned them.I am really concerned about the safety and security of Brampton residents.Businesses are being threatened, houses are being shot at, and organized criminal networks are growing.Conservatives proposed amendments to strengthen penalties for extortion involving firearms and to prevent those penalties from being weakened.1The Liberals rejected those amendments.2Promise · 6 wordsI would be happy to see—Partly on point
