Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Andréanne Larouche

Bloc Québécois on Protecting Victims Act 2026-06-09

137 words · 8 sentences · 10 clauses

Replying to Kurt Holman (Conservative)

“Mr. Speaker, Conservatives take public safety and the justice system very seriously, and there are quite the concerns with Bill C-16 regarding the removal of mandatory minimums, with the exception of murder and treason. I would like to ask my Bloc colleague, with the removal of mandatory minimums, how will that have a ripple effect on society?”

Statement grade

A–

Average 87 / 100

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

Claims 42%The ask 34%Positioning 4%Reasoning 20%

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

Mr. Speaker, Claims · 57 wordsthere is a bit of disinformation because the bill we are studying this evening essentially reiterates the Bloc Québécois’s proposal to restore mandatory minimums for serious crimes.¹ It also echoes the Bloc Québécois’s idea about the potential recruitment of young people at earlier stages and about deepfakes.² This bill is making progress on a lot of fronts. The ask · 16 wordsI think we have reached the point where we need to put this to a vote. Positioning · 6 wordsIt is time to move forward.Positioning Reasoning · 28 wordsI know there is room for improvement. We will have to continue to monitor progress, Partly on pointVague promiseas I said, because this will not be like waving a magic wand. The ask · 30 wordsHowever, I think that the disinformation needs to stop and that we need to work on making progress, recognizing victims and helping survivors find their way and rebuild their lives.Partly on point

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 94

1 of 9 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.

Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “It is time to move forward.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 61

7 of 9 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 “This bill is making progress on a lot of fronts.”A general claim that the bill progresses on many fronts, without addressing the ripple effect asked about.
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 think we have reached the point where we need to put this to a vote.”A call to put the bill to a vote, not an answer to the ripple effect asked about.
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 “It is time to move forward.”A general call to move forward on the bill, not an answer to the question put.
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 know there is room for improvement.”A general remark about room for improvement in the bill, without addressing the question put.
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 will have to continue to monitor progress,”A general pledge to monitor the bill’s progress, not an answer to the question put.
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 “because this will not be like waving a magic wand.”A general remark that change takes time, not an answer to the ripple effect asked about.
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 “However, I think that the disinformation needs to stop and that we need to work on making progress, recognizing victims and helping survivors find their way and rebuild their lives.”A general call to help victims rebuild their lives, without addressing the question put.

Respect · 100

0 of 9 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 · 92

1 of 9 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 “We will have to continue to monitor progress”The speaker commits her side to ongoing monitoring with no measure, actor detail or success condition named.

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“the bill we are studying this evening essentially reiterates the Bloc Québécois’s proposal to restore mandatory minimums for serious crimes”Bill C-16, the Protecting Victims Act, essentially reiterates the Bloc Québécois’s proposal to restore mandatory minimum sentences for serious crimes.search
2“echoes the Bloc Québécois’s idea about the potential recruitment of young people at earlier stages and about deepfakes”Bill C-16 includes provisions echoing the Bloc Québécois’s ideas on the recruitment of young people at earlier stages and on deepfakes.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20