“Mr. Speaker, I would like my colleague from Terrebonne to talk to me about the following. At first, there were a lot of objections to the bill. People said it would detract from freedom of expression, that there was a risk of abuse, and so on. I think that we found the right solution by reinstating the Attorney General’s consent to prosecute the offence. That way, with the Attorney General’s judgment, we avoid the possibility of frivolous charges and ensure that any charges brought truly target people who promote hatred. I would like her to respond to that.”
Statement grade
–
Not graded: fewer than 4 clauses beyond the address. The scores are shown; a grade would say little.
Not graded
A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.
Reasoning 50%Claims 50%
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Mr. Speaker, Reasoning · 28 wordsknowing that people who commit hate crimes will be brought to justice and held accountable for their actions, and having the Attorney General’s consent, adds even more weight.Claims · 28 wordsWhat communities are asking for, in fact, is the chance to speak out about their experiences and to know that there will be real consequences, not just footnotes.Partly on point
