“Mr. Speaker, the minister just said that the amendments returned to us by the Senate are relatively simple to deal with. Like my Conservative colleague earlier, I was of the impression that the House would likely pass this bill fairly quickly once it returned from the Senate. I wonder what message the government is sending by imposing time allocation on a bill on which there otherwise seems to be consensus. What does that say about the government’s way of doing things? When the government decides to impose closure, even on bills for which there is a consensus, it seems to me that this sends a very bad message. Can the minister tell me if discussions on passing Bill C-14 were stalling? I really do not get that impression. Imposing time allocation at this point in time seems all the more unjustified, to me.”
Statement grade
A+
The average of Signal, Relevance, Respect and Clarity.
Average 98 / 100
A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.
Claims 11%Reasoning 89%
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Mr. Speaker, Claims · 16 wordsI agree.The recent amendments made by the Senate are, indeed, fairly easy to deal with.1Reasoning · 127 wordsIt is my view that we can ill afford to risk the potential consequences of delays now.Even one or two days of delay in this chamber could lead to a months-long delay on the measures when it comes to violent repeat offenders.We just heard a petition read out in this regard.2We have an opportunity to make a difference.Vague promiseThe only choice that we have before us, given the seeming collaboration of different parties, is whether we are going to make the difference today, this week, or we are going to kick the can down the road and delay the implementation of the protections that Canadian communities are asking for and that every premier in this country has forcefully argued must be implemented right away.3
