Analysis · Debate question · beta

Andréanne Larouche

Bloc Québécois on Combatting Hate Act 2026-06-15

107 words · 6 sentences · 6 clauses

Statement grade

A–

Average 85 / 100

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

Procedure 15%Claims 56%Reasoning 29%

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

Mr. Speaker, Procedure · 16 wordsI would like to echo the sentiments of my colleague from Rivière-du-Nord and reiterate another point.Procedure Claims · 60 wordsCertain groups have written to us because there has been a great deal of disinformation coming from the Conservatives. At the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, the Bloc Québécois tabled certain amendments it felt were essential.¹ During one debate, I even heard people go so far as to say that people would no longer be able to protest.² Reasoning · 31 wordsNormally, a protest is a legitimate exercise of freedom of expression. I do hope, however, that if a protest is intended to incite hatred, there will be tools available to intervene.Vague promise

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 81

1 of 2 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.

Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “I would like to echo the sentiments of my colleague from Rivière-du-Nord and reiterate another point.”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · no score

Not applicable: nothing to answer. Excluded from the average.

Relevance checks whether the speaker stays on topic and answers the question asked. A low score means the speaker dodged the issue.

Respect · 100

0 of 2 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 · 74

1 of 2 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 “there will be tools available to intervene”The speaker’s own hope names no actor, measure, or condition for how intervention would happen.

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 Bloc Québécois tabled certain amendments”The Bloc Québécois tabled amendments at the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights during consideration of Bill C-9.search
2“people would no longer be able to protest”During a debate on Bill C-9, a participant said people would no longer be able to protest.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20