Analysis · Speech on a bill · beta

Ellis Ross

Conservative on Building Canada Strong Act 2026-09-24

1091 words · 57 sentences · 74 clauses

Statement grade

Average 90 / 100

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

Procedure 3%Claims 56%Positioning 8%Reasoning 12%Anecdote 15%Aside 1%The question 3%The ask 1%

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

Mr. Speaker, Procedure · 11 wordsI will be splitting my time with the member for Sudbury.Procedure Claims · 30 wordsWe are here talking about Bill C-39. It is another announcement, another 250-page bill to talk about what we already announced last year, basically rewrapped in a more complicated bill. Positioning · 21 wordsWe are trying to talk about building Canada strong when we really should be talking about how to rebuild Canada strong, PositioningClaims · 29 wordsbecause we were a country that was growing before 10 years ago, when the Liberal government decided to stall and stifle our economy with Bill C-69 and Bill C-48.¹ Reasoning · 33 wordsTo undo the damage done by these bills and the stifling of the economy, all we are getting now is announcements, whether we are talking about the Major Projects Office or Bill C-39. Anecdote · 60 wordsI was an MLA and was a chief councillor back in the days of LNG development 20 years ago, so this is where I come from.Partly on point More specifically, I come from the processes of how to get projects approved, whether we are talking about environmental assessments provincially in B.C. or federally in Canada, and the regulations that go underneath them.Anecdote Reasoning · 13 wordsParallel to that is the consultation accommodation that must happen with aboriginal peoples. Claims · 22 wordsIt is great to see the conversation that we need an economy being so universal. After 10 years, we need an economy, Positioning · 14 wordsbut the government is not admitting that it did not like the economy growing.Positioning Claims · 57 wordsIt did not like LNG development. It did not like LNG exports. In fact, it was the Liberal government that said that there was no business case for LNG development.² It was this government that let Germany, when it came knocking on the door of Canada to secure an LNG deal, go away with a hydrogen deal.³ Anecdote · 58 wordsI travelled to Ottawa to try to fix the record based on my experience of project development, whether we are talking about forestry, mining or LNG. The government did not take my request for a meeting.Partly on point A member of the opposition did, Off pointand all I was here to say was that they were talking to the wrong people.Anecdote Positioning · 11 wordsThe federal government has no idea what it is talking about.PositioningPartly on point Claims · 70 wordsThere is a huge business case for LNG. There is a huge demand, and if someone wants proof, they should come talk to the first nation leaders in B.C. They are the ones who put together the LNG export plan. They are the ones who fought for it and lobbied for it. In fact, a lot of the leaders who fought for it did so with no praise or recognition, Positioning · 4 wordswhich is a shame.Positioning Claims · 57 wordsThese are people like Elmer Derrick and the people of Nisga’a. The leadership at the time, who were supporting my band in getting LNG off the ground, never got recognition.Partly on point Now LNG is pursuing its own LNG facility, but all of that was with all the opposition from the provincial government in B.C. and the federal government. Anecdote · 46 wordsI did everything I could to understand environmental assessments, regulations and case law, and the only thing I can say now is that I wish I knew then what I know now in terms of how this place operates. We could have gotten it done quicker.AnecdotePartly on point Positioning · 31 wordsIt is a shame that Canada is in the position it is in now as a weak country, just because of the ideology of saying “no” to LNG development and exports.Positioning Claims · 42 wordsThere were 18 major LNG projects in B.C. at a time when we just got started.⁴ All of them left. One major project from my territory, the only one that survived, was LNG Canada, ⁵and there are some minor floating LNG projects. Reasoning · 85 wordsIf there had been no opposition to development back then, we would not be here having this conversation. We would not be talking about affordability, jobs or our young people leaving the country. We would not be talking about the need to cut taxes, because the economy would have been keeping up. Unfortunately, the damage that has been done in 10 years has brought us to a place where the most we can do now is try to send signals to the world about announcements: Claims · 36 wordsLet us repack what we announced last year into a 250-page bill and call it Bill C-39. However, I am glad that at a high level, the opinion of the Liberal government seems to be changing. Aside · 5 wordsIt is a Festivus miracle, AsideOff pointThe question · 8 wordsbut will that translate into something of substance? Claims · 43 wordsRight now, it is going to take some time to understand how this 250-page bill fits with the fast-track approval of a project, given that we already had an announcement of a Major Projects Office that was supposed to do the same thing.⁶⁷ Positioning · 11 wordsThat buzz over the Major Projects Office is now a fizzle.Positioning Claims · 48 wordsNow, partially, Bill C-39 is talking about the existing powers of the Canadian Impact Assessment Agency and how it is going to be amended but also how some is going to be transferred over to the energy regulator and some might be fast-tracked to the Major Projects Office. Procedure · 11 wordsI have just one fundamental question that the government cannot answer.Procedure The question · 29 wordsAt the end of the day, who signs the environmental assessment certificate? Is it going to be the regulator, the Major Projects Office or the Canadian Impact Assessment Agency? Claims · 157 wordsWhoever does it is going to take responsibility for that signature going forward. The government cannot answer that. How is industry supposed to have the certainty to invest in Canada if the legislation and regulations are all over the map? Corporations, and first nations for that matter, are going to have to hire lawyers and consultants to pore over these new bills to find out exactly what the process is. By the way, I heard a number of the government members talking about indigenous consultation. There is a contradiction in terms of what they are saying about consultative duties to first nations people affected by major projects. I am talking about that pre-decision, pre-approval, to approve it in one year, but the courts have said it cannot do that. When the Crown is aware of a decision that might affect rights and title, the government has to consult and accommodate first nations before it makes the decision.⁸ Procedure · 3 wordsHon. Kevin Lamoureux: ProcedureAside · 5 wordsTell that to Pierre Poilievre.Aside Procedure · 2 wordsEllis Ross: ProcedureAside · 5 wordsShall I say it again?Aside Claims · 25 wordsBefore you make the decision, you must consult and accommodate, not after the fact, when you have made the decision. Your own policy says it. The ask · 8 wordsRead your policy on the Justice Canada site. Procedure · 1 wordsIt—Procedure

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 67

25 of 39 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 will be splitting my time with the member for Sudbury.”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “We are trying to talk about building Canada strong when we really should be talking about how to rebuild Canada strong,”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “I was an MLA and was a chief councillor back in the days of LNG development 20 years ago,”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “so this is where I come from.”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “More specifically, I come from the processes of how to get projects approved, whether we are talking about environmental assessments provincially in B.C. or federally in Canada,”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “and the regulations that go underneath them.”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “but the government is not admitting that it did not like the economy growing.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “I travelled to Ottawa to try to fix the record based on my experience of project development, whether we are talking about forestry, mining or LNG.”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “The government did not take my request for a meeting.”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “A member of the opposition did,”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “and all I was here to say was that they were talking to the wrong people.”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “The federal government has no idea what it is talking about.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “which is a shame.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “I did everything I could to understand environmental assessments, regulations and case law,”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “and the only thing I can say now is that I wish I knew then what I know now in terms of how this place operates.”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “We could have gotten it done quicker.”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “It is a shame that Canada is in the position it is in now as a weak country, just because of the ideology of saying “no” to LNG development and exports.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
A remark off to the side of the point.What the tags mean “It is a Festivus miracle,”An aside: no claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “That buzz over the Major Projects Office is now a fizzle.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “I have just one fundamental question that the government cannot answer.”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “Hon. Kevin Lamoureux:”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
A remark off to the side of the point.What the tags mean “Tell that to Pierre Poilievre.”An aside: no claim, reason or ask.
Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “Ellis Ross:”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
A remark off to the side of the point.What the tags mean “Shall I say it again?”An aside: no claim, reason or ask.
Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “It—”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 95

14 of 39 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 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 “I was an MLA and was a chief councillor back in the days of LNG development 20 years ago,”About the member’s own past roles, not the bill.
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 “so this is where I come from.”Personal background, not the bill’s content.
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 travelled to Ottawa to try to fix the record based on my experience of project development, whether we are talking about forestry, mining or LNG.”About the member’s own trip to Ottawa, not the bill.
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 “The government did not take my request for a meeting.”About a refused meeting request, not the bill.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “A member of the opposition did,”About an opposition member granting a meeting, not the bill.
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 “and all I was here to say was that they were talking to the wrong people.”About whom the government met, not the bill.
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 “The federal government has no idea what it is talking about.”A general claim about the government’s knowledge, not the bill.
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 “In fact, a lot of the leaders who fought for it did so with no praise or recognition,”About recognition of individual leaders, not the bill.
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 “which is a shame.”About lack of recognition, not the bill.
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 “These are people like Elmer Derrick and the people of Nisga’a.”About named individuals and their recognition, not the bill.
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 “The leadership at the time, who were supporting my band in getting LNG off the ground, never got recognition.”About past leaders’ recognition, not the bill.
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 “and the only thing I can say now is that I wish I knew then what I know now in terms of how this place operates.”About the member’s hindsight on how Parliament operates, not the bill.
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 could have gotten it done quicker.”A personal reflection on timing, not the bill.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “It is a Festivus miracle,”A joke aside about the government’s change of view.

Respect · 100

0 of 39 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 · 100

0 of 39 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.

Nothing lost points.

Claims · 8

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“Bill C-69 and Bill C-48”The Liberal government passed Bill C-69 and Bill C-48, which the speaker says stalled the Canadian economy.search
2“there was no business case for LNG development”The Liberal government said there was no business case for LNG development.search
3“let Germany, when it came knocking on the door of Canada to secure an LNG deal, go away with a hydrogen deal”Germany sought an LNG deal with Canada but left with a hydrogen deal instead.search
4“18 major LNG projects in B.C.”There were 18 major LNG projects proposed in British Columbia at the time the sector was starting out.search
5“One major project from my territory, the only one that survived, was LNG Canada”LNG Canada was the only major LNG project from the speaker’s territory that survived.search
6“this 250-page bill”Bill C-39 is 250 pages long.search
7“an announcement of a Major Projects Office”The government announced a Major Projects Office that was to fast-track project approvals.search
8“the government has to consult and accommodate first nations before it makes the decision”Canadian courts have held that when the Crown is aware a decision might affect Aboriginal rights and title, it must consult and accommodate first nations before making the decision.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20