Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Connie Cody

Conservative on Building Canada Strong Act 2026-10-05

101 words · 7 sentences · 7 clauses

Replying to Steeve Lavoie (Liberal)

“Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech. I know that it can take a long time to prepare a speech for the House. I thought her speech was extremely interesting, because it really reflected the spirit of Bill C-39. This bill will make it possible to build Canada strong quickly. I think it responds to the wants and needs of her constituents. In light of what I heard in my colleague’s speech, I would like to know if, when the time comes, she plans to vote in favour of the bill so we can act faster for the people in her riding.”

Statement grade

A+

Average 95 / 100

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

Positioning 17%Reasoning 17%Claims 40%The ask 27%

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

Mr. Speaker, Positioning · 6 wordsConservatives do support getting projects built.Positioning Reasoning · 17 wordsThe question is whether Canadians would actually see better results and more results instead of more bureaucracy. Claims · 40 wordsEighteen months ago, Canadians were told that Bill C-5 would speed up approvals to get projects moving.¹ Instead of these things’ moving forward, we are in the House debating Bill C-39.² The promises of Bill C-5 still have not materialized. The ask · 27 wordsIf the Liberals are so confident of Bill C-39, they should be open to having it discussed in committee to provide full transparency and accountability to Canadians. Positioning · 11 wordsAt some point the conversation must shift from promises to results.Positioning

At a glance

Lost points for
AnsweredOf this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 79

2 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.

Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “Conservatives do support getting projects built.”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 “At some point the conversation must shift from promises to results.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 100

0 of 2 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.

Nothing lost points.

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 · 100

0 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.

Nothing lost points.

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“Eighteen months ago, Canadians were told that Bill C-5 would speed up approvals to get projects moving”About 18 months before October 2026, Bill C-5 was presented as a measure that would speed up approvals to get projects moving.search
2“we are in the House debating Bill C-39”The House is debating Bill C-39, the Building Canada Strong Act, on October 5, 2026.search

Analysed on 2026-10-19