“Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleague’s public service and I appreciated our constructive discussions on lawful access last year. We share the goals of getting projects done fast, building Canada strong and reducing unnecessary delays. Bill C-5 established a framework for designated national interest projects, while Bill C-39 would also improve coordination across the broader federal review and permitting systems. Setting aside our differences on other policies, does the member agree that running reviews concurrently and reducing duplication between departments would benefit Canadian businesses? If he doubts the process timelines, what specific changes would he recommend to make them achievable?”
Statement grade
A
The average of Signal, Relevance, Respect and Clarity.
Average 92 / 100
A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Mr. Speaker, Procedure · 6 wordswhat I am having trouble with, ProcedureReasoning · 39 wordsand what I think Canadians are going to have trouble with, is how we can improve the speed to get projects approved if we add a third layer of bureaucracy, because that is exactly what this bill would do.1Claims · 22 wordsIt troubles me that Bill C-5 did not seem to get it done, so let us add another layer in Bill C-39.Reasoning · 15 wordsThis is what I believe is happening here.I am hopeful that it will work, Partly on pointPositioning · 13 wordsbut the results are in the pudding, and right now, the pudding is—PositioningPartly on point
