Analysis · Debate question · beta

Kevin Lamoureux

88 words · 4 sentences · 6 clauses

Following a speech by Rachael Thomas (Conservative)
“Mr. Speaker, energy policy is not an abstract debate for academic journals or Ottawa boardrooms. In fact, it directly dictates whether a working family can afford their monthly bills. The Liberal government treats domestic energy developments as something to penalize, suppress or hold back. This is, at least, in action, because we know that with talk, it likes to promise a good game. Nevertheless, energy is the lifeblood of our supply chain, and penalizing energy does not reduce consumption. In fact, it simply drives up costs for the people who can least afford it, who are working families in this country. Our emergency fuel relief plan is designed to address this exact bottleneck. This is what we have put forward in the House today. By offering immediate tax relief on diesel and removing red tape for domestic energy infrastructure, we would directly attack the root cause of transportation costs and food inflation. We would take the burden off the back of Canadian producers, Canadian transporters and Canadian consumers, who ultimately end up paying that additional amount. This motion is about restoring economic common sense to our federal policies. It is about recognizing that we cannot tax the producer without punishing the consumer. We cannot drive up the cost of transportation without also driving up the price of bread, meat and potatoes at the supermarket. At its core, the motion the Conservatives have brought forward today has to do with everyday working people here in this great country. It is about the local farmer who reached out to my office because he sees the writing on the wall and the link between the cost of the fuel he is using to produce his crop, take it off the field and send it to market and the cost of food. There is a strong link. It is about the truck driver working gruelling hours to deliver essentials to our communities. It is about every single Canadian household struggling to make ends meet under 11 years of compounding Liberal policies that have mis-served this country. This includes the millions of Canadians, many of them working Canadians, who have had to line up at food banks in order to feed their families because the government has put policies in place that are punitive in nature. Canadians were told to judge the government by the prices at the grocery store. This is what the Prime Minister invited them to do when he was running for election. The judgment is in. The current system is failing working families. The cost at grocery stores is only going up, not down. It is time to bring down fuel prices. It is time to lower the cost of doing business. It is time to give Canadian families the relief they so desperately need and deserve. The Conservatives have put forward a legitimate, common-sense plan that will serve Canada well by tackling the root problems Canadians face. I urge every member in the House to vote yes to the motion that has been presented to them today. Stand on the side of Canadians. Vote with us.”
Statement grade
A+
Average 97 / 100
A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.
Claims 60%Procedure 9%The question 31%

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

Mr. Speaker, Claims · 19 wordsa Conservative member asked a question about the federal government playing the blame game, which is just not true. Procedure · 8 wordsLet me pose it in a different way.Procedure The question · 27 wordsCan the Conservatives explain to Canadians, on the issue of affordability, what they actually support among the multitude of programs the federal government has put in place? Claims · 34 wordsIs it the tax break for 22 million Canadians, the groceries benefit program for Canadians, the dental program, pharmacare, the national school food program for children, 1or the tax break we are giving them—

Analysed on