“Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his contribution to the debate. I am interested to hear his thoughts on something that comes up a lot in Bill C-39. I am referring to the message being sent to the minister. The minister is told that he will have the authority to impose conditions determining whether a project moves forward, yet he already has that authority. The new spin with Bill C‑39 is that the minister has to consider the feasibility of any conditions he adds on. That comes up in several places. I saw that as a message for the minister that he is expected to facilitate things for the proponents. How does my colleague see that?”
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.
Procedure 10%Positioning 18%Reasoning 73%
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Mr. Speaker, Procedure · 13 wordsI too am concerned about it, but probably for an entirely different reason.ProcedurePositioning · 24 wordsThe Liberals, over the last 10 years, have made the Canadian government a lobbyist playground rather than having a clear set of outlined rules.PositioningReasoning · 98 wordsThe Liberals are basically saying that if someone is going to build a fence, the fence has to be a certain height and colour, and then they can build the fence.No, they have to get approval from the minister.They have to hire a lobbyist, have them work, pay the right people and make things happen.That is what I am more concerned about when I read these bills.People would need to get the approval of the minister, hire the right lobbyist and pay money to the right people, and then the project would be approved.
