“Mr. Speaker, the member talked in his speech directly about timely and coordinated reviews. He talked extensively about this applying to the transportation components of Bill C-39. He also conflated those same provisions with one year, one review. However, in Bill C-39, there is no statutory deadline for transportation projects in part 1. Part 2 contains none of that as well. He also talked about the transportation project office as being a fundamental part of the bill. Maybe the member can say, first of all, why the government did not put in a statutory timeline. Second, why is the Minister of Transport given the discretionary power to create the transportation project office? It is not even mandatory under the law. Lastly, it would have zero approval authority. What is going on? Why is the member conflating transportation projects being done on time when there is nothing in the bill that would do that?”
Statement grade
B
The average of Signal, Relevance, Respect and Clarity is 86. The grade is held to 76, 30 above Relevance.
76 / 100, held down by Relevance
A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.
Claims 100%
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Mr. Speaker, Claims · 78 wordsas I said in the speech, transportation projects are critical for our supply chain in Canada, in our trade with international partners.The transportation project office is intended to be the lead coordinator for transportation projects not already coordinated by IAAC, CER, CNSC or the Building Canada Act processes.1These are all separate streams.Another bureaucracy would have bundled them all together, but we have chosen that the transportation project office would focus specifically on the transportation programs.Partly on point
