Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Patty Hajdu

Liberal on Building Canada Strong Act 2026-10-07

119 words · 4 sentences · 6 clauses

Replying to Alexis Deschênes (Bloc Québécois)

“Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for her contribution to the debate, and I want to draw her attention to an issue that goes beyond Bill C-39: the centralization of power. In several sections of the bill, authority that previously rested with cabinet, for instance, will be delegated to a minister. This will result in fewer and fewer people being involved in decision-making. When it comes to the regional assessments that will lead to the creation of regions of national interest, this is exactly what will happen. As a result, it will be the minister who sets the terms of reference to determine which types of development projects will be pre-approved in a region. Is my colleague not concerned, as I am, that all this centralization of power could open the door to abuses?”

Statement grade

75 / 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 84%Reasoning 16%

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

Mr. Speaker, Claims · 100 wordsthe Minister of Labour does have the responsibility and the right to use the Canada Labour Code to foster industrial peace. Section 107 is not the only tool that ministers have used in the past to end labour disruption because of national economic interest.¹ As the member would know, this House has been used to pass back-to-work legislation, ²which is obviously a worst-case scenario for everyone, including the employers, the employees and certainly the government. The legislation that we are proposing today in Bill C-39 would actually bring the responsibility back to the table, between the employers and the workers, Reasoning · 19 wordswhere that decision ought to be made, to form collective agreements to help workers and companies into the next—Partly on point

At a glance

Lost points for
Didn't answerNone of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 100

0 of 6 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.

Nothing lost points.

Relevance · 45

6 of 6 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.

Staying near the subject without addressing the matter at hand: what was asked, or what the bill, motion or speech is about.What the tags mean “the Minister of Labour does have the responsibility and the right to use the Canada Labour Code to foster industrial peace.”About the Minister of Labour’s general powers under the Canada Labour Code, not the centralization of decision-making asked about.
Staying near the subject without addressing the matter at hand: what was asked, or what the bill, motion or speech is about.What the tags mean “Section 107 is not the only tool that ministers have used in the past to end labour disruption because of national economic interest.”About past tools ministers used to end labour disruption, not the concern that the bill concentrates authority in ministers.
Staying near the subject without addressing the matter at hand: what was asked, or what the bill, motion or speech is about.What the tags mean “As the member would know, this House has been used to pass back-to-work legislation,”About the House’s history of passing back-to-work legislation, not the delegation of power raised in the question.
Staying near the subject without addressing the matter at hand: what was asked, or what the bill, motion or speech is about.What the tags mean “which is obviously a worst-case scenario for everyone, including the employers, the employees and certainly the government.”About the downsides of back-to-work legislation, not whether the bill’s centralization of power is a concern.
Staying near the subject without addressing the matter at hand: what was asked, or what the bill, motion or speech is about.What the tags mean “The legislation that we are proposing today in Bill C-39 would actually bring the responsibility back to the table, between the employers and the workers,”About Bill C-39’s labour provisions returning decisions to bargaining parties, but does not address the centralization concern asked.
Staying near the subject without addressing the matter at hand: what was asked, or what the bill, motion or speech is about.What the tags mean “where that decision ought to be made, to form collective agreements to help workers and companies into the next—”Continues on collective bargaining under the bill without engaging the question of concentrated ministerial authority.

Respect · 100

0 of 6 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 6 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“Section 107 is not the only tool that ministers have used in the past”Canada’s ministers have used tools other than Section 107 of the Canada Labour Code in the past to end labour disruptions.search
2“this House has been used to pass back-to-work legislation”The House of Commons has passed back-to-work legislation.search

Analysed on 2026-10-19