Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Evan Solomon

Liberal on Building Canada Strong Act 2026-10-07

116 words · 5 sentences · 6 clauses

Replying to Dan Albas (Conservative)

“Madam Speaker, the Liberals keep talking about one year, one review, but it is not consistent, it is not predictable and it is not certain in Bill C-39. I have asked Liberal members time and time again why major transportation projects are not subject to a statutory deadline of 12 months, as is purported for projects under the Impact Assessment Agency, the Canada Energy Regulator or the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. Some have said that transportation is too difficult. That is ridiculous. If we can require the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission to come up with a reasonable result, a yes or a no within 12 months, we can imagine that it would go for it. This creates a lot of questions, because someone could get a writ of mandamus and force a regulator to come to a decision if it went past the statutory deadline. Can the minister take a look at his notes, maybe fire up Copilot and answer the question: Why is it two-tier, and why is transportation not getting the same treatment as other types of projects?”

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.

Thanks 4%The ask 61%Claims 34%

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

Madam Speaker, Thanks · 5 wordsthat was a great question, ThanksThe ask · 71 wordsand I would welcome the hon. member’s support as we build great transportation projects like high-speed rail. If he wants to help expedite those kinds of things, I would be more than delighted to welcome him and his support to move some of the major projects in transportation forward. We will count on his support. I look forward to the foreshadowing of his support for expediting great projects like high-speed rail. Claims · 40 wordsThrough this particular bill, Bill C-39, it is absolutely important that we are doing one project, one review, one year for major projects while keeping the regulations, the safety of the environment and the consultation with indigenous partners in place.¹Partly 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 · 94

1 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.

Thanks and tributes.What the tags mean “that was a great question,”Thanks: no claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 45

5 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 “and I would welcome the hon. member’s support as we build great transportation projects like high-speed rail.”About welcoming support for transportation projects generally, not the missing statutory deadline 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 “If he wants to help expedite those kinds of things, I would be more than delighted to welcome him and his support to move some of the major projects in transportation forward.”Invites the member’s help expediting projects, without addressing why transportation lacks the 12-month deadline.
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 “We will count on his support.”On the subject of the question, but no answer to what was asked can be drawn from it.
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 “I look forward to the foreshadowing of his support for expediting great projects like high-speed rail.”Speaks of anticipated support for high-speed rail, not the deadline question raised.
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 “Through this particular bill, Bill C-39, it is absolutely important that we are doing one project, one review, one year for major projects while keeping the regulations, the safety of the environment and the consultation with indigenous partners in place.”Restates the bill’s one-project-one-review-one-year pledge generally, without addressing why transportation projects are excluded from it.

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 · 1

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“one project, one review, one year for major projects”Bill C-39, the Building Canada Strong Act, would establish a process of one project, one review, one year for major projects.search

Analysed on 2026-10-19