Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Mario Simard

Bloc Québécois on Building Canada Strong Act 2026-10-07

119 words · 9 sentences · 10 clauses

Replying to Andréanne Larouche (Bloc Québécois)

“Mr. Speaker, I think my colleague did a thorough job of showing that this proposed pipeline will not benefit us and is not in the national interest. Is it also in the national interest to fight with unions and violate their rights when businesses depend on workers? How is it in the national interest to alienate workers?”

Statement grade

B+

83 / 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%Claims 57%Procedure 2%Reasoning 33%Positioning 4%

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

Mr. Speaker, Thanks · 5 wordsmy colleague is absolutely right.Thanks Claims · 20 wordsAt the beginning of my speech, I asked who will benefit from this legislation. It is certainly not the workers. Procedure · 2 wordsWorse still, ProcedureClaims · 48 wordsas I have said, we experienced first-hand what happens when an oil and gas project is turned down. That is what happened in Quebec with GNL Québec.¹ When the Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement said no to GNL Québec, the company turned around and sued the Canadian government.² Reasoning · 39 wordsIt is not hard to imagine how much trouble a piece of legislation like this could lead to. Imagine how many lawsuits will be filed against the federal government if the Pacific link project is rejected on environmental grounds. Positioning · 5 wordsThis is all completely irrational.PositioningPartly on point

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 86

3 of 9 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 “my colleague is absolutely right.”Thanks: no claim, reason or ask.
Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “Worse still,”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “This is all completely irrational.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 53

6 of 9 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 “as I have said, we experienced first-hand what happens when an oil and gas project is turned down.”About litigation risks from a rejected oil and gas project, not the treatment of unions and workers.
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 “That is what happened in Quebec with GNL Québec.”About the GNL Québec episode in Quebec, not the question on unions and workers.
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 “When the Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement said no to GNL Québec, the company turned around and sued the Canadian government.”About a company suing the government after an environmental review, not the unions and workers point.
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 “It is not hard to imagine how much trouble a piece of legislation like this could lead to.”About the risk of lawsuits under the bill, not the question of alienating workers.
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 “Imagine how many lawsuits will be filed against the federal government if the Pacific link project is rejected on environmental grounds.”About possible lawsuits over the Pacific link project, not the unions and workers 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 “This is all completely irrational.”A general comment on the bill’s rationality, not the question on unions and workers.

Respect · 100

0 of 9 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 9 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“That is what happened in Quebec with GNL Québec”GNL Québec was an oil and gas project in Quebec that was turned down.search
2“When the Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement said no to GNL Québec, the company turned around and sued the Canadian government”After the Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement gave a negative report on GNL Québec, the company sued the Canadian government.search

Analysed on 2026-10-19