Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Rachel Bendayan

Liberal on Safe Social Media Act 2026-10-21

166 words · 7 sentences · 11 clauses

Replying to Lianne Rood (Conservative)

“Mr. Speaker, over one of the break weeks in September, I had an opportunity to host two town halls in Middlesex—London, where I heard from parents from all around the communities I am honoured and privileged to represent. I think we can all agree that parents want to protect their children. We all want to protect children from online predators, but what I heard from parents is that they feel they should have the opportunity, first and foremost, to protect their children, and that they also should have the opportunity to be heard on this matter. I am asking the government if it will consult with an array of Canadians from across this country to hear from parents what they would like the government to do, just as I did with my own constituents, and take that feedback going forward with this bill to make sure we get it right so we can all protect children from online predators.”

Statement grade

Average 90 / 100

A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.

Promise 22%Claims 78%

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

Mr. Speaker, Promise · 13 wordsI would like to assure the hon. member that the conversations will continue.Vague promise Claims · 130 wordsI would like to point out that the minister did extensive consultations over the summer, ¹as did I. Of course, the bill will move to committee if it is passed at second reading in the House, and there will be an opportunity for further study of the bill, where we will again hear from parents. I would like to point out that what the bill aims to do is to provide additional tools to parents. Nobody would be dictating to parents in any way how to teach or set boundaries for their own children. As my colleague would know from the bill itself, it aims to ensure that young people cannot create accounts, ²but if a parent would like their child to see something online, that would still remain possible.³Partly on point Promise · 23 wordsI hope we will have the opportunity to work together so I can help address some of the concerns the member may have.

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 100

0 of 5 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 · 70

4 of 5 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 “I would like to point out that what the bill aims to do is to provide additional tools to parents.”About what the bill provides to parents, not about the consultation asked for.
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 “Nobody would be dictating to parents in any way how to teach or set boundaries for their own children.”About how the bill treats parents’ discretion, not about the consultation asked for.
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 my colleague would know from the bill itself, it aims to ensure that young people cannot create accounts,”About the bill’s account provisions, not about the consultation asked for.
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 “but if a parent would like their child to see something online, that would still remain possible.”About what parents could still allow under the bill, not about the consultation asked for.

Respect · 100

0 of 5 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 · 88

1 of 5 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.

A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible.What the tags mean “the conversations will continue”The commitment names no participants, subject, date or measure of what will be done.

Claims · 3

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“the minister did extensive consultations over the summer”The minister sponsoring Bill C-34 held extensive consultations on the bill over the summer of 2026.search
2“it aims to ensure that young people cannot create accounts”Bill C-34 aims to ensure that young people cannot create social media accounts.search
3“if a parent would like their child to see something online, that would still remain possible”Under Bill C-34, a parent could still allow their child to access something online.search

Analysed on 2026-10-22