Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Martin Champoux

Bloc Québécois on Safe Social Media Act 2026-10-21

205 words · 11 sentences · 15 clauses

Replying to Rachael Thomas (Conservative)

“Mr. Speaker, I will pick up where he left off with regard to the commission. The commission is one example of a regulatory body that could be used to make sure platforms are held accountable and that could give this legislation “teeth”. Another body that could be used is the CRTC, which is already in existence. The CRTC already receives complaints with regard to telecommunications, for example, and investigates those complaints and then applies fines when an organization or institution is found to not be in compliance. The government has decided to create a commission, give it broad sweeping authority and leave many of its decisions up to regulation, which would be put in place behind closed doors with very little accountability. Does this concern the Bloc member at all?”

Statement grade

Average 76 / 100

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

Thanks 5%Procedure 14%Positioning 13%Claims 47%Promise 7%Reasoning 14%

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

Mr. Speaker, Thanks · 11 wordsI thank my colleague from Lethbridge for her very relevant question.Thanks Procedure · 17 wordsI find it interesting to hear her talk about the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, or CRTC, ProcedurePositioning · 26 wordsas the organization that could take on those powers, considering that it is not every day that I hear her praise the work of the CRTC.PositioningOff point Procedure · 11 wordsThat said, we are completely open to this type of conversation.Procedure Claims · 11 wordsPersonally, when it comes to the CRTC, I agree in principle. Promise · 15 wordsHowever, we are willing to discuss any more efficient and cost-effective solutions that are presented. Claims · 47 wordsI have my doubts with regard to the CRTC, since it is already having a hard time hearing all of the cases on its docket.² There is a big backlog. It took nearly three years to just to come up with regulations on levies for streaming platforms, ¹Reasoning · 23 wordsso I would be surprised if adding this task to the CRTC’s workload would be more efficient and cost-effective than creating a commission.Partly on point Claims · 30 wordsThat said, I completely agree with my colleague that there is a difference between keeping an arm’s length from political influence and operating without transparency. All bodies must be transparent. Reasoning · 5 wordsThat is what we expect, Vague promiseClaims · 9 wordsand we would expect the same from this commission.

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 59

5 of 13 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 “I thank my colleague from Lethbridge for her very relevant question.”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 “I find it interesting to hear her talk about the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission,”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “or CRTC,”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 “as the organization that could take on those powers, considering that it is not every day that I hear her praise the work of the CRTC.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “That said, we are completely open to this type of conversation.”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 48

7 of 13 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.

Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “as the organization that could take on those powers, considering that it is not every day that I hear her praise the work of the CRTC.”It provides commentary regarding the questioner’s comments about the CRTC.
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 “Personally, when it comes to the CRTC, I agree in principle.”It expresses a general agreement on the principles of the CRTC.
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 “However, we are willing to discuss any more efficient and cost-effective solutions that are presented.”It states willingness to discuss more efficient solutions, but does not address the accountability 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 “I have my doubts with regard to the CRTC, since it is already having a hard time hearing all of the cases on its docket.”It raises a criticism about the CRTC’s workload.
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 “There is a big backlog.”It confirms the existing backlog for the CRTC.
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 took nearly three years to just to come up with regulations on levies for streaming platforms,”It provides an example of the CRTC’s lengthy process for regulations.
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 “so I would be surprised if adding this task to the CRTC’s workload would be more efficient and cost-effective than creating a commission.”It questions the efficiency of adding the task to the CRTC versus creating a commission.

Respect · 100

0 of 13 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 · 95

1 of 13 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 “we expect”The speaker commits to an expectation without naming a specific action or measure to achieve it.

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“It took nearly three years to just to come up with regulations on levies for streaming platforms”It took nearly three years to come up with regulations on levies for streaming platforms.search
2“it is already having a hard time hearing all of the cases on its docket”The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission is already having a hard time hearing all of the cases on its docket.search

Analysed on 2026-10-22