Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Connie Cody

Conservative on Safe Social Media Act 2026-10-28

89 words · 5 sentences · 6 clauses

Replying to Kevin Lamoureux (Liberal)

“Mr. Speaker, I appreciate a number of the comments the member put on the record this evening. I truly believe that every member of the House of Commons understands that there is harm to children and that the potential there is great. The issue is that as a Parliament, we have a responsibility to take action. Quite frankly, for me, the establishment of the digital safety commission of Canada would be a major step forward. The member expressed some concerns with respect to it, but I wonder if she could provide her thoughts on the principle of having that commission. Is that something she supports?”

Statement grade

76 / 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 20%Reasoning 80%

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

Mr. Speaker, Claims · 18 wordsI think everyone in this House agrees that online harms are real and that children need better protection.Unearned certainty Reasoning · 71 wordsThe question is not whether action is needed. The question is whether the specific measures before us would deliver the results that families are expecting. If a law can be bypassed easily, if children can simply migrate to other platforms or if key details are left to future regulations, those are issues Parliament has a responsibility to examine carefully. We can act urgently while still making sure we get this right.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 7 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 · 46

6 of 7 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 think everyone in this House agrees that online harms are real and that children need better protection.”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 “The question is not whether action is needed.”Frames the debate but does not say whether she supports the commission.
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 question is whether the specific measures before us would deliver the results that families are expecting.”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 “If a law can be bypassed easily,”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 “if children can simply migrate to other platforms or if key details are left to future regulations, those are issues Parliament has a responsibility to examine carefully.”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 “We can act urgently while still making sure we get this right.”A general remark about urgency and care, not a position on the commission or the bill’s measures.

Respect · 100

0 of 7 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 · 76

1 of 7 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.

Something stated as certain with nothing to back it.What the tags mean “everyone in this House agrees”The claim asserts universal agreement in place of any source or evidence.

Claims · 0

This list shows the factual statements you can check for yourself: the words as said, and the claim restated to stand on its own.

No checkable claims.

Analysed on 2026-10-30