Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Charles Sousa

Liberal on Safe Social Media Act 2026-10-28

46 words · 1 sentences · 2 clauses

Replying to William Stevenson (Conservative)

“Mr. Speaker, I heard a lot in my hon. colleague’s speech. He said that the act would this and that, but from my understanding, it is the goal of the act to do those things while leaving a lot to the commission to figure out how to actually get there. Maybe the member can explain to me how he sees the bill doing these things, rather than setting goals for the commission to do them without parliamentary oversight once the legislation leaves here.”

Statement grade

–

Not graded

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

Reasoning 100%

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

Mr. Speaker, Reasoning · 46 wordsit is important for the House to set the tone and parameters by which we should proceed, but as with any other regulatory body, we would depend upon experts and those who execute the act to provide the appropriate parameters and safeguards to protect our children.Vague promise

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 100

0 of 1 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 · 100

0 of 1 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.

Nothing lost points.

Reasoning · 87

0 of 1 deductions are Reasoning

Reasoning checks for sound logic and solid support for any conclusion. A low score means the speaker made unsupported leaps or used weak arguments.

Nothing lost points.

Conclusions found · 1

Conclusion“but as with any other regulatory body, we would depend upon experts and those who execute the act to provide the appropriate parameters and safeguards to protect our children.”

BecauseGiven in the same sentence

Reason given

Respect · 100

0 of 1 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 · 35

1 of 1 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 “provide the appropriate parameters and safeguards”The statement describes necessary regulatory steps without naming a specific method, date, or outcome.

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