Replying to Mario Simard (Bloc Québécois). The question was off topic, so this reply is judged against the bill.
“Mr. Speaker, when one looks at the legislation, the many implications it could have become pretty clear. If the government wants to regulate certain online platforms, for instance, it has to include some form of education for young people. It also means taking action on content that may differ depending on whether one is francophone or anglophone. What I find especially unfortunate is that the bill does not include any obligation for the federal government to consult with the provinces or seek any kind of alignment, particularly with Quebec, which is a distinct society and has a different culture. Would my colleague agree that the government has missed the mark a bit with the one-size-fits-all measures set out in the bill? That said, I completely agree on the importance of the bill.”
Statement grade
A+
The average of Signal, Relevance, Respect and Clarity.
Average 96 / 100
A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.
Procedure 10%Claims 31%Reasoning 60%
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Mr. Speaker, Procedure · 12 wordsas a member of Parliament from Alberta, I would share those thoughts.ProcedureClaims · 37 wordsObviously, Off pointif the committee is given a strong enough mandate and enough time to study this piece of legislation, provinces will have a chance to weigh in, either at committee or by sending comments to the committee, Reasoning · 72 wordsand I think that would be really important.It is important to me, more than almost any other piece of legislation I have seen, that Parliament, through the committee process right now, take the time to get this right.There are many legitimate concerns that have been raised, and it is very important that the committee that undertakes this study take the time to really hear those concerns and get it right.
