Replying to Pat Kelly (Conservative). The question was off topic, so this reply is judged against the bill.
“Mr. Speaker, earlier in the debate, the member was asked about support for the creation of a commission, which is part of the act. I do not think a part of this, like the commission, could be or is a complete answer to the question of online harms. Some online harms are criminal acts. When crimes are committed, the commission of crime is a matter for law enforcement, not a commission. I think it is really important that we examine all of the issues around this bill and that we get it right. Does the member agree that there are many questions that a parliamentary committee needs to address? Does she think there is likely room for amendment?”
Statement grade
A–
The average of Signal, Relevance, Respect and Clarity is 89. The grade is held to 86, 30 above Signal.
86 / 100, held down by Signal
A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Mr. Speaker, Procedure · 3 wordsyes, I agree.ProcedurePositioning · 14 wordsThis is absolutely something that needs to be scrutinized as we move into committee.PositioningClaims · 14 wordsThe commission would be a superregulator and be able to make its own decisions.The question · 7 wordsWould there really be accountability in that, Positioning · 13 wordsor is it just going to be another excuse, another layer of bureaucracy, PositioningThe question · 23 wordswhere we would be able to pass blame instead of having real, true criminal accountability for a few of the items just discussed?
