Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Jacob Mantle

Conservative on Safe Social Media Act 2026-10-29

74 words · 6 sentences · 7 clauses

Replying to Mario Beaulieu (Bloc Québécois)

“Madam Speaker, because it has jurisdiction in the area of telecommunications, the federal government may make regulations on social media and digital safety, but this also affects areas under the jurisdiction of Quebec and the provinces in terms of social matters, youth protection and education. Would my colleague agree that Bill C‑34 should have an asymmetrical and flexible approach and that Quebec and the provinces should be consulted?”

Statement grade

A–

Average 87 / 100

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

Promise 12%Procedure 18%Positioning 14%Claims 20%Reasoning 36%

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

Madam Speaker, Promise · 9 wordsI am always open to consultation with the provinces.Vague promise Procedure · 13 wordsI talked about constitutional issues. One, of course, is the division of powers.Procedure Positioning · 10 wordsI am not sure I agree with the member’s premise.Positioning Claims · 15 wordsThe Criminal Code is obviously within the purview of the federal government, not the provinces.¹ Reasoning · 27 wordsHowever, there is nothing that prevents the federal government from consulting with Quebec or any other province on these issues, and I think it should do that.

At a glance

Lost points for
AnsweredOf this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 65

3 of 4 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.

Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “I talked about constitutional issues.”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 “One, of course, is the division of powers.”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 “I am not sure I agree with the member’s premise.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 100

0 of 4 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.

Respect · 100

0 of 4 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 · 83

1 of 4 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 “I am always open to consultation with the provinces”A commitment with no measure, date or success condition named.

Claims · 1

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“The Criminal Code is obviously within the purview of the federal government”Criminal law, including the Criminal Code, falls under federal jurisdiction in Canada, not provincial jurisdiction.search

Analysed on 2026-10-31