Borrelli speaks for Windsor-Essex manufacturers and steel workers, pressing the government to lift countertariffs on tools and moulds, stop dumping of foreign steel, and require Canadian steel on Canadian projects. She argues by leaping from single cases to sweeping claims — one firm’s “5% to 10% profit is wiped out by countertariffs” becomes whole industries sacrificed. She also raised parole rules for a murderer in her riding.Written by AI from their statements. Updated .
Average grade
A+
The average grade of 7 analysed statements. 2 more were analysed but were too short to grade.
95 / 100 over 7 statements
Signal89 / 100
Relevance100 / 100
Respect100 / 100
Clarity95 / 100
Averaged over the 7 of 9 statements graded so far.
In their own words
Loses points more than most for
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.1.5 times as often as most members.What the tags mean →×1.5
“A convicted murderer in my community was denied parole, but the government is still letting him leave prison alone for 60 days. I want the government to explain why it is allowing this.”
“Mr. Speaker, recently I spoke with Tina from my community, whose nine-year-old son was murdered by Douglas Lambier. In the 21 years since her son’s murder, her life has never been the same. While his parole was recently denied by the government, Mr. Lambier has been allowed to have a 60-day unescorted absence to attend a program. Why is the Liberal government allowing a murderer who the Parole Board deems unfit to rejoin society to have a 60-day unescorted absence?”
Official Hansard
Mr. Speaker, recently I spoke with Tina from my community, whose nine-year-old son was murdered by Douglas Lambier. In the 21 years since her son’s murder, her life has never been the same. While his parole was recently denied by the government, Mr. Lambier has been allowed to have a 60-day unescorted absence to attend a program. Why is the Liberal government allowing a murderer who the Parole Board deems unfit to rejoin society to have a 60-day unescorted absence?
“A fire at CFB Wainwright critically injured Private Daniel Thrasher. I ask all members to keep him and his family in their prayers.”
“Mr. Speaker, in the wake of Saturday’s tragedy at CFB Wainwright, I want to take a moment to recognize not only the tragedy but also the people and families whose lives have been changed forever. From Tecumseh, Ontario, Private Daniel Thrasher, an infanteer with Princess Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry since December 2025, was critically injured in Saturday’s fire. Prior to joining the military, he was an athlete playing varsity football with Wilfrid Laurier University and the University of Windsor Lancers. He also worked as a wildland firefighter in Edson, Alberta. Our thoughts remain with Daniel, his parents, John and Carmen, and his siblings during this difficult time. In moments like these, we are reminded, across this nation, of the strength, compassion and solidarity of the brave men and women in uniform who put their lives on the line every day to protect our country. We ask all members of the House to keep Daniel and his family in their prayers.”
Official Hansard
Mr. Speaker, in the wake of Saturday’s tragedy at CFB Wainwright, I want to take a moment to recognize not only the tragedy but also the people and families whose lives have been changed forever. From Tecumseh, Ontario, Private Daniel Thrasher, an infanteer with Princess Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry since December 2025, was critically injured in Saturday’s fire. Prior to joining the military, he was an athlete playing varsity football with Wilfrid Laurier University and the University of Windsor Lancers. He also worked as a wildland firefighter in Edson, Alberta. Our thoughts remain with Daniel, his parents, John and Carmen, and his siblings during this difficult time. In moments like these, we are reminded, across this nation, of the strength, compassion and solidarity of the brave men and women in uniform who put their lives on the line every day to protect our country. We ask all members of the House to keep Daniel and his family in their prayers.
“Canadian projects should use Canadian steel and Canadian workers. Steel workers are losing their jobs, and local projects are using foreign steel instead. I want the government to keep its promise to protect Canadian workers.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Liberals promised to stand up for Canadian workers. Back in Windsor, we are still waiting. Last week’s layoffs at Stelco are just the latest warning. Last October, Windsor workers called out the use of foreign steel on the Banwell-E.C. Row project, even though Canadian producers were ready to compete for the work. Canadian projects should use Canadian steel and Canadian workers. When will the Liberals stop the rhetoric and actually deliver the results they promised Canadian workers?”
Official Hansard
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals promised to stand up for Canadian workers. Back in Windsor, we are still waiting. Last week’s layoffs at Stelco are just the latest warning. Last October, Windsor workers called out the use of foreign steel on the Banwell-E.C. Row project, even though Canadian producers were ready to compete for the work. Canadian projects should use Canadian steel and Canadian workers. When will the Liberals stop the rhetoric and actually deliver the results they promised Canadian workers?
“Canada's taxes on American metals are hurting Windsor factories like Cavalier Tool. These plants need metal they can only buy in the United States, and the taxes wipe out their profits. I want the government to stop these taxes before more people lose their jobs.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government’s countertariffs are killing new work for Windsor manufacturers. Cavalier Tool’s three plants need specialized U.S. steel and aluminum they cannot source elsewhere. On $244,000 moulds, their 5% to 10% profit is wiped out by countertariffs. They are trying to maintain their skilled workforce. Under the conditions the Liberals have caused, this is becoming too challenging. How many more Windsor jobs will the government sacrifice?”
Official Hansard
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government’s countertariffs are killing new work for Windsor manufacturers. Cavalier Tool’s three plants need specialized U.S. steel and aluminum they cannot source elsewhere. On $244,000 moulds, their 5% to 10% profit is wiped out by countertariffs. They are trying to maintain their skilled workforce. Under the conditions the Liberals have caused, this is becoming too challenging. How many more Windsor jobs will the government sacrifice?
“Canada is the only G20 country in a recession because of government spending, rules, and bad policies. I want the Prime Minister to take responsibility for causing this crisis.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised Canadians strength and stability, but under his watch, Canada became the only G20 country in a recession. That is the result of Liberal inflationary spending, red tape and anti-development policies that have crushed workers, businesses and families. Canadians deserve a Prime Minister who takes responsibility, not one who hides behind excuses. Will the Prime Minister admit that his policies caused the crisis, or will he keep pretending Canadians are not struggling under his watch?”
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised Canadians strength and stability, but under his watch, Canada became the only G20 country in a recession. That is the result of Liberal inflationary spending, red tape and anti-development policies that have crushed workers, businesses and families. Canadians deserve a Prime Minister who takes responsibility, not one who hides behind excuses. Will the Prime Minister admit that his policies caused the crisis, or will he keep pretending Canadians are not struggling under his watch?
“I do not support this bill. People should be able to fix their own appliances, but this bill creates too many rules for businesses. It will make electronics and home appliances more expensive and give shoppers fewer choices.”
“Mr. Speaker, imagine a family standing in an appliance aisle because their washing machine has broken down. They are already dealing with higher grocery bills, higher mortgages, higher rent and higher utility costs. They are looking at the price tags and trying to make the best decision for their household. One model is more expensive but may last longer. Another is more affordable and fits their budget today. That family should have the freedom to make that choice. Bill C-267, despite its good intentions, risks having Ottawa make that choice for them by creating a broad new regulatory framework that could increase costs, reduce options and make essential products less affordable for Canadians. Every single one of us gets frustrated when products break too soon, when repairs are difficult or when replacing an item seems easier than fixing it. Those concerns are real. Canadians should be able to repair the products they own, access reasonable repair options and receive clear information about the products they buy. However, the question before us is not whether durability and repairability are good things. The question is whether Bill C-267 is the right way to achieve them. On that question, Conservatives have serious concerns. Bill C-267 would require the Minister of Industry to develop a national framework on the durability and repairability of electronic products and essential home appliances offered for sale, distributed or sold in Canada, whether they are made here or imported. That framework would include measures related to minimum useful life, labelling, access to parts, tools and repair information, replacement parts, technical documentation, software support and the responsibilities of manufacturers, importers and distributors. The bill also contemplates future legislative measures, including obligations on the industry, inspection mechanisms and penalties for non-compliance. That is a very broad scope. It goes well beyond simply helping Canadians fix what they own. It opens the door to a new federal regulatory framework over a wide range of consumer products, many of which are already subject to complex supply chains, international standards, safety requirements, warranties and provincial consumer protection laws. Parliament has already taken steps in that direction through targeted right to repair legislation. In recent years, members from different parties have worked to address practical barriers that prevent Canadians from repairing the products they own. For example, in the 44th Parliament, Bill C-244, introduced by a Liberal member, addressed the issue of digital locks by allowing circumvention for the purpose of diagnosis, maintenance and repair. Also in the last Parliament, Bill C-294, introduced by a Conservative member, addressed interoperability by allowing consumers and businesses to use third party parts, systems and devices without being blocked by copyright rules. Both bills received royal assent in 2024. Those were targeted changes. They focused on removing specific legal barriers that made repair more difficult. They did not impose broad new federal product standards. They did not create a national framework for minimum product lifespans. They did not open the door to sweeping new rules on labelling, replacement parts, technical documentation and the like, and that distinction matters. Conservatives have supported practical right to repair reforms because they can empower consumers, support farmers, help small businesses and improve competition. As we consider the best policy response, we should focus on measures that remove unnecessary barriers to repair, support competition in repair markets and give consumers better information without imposing rigid top-down requirements that may not fit every product category, or even consumer need. At a time when businesses are already struggling with red tape, tariffs, supply chain pressures and weak productivity, we should not support legislation that could add new compliance costs and uncertainty. Canadians deserve products that are durable. They also deserve affordable products. They deserve repair options, but they also deserve marketplace choice. They deserve consumer protection, but—”
Official Hansard
Mr. Speaker, imagine a family standing in an appliance aisle because their washing machine has broken down. They are already dealing with higher grocery bills, higher mortgages, higher rent and higher utility costs. They are looking at the price tags and trying to make the best decision for their household. One model is more expensive but may last longer. Another is more affordable and fits their budget today. That family should have the freedom to make that choice. Bill C-267, despite its good intentions, risks having Ottawa make that choice for them by creating a broad new regulatory framework that could increase costs, reduce options and make essential products less affordable for Canadians. Every single one of us gets frustrated when products break too soon, when repairs are difficult or when replacing an item seems easier than fixing it. Those concerns are real. Canadians should be able to repair the products they own, access reasonable repair options and receive clear information about the products they buy. However, the question before us is not whether durability and repairability are good things. The question is whether Bill C-267 is the right way to achieve them. On that question, Conservatives have serious concerns. Bill C-267 would require the Minister of Industry to develop a national framework on the durability and repairability of electronic products and essential home appliances offered for sale, distributed or sold in Canada, whether they are made here or imported. That framework would include measures related to minimum useful life, labelling, access to parts, tools and repair information, replacement parts, technical documentation, software support and the responsibilities of manufacturers, importers and distributors. The bill also contemplates future legislative measures, including obligations on the industry, inspection mechanisms and penalties for non-compliance. That is a very broad scope. It goes well beyond simply helping Canadians fix what they own. It opens the door to a new federal regulatory framework over a wide range of consumer products, many of which are already subject to complex supply chains, international standards, safety requirements, warranties and provincial consumer protection laws. Parliament has already taken steps in that direction through targeted right to repair legislation. In recent years, members from different parties have worked to address practical barriers that prevent Canadians from repairing the products they own. For example, in the 44th Parliament, Bill C-244, introduced by a Liberal member, addressed the issue of digital locks by allowing circumvention for the purpose of diagnosis, maintenance and repair. Also in the last Parliament, Bill C-294, introduced by a Conservative member, addressed interoperability by allowing consumers and businesses to use third party parts, systems and devices without being blocked by copyright rules. Both bills received royal assent in 2024. Those were targeted changes. They focused on removing specific legal barriers that made repair more difficult. They did not impose broad new federal product standards. They did not create a national framework for minimum product lifespans. They did not open the door to sweeping new rules on labelling, replacement parts, technical documentation and the like, and that distinction matters. Conservatives have supported practical right to repair reforms because they can empower consumers, support farmers, help small businesses and improve competition. As we consider the best policy response, we should focus on measures that remove unnecessary barriers to repair, support competition in repair markets and give consumers better information without imposing rigid top-down requirements that may not fit every product category, or even consumer need. At a time when businesses are already struggling with red tape, tariffs, supply chain pressures and weak productivity, we should not support legislation that could add new compliance costs and uncertainty. Canadians deserve products that are durable. They also deserve affordable products. They deserve repair options, but they also deserve marketplace choice. They deserve consumer protection, but—
“Canada is in a recession. The government should protect Canadian jobs by stopping cheap, illegally dumped Chinese aluminum.”
“Madam Speaker, under the Liberal Prime Minister, Canada is the only G20 country to fall into a recession. Just by stopping the illegal dumping of cheap subsidized Chinese aluminum, the government could help aluminum extrusion companies be profitable, provide jobs for hard-working Canadians and put food on their tables. Will the Liberal Prime Minister tell aluminum workers that Canada is in a recession or just a technical recession?”
Madam Speaker, under the Liberal Prime Minister, Canada is the only G20 country to fall into a recession. Just by stopping the illegal dumping of cheap subsidized Chinese aluminum, the government could help aluminum extrusion companies be profitable, provide jobs for hard-working Canadians and put food on their tables. Will the Liberal Prime Minister tell aluminum workers that Canada is in a recession or just a technical recession?
“Canada is in a recession, but the Prime Minister spent $195,000 on airplane food for just three flights. That money could have fed hungry people. I want to know when the government will stop this wasteful spending.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has taken Canada into a recession, the only one in the G7. How does he respond? His latest inflight catering bill for only three flights was $195,000. That is enough to pay for 2,600 food hampers at a Windsor food bank, enough for 36,400 days. While the Liberal Prime Minister led us into recession, he dined on luxury inflight meals while Canadians were starving. How many more bad economic reports will it take for the Liberals to rein in their out-of-control, wasteful spending?”
Official Hansard
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has taken Canada into a recession, the only one in the G7. How does he respond? His latest inflight catering bill for only three flights was $195,000. That is enough to pay for 2,600 food hampers at a Windsor food bank, enough for 36,400 days. While the Liberal Prime Minister led us into recession, he dined on luxury inflight meals while Canadians were starving. How many more bad economic reports will it take for the Liberals to rein in their out-of-control, wasteful spending?
“New tariffs are hurting tool, mould, and die companies, and hundreds of thousands of workers could lose their jobs. I want the Prime Minister to present a plan and negotiate to protect these workers.”
“Mr. Speaker, the new section 232 tariffs are gutting our tool, mould and die companies in Windsor-Essex and across the country. These shops are vital to our manufacturing industry. Hundreds of thousands of skilled workers will lose their jobs. Where is the Liberal Prime Minister’s plan? Workers need results now in order to survive. When will the Prime Minister finally do his job, get to the table and put our workers first for a change?”
Official Hansard
Mr. Speaker, the new section 232 tariffs are gutting our tool, mould and die companies in Windsor-Essex and across the country. These shops are vital to our manufacturing industry. Hundreds of thousands of skilled workers will lose their jobs. Where is the Liberal Prime Minister’s plan? Workers need results now in order to survive. When will the Prime Minister finally do his job, get to the table and put our workers first for a change?
