Some Hon. Senators: Agreed.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): This government has imposed serious sanctions under the Sergei Magnitsky Law. This is the government that passed the act, and it continues to take measures against all foreign nationals who are undermining our national security.

I’m not familiar with the details that you mentioned with regard to these three nationals. If they indeed are committing fraud or are wanted elsewhere, these are matters that the government will deal with in the appropriate way.

Hon. Ratna Omidvar, pursuant to notice of February 14, 2023, moved:

That the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology be permitted, notwithstanding usual practices, to deposit with the Clerk of the Senate, no later than March 31, 2023, an interim report on issues relating to social affairs, science and technology generally, if the Senate is not then sitting, and that the report be deemed to have been tabled in the Senate.

Senator Martin: Transparency is one of the many serious problems with the Canada Infrastructure Bank. For example, it was revealed late last year that the $1.7‑billion Lake Erie Connector project had actually been cancelled in July. However, if you check the Canada Infrastructure Bank’s website today, you can still see a press release announcing this project. There have been no answers to legitimate questions surrounding the awarding of Canada Infrastructure Bank contracts to McKinsey, which has extensive ties to this bank from its creation to this day, and now we have what looks like a mostly internal review process. So, leader, why is there so much secrecy surrounding this process? Could you tell us if the contract given to McKinsey by the Canada Infrastructure Bank will be part of the five-year review?

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): My question also concerns the Canada Infrastructure Bank. In fact, it is legislated for a five-year review. Minister LeBlanc is required to bring forward a report to Parliament by the end of June.

(1450)

According to documents obtained through Access to Information and Privacy and released last week by the Canadian Union of Public Employees, this review began in June 2022 but has had no public engagement and no public information on the process being followed. Yesterday, a senior official from Infrastructure Canada told our National Finance Committee that they have opened some public consultation.

Leader, could you tell us when this consultation began and if it’s still open? Were all Canadians invited to comment or just those groups and individuals chosen by the Trudeau government?

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your question. I don’t have the specific answer. I’ll have to make inquiries and report back. Thank you.

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): Leader, British Columbia’s world-famous wine industry has been hurt by the pandemic, supply chain issues and increased costs brought on by record inflation. As of April 1, the federal alcohol excise tax will automatically increase by 6.3%.

Last fall, Miles Prodan, the CEO of Wine Growers British Columbia, stated:

. . . we don’t see an opportunity for that excise escalator to decrease ever. It’ll just keep adding and adding and adding. So we think we should be exempt.

Leader, what is your response to growers in the Okanagan Valley and all across British Columbia who are concerned by what this upcoming tax increase will mean to their bottom line?

Senator Plett: Well, hope springs eternal.

Leader, last April, I asked you why the Canada Infrastructure Bank was paying millions in taxpayer dollars in short- and long-term bonuses to its employees. In fact, it is quite innovative how they found a way to do so, when not a single project had been delivered at that point.

Just to jog your memory, leader, in 2021 alone, the Canada Infrastructure Bank paid out over $5.7 million in short-term incentives to 79 employees. That works out to an average bonus of over $73,000 per employee. Where do we apply?

Leader, could you make inquiries and tell us how much was paid out in bonuses to the Canada Infrastructure Bank employees in 2022?

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Jaffer, seconded by the Honourable Senator Massicotte, for the adoption of the ninth report of the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs (Bill S-205, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and to make consequential amendments to another Act (interim release and domestic violence recognizance orders), with amendments and observations), presented in the Senate on December 14, 2022.

The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, I wish to draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of His Excellency Woongsoon Lim, Ambassador of the Republic of Korea in Canada, and Colonel Dongwon Lee, Defence Attaché for the Republic of Korea in Canada. They are the guests of the Honourable Senator Martin.

On behalf of all honourable senators, I welcome you to the Senate of Canada.

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the government leader in the Senate.

On this Agriculture Day in Canada, it concerns a matter of importance for many of our farmers. It’s been almost a year since the Trudeau government imposed a 35% tariff on fertilizer imports from Russia, including fertilizer that had been ordered long before Vladimir Putin’s illegal war in Ukraine began. This tariff has punished Canadian farmers, as about $34 million has been collected by the Trudeau government.

Leader, in December, the Atlantic Grains Council, the Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario, the Grain Farmers of Ontario, the Grain Growers of Quebec and the Ontario Bean Growers jointly asked that this money be refunded to the farmers who paid it. What is the Trudeau government’s response to this request?

Hon. Clément Gignac: Honourable senators, my question is for the Government Representative in the Senate.

Senator Gold, on November 2, the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry ordered three Chinese companies to divest their interests in the critical minerals sector. Yesterday, the Government of Canada announced that, from now on, applications for research grants on subjects deemed to be sensitive will be denied if any of the researchers are affiliated with a university or institution with ties to “foreign governments posing a risk to national security.”

Senator Gold, my question is as follows. Given that the U.S. government decided in June 2019 to ban public transit organizations from using federal funds to buy transportation equipment such as trains, subway cars or buses from foreign suppliers that have ties with threatening state actors, does the Government of Canada intend to review its procurement and grants policies for public transit organizations to ensure Canadians aren’t exposed to surveillance controlled by hostile foreign countries?

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your questions and kind wishes. I appreciate it.

Senator, I don’t know what the current status is regarding the government’s plans around that bill. I’ll make inquiries and report back as quickly as I can.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for the question. It’s one that has been raised in the chamber several times in relation to various industries, beer and now wine. I understand the concerns. The government understands the concerns of producers.

All aspects of our economy are challenged by issues of price and supply chain availability. However, the excise tax, which is a regular feature of the industry, does not amount to an unsupportable addition to, ultimately, the price at which a bottle of wine may be sold. I have every confidence that the excellence of B.C. wines — and, indeed, the wines in other provinces — will continue to attract customers, even if the excise tax is maintained, as it will be.

Senator Gold: Thank you for the question. Bill C-11 has the support of the vast majority of people and cultural industries, especially in Quebec. It is a well-known fact to those who follow the news in Quebec and read the papers in Quebec, as I am sure you do, honourable colleague.

Bill C-11, which passed the Senate with several amendments, is now at the other place. We look forward to the message from the House of Commons. At that time, the debate will continue, I’m sure.

[English]

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for the question, senator.

As we all know, the federal government announced the funding of $198.6 billion over 10 years, which includes $48.7 billion in new funding. The federal government also recognizes not only the primacy of provincial jurisdiction in health care but the fact that provinces and territories have their own unique circumstances and their own ways of doing things.

As such, the bilateral agreements — discussions around which are ongoing, as we know — are intended to be flexible and tailored so that provinces and territories can address the unique circumstances and needs of their populations and of their geography. As part of those bilateral agreements that are being discussed and negotiated, provincial and territorial governments are being asked to develop action plans that will describe how the funds will be spent and how progress will be measured. Action plans with targeted results and indicators will be made available publicly by both federal and provincial/territorial governments, and provinces and territories would and will publicly report those results to their own residents.

That is a first important step, and I think all Canadians hope and expect that the governments will work together to actually deliver the results that this new funding promises to secure.

Hon. Jean-Guy Dagenais: Honourable senators, I want to take a few moments today to share with you a few things that I noticed during our mission to observe the general election that took place in Kazakhstan on November 20, 2022.

At the invitation of the Ambassador of Kazakhstan to Canada, Akylbek Kamaldinov, Senator Oh and I were part of a group of foreign observers who were able to witness the country’s electoral process and assess and comment publicly on it. I’m sure it was just as rewarding of an experience for them as it was for us.

During that visit, I was able to see just to what extent Canada serves as an example to this country, which set up a democratic electoral system, a parliament and public institutions that are very similar to the ones we have here in Canada. After becoming independent from the Soviet Union in 1991, the Republic of Kazakhstan was quickly recognized by Canada.

The very next year, in 1992, our Progressive Conservative prime minister at the time, Brian Mulroney, established diplomatic relations with this very promising new country. Today, 30 years later, we can certainly say that he was right and that the Republic of Kazakhstan is a partner of choice for Canada and for many of our major businesses.

At the time of our mission, an economic forum was being held in the capital, Astana. This event, which Canadian ambassador Stéphane Dion attended, enabled me to see first-hand the importance of the Canadian trade relations that now exist with businesses in the Republic of Kazakhstan.

Let’s talk about aeronautics first. At that forum I met representatives of Bombardier, from Quebec, and De Havilland, from Alberta. These two companies supply aircraft to Qazaq Air.

An exporter of oil and natural gas, Kazakhstan has also become a major global supplier of uranium. The local uranium mine in Kazakhstan is operated by a company called Inkai. That company is 40% owned by Cameco, a large Canadian mining company from Saskatoon. This company alone produces 18% of the world’s uranium. I had the pleasure of meeting the president and CEO of Cameco, Tim Gitzel, and talking to him about the importance of uranium in the energy transformation taking place around the world.

Kazakhstan, like Canada, has vast agricultural lands. Agriculture employs 20% of the country’s workers and is therefore an economic sector where other Canadian manufacturers have found buyers for products made in Canada.

The Republic of Kazakhstan and Canada have something else that is very important in common: hockey. Astana has a team in the Kontinental Hockey League. After watching a game, I had the pleasure of meeting some of the players, including two Canadians from Saskatchewan. They were singularly proud to wear the Astana Barys uniform.

By the way, in Kazakhstan, hockey is not played in second-rate facilities. The arena where this team plays would certainly make some teams in our National Hockey League green with envy.

In closing, I want to add this: The modern urban facilities that I saw in this very young country are impressive. In my opinion, its new capital, Astana, is a true reflection of the ambitions of this country, which is landlocked between China and Russia. The leadership and the people of Kazakhstan have accomplished so much since 1991. I am especially grateful for the invitation from Ambassador Kamaldinov, which made it possible for me to see all this in person.

Thank you.

Hon. Andrew Cardozo: Honourable senators, I am pleased to rise today on the occasion of National Flag of Canada Day.

This day marks the fifty-eighth anniversary of the Canadian flag bearing the maple leaf, and it is an opportunity to stop and reflect on what the flag means to Canadians.

[English]

Fifty-eight years ago today, the flag was first raised on Parliament Hill, on a temporary flagpole just to the left of the Peace Tower, in the presence of thousands of celebrating Canadians.

A new Canadian flag was a long-time ambition of former prime minister Lester B. Pearson — one that would be free of any colonial symbols, and that would help national unity.

Canadians enthusiastically participated in the work of a special House of Commons committee, and they sent in thousands of contributions and suggestions. They sent in drawings and paintings with everything: the beaver, the moose, the Mountie, prairies, mountains and, indeed, maple leaves. Through that participatory process, the red and white flag was developed.

The political debate lasted many months, and was one of the most raucous in Canadian history. Changing the flag was vigorously opposed by former opposition leader John Diefenbaker. But, to his credit, once the debate was over, Diefenbaker accepted the result and went with Pearson to Buckingham Palace to witness the Royal Assent by Queen Elizabeth II.

Since then, the flag has come to be a symbol of a modern united Canada, where we value equality, harmony and prosperity. Indeed, every new Canadian gets a small flag at their Canadian citizenship ceremony, and adopts it with the greatest of pride. The flag is recognized positively around the world.

While my preference today would have been to speak of this anniversary only in positive terms, I have to say that over the past year the Maple Leaf flag has been appropriated by those who oppose many basic Canadian values — those who believe that a few hundred people can arrive in our capital city and, by brute force and intimidation, replace the elected government. For some, the flag has come to be a symbol of opposition to the Canadian state and government; opposition to all vaccines, including measles and polio; and opposition to many values that we, normally, believe to be basic Canadian values.

Some folks even feel free to deface the flag with messages of hate and anger, and to use the Maple Leaf to replace the letter “u” in the F-word on their protest flags. I don’t believe that is what Parliament intended back in 1965.

And here’s a troubling trend: We know that too many fair‑minded, peaceful Canadians have taken down their flags on the front of their homes so they are not mistaken to be supporters of the angry mobs. This should not be happening.

[Translation]

Colleagues, it’s time for the Canadian flag to once again become a symbol of respect, equality and unity. Long live the Canadian flag.

[English]

Hon. Senators: Hear, hear!

Hon. Bev Busson: Honourable senators, I rise today to mark National Flag of Canada Day. It’s a day to remind ourselves of the values for which we all stand.

Fifty-eight years ago today, on February 15, 1965, our new national flag was raised on Parliament Hill during a ceremony made official by Queen Elizabeth II, just in time to be showcased to the world two years later at Expo 67, celebrating Canada’s one-hundredth birthday.

While the design of the flag was new, it featured a familiar symbol. The maple leaf emerged in the 19th century as a symbol of Canadian identity and was being seen everywhere, from books to coins. It was during the First World War when the maple leaf was first used as the cap badge worn by members of the Canadian Expeditionary Force and became the most widely recognized emblem of our nation. More poignantly, it is a single maple leaf that is carved upon the many headstones of Canadian servicemen and servicewomen who gave their lives in the First and Second World Wars. It became a symbol of courage and sacrifice.

Today, we continue to drape our flag on the caskets of those in the Armed Forces and other first responders who have given their lives in service of our country, both abroad and at home. This act is a jarring reminder that the preservation of our shared values comes at a tremendous cost. We then give the flag to the family members of our fallen as a symbol of respect and strength, to convey our nation’s collective condolences.

While the Canadian flag is a symbol of peace, hope and respect around the world, provincial flags pay homage to their respective histories. Based on an 1896 design, the flag of British Columbia was officially adopted in 1960. The top of the flag depicts the Union Jack, reflecting B.C.’s British heritage, with a crown in the centre. Below is a setting sun, representing B.C.’s position as Canada’s westernmost province. The wavy white and blue lines symbolize B.C.’s location between the Pacific Ocean and the Rocky Mountains, signifying the vast diversity of the landscape.

I should have started today with the flag of the very first peoples to occupy and shape the territory I now represent. The flag of the Secwepemc, or Shuswap, people, whose traditional territory is a vast part of the interior of British Columbia, is filled with symbolism and meaning. It consists of red and black bars of a cross, which represent the intersection of the great spirit and of human beings. In the centre of the bars are blue wavy lines to signify the great rivers, the Fraser, the Thompson and the Columbia, which define this territory. The crossing point depicts the dwelling site and the sun, the creator’s life force. There are two fawns and two salmon on the white background to signify the traditional food of the Shuswap people and our collective obligation to be stewards of the earth. At the ends of the cross are the four colours — red, black, yellow and white — a reminder of the circle of life. With respect, it is now flown in significant places in both Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities throughout the Secwepemc territory.

On this Flag Day, we must honour our past. We must be grateful for the blessings of the present. And in the spirit of reconciliation, we must look to a brighter shared future for generations to come.

Kukwstép-kuc. Thank you.