Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): My question today is again for the Leader of the Government in the Senate. Senator Gold, I want to follow up on my question to you from yesterday, which revealed that the Prime Minister’s office — along with Minister Hussen — sat on its hands for over a month.

Let me repeat this, Senator Gold. It took them both more than a month to publicly condemn derogatory tweets written by a government consultant who was granted taxpayer funds. This story became outrageous when we learned the minister knew about the situation for more than a month prior to doing anything, but now it’s hit a new level. The Prime Minister’s office — the highest office in the land — was aware of this, and it also took them more than a month to publicly condemn the anti-Semitic tweets of Laith Marouf, after being informed of the situation.

I can’t even understand the rationale here. Were there hopes that the comments of xenophobia, racism and anti-Semitism would simply disappear out of nowhere? The Trudeau government has lost its way, leader. Canadians deserve better leadership than this. What is even more bonkers is the fact that the Prime Minister himself said the government had acted quickly.

My question to you, Senator Gold, is a simple one: Do you believe that taking more than a month to publicly condemn comments is acting swiftly?

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your question and for raising an important issue about the vile and unacceptable comments directed against the Jewish community of Canada.

The comments from this individual were absolutely appalling, and the government condemns the comments — condemns the racism and hatred that lies behind them — as it does in all forms directed at any of our citizens. The government is grateful to the member of Parliament Anthony Housefather for bringing this to their attention.

I’m advised that when this issue was raised, the government immediately asked the Department of Canadian Heritage to confirm the details of the funding that was allocated, as well as to inform the government on the next procedural steps — and after the government was advised, they also sought the legal opinion of legal officials to make sure that any steps they took were within the law. The government followed the legal process — the responsible process — to quickly act and cut funding to the organization and to suspend the project.

Hon. Jane Cordy: Honourable senators, it is indeed my pleasure to join the other leaders in welcoming another new member, Senator Osler, to the Senate of Canada.

Senator Osler, as we know, you were the former president of the Canadian Medical Association, the first woman surgeon and the first woman of colour to hold that title. You have earned another first here as the first woman of Filipino descent to be appointed to this chamber. I have heard you might be the first woman surgeon to hold the title of senator. We are very fortunate to have you join us.

Thanks to your commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion, I know you are well aware of the power of representation. It matters to a great many of us here who are proud that the Senate gives voice to historically under-represented groups, and your appointment honours that commitment in two ways.

In your new position here, you will once again be a role model as a previously unrepresented group will now be able to see themselves in the Senate of Canada. We know how very important that is. But it’s also valuable for our work here because we are strongest when we hear a variety of views. We are always grateful to have a new voice as we examine the numerous issues before us.

Your policy work has also demonstrated that you will fit right in here as you’ve focused on topics like seniors’ care, the health impacts of climate change and, as I’ve mentioned, equity and diversity. I’m sure I am not alone in my curiosity to see what you will work on next. Perhaps we will find out over TikTok.

Senator Osler, on behalf of the Progressive Senate Group, it is indeed my pleasure to officially welcome you to the Senate of Canada. We look forward to working with you.

Hon. Jane Cordy: Honourable senators, I rise today to recognize October as Canadian Library Month and this upcoming Friday, October 21, as Canadian Library Workers Day.

Libraries are tremendous fountains of knowledge and proof that information truly belongs to everyone. Particularly important are the librarians who help us navigate this world of information by providing us with the right books and tools we need to succeed. In my role as a senator, and particularly as a teacher, I have seen first-hand the part that libraries and books can play in encouraging imagination, empathy and civic duty.

This year’s Library Month theme is “One card, one million possibilities.” In Nova Scotia libraries, some of the programs on offer include career planning and job search assistance, support services for immigrants, language practice groups, tech help and computer classes, housing support services, health and well‑being programs, information sessions for small business owners, storytime and activities for babies and children, author readings, book clubs, movie nights, community cafes, parenting programs, teen cooking classes, photo exhibits, music and dance classes, quilting and needlework clubs, running groups, chair fitness and events with Mi’kmaw artist Alan Syliboy, the Halifax Public Libraries’ Artist and Innovator in Residence.

Colleagues, the list goes on.

You can see that libraries don’t just lend books. Here in Ottawa, you can access a 3-D printer or a musical instrument, borrow passes for museums or to ski and snowshoe in nearby provincial parks or even borrow a telescope to look at the stars. Canadians are increasingly organizing a variety of other libraries, be it for tools, camping gear or even the Little Free Library on your street corner where you can share books with your neighbours or passersby.

We ask a lot of libraries and their staff. During the pandemic, many libraries doubled as food bank distribution centres, vaccine clinics or testing sites. Staff provided wellness checks to seniors during lockdowns. While primarily intended as our information guides, librarians are increasingly called on to act as de facto social workers and, in some cases, emergency responders. Some libraries now have dedicated mental health and addiction support services, and at several libraries across the country, staff are trained to use naloxone kits in response to the opioid crisis.

Colleagues, libraries are so much more than simply a place to find books. They connect people and ideas, and help to build vibrant communities. Libraries bring us together. Whether it is by carrying your library card with pride, visiting or volunteering at your local branch, posting in support on social media or thanking library staff for all they do, please join me in showing your appreciation this month for all that these great institutions provide.

I love my library card, and I love my library.

Thank you.

Hon. Scott Tannas: Honourable senators, I rise today to pay tribute to our former colleague Vern White, who retired from the Senate two weeks ago after serving in this chamber for a decade. Senator White did not want formal tributes or any kind of a fuss to mark his departure, but we could not let him leave without saying at least a few words and paying tribute to a highly respected parliamentarian and cherished colleague.

Senator White spent a 42-year career in public service. As an RCMP officer, he worked throughout Canada, including serving in Canada’s three northern territories. His law enforcement career culminated in his position as the Chief of the Ottawa Police Service, a position he held for five years.

In his law enforcement career, Senator White was held in the highest esteem by the rank-and-file members of the police force. He commanded respect and loyalty because of his unique way of “leading from behind” — servant leadership, providing your people with the resources they need to be the very best they can be at the job before them.

Senator White brought his decades of experience and leadership to this place when he was named to the Senate in 2012. With his expertise in public security, he made an important contribution to the Senate. He was a member of several of our committees and chaired the then-called Aboriginal Peoples Committee and the Rules Committee. He also chaired the Senate Speaker’s advisory committee on security and was a long-serving member of the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians.

Those of us who got to know him well over the years know that Senator White is a very generous person. This was perhaps most evident in his involvement in a wide range of community organizations, including the Dave Smith Youth Treatment Centre, the Ottawa Regional Cancer Foundation and the Ottawa drug treatment centre. He is very passionate about solving the opioid and addiction crises in our communities.

Senator White retired from the Senate to move to Finland with his wife and daughter. Of course, it’s not really retirement at all, since he is still actively teaching university courses and sharing his experience with students and with police services around the world.

Everybody is a buddy to Vern White. It doesn’t matter who you are or what position you hold; he always looked you in the eye and called you “buddy.” You feel like you’re two old pals from Cape Breton.

Vern, we’ll miss your humour and quiet leadership here in the Senate and we wish you all the best in your next chapter.

Senator Gold: First of all, thank you for the question. In terms of fighting crime, let’s start with that. This government is proud that it is taking an intelligent, progressive approach to addressing not only crime but the social determinants of crime.

Again, we have a bill before us, of which I’m the proud sponsor, that will take a major step forward in reversing some of the misguided policies of previous governments, which assume that the best solution to crime is to simply legislate more and have harsher penalties. Instead, we should deal with the actual causes of crime, which includes the over-incarceration of persons from all communities, including Indigenous and marginalized communities. They then learn very sad lessons in their first incarcerations, very often in the provincial system, with the corresponding impact on their lives, their families’ lives and their communities’ lives.

In terms of housing, there are a number of measures in terms of housing affordability.

Again, colleagues, to be serious — because this is a serious chamber — and to be real, let’s acknowledge that, well before the pandemic, there has been strong demand for housing in certain markets, notably in Vancouver, not only by Canadians but by those who seek to live in Canada. That strong demand existed even before the pandemic, exacerbated by limited housing supply, and it has led to surging house prices in many centres across the country and, indeed, even in more rural areas such as where I live in the Township areas in Quebec. The government is committed to building more homes and to helping Canadians save and buy their first homes.

That’s why measures such as the Tax-Free First Home Savings Account introduced in Budget 2022 will help. The government launched a $4-billion Housing Accelerator Fund to provide incentives to municipalities — and the mayor to whom you referred — to build more homes faster. It is taking initial steps to develop a homebuyers’ bill of rights and bring forward a national plan to end blind bidding and to ban foreign buyers from owning non-recreational residential property for two years.

These measures and others, with the collaboration of provinces and municipalities and the private sector, we hope and expect will make a difference so that Canadians can have the homes they want and can acquire the homes they seek.

Hon. Fabian Manning: Honourable senators, today I am pleased to present Chapter 65 of “Telling Our Story.”

Today, I want to tell you about a satirical tribute to the history of Newfoundland and Labrador known as the “screech-in.” It may give you an additional reason to come visit our beautiful province.

A long time ago, before any rules or regulations dealing with the selling of liquor became the law of the land, salt fish from Newfoundland was being shipped to the West Indies in exchange for rum. This resulted in fish becoming the national dish for Jamaicans and the dark rum becoming the traditional drink for Newfoundlanders. At that time, the 80-proof rum did not have a name, and the delightful product may have continued to be a nameless rum except for the influx of American servicemen to Newfoundland during World War II.

Legend has it that during a visit to a local pub, a visiting American serviceman downed the rum in one quick toss. His howls of distress caused another patron of the bar to rush to his aid, shouting out, “What the cripes was that ungodly screech?” A Newfoundlander sitting close by simply replied, “The screech? ’Tis the rum, me son.”

As word of the incident spread, more of the visiting soldiers began trying this mysterious rum, adopting it as their favourite. Thus, a legend was born. The “screech” name stuck, and today the rum and its place in Newfoundland’s culture have become legendary.

Then in 1974, when brainstorming for a Canadian Teachers’ Federation conference in St. John’s, Merle Vokey came up with the idea of the screech-in to top what had been done in a previous year in another province. Today, it is arguably Newfoundland’s most marketed tradition. When a person completes the screech-in ceremony, they become an honorary Newfoundlander. Now b’ys, it doesn’t get much better than that.

Now, for those who may not have experienced a screech-in ceremony and, more importantly, for those who would like to do so, let me tell you about some of the details of such an event.

The ceremony can take place anywhere in the province such as someone’s kitchen, down on a wharf, in the local community centre or in any of the pubs and bars on our famous George Street in St. John’s, but it can only be conducted by a born and bred Newfoundlander. There is no exception to this rule.

There are variations of the ceremony in different parts of the province. The event usually begins with some good Newfoundland music playing in the background and the entrance of the “master screecher” of the night, decked out in full fisherman’s rain gear or at least a sou’wester. He or she will announce that there are some CFAs in the audience — that is “come from away” for those who do not know — and that they want to become Newfoundlanders.

Each participant is asked to introduce themselves and where they come from, and then they are given a shot of screech to hold in their hands. If one is lucky, there would be more than one shot of screech in the glass, but I digress for a moment.

While holding tightly to their shot of screech, the master screecher will ask the participants if they want to become a Newfoundlander, and the answer would be a hearty “yes, b’y.”

Then each person, while still holding their shot of screech, is asked, “Is you a Newfoundlander?” and they are taught the proper response, which I am not going to repeat here today, but translated means, “Yes I am, my old friend, and may your sails always catch the wind.”

That then is followed by the eating of a slice of Newfoundland steak, better known as a slice of baloney. Then a fish — most likely a cod fish — is held up to the wanting lips of a participant who then bestows the fish with a kiss. It could be a frozen fish, but if you strike a lucky day, the cod fish could be fresh out of the water with their tail still flapping when you pucker up.

Then to finish off the ceremony, the participant downs the shot of screech in one smooth mouthful and has earned their title as “Honorary Newfoundlander” and will be presented with an official certificate to show everybody back home.

So if anyone is planning a visit to my home province, let me know and I will gladly assist you in making the arrangements for a screech-in. Long may your big jib draw!

Hon. Ratna Omidvar: Honourable senators, I wish to thank Senator Tony Loffreda for his very gracious and kind comments about me yesterday. I was, sadly, not in the chamber. Let’s put it down to the vagaries of Air Canada. But I do really appreciate them. I should tell you that he, too, was a rock star, especially as he placed his substantive comments in the context of his own compelling personal narrative. Senator Loffreda, I’m happy to go with you on the road again any time. We do a good two-step.

Substantively, I came back with three distinct but interconnected challenges. The first is the incredible rise in global displacement. These figures are not to be taken lightly, colleagues. We’re now at 100 million globally displaced people. Along with this unfortunate rise in global displacement, there is another disturbing trend, which is the global meltdown in governance and solidarity.

Second, there is the looming challenge of climate migration. In 30 short years, the International Metropolis Conference, or IOM, has estimated that we will see 1.5 billion — not million — people be displaced. We don’t know where they will go, and we don’t know how they will get to safety.

Third, there is the growing number of so-called low-skilled workers moving for work and filling labour market gaps in essential work — in OECD countries — without certainty for their future, as well as without any predictability for employers. In Germany, I was reminded by Germans about their field experiment with their guest workers, the Gastarbeiter. They paraphrased it to me as, “We wanted workers; we didn’t realize we were getting human beings instead.” Let’s keep that experience in mind.

In each of these buckets, sadly, there is less and less multilateralism, when, in fact, we need more and more. If there is a silver lining I came back with, it’s at the bilateral level. It is the policy coherence and values alignment between Germany and Canada, whether it is energy policy, trade, climate change or migration. As a member of the German-Canadian Parliamentary Friendship Group, I look forward to deepening these bilateral ties in the next couple of years under the capable leadership of our chair, Senator Boehm. Thank you.

Hon. Marty Deacon: Honourable senators, last year, on Christmas Day, a rocket carrying the James Webb Space Telescope launched from French Guiana, ushering in an era of scientific discovery that is set to unveil some of the longest-held mysteries the universe has thus far hidden from us.

Sitting in orbit 1.5 million kilometres from earth and essentially having to unfold its mirrors and tennis-court-sized sun shield remotely, James Webb is a marvel of engineering that is the result of decades of work and collaboration between NASA, the European Space Agency and the Canadian Space Agency. I will, of course, use my time today to discuss how Canada has contributed to this project.

Critical to the operation of the telescope is its Canadian-engineered Fine Guidance Sensor, which was designed to find and lock onto cosmic targets and is crucial for the long-exposure imagery needed for the telescope to provide the kind of imagery required for quality science to be conducted.

Some of you might be familiar with one of the first images released by the James Webb team in July. It was a field of stars and galaxies littered across a scarlet background, with some stars blacked out with refraction points extending beyond. This was captured using the Fine Guidance Sensor. Though just a test image, it gave a hint of what was to come.

The Canadian Space Agency’s other contribution was the Near Infrared Imager and Slitless Spectrograph, or NIRISS for short. Using a camera sensitive to infrared wavelengths, the NIRISS captures the infrared light emitted by objects and gathers information about the spectra of distant planets. This is where some of the real science will emerge from James Webb, and includes its ability to examine the composition of the atmospheres of exoplanets orbiting other stars. In doing so, scientists will be able to determine if these planets have water, methane, oxygen and other molecules associated with life here on earth.

Senators, if you’re wondering and if you’ve forgotten, this was about the third month of your Grade 11 physics class, when you did light refraction, telescopes and all kinds of things in that area.

In exchange for our contribution to this project, Canadian scientists are guaranteed a share of Webb’s observation time. This means that our scientists will be at the forefront of groundbreaking scientific discoveries, which could include not only if other planets might harbour life but when some of the first stars and galaxies formed some 13 billion years ago, as well as the mysteries of dark matter, which makes up roughly 85% of the mass in the universe but we know very little about.

I look forward to learning what they have to tell us, and I’m sure you do as well. Thank you, meegwetch.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Senator Martin, thank you for the question. First of all, I think all of us in this chamber want to congratulate the new mayor of Vancouver. It’s an historic moment for Vancouver’s first Chinese-Canadian mayor. And we should celebrate our democracy, which gives people a chance to hold their governments to account and to make changes when appropriate. But it’s simply not the case that this Government of Canada — or any government, frankly, of whatever stripe — is responsible for the opioid crisis, for worldwide inflation and for the inflated cost of housing in Vancouver, which is hardly an issue.

I lived and studied in Vancouver, proudly and happily, in the 1970s. It wasn’t cheap then, and it has gotten completely out of hand now.

The fact is that this government is working with its provincial counterparts and municipal governments where appropriate. It is doing what it can to address the opioid crisis and, in fact, to divert people from the criminal justice system when it’s really a health issue. We have a bill before us now in committee that is studying the issue to that effect. I will not repeat yet again the very important measures that the government has introduced to assist Canadians with the rising costs of living caused by the global pandemic, the war in Ukraine and other factors that are worldwide in nature.

So, yes, congratulations to the mayors and the citizens who elected them, but, no, this government is on a strong path to help Canada emerge from the pandemic and to grow our economy in a safe and sustainable way.

Hon. Paula Simons: My question is for the Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Transportation and Communication.

Senator Housakos, on Wednesday, October 5, our committee heard from a witness, Blayne Haggart, a professor at Brock University. You, in fact, praised his testimony. You said that if you had professors more like him, maybe you would have stayed in university. But this Saturday, Dr. Haggart received a surprising email signed by you. It says:

Hello, Blayne. Right now the Trudeau Liberals are dangerously close to being able to control what you see and say online.

It continues:

[Bill C-11] is online censorship, pure and simple.

And then in bold print:

Canadians have a right to freedom of expression online — they should not be censored by government gatekeepers.

But I’m just wondering, because you sent this to a witness we’ve just heard from who spoke in support of the bill so, presumably, future witnesses may have received a similar letter. I’m wondering if future witnesses, never mind past ones, will feel safe and welcome to speak freely to our committee, knowing that you, as committee chair, are sending out what might politely be called hyperbolic letters, attacking the bill, while you yourself are chairing the hearings?

Hon. Leo Housakos: Senator Simons, firstly, what I said at the committee was that I found the testimony interesting. I didn’t say I agreed with it. Second of all, I think you’re talking about an email that went out to stakeholders and party membership of the Conservative Party of Canada, asking them to sign a petition.

I don’t know how the gentleman would have gotten on that particular list. He’s probably a member of the party, and that’s how he got on the list. So, at the end of the day, when you have 680,000 members, as the Conservative Party of Canada currently has — an historic number, the largest number of any political party in the history of the country —

Senator Plett: Wow. How many do the Liberals have?

Senator Housakos:  — obviously, you communicate with a lot of people. It’s called democracy. And, of course, when they receive these emails, they have the right to sign on if they agree with the content. They have the right to do whatever they think is appropriate. It’s called, again, democracy. I don’t think I have anything to apologize for. I think this is common practice in public discourse to be able to communicate your position and points of view with people.

Hon. Brian Francis: This question is for Senator Gold.

Last week, the Canadian Red Cross announced that more than $11 million had been distributed to people impacted by Hurricane Fiona. However, serious questions and concerns about the rollout have been raised by Islanders who registered for assistance.

For example, seniors and others struggling had to wait in line for hours just to verify their identity and receive $250. Those with mobility issues were provided with no accommodation.

What is the Government of Canada doing to ensure that the Canadian Red Cross is distributing funds to Islanders in an inclusive, transparent and accountable way as soon as possible?

How will the Government of Canada ensure this demeaning, complicated and exclusionary situation is not repeated in future crises?

Senator Housakos: For starters, section 4 of the bill is very concerning to me, as it has been a concern to you.

Ultimately, when you have the chair of the CRTC coming before our committee and publicly stating that this bill doesn’t take away from him the right to force platform providers to push algorithms toward a particular direction, that in itself, as far as I’m concerned, controls what people see and what people get to post. At the end of the day, I think there are many witnesses who have come before the committee and are very concerned about how algorithms are being used, both in terms of platform providers and in the future. This bill hasn’t been clear when it comes to these particular issues.

If you’re telling me that these concerns have not been addressed at our committee, I disagree. I’ve heard a number of stakeholders and witnesses address those concerns. I will continue to fight those concerns. If we’re a regular member of the committee, a chair of the committee or if we’re a part of this chamber in a leadership position, nothing takes away our right to express ourselves on a particular issue, and I will continue to do so.

[Translation]

Hon. Renée Dupuis: My question is also for the Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications. It is a bit more general than Senator Simons’ question, but it pertains to the same email signed by the Honourable Senator Housakos.

Where do you draw the line between your responsibility as the Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications, which is currently examining Bill C-11, to ensure the smooth flow of debate in committee and the kind of messages that you sign as “the Honourable Senator Housakos” asking citizens to help you stop Bill C-11 in the Senate?

Can you enlighten us on where you draw the line?

Senator Dupuis: Thank you for enlightening us, but I already knew that. I am well aware that chairs can have an opinion of a bill. That is not what I was asking. As a member of a committee, I don’t have the same responsibilities as the chair of the committee.

As the person responsible for maintaining what I call the smooth flow of debate, you have to show openness and neutrality. You hear all sorts of opinions, those you agree with and those you might not. Where do you draw the line between those responsibilities, as chair, and keeping the debate flowing smoothly?

Senator Housakos: It’s not complicated. The work of the chair is by nature procedural and concerns the rules. As chair, I have a duty to enforce the rules and ensure that the committee operates fairly and justly. From day one, this committee has worked well, independently and transparently, and we will stay the course.

However, a chair cannot be prevented from taking a position on a bill. That has never been the case. Personally, the problem I see at the moment is that people are opposed to my point of view on the bill and not my work as chair of the committee. The work is about respecting procedure and the rules. Moreover, I have the right and the obligation to speak to a bill, as does the chair of any other committee of this institution.

[English]

Hon. Scott Tannas: My question is for the Leader of the Government in the Senate. Today we welcomed Senator Osler to this chamber. She’s the nine hundred eighty-seventh person to be summoned to sit in the Senate of Canada since Confederation.

I think it’s an appropriate occasion to point out the 15 empty seats that remain in this chamber today; some have been vacant for a long time. In fact, one of British Columbia’s six seats in this chamber has been empty for over 1,000 days.

One of the six seats in my home province of Alberta has been unfilled for nearly two years. This is a big problem for a chamber that was created to guarantee regional representation in our Parliament.

It’s a different situation in the other place, as you would know, leader. A by-election must be called to fill a vacant seat within six months in the other place.

Would the government support a similar process for the Senate whereby the Prime Minister must recommend an appointment to this chamber when a seat is vacant for more than six months?

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

We all look forward to having more Senate appointments announced so as to continue to receive senators, colleagues, of the quality that we need to do our work.

The process that this Prime Minister has introduced, a process whereby candidates are identified and vetted, is a different process. It is one that involves not simply an application process for those before it, but the constitution — in each and every region and province — of a committee jointly composed of two provincial or territorial representatives and three named by the government.

In some cases, though not all, the delay in appointments is a function of the failure of one of the jurisdictions to name their members to the committee. In other cases, frankly, it is just a function of the time that the process seems to take, and it’s longer than most of us would want.

I do not believe that your proposal is something that would find favour with the government, because it runs counter to the merit-based and participatory process not only of Canadians but of the committees that vet them.

However, it is always possible to improve processes. I will take your suggestion back to my colleagues in government so that they can reflect upon it further.