Hon. Mary Jane McCallum: Honourable senators, I rise today to speak in support of Senator Patterson’s Bill S-228, An Act to amend the Constitution Act, 1867 (property qualifications of Senators). I note that Senator Patterson has a sister motion before the Senate as well, Motion No. 19, which deals with the same subject matter, and I will be ardently supporting both initiatives.

I would first like to commend Senator Patterson for reintroducing this legislation. I note this is our colleague’s third time bringing such a bill forward, championing this initiative from other parliamentarians who have come before us. I am hoping this time around, Parliament collectively will agree that the property qualifications for Senate eligibility are an outdated requirement, which is no longer consistent with modern society.

Colleagues, what Senator Patterson’s bill aims to accomplish is simple in its dual purpose: It would alter the eligibility requirements for Senate appointments by removing the requirement of owning land worth at least $4,000 in one’s home province, as well as removing the requirement of having a personal net worth of at least $4,000.

We in this chamber are not oblivious to the current state of the country and the ever-changing, unpredictable climates under which we live. We need look no further than the severe housing crisis that is impacting every region of Canada or the burgeoning levels of inflation, which are making the cost of living untenable for many in Canada. In considering today’s economic and housing realities, we must acknowledge that they represent massive barriers that are gatekeeping many Canadians from the possibility of serving their country in this chamber.

Colleagues, these property requirements are elitist and antiquated. They serve no purpose in today’s society beyond entrenching a further unnecessary divide between the haves and have-nots.

Four thousand dollars today, based on inflation calculators, would have equalled well over $100,000 when this requirement was enshrined into our Constitution. It was intended to ensure that those who took a seat in this august chamber were of the very upper crust of society, the propertied elite. Even though the value of $4,000 is not what it used to be, the sheer existence of this requirement still precludes countless Canadians, the majority of whom make up the middle and lower classes of this country, from holding the very position that we do. Based on what — solely because they rent or do not hold title for their dwelling?

I would hold, colleagues, that this chamber works best when it is truly reflective of the population of Canada. After all, we have long argued that diversity is our strength as a nation. The working class and the economically marginalized are voices that have had very little space in this chamber since Confederation. The deeply entrenched and colonial system we work under has all but assured that. However, would we in Canada not benefit from having this chamber be a better representative of the country at large?

Senator Patterson put this issue into clear perspective when speaking of his home region of Nunavut. As Senator Patterson has described, he estimates that 80% of the people in his territory would not be eligible to apply to become a senator because they do not own land. I cannot fathom excluding four out of every five people from being eligible to become a senator simply based on whether they own $4,000 worth of property.

Honourable senators, the property requirement is of particular concern for me because of what it means for First Nations in Canada. Many of you may not realize this, but countless individuals who live on reserve are ineligible for this position because they do not actually own title for the land on which they live. This is not by choice, of course. This is a by-product of colonization, which has relegated First Nations onto reserves, which are federally held land.

This issue is best described by Ms. Francyne Joe, the former president of the Native Women’s Association of Canada, who is currently doing important work with the National Association of Friendship Centres. Beyond serving in such high-profile roles, she has long been an outspoken advocate for First Nations, Inuit and Métis women, highlighted by her work on the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls file. While she had once pondered applying to become a senator as a strong and competent voice for a highly marginalized population, she was stopped short by the property qualification.

In Francyne Joe’s own words, this was her experience:

My name is Francyne Joe, and I am a Shackan First Nations member . . . located in BC’s Central Interior.

. . . I researched the process of putting my name forward for a Senate Appointment as there is an open seat for BC and I felt that I would be a good candidate for such a role. I meet most of the necessary criteria such as age, citizenship, non-partisanship, knowledge, good personal qualities and residency . . . . However, the eligibility criteria related to a qualification of property are a barrier.

As an Indigenous woman . . . I am disappointed by this criteria -- and I question if its truly necessary and the reasons behind the criteria.

When my mother married, the Indian Act automatically transferred her to her husband’s band, Shackan -- and when she divorced, she had to re-apply to return to her band, Lower Nicola. For funding purposes, I remained a Shackan band member -- I receive no housing benefits because there is very limited land on Shackan reserve available. My mother received property on [the Lower Nicola] reserve -- it passed to her when my grandparents died. It is a good size property located within minutes of Merritt, BC -- about 10 acres that was used for farming and ranching . . . .

My grandparents had this land for decades and it was passed on to my mom and her brother. Houses were built on the property for my grandparents and their kids; an indoor arena was erected for rodeos which supported the agriculture part of my grandparents’ business; a large garden was planted annually to produce for family and community; corrals, barns and workshops were built -- there is even a small family cemetery on the property. But to a realtor, the property is located on-reserve so there is no value and therefore, I would not be able to use in my application for a Senate role.

My mom would like me to transfer to [Lower Nicola] then she could put me on the Certificate of Possession documents as joint-owner, but the difficulty is that the property needs some work which requires money. If I put monies into our home property which means so much to me and my two children, then I cannot purchase off-reserve property to clearly meet the eligibility requirements to be a Senator. But this property obviously has value to myself, my family and even to other community-members.

As you can see from this personal story, colleagues, the currently held property qualification requirements pose an extra barrier for First Nations’ entry into the Senate.

Honourable senators, there had been much hand-wringing when legislation to remove this barrier was first brought before Parliament. This was largely due to the onerous threshold that needed to be met federally and provincially to fulfill the requirements of the Constitution’s amending formula.

However, greater clarity and flexibility have been given on this matter thanks to the Supreme Court of Canada. In 2014, the SCC gave their much-anticipated reply to the reference question regarding Senate reform. As was stated in the SCC decision:

We conclude that the net worth requirement (s. 23(4)) can be repealed by Parliament under the unilateral federal amending procedure. However, a full repeal of the real property requirement (s. 23(3)) requires the consent of Quebec’s legislative assembly, under the special arrangements procedure. Indeed, a full repeal of that provision would also constitute an amendment in relation to s. 23(6), which contains a special arrangement applicable only to the province of Quebec.

As Senator Patterson clarified in his March 24 speech on this bill:

. . . the decision states Parliament can, indeed, unilaterally remove the net worth requirement for all senators and the real property requirement for every senator except those in Quebec, which this bill aims to do. We do not need to invoke the amending formula and involve provinces, apart from the special situation . . . in Quebec.

Colleagues, throughout my tenure in the Senate, great pride has been taken in the ongoing modernization and rejuvenation of the upper chamber. The Senate has arguably become more accessible and more inclusive. It is up to us to continue this march, and supporting this bill represents an important step on that journey.

The property requirement is an outdated relic of the past. As Senator Patterson has argued, this is no longer an appropriate or relevant measure of the fitness of a person to serve in the Senate. Not only is it arbitrary in this day and age, it also happens to represent one of the biggest, if not the biggest, systemic barrier for Canadians applying to serve in this chamber.

It is disconcerting when I think about the number of Canadians who are ineligible to become a senator based solely on this single requirement. It frustrates me even more when it is evident that those who continue to be excluded from applying are those who historically have been — and continue to be — among the most marginalized and least represented voices in the Senate of Canada.

Honourable senators, the path forward to righting this wrong and correcting this antiquated rule is before us. The highest court in this country has provided a blueprint with which we can accomplish this feat with relative ease. I urge you to support Senator Patterson’s Bill S-228 and its sister motion so that we can remove a large barrier to entry into the Senate of Canada, thereby enriching it for generations to come. Kinanâskomitin, thank you.

Senator Patterson: Bravo!

Hon. Ratna Omidvar: Yes, please.

Would Senator McCallum take a short question?

Senator McCallum: Thank you for the question. I have discussed this with different people. When we look at Canadians who pay rent, rent itself is an attachment. Many of them cannot afford to buy a house. I have seen young people lately.

When I look at the people who are here, I don’t think that we think about the province we live in. We’re already invested in bringing forward the concerns of the people. For me, the collective that I represent is top of mind, and mine is Manitoba. That is my home. All of us have deep roots in the provinces we come from. Thank you.

(On motion of Senator Martin, debate adjourned.)

[Translation]

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Ringuette, seconded by the Honourable Senator Ravalia, for the second reading of Bill S-239, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (criminal interest rate).

Hon. Chantal Petitclerc: I see that this item is at day 15 on the Order Paper, and Senator Duncan wishes to participate in the debate. I therefore move the adjournment of the debate in the name of Senator Duncan for the remainder of her time.

(On motion of Senator Petitclerc, for Senator Duncan, debate adjourned.)

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Klyne, seconded by the Honourable Senator Harder, P.C., for the second reading of Bill S-241, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act (great apes, elephants and certain other animals).

Hon. Chantal Petitclerc: Honourable senators, I rise today in support of Bill S-214, the Jane Goodall Act.

Over Christmas break in 2020, I took my son to SeaWorld in Orlando to see Nalani, the orca, who was swimming around her pool and splashing water in our direction. For a parent, there’s nothing quite like the joy of seeing your child’s eyes wide with wonder. My son was amazed and fascinated by this majestic animal just two metres away from us, on the other side the glass. This wasn’t the first time that I’d taken my son to a place like this, but things were different this time.

Things were different because, just one month earlier, Senator Sinclair had given a powerful speech in this place on the original version of this bill. There I was, with my son, sitting in the front row, excited and amazed, eating a burger without a care in the world. At the same time, this magnificent mammal was swimming in circles in her enclosure, doing tricks that were, quite frankly, beneath her.

I was thinking about Senator Sinclair’s speech. The examples, studies and data he shared with us made it quite clear to me that this animal was suffering, was abused, and was not where she was meant to be. Our admission tickets had funded this abuse, all for my son’s short-lived entertainment.

The wrongness and injustice of it were crystal clear and impossible for me to ignore. It was the last time we went to that kind of park.

[English]

I knew more, I knew better, and I could not hide behind the false sentiment of ignorance. I believe that when we know better, we have a responsibility to do better. This is what this bill is asking us to do: to take our responsibilities and commit to do better.

[Translation]

This bill is another major step in transforming our relationship with animals, particularly those we think of as exotic.

What we feel instinctively is now well documented. Here and elsewhere, studies, data and science about animals’ characteristics and needs prompt us to think about whether it is okay to keep them in captivity and under what conditions.

Putting animals on display just for our entertainment when there’s no guarantee that they’re being treated properly is no longer justifiable. More and more organizations, countries and individuals share this belief. Our laws must reflect our changing values.

Sabine Brels, who holds a doctorate of law from Laval University and wrote her thesis on the evolution and globalization of animal welfare law, has shown that steady progress is being made in terms of animal welfare law. She said, and I quote:

 . . . there are more and more obligations for treating animals properly, regulations for animal welfare and prohibitions that are both general (e.g. intentional cruelty) and specific (regarding specific practices) in nature. . . .

 . . . this study identified a trend toward the progressive convergence of protective animal welfare provisions at all levels: at the national level through the move from anti‑cruelty laws to laws that proactively protect the welfare of animals, and at the supranational level through European and international standards in commons areas (farming, transport, slaughter, experimentation).

The safety of animals is an issue that Canadians care about. Last March, a Nanos poll indicated that 88% of Ontarians would support regulations that would create licenses for zoos in the province and set standards for safety and animal welfare.

Whether this all comes from the government or senators, many discussions have been held to give Canada protective standards to improve animal welfare.

Thanks to the determined efforts of former senator Wilfrid P. Moore, keeping whales and dolphins in captivity is now a thing of the past. We should also note Senator Michael L. MacDonald’s Bill S-238, concerning shark finning, and Bill C-68, which prohibits shark finning and the import and export of fins that are not attached to the shark.

Let’s not forget the tireless efforts by former senator Carolyn Stewart Olsen to prohibit animal testing of cosmetics. More recently, we studied Bill C-84 to strengthen protections against bestiality and animal fighting. I will take this opportunity to thank Senator Klyne, who has broadened somewhat our responsibility to protect animals.

Thanks to this bill, more than 800 animals will be designated animals, chosen primarily for their need for space or because our climate is not appropriate for them. That is the case in particular of elephants, great apes, big cats, bears, wolves, seals, sea lions, walruses and certain primates. Other designated species such as crocodiles, giant pythons and venomous snakes have been selected to protect the public.

This legal protection would prevent these species from being acquired or bred in captivity without a permit being obtained first. It would then be impossible to hold them in captivity in just any location or treat them in any old way.

Let’s be clear. Zoos, aquariums and sanctuaries would continue to shelter them after first obtaining animal care organization status as set out in this bill. The eligibility criteria would be consistent with the standards of the Association of Zoos & Aquariums, AZA, as well as other organizations to be determined by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change Canada, in consultation with animal welfare experts. These zoos and aquariums wouldn’t be able to organize shows for entertainment purposes unless they have a provincial permit.

One of the ambitions of this bill is to gradually eliminate keeping elephants in captivity in Canada, something I support wholeheartedly. You will all recall that, at second reading stage of the first version of the Jane Goodall Act, Senator Sinclair eloquently illustrated the extreme intelligence of elephants, animals whose physical, social and spacial needs are very complex. I will quote an excerpt from his speech:

[English]

Elephants are also altruistic. They try to revive sick or dying individuals, including strangers, lifting them with their tusks to get them to their feet. Elephants mourn their dead, scattering family members’ bones and standing vigil over dead matriarchs.

[Translation]

Just recently, 24 elephant welfare scientists from a wide range of disciplines expressed their support for gradually putting an end to keeping elephants in captivity. According to these scientists, no captive facility can meet the biological, social, spacial, cognitive and basic needs of elephants.

[English]

But I think we can arguably say that one doesn’t need to be an expert to know that keeping the largest land animal indoors — for example, in Quebec — during a long, cold winter, is just a bad idea. It’s as simple as that.

[Translation]

By passing this bill, Canada would become a leader in protecting against animal cruelty and neglect.

It is important to note that this isn’t about closing down every zoo, aquarium and animal sanctuary. Rather, it is about regulating the practice, with animal welfare at the heart of the decisions. This is a significant change, one that demonstrates how we now see humans living alongside and in harmony with other species, but not with the sole purpose of controlling them.

Labelling certain species as designated animals won’t come into effect until six months after Royal Assent. This period could be used to allow owners to adjust.

While there is some flexibility, let it be known that there will be consequences for owners or animal organizations that haven’t met the conditions for obtaining a permit to place new animals in captivity, particularly with respect to breeding.

Each change comes with its own set of repercussions, which aren’t always desirable but remain necessary to achieve a goal. I hope that this aspect will be studied by a committee. We need to find solutions and ways to support organizations during this transition phase.

Another aspect that the committee should focus on is the issue raised by Senator Miville-Dechêne concerning the risk of creating a two-tier system, since the seven zoos and aquariums that already meet the AZA standards benefit from additional protection because they are named in the bill. This issue will need to be studied.

This bill is the result of a collaborative effort that I wanted to mention before I conclude my speech. Senator Klyne worked with many animal rights organizations in the drafting of this bill. Five major zoos, including the Granby, Calgary and Toronto zoos and the Montreal Biodome and Assiniboine Park in Winnipeg, also contributed to the bill. These organizations are already involved in wildlife conservation and are committed to species preservation. I understand from their testimony, which was in support of this bill, that despite their daily efforts to ensure animal welfare, our laws need to be strengthened.

[English]

By the way, practising what it preaches by announcing its support for the bill, the Zoo de Granby plans to no longer house elephants in a few years.

Now, let me go back to Nalani the Orca. While he will, sadly, spend the remainder of his life in a small tank with the other orcas, SeaWorld has decided they will be the last orcas to be held in captivity in the park, a clear sign that here and everywhere things are changing and that entertainment and financial gain does not justify cruelty against animals. This leaves me hopeful.

As for having my son learn about the wonders of nature and those great animals, I have come to realize that there are other much better ways. Technology, for one, has permitted the unintrusive filming of animals in their natural environments for education, conservation and, yes, entertainment purposes.

You may all remember the magnificent film La Marche de l’Empereur, a 2005 French feature-length nature documentary that tells us about the yearly journey of the Emperor penguins of Antarctica. It took one year for two isolated cinematographers to shoot the documentary. Surely we can learn way more from this film than we can from watching them through a window in a small man-made captivity setting.

I did go back to Florida, and my son wanted to see dolphins, so I took him kayaking on the ocean. I told him it was a much better way for us to go into their home and hope they would want to meet him. After a good 40 minutes, we did manage to see some dolphins in the far distance, and he was overjoyed to be in their environment with them. Quite frankly, it was so far that I’m not sure it was a dolphin or a water safety device, but my goal was achieved.

[Translation]

For all these reasons, I sincerely hope that this bill will be referred to committee.

[English]

As parliamentarians, there are things that are out of our control, but this is not one of them. This bill has been debated, and I believe now is the time to act. The longer we wait, the longer vulnerable animals will lack protection.

[Translation]

As Senator Klyne and Senator Sinclair before him urged us to do, let’s ensure we have the means to “speak and act for the voiceless.” That is the purpose of this bill, which I hope will soon be referred to committee. Thank you.

(On motion of Senator Patterson, debate adjourned.)

[English]

The Senate proceeded to consideration of the sixth report (interim) of the Standing Senate Committee on Indigenous Peoples, entitled Not Enough: All Words and No Action on MMIWG, tabled in the Senate on June 22, 2022.

Hon. Brian Francis moved:

That the seventh report of the Standing Senate Committee on Indigenous Peoples, tabled with the Clerk of the Senate on Monday, June 27, 2022, be adopted and that, pursuant to rule 12-24(1), the Senate request a complete and detailed response from the government, with the Minister of Indigenous Services Canada being identified as minister responsible for responding to the report, in consultation with the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations.

He said: Honourable senators, this report of the Committee on Indigenous Peoples found that piecemeal amendments to the Indian Act brought forward by the Government of Canada in 1985, 2010 and, more recently, in 2017 in response to court challenges did not address all inequities in the registration provisions impacting First Nations women and their descendants but, rather, helped to worsen them.

The committee is grateful to all the witnesses who shared their stories and recommendations, and remains committed to continuing to advocate for restoring long overdue equality to First Nations women and their descendants in the registration provisions of the Indian Act.

The committee is disappointed that the Government of Canada is once again involved in litigation related to enfranchisement. Given that it intends to amend the Indian Act for the fourth time to address this matter, the committee strongly urges the Government of Canada to take a proactive and comprehensive approach that will, once and for all, end the discrimination against First Nations women and their descendants.

The committee makes nine recommendations to the Government of Canada. The witnesses, for example, testified that the registration process was overly complex and slow. As a result, we recommend providing access to historical and genealogical records, developing and distributing plain-language materials, and publishing an annual service standard report and other changes.

The committee also urges the repeal of all outstanding inequities, including enfranchisement, the 1985 cut-off and age and marital distinctions, as well as an apology and compensation for the harms experienced by First Nations women and their descendants, and funding to reconnect individuals who lost status with their communities.

In sum, colleagues, the Government of Canada must take immediate steps to ensure that First Nations women and their descendants are treated equally under the Indian Act. We cannot let these inequalities continue to harm more generations. Wela’lin, thank you.

(On motion of Senator Martin, debate adjourned.)

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Boyer, calling the attention of the Senate to the positive contributions and impacts that Métis, Inuit, and First Nations have made to Canada, and the world.

Hon. Kim Pate: Honourable senators, I rise today to speak to Senator Boyer’s inquiry recognizing the positive contributions of Métis, Inuit and First Nations peoples to Canada and the world.

I want to take the opportunity to acknowledge our incredibly inspiring Indigenous colleagues and friends in this chamber, all of whom we are honoured and humbled to work alongside.

Thank you for enriching our collective work. We are tremendously grateful for your outstanding careers and exceptional contributions, in fields ranging from government administration to conflict management, health care, law, psychology, business finance, environmental protection, infrastructure development, engineering, advocacy, dentistry, reconciliation, fisheries and more.

In alphabetical order, we celebrate first, Senator Margaret Dawn Anderson. Senator Anderson is an Inuvialuk woman from Tuktoyaktuk who credits her five children with inspiring her Senate work. As co-chair of the Indigenous Senators Working Group, Senator Anderson brings two decades of experience in public service roles working with communities across the N.W.T., advocating for self-governance, marginalized and disenfranchised groups, including as Director of Community Justice and Policing and Assistant Director of Corrections Services and the coordinator of the Planning Action Responsibly Toward Non-Violent Empowered Relationships — PARTNER — program, aimed at addressing domestic violence.

Senator Anderson’s work in the Senate is informed by her commitment to seeking out and reflecting the perspectives of groups and communities in the Northwest Territories and raising the profile of Arctic, Inuit and Indigenous issues. She is also a gifted charcoal artist and poet.

Senator Michèle Audette is an Innu woman with visual arts and art education degrees from the Université du Québec à Montréal and Concordia University. Senator Audette has devoted decades to transforming the relationship between Indigenous Peoples, Quebec and Canada. At 27, she was elected president of Femmes autochtones du Québec, and was later appointed as Associate Deputy Minister of Quebec’s Secrétariat à la condition féminine and president of the Native Women’s Association of Canada.

I have had the privilege of working with her for more than two decades, and several months ago we celebrated, with a number of you, her receipt of a second honourary doctorate from the University of Ottawa. The Université de Montréal also previously recognized her tireless advocacy for Indigenous women, including as a commissioner for the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls. Our collective work to advance the inquiry’s Calls for Justice, as you have just heard from Senator Francis, continue.

Senator Yvonne Boyer is a member of the Métis Nation of Ontario, holds a doctorate in law from the University of Ottawa and an honourary doctorate in education from Nipissing University. Prior to studying law, she trained as a nurse. She has published widely on topics of Indigenous health and the interactions between Aboriginal rights, treaty rights and the health of First Nations, Métis and Inuit Peoples and has served as Canadian Human Rights Commissioner.

In the Senate, Senator Boyer co-chairs the Indigenous Senators Working Group and has led the study of the forced and coerced sterilization of Indigenous women by the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights.

Senator Patrick Brazeau is a member of the Algonquin community of Kitigan Zibi and served as national chief of the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples. In addition to being a member of the Canadian Armed Forces Naval Reserve, Senator Brazeau studied law at the University of Ottawa. He advocates for accountability, responsibility and transparency in Indigenous affairs and the mental health of Indigenous peoples. He persistently seeks to promote the well-being of youth.

Senator Dan Christmas of Membertou First Nation was the first Mi’kmaq person to be appointed to the Senate and to establish an on-reserve Senate constituency office. He holds honourary degrees from Dalhousie University, Nova Scotia Community College, Saint Mary’s University and, most recently, Cape Breton University. I think he’s about to get another one but we’ll wait and announce that later.

Through his leadership with the Mi’kmaw Nation of Nova Scotia, including as former director of the Union of Nova Scotia Indians and former band manager, elected councillor and Senior Advisor for the Community of Membertou, Senator Christmas has worked for decades to ensure the recognition and implementation of Mi’kmaq and treaty rights in Nova Scotia and was a driving force in the flourishing of Membertou from bankruptcy to a thriving and vibrant community. Senator Christmas continues his inspirational leadership in the Senate, including as deputy chair of the Indigenous Peoples Committee.

Senator Brian Francis has roots in Lennox Island and Abegweit Mi’kmaq First Nations. He brings to the Senate over 40 years of experience in governance, including as aboriginal coordinator with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, and as chief and band administrator of the Abegweit Mi’kmaq Nation.

Senator Francis has led and inspired Island First Nations to achieve key social, economic and cultural initiatives, including programs relating to biodiversity, water infrastructure, housing initiatives, justice initiatives and roadworks. Indeed, the river that flows by our old family cottages — we call them cabins there — on P.E.I. is one of the many whose water quality and fish stock are being restored as a result of the amazing work of Senator Francis and his community.

Senator Francis continues his legacy of leadership, driven by the goal of improving the lives of community members in the Senate including as chair of the Indigenous Peoples Committee.

An Indigenous Peruvian, Senator Rosa Galvez is a leading expert on pollution sciences and has shared with the Senate her lifelong passion for democratizing knowledge and education, and finding innovative solutions to a just, equitable and sustainable world. She holds a PhD in environmental engineering and prior to her appointment was a professor and head of the Department of Civil and Water Engineering at Université Laval. She has served as an adviser to international bodies, governments, community organizations and private firms.

In the Senate, her work has emphasized links between income gaps, social inequality and environmental degradation, including through her publication of a white paper entitled Building Forward Better: A Clean and Just Recovery from the COVID-19 Pandemic, a motion to declare climate change an urgent crisis and her proposed legislation to ensure alignment between the financial sector and Canada’s climate commitments.

Thank you for ensuring we are always mindful of the world we will leave for generations to come.

Senator Marty Klyne is a Cree Métis citizen and graduate of the University of Regina. His experience in business finance includes particular expertise in advancing Indigenous economic development. Senator Klyne has held leadership positions in diverse fields including media, corporate governance, sports and entertainment industries. His community work includes involvement with the National Aboriginal Economic Development Board, the Interim Reconciliation Regina Council, the Saskatchewan Chamber of Commerce Labour Market Council, and the Economic Development Regina board of directors.

We have worked on issues of prison segregation and now sit together on the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance.

Senator Patti LaBoucane-Benson is Métis from Treaty 6 territory and holds a PhD in human ecology from the University of Alberta, where her research focused on the resilience of Indigenous families and communities.

Senator LaBoucane-Benson worked for more than two decades with the Native Counselling Services of Alberta and served as conference director and lead facilitator of the Nelson Mandela Dialogues in Canada in 2017. She combines neuroscience and Indigenous knowledge of child development in her work and service to marginalized communities. In addition to forming part of the government representation here in the Senate, she continues to ensure issues of reconciliation and Indigenous leadership are central to her work and ours.

Senator Sandra Lovelace Nicholas is a voice for the Maliseet people and a driving force for advancing and upholding the rights of Indigenous women in Canada. Senator Lovelace Nicholas brought international attention to sex-based discrimination in the Indian Act when she successfully challenged Canada before the United Nations Human Rights Committee and lobbied for legislation to restore status to women with non-Indigenous spouses. For decades, she has continued this fight for equality for Indigenous women and their descendants, most recently through participation in the Senate’s examination and analysis of the implementation of Bill S-3 on which Senator Francis just reported.

Senator Lovelace Nicholas is a recipient of the Order of Canada, the Governor General’s Award in Commemoration of the Persons Case, an honourary degree from St. Francis Xavier University, and one of the “Famous Six” Indigenous women leaders in this country.

Senator Mary Jane McCallum is an advocate for social justice. Cree Senator Mary Jane McCallum holds a Doctor of Dental Medicine from the University of Manitoba and numerous honours and awards — most recently, an honourary doctorate from the University of Manitoba. Throughout her career, Senator McCallum has provided vital dental and community health services to First Nations communities throughout Manitoba, particularly in northern First Nations communities. Senator McCallum has worked at the University of Manitoba as an assistant professor and as head of the university’s Aboriginal dental health program and serves as the first Indigenous woman chancellor of Brandon University. In the Senate, she had shared her personal experiences as a residential school survivor, organized information sessions regarding Indigenous law and policy issues and championed initiatives including legislation to recognize National Ribbon Skirt Day and related initiatives promoting gender-based analysis plus, anti-racism in health care, residential school awareness and more, all with the aim of educating and inspiring colleagues and the public to engage in truly emancipatory efforts in the spirit of reconciliation.

Honourable senators, please join me in celebrating these 11 amazing, outstanding friends and colleagues.

To each of you, we thank you for all that you do, all that you are, in this chamber and beyond, to advance a more fair, just and equal future for Indigenous peoples and all of us on Turtle Island.

Chi-megweetch, and endless gratitude.