Senator Omidvar: Senator McCallum, thank you for weighing in on this matter. I agree with you and Senator Patterson completely that this provision is a relic of the past. But it is also an expression, I believe, of searching for some kind of attachment to the place that people come from.

Whilst property ownership and net worth is a relic of the past, do you believe that the other requirements — age, citizenship, residency and merit-based criteria — demonstrate enough of an attachment to the place we are supposed to represent?

I agree with you that net worth has nothing to do with attachment, but is there something else that you would like to see represent attachment or are you satisfied with simply removing that requirement and not replacing it with anything else?

Hon. Dennis Glen Patterson: Welcome, minister. The Inuit‑Crown Partnership Committee has done significant work in advancing and promoting a whole-of-government approach to the stated Inuit priorities. President Obed and his board have been successful in getting your government’s support for many important social and economic issues.

One very important example is the framework to eliminate tuberculosis from Inuit Nunangat by 2030, which came with a $27.5-million commitment in 2018 from your government to be spent over five years. However, as I’m sure you know, The Globe and Mail carried out an investigation in June and found that $13 million allocated for tuberculosis countermeasures in Nunavut has been largely unspent, despite an active TB outbreak in Pangnirtung that has been ongoing for months.

Can you use your good offices — the funds came from your ministry’s table — to see that these desperately required funds are deployed where they are critically needed, in Pangnirtung?

Hon. Dennis Glen Patterson: Minister Miller, in a December 7, 2020, letter, former premier Joe Savikataaq of Nunavut wrote to your colleague Minister Wilkinson, who was Minister of Environment and Climate Change at the time. In it, he said:

The [Government of Nunavut] . . . respectfully insists that, until we have achieved a devolution agreement and an offshore oil and gas agreement, that Nunavut lands and waters not be used to meet these targets.

— referring to Canada’s 2030 conservation targets.

During the Nunavut Land Use Planning Commission hearings on the Draft Nunavut Land Use Plan, which were held in Cambridge Bay just last week, the Kitikmeot Inuit Association reminded those present that, under the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement, the regional Inuit associations decide who has access to and what activities can occur on Inuit lands. However, despite these interventions, federal departments continue to engage with communities directly on targeted efforts to create new conservation areas in Nunavut, circumventing both the GN, and, in the case of Talurjuaq’s proposed area, the Kitikmeot Inuit Association. In fact, DFO paid to charter —

Hon. Dennis Glen Patterson rose pursuant to notice of Senator Gagné on September 20, 2022:

That she will call the attention of the Senate to the life of our late Sovereign, Queen Elizabeth II.

He said: Honourable senators, I rise to speak in tribute to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II and also to speak of the special relationship Her Majesty had with the North, especially with St. Jude’s Cathedral, the Anglican cathedral in Iqaluit.

In 1970, Queen Elizabeth came to what was then the Northwest Territories, or N.W.T., the first reigning monarch to visit there. This was the first of three visits to the North. The Queen was accompanied by her husband, Prince Philip, and their then younger children Charles and Anne. She had planned to begin her visit to Canada by flying into the North, beginning in what was then Frobisher Bay. But the weather that day was very daunting — heavy overcast with no ceiling at all. However, minutes before Her Majesty’s plane arrived, having flown direct from London, the clouds providentially lifted.

The visit was thrilling for the Inuit residents of Frobisher Bay, many of whom were and are devout Anglicans. They were really excited to see their Queen in person — the person in the Anglican Book of Common Prayer, the person to whom they sang “God Save the Queen” and the head of their church. The Inuit were touched when Queen Elizabeth spoke a few words to them in their own language.

This first of three visits to the Arctic by Her Majesty and many more by members of the Royal Family, including Prince Philip and Prince Charles on more than one occasion, generated the excitement normally associated with the moon landing. In fact, young Charles said as he stepped off the plane, “It looks like the moon!”

Her Majesty often showed her ever-present sense of humour in her visits to the North as related to me by our former Senate colleague Pat Carney, who was there. The former mayor of Iqaluit — of Frobisher Bay then — Bryan Pearson was in charge of the gift presentations. He said that they couldn’t have someone staggering up to the stage with a kayak on his shoulders, so he had an Inuk gentleman make the presentation and two others who will lift it onto the stage. This was done and the Queen studied the kayak carefully. “Do you think I would do very well in a kayak?” she asked Prime Minister Trudeau the first. “I have one myself,” he told her.

During that visit, Her Majesty also turned the sod for St. Jude’s Anglican Cathedral, the first cathedral in the huge Diocese of the Arctic, which was built by Inuit carpenters in the shape of an igloo and completed in 1972. Queen Elizabeth also donated the cathedral’s cherished and beautiful baptismal font with its soapstone base.

Tragically, the cathedral was lost to arson in November 2005, and the demoralized congregation faced the giant task of rebuilding from scratch. I remember relaying to Her Majesty the promising news that a rebuilding committee had been formed for what became a successful $12 million undertaking from our small community.

Her Majesty and the family were active supporters of St. Jude’s. Every time any member of the Royal Family, including Her Majesty, visited Iqaluit after that first visit in 1970, they visited the cathedral. In recent years, Prince Edward and the Countess of Sussex ensured that when they visited the newly opened cathedral, it would be available as a place where they would receive visitors during their time in our community.

Her Majesty has seen a lot of the Arctic since she and her family first set foot in Frobisher Bay. After time spent in what is now Nunavut’s capital, the Royal Family made the long journey to one of Canada’s very most northern communities, Resolute Bay on Cornwallis Island, which at 74 degrees north latitude is Canada’s second most northerly community after Grise Fiord. It was there in Resolute Bay in 1970 that Her Majesty said the words that are emblematic of her affinity with the Arctic. “You have not seen Canada until you have seen the North,” she said in that remote location.

After those stops in the eastern Arctic, the royal entourage flew to Tuktoyaktuk with the media following in a Hercules aircraft. When the Herc broke down in Tuk, the press was stuck there and had to make do overnighting in the school gym, but the royal party flew on to Inuvik with the media left behind. Former Iqaluit mayor Bryan Pearson — who had been travelling with the media — and former senator Pat Carney abandoned the media in Tuk and slipped down to the local float plane dock on a channel in the Mackenzie River to fly on in time to meet the royal party at their next stop in Inuvik.

Upon her arrival in Inuvik, the Queen was surprised to be met by Mr. Pearson. When she saw Mr. Pearson, she exclaimed, “Are you following me, Mr. Pearson?” He answered, “Oh, yes, Your Majesty. Just to make sure everything goes well.”

Senator Carney related how without the media, she and Mayor Pearson had the Royal Family all to themselves as they visited the local fur shop, tried on hats and jackets, and examined prints and sculptures. During that visit, the Queen met the late Chief John Tetchi of Fort McPherson. He wore his treaty uniform of blue pants with a red stripe and a jacket with yellow lapels.

We were honoured again in the North in 1994 when Queen Elizabeth visited Yellowknife to dedicate the new Legislative Assembly of the Northwest Territories and then went on to stop in Rankin Inlet, where the entire community turned out to greet her. Then she went on to Iqaluit, where she visited the cathedral for which she had turned sod. Our commissioner, the Queen’s representative in Nunavut, the Honourable Eva Aariak, said it well at a memorial service held last Sunday in her beloved St. Jude’s Cathedral. She said that Queen Elizabeth showed her great power in a quiet, dignified way of serving others with love.

I’m pleased to pay tribute to Her Majesty and acknowledge her keen interest in and understanding of the North and its Indigenous First peoples, a passion I know is shared by her son King Charles. May she rest in very well-deserved peace. Thank you. Qujannamiik.

(On motion of Senator Gagné, debate adjourned.)

The Senate proceeded to consideration of the ninth report of the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology (Bill S-208, An Act respecting the Declaration on the Essential Role of Artists and Creative Expression in Canada, with amendments and observations), presented in the Senate on June 20, 2022.

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!