The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, the question is as follows: It was moved by the Honourable Senator Seidman, seconded by the Honourable Senator Wells:

That the motion in amendment be not now adopted, but that it be amended —

Shall I dispense, honourable senators?

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

The Canada Pension Plan Investment Board is an independent organization that makes its own investment decisions based on its perspective on the economy and market conditions.

The board operates at arm’s-length from the federal and provincial governments, and its mandate is to invest the Canada Pension Plan Fund in the best interests of the 20 million Canadians who contribute to and benefit from the plan.

It is important to note that, as stated in the board’s 2019-20 report, the Canada Pension Plan remains secure as a result of the resilience of the fund. I have been assured that the plan continues to reach its performance objectives and provide a base for Canadians’ retirement even in these unprecedented and uncertain times. I would point out that the board independently made a commitment to establish a plan to achieve net zero by 2050.

Hon. Salma Ataullahjan: Honourable senators, my question is for the government leader in the Senate.

According to the Canadian Real Estate Association, in March the average price of a home was over $874,000 — an increase of 27% in just one year. In the Greater Toronto Area, the average cost of a home has gone up another 2.7% in one month.

Right now, the maximum qualifying purchase price under the First-Time Home Buyer Incentive is lower than the average cost of a home across much of Canada. In its recent budget, the NDP-Liberal government is once again promising changes to this program — the third attempt to change this program in the three years it has been in existence.

Leader, why is the NDP-Liberal government doubling down on this failed program, which has never worked in the way it was promised?

Senator Housakos: Senator Gold, I’m aware of this individual. You’re aware of this individual. It’s high time we made the government aware of the inherent dangers of this individual.

B’nai Brith Canada has been raising this issue with your government for quite some time. It has provided intelligence on Barakat’s whereabouts here in Canada, as well as his involvement with a designated terrorist organization. While in Canada, Barakat has published articles in which he calls for targeted terrorist attacks to be carried out against Israel and other Zionist targets beyond the Middle East.

Senator Gold, how is the Jewish community in Canada supposed to take your government’s claim to be committed to fighting anti-Semitism seriously if it allows this man to remain in Canada? Will your government do the right thing and order Barakat out of Canada? It’s not right. We have laws. Individuals of this nature should not be admitted into our country.

Hon. Senators: Hear, hear!

Hon. Ratna Omidvar: Honourable senators, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the sixth report of the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology, which deals with Bill S-203, An Act respecting a federal framework on autism spectrum disorder.

(For text of report, see today’s Journals of the Senate, p. 499.)

Hon. Lucie Moncion, pursuant to notice of November 24, 2021, moved:

That the Senate recognize that, each year, thousands of Canadians are called to jury duty and contribute to the Canadian justice system; and

That the Senate call upon the Government of Canada to designate the second week of May in each year as Jury Appreciation Week in Canada, to encourage those Canadians who provide this public service and to recognize their civic duty.

She said: Honourable senators, I rise today to speak to Motion No. 9, in which I make two proposals. First, I propose that the Senate recognize the contribution made to the justice system by the thousands of Canadians who are called to jury duty each year and, second, that the Senate call upon the Government of Canada to designate the second week of May in each year as Jury Appreciation Week, or Semaine d’appréciation du jury in French.

The week proposed in the motion, the second week of May, coincides with similar jury appreciation weeks in other jurisdictions, including California. The week is also recognized by the American Bar Association. This year, the week will unofficially be held from May 8 to 14. The Canadian Juries Commission will be running a social media campaign in collaboration with prominent Canadians to thank current and former jurors.

Senators, I think you will agree that the issues that affect jurors deserve our attention and the attention of Canadians at least once a year. These include recognition of the contribution of current and former jurors to the justice system, the mental health and well-being of current and former jurors, access to justice, and issues of representation and diversity on juries.

Steady progress has been made over the past few years on the plight and well-being of jurors. Allow me to share some notable events that have helped advance the cause.

[English]

Mark Farrant was a juror in a first-degree murder trial in 2014. He helped shed light on the need for more jury support in Canada. Drawn from his own experience, he identified the gaps in support provided to jurors and discovered that he was not alone. Mark was diagnosed with PTSD after the trial and struggled to find support in his home province of Ontario. In 2016, his advocacy helped prompt the Government of Ontario to launch a free counselling program for former jurors.

In 2017, to help move things forward at a national level, Mark brought to the attention of parliamentarians and government officials what has become known as the “12 angry letters.” In those letters, 12 former jurors chronicled their suffering and struggle to find support to deal with the trauma after exercising their jury duty.

[Translation]

This initiative paved the way for a study on the support provided to jurors, conducted by the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, and the tabling of the report entitled Improving Support for Jurors in Canada in May 2018. The fourth recommendation in this report turned into a bill, Bill C-417, which was introduced in the House of Commons on October 29, 2018. This bill has had a bumpy ride and is now known as Bill S-206. It is my hope that it will pass in the House of Commons in the coming weeks. I thank the bill’s sponsor in the Senate, Senator Boisvenu, whose work helped ensure this bill’s speedy passage in the Senate during this session.

As you know, this bill amends section 649 of the Criminal Code to authorize jurors to discuss proceedings with mental health professionals after the trial. In the meantime, in 2019, Mark Farrant founded the Canadian Juries Commission. This is the first not-for-profit organization dedicated to representing the interests of jurors specifically. Among the initiatives introduced by this organization, I would like to highlight a pilot project to support jurors in British Columbia called Jury Duty Peer Support and Mental Health First Aid and Wellness Training for Sheriffs and Court Officers. This project supports and encourages Canadians to participate in jury duty by providing in-trial and post-trial support for jurors and promoting the importance of mental health within the justice system.

The commission also conducted a national opinion study in June 2020 that showed only 18% of Canadians are willing to participate in jury duty. The study also found that a number of former jurors experience repercussions long after the trial. Some former jurors reported being re-traumatized by media coverage of similar cases. Others reported being traumatized at parole hearings in their own cases.

In contrast, the House of Commons Justice Committee report indicates that, in general, serving as a juror can be a rewarding experience and result in a sense of having contributed to one’s community. These aspects of the juror experience should also be promoted. The federal government should encourage Canadians from all walks of life to do this civic duty, and it should support them.

If the government were to designate Jury Appreciation Week, we could continue to promote this cause and the implementation of all the recommendations in the report entitled Improving Support for Jurors in Canada across the country. As the critic for Bill S-206 in the Senate, I have certainly spoken at length in this chamber about the report’s fourth recommendation. Today I would like to talk to you about the other 10 recommendations.

[English]

As I had mentioned, in May 2018, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights tabled a report entitled Improving Support for Jurors in Canada. Because the issue of juror support falls mostly within provincial and territorial jurisdiction, given the responsibility for the administration of justice, most of the recommendations contained in the report direct the Minister of Justice to encourage the provinces and territories to implement the recommendations.

Let me go through some of these recommendations. First, the provinces and territories should make available to prospective and selected jurors an information package about jury duty. This package should contain the role and responsibilities of jurors, the compensation provided, the legal concept and mechanism of the trial process or the inquest and the deliberation process, including tools to help jurors manage interpersonal conflict.

The package should be available in both official languages and, where appropriate, in Indigenous and other languages.

The second recommendation provides that the provinces and territories should implement the policy that would ensure that the jurors be offered a debriefing session after the trial.

As a former juror, I can confirm without a doubt that I would have benefited greatly from having access to debriefing sessions. The idea would be to provide debriefing sessions to allow jurors to share, express and better understand their emotions with others who have had similar experiences. This collective process could allow jurors released from their duties to better resume the normal course of their lives.

The third recommendation relates to psychological support and provides for the provinces and territories to offer psychological support and counselling programs to all jurors after the trial. Some provinces have a counselling program for former jurors. I alluded to this earlier in my speech.

The Province of Ontario offers free, confidential and professional counselling services to jurors as part of the Juror Support Program since 2016. Former jurors can speak to a qualified and experienced counsellor 24-7. Saskatchewan has a similar program, the Juror Assistance and Support Program. I invite former jurors to investigate the different resources offered to them in their respective provinces and territories.

The fifth recommendation relates to daily allowance. Jurors should be offered a daily allowance for services rendered of at least $120 throughout the legal proceedings, which should be adjusted to reflect the cost-of-living increases.

The compensation to jurors varies across Canada, but in most cases the compensation offered is lower than the minimum wage in that province or territory. This hurts the diversity on juries in Canada because some individuals simply cannot afford to be jurors.

[Translation]

Similarly, and this is also very important for ensuring greater diversity among our jurors, the report’s sixth recommendation states that the provinces and territories should be encouraged to offer jurors compensation to cover the costs associated with serving as a juror, such as the cost of child care, travel, parking and meals.

The seventh recommendation has to do with providing jurors with the optimal physical environment. The provinces and territories should strive to provide an environment that minimizes casual interactions between jurors and other participants in the proceedings outside the courtroom to reduce the potential for intimidation and awkwardness.

[English]

Some of those interactions can be a significant source of stress for jurors and contribute to mental health issues experienced by jurors during and after a trial.

[Translation]

The discretionary power of certain actors in the judicial system must not be overlooked in the search for solutions. The eighth recommendation is about the federal government providing funding to the National Judicial Institute to develop training designed to increase judicial awareness of the mental health needs of jurors. With proper training, judges, coroners and judicial officials who interact with jurors may be better able to identify stress in some jurors and offer advice and support where appropriate.

[English]

Similarly, the ninth recommendation relates to the importance of increasing awareness. The provinces and territories should support training programs aimed at increasing awareness among judges, coroners and judicial officers who interact with jurors of the potential impact of legal proceedings on the mental health of jurors.

As mentioned at the beginning of my speech, the pilot project in B.C. is an attempt to implement this recommendation in at least one province. The federal government should exercise leadership at a national level to have this program implemented in all provinces and territories.

The tenth recommendation relates to federal funding on a one-time basis for provinces and territories to cover some of the costs resulting from the implementation of this report’s recommendations. More needs to be done with respect to helping the provinces and territories implement the various recommendations.

Finally, the eleventh recommendation provides that the Minister of Justice shall share the practices recommended in this report with the minister’s provincial and territorial counterparts during the next meeting of the federal-provincial-territorial ministers responsible for justice and public safety. The report was shared with provinces and territories and raised during the fall of 2018 federal-provincial-territorial meeting of ministers responsible for justice and public safety.

It is important that high-level conversations like these continue over time and that progress reports be made public and available to all Canadians.

On May 22, 2018, the government responded to the report recognizing the leadership role of the federal government with respect to supporting jury duty across the country. Let me quote part of the response:

The Government of Canada recognizes the importance of supporting jurors in their duties and is committed to working with the provinces and territories to improve support measures for jurors, and facilitate the sharing of best practices between jurisdictions.

Officially recognizing a jury duty appreciation week could be helpful in that regard.

[Translation]

In its response, the government agreed on the importance of continued collaboration with the provinces and territories to ensure that adequate supports are provided to jurors. The Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada concluded at the time, and I quote:

Ensuring that they [the jurors] are adequately supported before, during and after their service is an important objective to maintain public confidence in juries, minimize the impact that jury duty has on jurors’ lives, and help ensure jury representativeness in various ways.

One very simple and effective way for the federal government to put words into action would be to officially recognize Jury Appreciation Week in Canada, which would foster and promote ongoing and ad hoc dialogue between the provinces and territories and the various stakeholders on the support provided to jurors across Canada.

Colleagues, I urge you to support this motion calling on the Government of Canada to officially designate the second week of May in each year as Jury Appreciation Week. Furthermore, from May 8 to 14, I invite you to mark this week in your own way, to show your support for this cause.

Thank you for your attention.

(On motion of Senator Housakos, debate adjourned.)

[English]

Hon. Pierre J. Dalphond: The Honourable Lawrence A. Poitras passed away on April 9 at the age of 91. Today I would like to pay tribute to this remarkable man.

Larry, as he was known to his friends, was the son of a Montreal Star crime reporter, and he himself worked there as a crime reporter while studying arts at McGill University and law at the Université de Montréal, making him the fourth generation of the Poitras family to work for this daily paper.

In 1957, he chose to practise civil and commercial litigation, a field in which he rose to such prominence that he was appointed Queen’s Counsel. In 1975, he was appointed to the Superior Court of Quebec at the age of 44. He earned the respect of litigants, lawyers and colleagues alike.

He was also a man of action, eager to get involved with numerous professional and community organizations. He was a founding member of the Canadian Superior Courts Judges Association and became its president in 1981, 30 years before me.

In 1983, Prime Minister Trudeau appointed him Associate Chief Justice of the Superior Court of Quebec, where he worked closely with the chief justice of the day, the father of our colleague, Senator Gold.

[English]

In 1986, he served on the three-person commission of inquiry examining the wrongful conviction of Donald Marshall, a member of Nova Scotia’s Mi’kmaq community, who served 11 years in prison for a murder he did not commit. The commission’s seven-volume report, released in 1990, described Nova Scotia’s justice system as plagued by racism, unprofessionalism and unfairness. It led to significant changes.

[Translation]

In 1992, Prime Minister Mulroney appointed him as the fifteenth Chief Justice of the Superior Court of Quebec. I had the honour of serving under him and witnessing reforms that reduced wait times for hearings.

[English]

In 1996, when he turned 65, he resigned from the bench. The same year, the Quebec government appointed him to lead a public inquiry into the Sûreté du Québec following allegations of corruption and evidence tampering.

The 2,700-page report described a police force more concerned with protecting its image than investigating misconduct.

[Translation]

To his beloved wife Thérèse Boivin and their children, I offer my deepest condolences and, on behalf of all Canadians, I thank this remarkable man for his contribution to the Canadian justice system.

Thank you.

[English]

Hon. Leo Housakos (Acting Deputy Leader of the Opposition): Honourable senators, my question is for the government leader in the Senate.

Senator Gold, last week, Terry Glavin wrote at great length in the National Post about Khaled Barakat, a senior member of the anti-Semitic terrorist group Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. Mr. Glavin goes into great detail about the activities of the PFLP, including airplane hijacking, suicide bombings and a 2014 massacre at a Jerusalem synagogue that left several worshippers severely injured and five dead, including Toronto-born Rabbi Howie Rothman. Barakat, 51, is said to have been living in Canada off and on for the past 20 years, and for the past 2 years he has been splitting his time between Vancouver and my home city of Montreal.

Senator Gold, Khaled Barakat has been barred from the United States and Germany, yet the Trudeau government still allows this individual to remain in Canada, despite Canadian laws that forbid any individual with connections to terrorist organizations from entering our country or receiving Canadian citizenship.

Why does your government allow him to remain in the country?

Hon. Donna Dasko: Honourable senators, my question is for the Government Representative.

Senator Gold, we know that Ukraine desperately needs more military support, and they need it now. On April 22, I forwarded a letter on behalf of myself and 15 other honourable senators to Defence Minister Anand stressing the urgent need for military hardware, and armoured vehicles in particular. It has been reported that $120 million in military aid has been provided so far, and $500 million in additional military aid was promised to Ukraine in Budget 2022 for the 2022-23 fiscal year.

Senator, can you tell us how those monies are intended to be spent? In particular, what is your timeline for this aid, given that the need is immediate? Thank you.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your question. I am very aware of the person you describe and the story that appeared in the press.

Canada has a robust system for dealing with those who seek admission to Canada or those in Canada who may be judged or thought to be inadmissible to remain in Canada. Indeed, in that regard, Canada is well recognized — and has been regularly recognized — by the United Nations for its system, whether it’s that of welcoming refugees or otherwise dealing with those who find themselves within our borders.

The CBSA has a legal obligation to remove inadmissible individuals as soon as possible when that determination has been made. I cannot comment on specific cases, such as the one you’ve identified, but everyone who may be ordered removed remains entitled under our system of justice to due process and is subject to many levels of review and appeal.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you, senator, for your question. I will attempt to answer it as best I can and, in so doing, I might encourage those to consider such questions to be supplementary or additional information to questions that have been posed before.

Thank you for noting that Budget 2022 provides additional funding and that it builds on the previous support the Canadian government has provided to the people of Ukraine. It will ensure that Canada holds Vladimir Putin and his supporters accountable for this illegal invasion.

As colleagues will know, it is not atypical at all for amounts to be set aside in a budget for the ability to provide flexible and timely responses to what is, in this case, a clearly volatile situation. In that regard, I am advised of the following: First, that the Minister of National Defence is in close contact with Ukraine to discuss their needs and with our NATO allies in order to coordinate our responses to the stated needs of Ukraine.

Second, I would also note that, last week, the Minister of National Defence joined with our allies in Germany to participate in the Ukraine Security Consultative Group, and she met again with her Ukrainian counterpart. The minister also had very productive meetings with her American counterpart, most recently at the Pentagon just last week.

Given the nature of this conflict, the government will not be providing more details on the arrival and transit of military support for reasons that I think we would all understand.

Canada, along with our allies, will continue to provide to our Ukrainian friends the tools that they need to keep fighting, and we hope to win this war.

Hon. Donna Dasko: Senator, I would like to revisit a question posed to you last week by Senator Omidvar. To summarize, there are two paths for entry into Canada for visitors, a faster express stream for citizens from some countries such as the U.K. and a slower stream for other countries which include Ukraine. With the current crisis in Ukraine, we are facing a situation where many more Ukrainians have applied for entry into Canada than have been authorized under the new emergency travel program.

Senator Gold, will the government extend express travel authorization to Ukrainians which would help tremendously to alleviate the situation? Thank you.

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

Since January, more than 23,000 Ukrainians have arrived in Canada. They continue to arrive regularly. I’m advised that since the launch of the Canada-Ukraine Authorization for Emergency Travel, aiming to facilitate Ukrainian immigration to Canada and Ukrainians coming to Canada, more than 85,000 applications have been approved. The government will continue to do what it can, not only to get Ukrainians here but also to support them when they arrive. In that regard on behalf of the Government of Canada, I want to thank all the organizations, church groups, synagogue groups, mosques and other not-for-profit organizations who have done their part to raise money and provide support for those who arrive.

The government is working with partners, of course — all of whom I’ve just mentioned — but notably the Canadian Ukrainian community and settlement organizations. The government is continuing to monitor travel volumes and the needs, and will respond as appropriate.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for the question. I have not read the article to which you refer, but I’m aware of the general tenor of the allegation. The short answer, Senator Lankin, is, no, I am not concerned. I think the debate that we had here in the Senate was a fulsome and transparent one. I can’t speak for what motivated those of you who voted in support of the legislation, or what factors influenced you more than others.

I will say this: The government then and now continues to support and encourage the parties to reach a new, negotiated collective agreement. As you know, federal mediators and conciliators worked with the parties for over two and a half years. Unfortunately, the parties were not able to reach an agreement during that period of time, so the act that you referenced, Senator Lankin, was introduced. We debated it and the Senate and Parliament indeed were satisfied that it was necessary, and so we did approve it.

The act, as you know, and one of the features of modern back-to-work legislation — unfortunately necessary in some circumstances — is to provide a neutral mediation-arbitration process to resolve the disputes so that a new collective agreement can be reached. On May 12, 2021, Mr. André Lavoie was appointed as mediator-arbitrator to resolve the issues in dispute between the parties and conclude a new collective agreement. I’m advised that this mediation-arbitration process is under way and meetings are scheduled until the end of the year.

Hon. Elizabeth Marshall: Honourable senators, I rise today in recognition of Mental Health Week. This year’s theme — a highly appropriate one — is empathy. This word means “to understand and share the feelings of others.” It differs from sympathy which, in simple terms, means feeling sorry for someone while perhaps not understanding why they feel the way they do.

With empathy, you put yourself in their shoes, not just to recognize their feelings but also to share them. As one commentator said, “Sympathy means I know how you feel.” With empathy, “I feel how you feel.”

That is why empathy is very important when it comes to mental health. It creates a connection between people and allows the person dealing with mental health issues to understand that they are not alone. Empathy is the bridge that connects people.

Honourable senators, it is a rare person who doesn’t at some point in their life experience mental health issues, and to varying degrees. As the Canadian Mental Health Association states on their website:

The pandemic has taken a collective toll on all of our wellness. It has created a shared experience: of fearing the disease. Of wearing masks. Of seeing our children and grandchildren wearing masks. Of working from home. Of experiencing lockdowns and quarantines. Feeling the anxiety and the stress. It is common to us all.

Most of us are not mental health experts. However, we can be aware of what is happening around us and what others are experiencing. Many of life’s experiences affect our mental health, such as the loss of our job or the death of a family member or friend. We should be empathetic towards others and offer support, encouragement and understanding to those experiencing mental health issues. Kindness only takes a moment of our time.

I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the Senate’s Human Resources Directorate and the Senate’s Mental Health Advisory Committee for the work they do and the support they provide year-round. Mental health is a crucial part of a person’s overall health, and we should be aware of it in our everyday lives.

And remember: Take time for your own mental health.

Hon. Percy E. Downe: Honourable senators, in the early 1990s, when the fixed link joining Prince Edward Island to the rest of Canada was under construction, the Government of Canada asked former premier Alex Campbell to chair a committee to select a name for the bridge. That committee recommended Epekwitk Crossing, the original name given by the Mi’kmaq for the land now known as Prince Edward Island. But the federal government rejected that recommendation and, in 1996, named the crossing Confederation Bridge.

Late last year, I was contacted by Island resident Peter Rukavina, who reminded me of the 1996 decision and suggested that it was time to correct this mistake. I immediately contacted my colleague Senator Brian Francis and then Senator Diane Griffin, and a series of meetings were organized.

After confirming the support of Indigenous groups, we met with the leaders of three political parties in Prince Edward Island: Premier Dennis King of the Progressive Conservatives, Official Opposition leader Peter Bevan-Baker of the Green Party and Third Party leader Sonny Gallant of the Liberals. They all agreed to jointly move a motion urging the federal government to rename the bridge Epekwitk Crossing, using the traditional Mi’kmaq spelling.

Honourable senators, I am pleased to report to this chamber that the motion passed unanimously last Friday in the P.E.I. legislature.

Senator Downe: The Government of Canada and the Government of Prince Edward Island have an obligation to work in full consultation and cooperation with Indigenous people to uphold their rights as well as to redress past and ongoing harms.

Language is important to preserve a culture, and this effort to reclaim the Epekwitk name that was recommended in 1996 would be a powerful symbol of the true history of our province.

Colleagues, as I stated, many people have worked to correct the mistake made in 1996, but we would not have achieved this milestone without the outstanding leadership of former chief and current Senator Brian Francis. Let the record show that he made the successful passage of this motion happen. All praise to him and to the Mi’kmaq people of our province.

The unanimous passage of this motion in the P.E.I. legislature is a wonderful development and important first step. I want to congratulate the Progressive Conservative, Green and Liberal MLAs for working collectively on this motion and urge the Government of Canada to take immediate action to change the name of Confederation Bridge and make the name Epekwitk Crossing a reality as soon as possible.

Hon. Mohamed-Iqbal Ravalia: Honourable senators, yesterday marked the beginning of Eid al-Fitr, also called the “Festival of Breaking Fast,” celebrating the end of the sacred month of Ramadan, the Islamic holy month of fasting. This is an important religious holiday celebrated by Muslims in Canada and around the world. I had the privilege of celebrating with my two sisters, Aisha and Nurjah, who graciously hosted me at their home in Aurora, Ontario, this past weekend.

Colleagues, Ramadan is a time for prayer, spiritual introspection and reconnecting with loved ones. It is a time for giving back to your community. It is also an opportunity to celebrate Muslim communities and the important contributions they have made, and continue to make, within and beyond Canada.

In my home province of Newfoundland and Labrador, Memorial University’s Muslim Students’ Association helped to ensure that all students who were observing this sacred month were able to do so with ease. The association, which is supported exclusively by donations and dedicated volunteers, organized daily prayers for brothers and sisters at the MUN chapel and facilitated iftar dinners on campus, which were attended by more than 200 students every day, both Muslim and non-Muslim.

I would like to take a moment to recognize and thank the students who have been instrumental in ensuring that these sacred traditions continue for the students of Newfoundland and Labrador, including Akheel Mohammed, Raiyan Rahman, Jannath Naveed, Muhammad Patel, S. M. Fahim and Mohammed Shakeel. Islam is a faith that embraces the ideals of peace, benevolence and generosity of spirit. They have exemplified these fundamental principles.

Muslims in my province are part of a broad interfaith coalition that works towards community-wide efforts to help those in need. Collaboration and education help to strengthen the bonds of community amongst those of different faiths and traditions and to eradicate any preconceptions based on misunderstanding.

For all those who observed this sacred month, I hope you had a blessed and peaceful Ramadan. On behalf of my fellow Muslim senators — Senators Ataullahjan, Jaffer, Gerba and Yussuff — and, colleagues, on behalf of all of you, I would like to take this opportunity to wish all celebrants Eid Mubarak.

Thank you, meegwetch.

[Translation]

Senator Gold: Thank you for your question and your views. We all respect and take it seriously. No, I do not think we failed our duty, senator. I think that we had a proper and appropriate debate based upon all the information which included, Senator Lankin, the issues of the economic impact, Canada’s reputation and the health material necessary to protect Canadians’ health which go beyond simply vaccines, as we have discussed many times here. All the issues were on the table, including the Charter analysis and the Charter discussion.

I think we were correct in our legislative role in ensuring that the legislation complied with the Charter in the sense that the limits on rights that, clearly, back-to-work legislation imposes — that goes without saying — are nonetheless justified under the circumstances, of course.

In a free and democratic society, the courts can also play a role — I was going to say second-guessing us, but that’s not correct — in reviewing legislation once it is passed and given Royal Assent. We look forward with confidence to the decisions of the courts in this regard. The respect we have for our Canadian judiciary is no less than we have for our own good work. We did good work on that, even if we disagree on the results.

[Translation]