Senator Gold: Would the senator take a question?

Senator Forest: Yes, there are several possibilities, including the length of the bell, for example, and they all should be considered. If we really are here in person, on site, we shouldn’t need an hour-long bell for a vote. There is absolutely nothing to gain in terms of productivity, when every decision we make must be efficient. Would you agree with that?

Senator Housakos: Will Senator Deacon take a question?

Senator C. Deacon: Absolutely.

Senator Housakos: First of all, as long as we need to be sitting in this place and doing our job, I will commit to being available to do our job as an opposition party. It has been the tradition in this place that committees serve at the pleasure — again, I’ve had these debates with other colleagues, especially some who have arrived here recently — of the Committee of the Whole. That is how Parliament has always operated, and we’re not going to change the whole Westminster parliamentary system to accommodate a process that doesn’t fit into the tradition in this place.

Senator Gold: Our Rules, which are well established, do give both the government and the opposition a veto over whether a committee request to sit, notwithstanding that the Senate may be adjourned for over a week — they can approve or disapprove. Honourable senators will know that those requests have often been disapproved.

I’m asking whether you would agree, in light of the legitimate concerns you’ve raised about the importance of the work we do, especially in committees, and representing the opposition as the leader — at least today — that those requests should in fact be acceded to such that committees could do the work with greater time and resources.

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Are senators ready for the question?

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Leave is not granted.

Senator C. Deacon: Thank you, Your Honour.

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Is leave granted?

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Honourable senators, when shall this bill be read the third time?

(On motion of Senator Gold, for Senator Dalphond, bill referred to the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs.)

[Translation]

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?

Senator Gold: Once again, I will ask the question and we shall see the reply. However, in order not to confuse senators and those watching, I will quote something that appeared in La Presse recently. Chief Federal Prosecutor André Albert Morin, of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada, Quebec Regional Office, confirmed as follows whether the trial was authorized, and I quote, “The answer is no.” He did not authorize a secret trial.

[English]

Senator Cordy: Thank you very much. You raise a really good point.

We all would love to be sitting in our committee meetings. For those of us who normally sit twice a week, it’s now down to once a week. We all understand.

But you also have to recognize that a number of our staff have developed COVID as a result of working in circumstances with a lot of people around. We know there are senators who have contracted COVID, whether that’s in the Senate Chamber, getting on an airplane and flying to Ottawa or whether it’s when they’re at home. We don’t know that, and it’s very challenging to figure out where the contacts have come from when you’ve been on an airplane, in an airport or even in the Senate Chamber as a whole.

It would be great if committees could sit twice a week, but I don’t go back on what I believe, which is that we should, at least until the end of June, maintain hybrid. I’m willing to support this motion, but I think it should be the end of June when we could better make an evaluation. We should, in fact, go along with the House of Commons — and I don’t often say that. However, in this case, I believe the motion should be until the end of June.

The Hon. the Speaker: I hear a “no.” All those in favour of the motion who are in the Senate Chamber will please say “yea.”

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Would the senator take a question?

Hon. Rosa Galvez: Thank you, Senator Marshall. I know you say that you have to repeat the same thing many times for people to hear. I want to tell you that I hear you, and I’m worried, as are you, that we see only one third of all the expenses.

Because you have been on the National Finance Committee much longer than I have, will you please tell me if this was the practice years ago? Is it common that we only see one third, or is it because of COVID? Thank you.

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Senator Patterson, Senator Dupuis has a question for you. Would you take a question?

Senator Forest: Reading between the lines of your speech, setting aside your comments about the Prime Minister’s travels, I believe you were indicating that you’d like us to be more efficient in our work.

Do you suppose that, once we’re back to in-person attendance, or even during hybrid sittings, we could try ringing the bell for less time? Instead of 60 minutes, it could ring for 15 minutes, saving us 45 minutes per vote. Could we also boost the Senate’s efficiency by not seeing the clock? That would benefit Canadians, wouldn’t it?

Hon. Raymonde Gagné (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate), pursuant to notice of earlier this day, moved:

That, when the Senate next adjourns after the adoption of this motion, it do stand adjourned until Tuesday, April 5, 2022, at 2 p.m.

Some Hon. Senators: Yea.

The Hon. the Speaker: Is leave granted, honourable senators?