Hon. Pierre J. Dalphond: I understand that the constitutional amendment actually targets a commercial entity, Canadian Pacific, not necessarily the parent company, but the company that runs the railway.

Does the parent company or the railway have a position on the proposed constitutional amendment?

Senator Dalphond: I have another question.

If I properly read the text of the draft, it says that there was some kind of agreement in 1966 between the then president Ian Sinclair of CP and the Government of Canada through the minister of transport Jack Pickersgill. Do we have a copy of that agreement? Is it a written agreement or an oral agreement? If it is a written agreement, could we have a copy of it?

Senator Dalphond: Thank you.

[Translation]

Hon. Pierre J. Dalphond: I thank you and the entire government for supporting the provinces in their fight against the pandemic, for example by providing vaccines and implementing complementary health care measures, especially at the borders.

According to scientists, including federal experts, we are transitioning from pandemic to endemic, so wouldn’t this be the time to review the federal measures that may no longer be necessary?

Hon. Pierre J. Dalphond: During the last Parliament, your government asked us to amend the medical assistance in dying legislation. The legislation, as passed, required the establishment of a special joint committee of senators and members of Parliament to report on the first few years of medical assistance in dying and to study the possibility of advance directives.

Why didn’t the government reconvene this special committee after the election?

Senator Dalphond: The answer is more interesting than I expected. So the amendment is being proposed at the request of the province that is involved in a court battle with Canadian Pacific to end the litigation.