Hon. Rosa Galvez: Honourable senators, I rise again today to speak in support of Motion No. 12 introduced by Senator McCallum requesting that the Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources be authorized to examine and report on the cumulative positive and negative impacts of resource extraction and development, and their effects on environmental, economic and social considerations.

In the last parliamentary session I also spoke in favour of this motion, and I thank Senator McCallum for bringing this study proposal to the floor of the Senate. Her continued passionate work on community impacts, especially on Indigenous communities, is admirable and needs to be supported.

I believe this study could bring great value in understanding the overall impacts of resource extraction and development in Canada. I say “overall impacts,” because Canadians — and especially parliamentarians — are often bombarded by the one‑sided promotion of the positive contributions of resource extraction on Canada’s GDP, employment and government revenues. Next to these amplified voices, communities, NGOs, academics and scientists can barely pierce through the noise to present other aspects — positive or negative — and have to resort to protests to get media attention.

I have been teaching engineering students how to conduct and complete environmental impact assessments for almost 30 years. A project that considers and integrates the needs of a host community from its early conception and design will result in a project that is technically sound, cost-efficient, safe, prosperous for all and healthy for the community and the environment. On the contrary, a project that is conceived independently without considering community issues puts at risk the implementation of the entire project and will most certainly create irritants and opposition which can lead to wasting important and valuable investments. Nobody wants this, yet it still happens so often.

Effective and successful decision making requires in-depth analysis.

[Translation]

Senator Galvez: Okay.

(At 9 p.m., pursuant to the order adopted by the Senate on November 25, 2021, the Senate adjourned until Tuesday, February 22, 2022, at 2 p.m.)

Hon. Rosa Galvez: Honourable senators, I rise to speak in support of Motion No. 6, introduced by my colleague Senator Pate, requesting that the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance be authorized to examine and report on a road map for post-pandemic economic and social policy and potential national approaches to interjurisdictional collaboration to implement a guaranteed livable basic income.

I wish to thank Senator Pate for proposing this study as it will be extremely timely and useful for the upcoming economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic.

As you all know, I published over a year ago a white paper on a clean and just recovery in an effort to document the work of experts advocating for a holistic approach to rebuilding Canadian society to achieve greater overall, collective well-being. It is available in three languages. I’m proud to say that the document has been enthusiastically cited by parliamentarians in the Americas and Europe.

The paper provided a set of 11 recommendations and a toolbox of key policies to stimulate an economic recovery that would put people first, focus on furthering human and ecosystem well‑being, ensure the costs and benefits will be distributed equitably and shift our measure of economic success toward sustainable prosperity.

Namely, the federal government should review all its policies through a climate lens that will consider the impacts on future generations, as well as a social justice lens to ensure the benefits and costs of the recovery are distributed equitably; impose enforceable and verifiable accountability measures on all financial assistance provided to large corporations; implement practicable methods of recouping their costs, such as through a tax on the wealthiest Canadians; and establish a guaranteed livable income and other measures focused on helping people rather than corporations.

These recommendations and many other potential post‑pandemic economic and social policies have the potential to increase the quality of life for all Canadians during a period where financial inequality is on the rise.

Research has shown that the degree of equality within a society is linked to its health and happiness. Almost every modern social problem — be it poor health, violence, lack of community life, early life pregnancy or mental illness — is more likely to occur in a less equal society. Higher levels of inequality correlate with lower levels of life satisfaction, and countries whose income inequality is decreasing grow faster than those with rising inequality.

This past December, the Parliamentary Budget Officer published — by my request — an updated High-net-worth Family Database “. . . to study the trends in the distribution of Canadian net wealth.” Beyond, once again, confirming the concerning trend of the greater accumulation of wealth for the richest Canadians, it also points to Statistics Canada’s under‑reporting of the share of wealth of high-net-worth families. This is concerning given the need for precise and adequate data for effective policy-making.

[Translation]

Canadians are aware that the pandemic exacerbated wealth inequality in Canada. An August 2021 survey by Abacus Data showed that most Canadians believe our tax system is unfair. In fact, 82% of them feel it is time to tackle wealth and income inequality. The post-pandemic recovery means a lot of support is available for new, novel, bold ideas. The Standing Senate Committee on National Finance is in a good position to study the matter and make recommendations to the federal government.

When the committee decided to examine the government’s response to the pandemic in 2020, it also raised the possibility of expanding the study to the future green recovery. Unfortunately, that plan was derailed because Parliament prorogued.

As Senator Pate pointed out in her speech, the committee had recommended that the Government of Canada, with provinces, territories and Indigenous governments, give full, fair and priority consideration to a basic income guarantee.

Then, in April 2020, 50 senators urged the Prime Minister to transform the Canada Emergency Response Benefit into a guaranteed basic income program. Honourable colleagues, the post-pandemic social and economic policy possibilities are numerous, and Canadians have proven that they are hungry for new ideas and effective action. I’m sure you all have big ideas for reopening our economy. Thanks to our committee, this study has the potential to carry out a comprehensive review of the proposed social and economic policies to ensure a speedy, efficient and prosperous recovery for all Canadians. I’m happy to support this motion, and I strongly encourage you do the same. Thank you. Meegwetch.