Hon. Ratna Omidvar: Honourable senators, with leave of the Senate and notwithstanding rule 5-5(b), I move that the bill be read the third time now.

Hon. Ratna Omidvar: Honourable senators, as we all slowly get ready for a break for the holidays, I want to bring a story of hope and optimism and some cheer — much in the tradition of Senator Manning.

For a true story of hope and optimism, I need look no further than the beautiful island of Barbados. A member of the Commonwealth since 1996, the people of Barbados became a republic on November 30 — just a few weeks ago. It was a peaceful transition, celebrated with much joy on the island and heralded as a deliberate move to leave the colonial past fully behind and look with confidence into the future.

What is also a really wonderful sign of hope is the two women who are leading the country. President Sandra Mason, who transitioned from Governor General to head of state and President, is an accomplished lawyer and diplomat. Prime Minister Mia Mottley is the head of the Barbados Labour Party and is the first woman to be elected to the role of PM in Barbados. She has been a relentless fighter on her mission to lead Barbados to become a republic.

Most recently, at COP26, PM Mottley made an impassioned, authentic and, from all observations, completely unscripted speech on the impending danger to island countries like the Maldives, Antigua, Barbados, Fiji, Kenya, Mozambique and Samoa. She said to the world, “Try hard.” She said again, “Try harder because our people . . . need our actions now.”

What I find deeply hopeful is not just that this beautiful tiny island nation has taken its fate firmly into its own hands but that it is led by two strong women who are role models for women around the world, but especially for Black girls.

I hope you will join me in congratulating Barbados and wishing it all the best in its new personality as a republic.

Hon. Ratna Omidvar: Thank you, Senator Miville-Dechêne. You have been an effective advocate in preventing child labour, and I appreciate the distinction you made in the bill between child labour and forced labour. They are both beasts, but they are beasts of a different kind. My question is about child labour.

When we squeeze the supply chain so that consumers make the call on buying ethical products, the downward impact is on the children in other countries that have no other means of survival outside of working in these factories. I know that when that means of employment is removed, they will turn to drugs. They will turn to crime. They will turn to prostitution. They may even turn to selling their organs on the free market. I know this: I have seen it.

When this bill goes to committee, can we consider complementing this measure with other measures that speak to development assistance, so that when children are no longer able to work they can be guaranteed education and health?

[Translation]