Hon. Scott Tannas: Honourable senators, let me begin by quoting one of my predecessors, Senator Joyce Fairbairn. She said in this chamber:

. . . throughout history there are times when the stars and the planets are aligned to produce spectacular events. I would say that one of those occasions was the day Landon Pearson was summoned to the Senate on September 15, 1994.

Colleagues, Canada has lost one of its strongest advocates for the rights of young people in the form of the Honourable Landon Mackenzie Pearson. During her time in this place, she held the very distinguished title of being “the Children’s Senator” for her tireless advocacy for the rights and well-being of young people in Canada and internationally.

She was the co-chair of the Special Joint Committee on Child Custody and Access that produced the report entitled For the Sake of Children, which interpreted the consequences of family breakdown from a new perspective: the children themselves. She was a Canadian representative at the United Nations World Summit for Children and the United Nations Special Session on Children — that was under two different prime ministers from different parties. She was also an adviser to the Minister of Foreign Affairs on the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child.

During her 11 years as a senator, she was described as an individual with sharp eyes and ears, a clear mind, a big heart and the ability to watch and learn. Her passion for children was described as constant, persistent and often dogged. She often said, “When one door closes, another opens,” which showed her commitment and dedication.

We offer our sincere sympathies to her children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren and to all children in Canada.

Hon. Scott Tannas: Before I speak to Bill S-241, I’m sorry, colleagues, that I missed my call for Bill S-201. I was at a subcommittee meeting, and three senators who were supposed to speak today didn’t; I missed it. I have apologized to Senator McPhedran, who was expecting me to deliver that speech — and also to Senator McCallum, who was also ready to speak today on that subject. We will get to it.

Honourable senators, I rise today to speak to Bill S-241, the Jane Goodall act. It certainly has some high expectations, I would suggest, with such an internationally eminent person agreeing to attach her name to it.

Speaking of eminent people, illuminous former Senator Sinclair was the former sponsor of this bill. I want to thank him for bringing it forward. I also want to thank Senator Klyne for taking the torch upon Senator Sinclair’s retirement.

At some point, there will be committee hearings on this. I know there are other speakers on Bill S-241 before we get to a second-reading vote. It’s my hope that the committee will look carefully at the bill and at the potential amendments, if they’re needed.

I have two concerns that I’m hopeful the committee will spend some time on — they’re around the unintended consequences of the bill.

The first one that I worry about is the transition of the current population of animals that are affected by this bill, particularly in the context of the restrictions on the activities that are immediate, but might also be part of the funding process for the care and feeding of those animals.

In any of the preliminary inquiries that I’ve made, I have not heard of any amount of time that’s been spent on a real, practical plan to deal with the thousands of animals whose lives we are going to change through the restrictions that come into effect right away — never mind that those animals are grandfathered in the possession of whom they are now. In some cases, I suspect that the restrictions that are there for the future activities of those grandfathered animals may prevent people from being able to afford feeding them and caring for them.

The committee needs to satisfy itself that there is a plan, as well as what the plan is, who is going to conduct it and how it will be paid for. I would like to ensure that there are a couple of ways that the committee is, in fact, doing its due diligence on this.

The best thing would be for the committee to report — when it reports back to us — on their estimates regarding the transition of animals to zoos and sanctuaries. How many animals will age in place because they are owned by people who have funding that isn’t reliant on exhibitions, and how many animals will be euthanized? If we’re going to pass this bill, we’d better ensure that we understand all of those things, in addition to the plan regarding how animals arrive at zoos; how animals arrive at sanctuaries; how we’re going to police the idea that people will treat these animals humanely, and have the capacity to feed them; and the result for those who can’t afford them, can’t sell them, can’t trade them and can’t do anything other than euthanize them. We owe it to ourselves to know all of that. I think it will also help us prevent what could be a horrifying tragedy during the transition period that would outrage lots of Canadians, including the Canadians that are probably the most keen to see this bill passed. I think we owe it to ourselves to make sure that we have, in the cold light of day, examined that particular unintended consequence.

My second concern, which has been spoken to before, is around the animal advocate legal status that the bill confers in certain circumstances. There is a legitimate concern posed by certain groups and people that this somehow could be a first step toward influence or interference in animals for food. That is a legitimate concern and the committee should listen to those groups and try and find ways to mitigate that concern rather than simply dismiss it.

Both those items, the transition plan and the advocate role, are potential unintended consequences that we must spend the time working on here if we are going to propose this bill and send it over to the popular house that may or may not spend as much time on sober second thought as we would if the roles were reversed. Thank you, colleagues.

(On motion of Senator Clement, debate adjourned.)

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Galvez, seconded by the Honourable Senator Gignac, for the second reading of Bill S-243, An Act to enact the Climate-Aligned Finance Act and to make related amendments to other Acts.

(On motion of Senator Martin, debate adjourned.)

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Wallin, seconded by the Honourable Senator Tannas, for the second reading of Bill S-248, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying).