Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your question. I think actions speak louder than words, colleagues.

The fact is, as the government announced, its plans were designed in this budget to strike the appropriate balance between responsible fiscal management and an investment in our future.

At the same time, the government predicted that inflation — far too high and far too difficult for too many Canadians — would be brought under control, and, indeed, it is being brought under control.

At the same time, the government’s fiscal approach has supported the creation of over 830,000 new jobs, more jobs than existed before the pandemic.

Inflation continues to fall; it has been flat or falling for eight months in a row.

Our unemployment rate is at a record low. Our credit rating is high. Although you do not like to hear me quote the debt-to-GDP ratio, it is an important indicator of the overall vitality of our economy and our capacity to move forward.

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

(On motion of Senator Clement, bill placed on the Orders of the Day for second reading two days hence.)

The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, I wish to draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Nicholas Clark and Jenny Bégin. They are the guests of the Honourable Senator Patterson (Nunavut).

On behalf of all honourable senators, I welcome you to the Senate of Canada.

Hon. Bernadette Clement introduced Bill S-1001, An Act to amalgamate The Roman Catholic Episcopal Corporation of Ottawa and The Roman Catholic Episcopal Corporation for the Diocese of Alexandria-Cornwall, in Ontario, Canada.

(Bill read first time.)

Hon. Denise Batters: Senator Gold, in April 2019 I asked then-government leader Harder a question about Martine Richard, the sister-in-law of senior Trudeau government minister Dominic LeBlanc, as she was being named the director of investigations in the Ethics Commissioner’s office in the middle of the SNC-Lavalin scandal.

Four years later, yet another Trudeau scandal, and guess who is being promoted? Amid the Beijing interference and Trudeau Foundation scandals, the Trudeau cabinet has appointed Minister LeBlanc’s sister-in-law, this time, as the Interim Ethics Commissioner. Since it’s an interim position, the appointment does not require House of Commons approval.

Yet Ms. Richard could hold this role for many months or even years. Dominic LeBlanc is a senior Trudeau government minister. He is a long-time close Trudeau family friend. My goodness, he used to babysit the Prime Minister. Senator Gold, the entire cabinet is in conflict from this association. Why is the sister-in-law of this senior Trudeau cabinet minister now in charge of investigating any Trudeau government minister or Prime Minister Justin Trudeau?

Hon. Raymonde Gagné (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate): Honourable senators, I give notice that, at the next sitting of the Senate, I will move:

That, when the Senate next adjourns after the adoption of this motion, it do stand adjourned until Tuesday, April 25, 2023, at 2 p.m.

[English]

The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, I wish to draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Nicholas Clark and Jenny Bégin. They are the guests of the Honourable Senator Patterson (Nunavut).

On behalf of all honourable senators, I welcome you to the Senate of Canada.

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

(On motion of Senator Clement, bill placed on the Orders of the Day for second reading two days hence.)

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your question and for underlining the challenge that we face as a country and in order to both deal in a responsible way with those who seek to come here and do so in a responsible way with our important neighbour to the south. I think the government is doing what it can to find the right balance between those two. As you would know senator, as colleagues would know, Canada and the United States entered into discussions about renewing the Safe Third Country Agreement well over a year ago, signed statements of principle, as I described in the chamber before. A lot of work gets done between the statement of principle and the ultimate putting into place of regulations, which were done more or less around the President’s visit here.

Canada believes that the United States is a safe country for refugees and is defending that position. And, of course, when the court rules, the government will take account of its rulings and respect its rulings as it always does, but the government remains of the view that modernizing the Safe Third Country Agreement was the best solution to an intractable problem of providing security for those who arrive and seek asylum, but also being able to manage our border in an effective way for the benefit of Canadians and the communities that are affected.

Hon. Mobina S. B. Jaffer: Honourable senators, my question is to the Government Representative in the Senate. Senator Gold, instead of withdrawing from the Safe Third Country Agreement, Canada and the United States have recently expanded it. The United States is the only country in the world we have a Safe Third Country Agreement with. We’ve had this agreement before, and when the Trudeau government came to power, they stopped using it. We have again reintroduced it.

Now the agreement applies not only to Canada’s land border crossings — not just to official crossings — but also to irregular crossings. However, this agreement is what led to dangerous crossings, such as Roxham Road, in the first place. Expanding it will not prevent irregular migration patterns. It only makes the journey more difficult and perilous.

Like many advocates, I have challenged the most basic assumption of this agreement that the United States is a safe country for refugees seeking protection. It is not. We have seen examples of this on a continual basis. As I earlier said, we had an agreement. Then we stopped using it because we were not happy with the situation in the United States, and now we’ve signed another agreement. The question of whether the United States is a safe country for refugees is currently under the review of the Supreme Court of Canada. It is beyond comprehension why the Canadian government would take this step while the constitutionality of the Safe Third Country Agreement is being challenged. Why does the government find it prudent to expand this agreement while it’s still in the courts? Thank you.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your question. The Interim Ethics Commissioner is a career public servant, served in a senior role in the Ethics Commissioner’s office for over 10 years, predating this government. Indeed, to disregard her personal achievements and her competence only serves to undermine the important role that the Ethics Commissioner plays in our system.

Hon. Marty Deacon: My question is regarding the school food program and is, of course, for the Government Representative, Senator Gold. It concerns the national school food program as we have heard over the last several years. Despite a $1-billion Liberal campaign commitment for federal funding to implement a national school food program, the budget, yet again, allocated no spending in this area. This has been an ongoing discussion for years, including way back when former Senator Eggleton brought this motion in the chamber, in 2018-19. I appreciate that consultations have been intense and thorough, have been held with stakeholders and they finished in December. A national school food program seems like an easy win for the government at a time when families are struggling with food prices and Canada remains the only G7 country without a school nutrition program.

My question is when the government will deliver on its commitment to fund a national school food program in Canada.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your question. It’s an important one but a complicated one in our country. The government understands food insecurity is on the rise and it’s causing real, serious concerns for families and for their children. And strengthening our food supply and developing a national school food policy remain an important goal of this government. Indeed, this has been highlighted in mandate letters that were given to the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development, as well as the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food. What the government is doing and will continue to do is to work with those jurisdictions which have primary responsibility here — the provinces and territories and municipalities and, indeed, Indigenous communities and stakeholders — to develop a national school food policy and to create a nutritious national school food program.

Senator M. Deacon: Thank you. Respectfully, do you see this coming to life in the next 6 to 12 months?

Hon. Pierre-Hugues Boisvenu: Senator Gold, yesterday and today we are marking the terrible tragedy in Portapique, Nova Scotia. It was a tragic event that cost the lives of 27 people and one unborn child. It left dozens of families in mourning. This is the worst massacre in modern Canadian history and the victims’ families have had to cope with immeasurable pain while being left in dark about government support.

While Justin Trudeau made a $300-million fund available to victims of Hurricane Fiona, the families in Portapique have been ignored and have had to use their own financial resources to cover the costs of losing their loved ones and rebuilding their own mental health.

Why didn’t the Prime Minister take the time to meet the families who were present during the tabling of the Mass Casualty Commission’s report on March 30, in Nova Scotia, to express his sympathy? It was the deadliest mass shooting Canada has ever known.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for the question. As I just mentioned to our colleague, Senator Bernard, I will have to find out more about the progress made and the status of the discussions between the two governments to provide help to the communities involved. I will do my best to get an answer soon.

Hon. Robert Black: Thank you, honourable colleague, for your question, and for your interest in the Agriculture and Forestry Committee. Senator Wallin, thank you for your work in advocating for rural Saskatchewan and beyond.

The Agriculture and Forestry Committee has, indeed, embarked upon a study on the health of Canada’s soils, as you noted — acknowledging that next year, the last Senate study on soil health entitled Soil at Risk: Canada’s Eroding Future will be 40 years old. Our committee chose to undertake a new study, and has had the opportunity to hear from 71 witnesses over 17 meetings since the chamber approved the order of reference and our committee meetings started last fall. These witnesses have been from across Canada, each in their varying fields of agriculture, and have contributed integral information that will help to complete our report.

We’ve heard excellent testimony from farmers who engage in no-till practices; from Indigenous agriculture leaders who are working hard to share data compilation and expand soil health operations across the country; and from many other experts developing beneficial techniques and innovations aimed at preserving the health of Canada’s soils. In our time conducting research, one thing has become very clear: Improving soil health is not a one-size-fits-all endeavour across the country.

I hope this study will also assist with food insecurity and help support our agricultural industry, along with other industries that rely on soil health. That’s why it’s important that the committee continues its work to engage in the soil health study.

I want to thank our witnesses to date for their testimony. The work wouldn’t be successful without them.

In regard to your second question, one thing that I think is important for Canadians to hear is that soil is a finite resource. As noted by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the world’s topsoil could be gone within 50 years if the current rate of degradation continues. Furthermore, generating three centimetres of topsoil takes a thousand years, so we can’t count on that — 50 years is all we’ve got.

That’s why soil conservation and preservation are so important, and that’s why we need to continue. We all need to be thinking about soil health, and, as I mentioned, this is one week that we can do that. I would encourage our colleagues — and everyone — to learn more about how they can do so. Thank you again for your question.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your question, and, as I responded yesterday, our hearts and sympathies go out to the families and communities of Portapique and Truro, as well as all who are suffering and need help.

Senator, I simply don’t know the status of the discussions between the federal government and the Nova Scotia government, and, therefore, I’m not in a position to provide an answer regarding the timeline or the progress that’s being made on this initiative. I will make inquiries and try to provide an answer as quickly as I can.

Hon. Pamela Wallin: As we heard earlier this week, it is National Soil Conservation Week, so I would like to direct my question to the Chair of the Senate Agriculture and Forestry Committee who has been a champion for the agricultural community in Canada — I thank you for that.

You have said, here in the chamber, that the soil health study being undertaken by your committee is long term and all‑encompassing because soil health is — as you have suggested — intrinsically connected to the health of Canadians, directly affecting our economy, our food security and our climate.

As always, the doers — those people who do things — lead. Can you tell us what the committee is hearing about soil conservation methods already being used by farmers, processors and producers to support Canada’s climate health?

I’ll ask my follow-up question as well: If you could share just one thing that we all need to know about soil health in order to highlight National Soil Conservation Week for Canadians, many of whom don’t follow our committees online, what would that be? Thank you.

Hon. Wanda Thomas Bernard: My question is for the Government Representative in the Senate.

Senator Gold, as we heard from my Nova Scotian colleague Senator Coyle, yesterday marked three years since the harrowing mass shooting in Nova Scotia. Today, I wish to ask a question about a time-sensitive matter covered in Volume 4 of the Mass Casualty Commission report.

The commission recommends — under Recommendation C.13 entitled Reversing the Course: Addressing the Public Health Emergency in Colchester, Cumberland, and Hants Counties — that:

(a) By May 1, 2023, the Governments of Canada and Nova Scotia should jointly fund a program to address the public health emergency that exists in Colchester, Cumberland, and Hants counties as a result of an unmet need for mental health, grief, and bereavement supports arising from the April 2020 mass casualty.

(b) This program should be developed and implemented by a local multidisciplinary team of health professionals with the ability to draw on external resources as needed.

(c) The program should provide concerted supports on an urgent basis and transition to long term care over time.

(d) Mi’kmaw communities should have the opportunity to participate in the program either on a joint or an independent basis.

(e) The program should be funded to carry out needs and impact assessments in 2023, 2025, and 2028.

My question, Senator Gold, is as follows: The community members of Colchester, Cumberland and Hants counties are in urgent need of mental health supports right now. Is the government currently on track to follow this urgent recommendation made by the commission to have a program funded in two weeks from now?

Hon. Pierre-Hugues Boisvenu: Senator Gold, yesterday and today we are marking the terrible tragedy in Portapique, Nova Scotia. It was a tragic event that cost the lives of 22 people and one unborn child. It left dozens of families in mourning. This is the worst massacre in modern Canadian history and the victims’ families have had to cope with immeasurable pain while being left in dark about government support.

While Justin Trudeau made a $300-million fund available to victims of Hurricane Fiona, the families in Portapique have been ignored and have had to use their own financial resources to cover the costs of losing their loved ones and rebuilding their own mental health.

Why didn’t the Prime Minister take the time to meet the families who were present during the tabling of the Mass Casualty Commission’s report on March 30, in Nova Scotia, to express his sympathy? It was the deadliest mass shooting Canada has ever known.