Senator Gold: Thank you. That’s a very good question.

It allows me to remind colleagues that one of the elements of the agreements in principle that have been struck is precisely that they call for bilateral agreements. That is important because every province has its own needs in health care, its own priorities and its own programs in place for which it needs and seeks additional funds to operate even more effectively for the benefit of its citizens.

Again, without knowing what is going on in negotiations between the federal government and, say, Manitoba, Nova Scotia or any of the other provinces or territories, if it is a priority of the provincial government, they will bring that to the table, and they will have a willing partner in the federal government in the course of those negotiations.

Senator Gold: Once again, thank you for sharing what has been made public, but you’ll understand that some things are not yet public and I’m not in a position to share them. This shows that the government is serious not only about the principle, but also about making it work on the ground.

I’m confident that once the full details of the bill are released, Canadians will see a more robust system than what’s in place now.

[English]

Senator Plett: We won’t need time allocation. We’ll move it ahead.

Senator Tannas: I would.

Senator Ataullahjan: Senator Gold, I have asked three former Liberal immigration ministers and the current minister, Minister Fraser, when the visa office would be shifted back to Islamabad. Pakistan, at one time, was not considered a safe country. However, most of our allies have their embassies open. It has become a family station again. Canada continues to have an office in Abu Dhabi, which adds to the wait times.

I have brought up the issue to the current immigration minister, Minister Fraser. The response I always get is, “We are aware of the issue. It has been brought to our attention.”

If the Liberal government is aware of the issue, why is it not acting on it? Why is it not attempting to fix the problem?

Senator Gold: Thank goodness for that.

Senator Housakos: We’ve seen that before.

Senator Plett: Well, leader, the Prime Minister never has to worry about not having a passport when he flies to New York. Meanwhile, his government is telling Canadians to not even apply for a passport right now because they can’t be processed. I’m not surprised the Prime Minister decided to go to New York when 150,000 public workers are on strike.

Leader, it reminds me of the time he flew overseas and warmly embraced the Iranian foreign minister just weeks after Iran shot down a plane carrying dozens of Canadian citizens and permanent residents. It also reminds me of how he flew to B.C. for a surfing holiday on the very first National Day for Truth and Reconciliation. It further reminds me, leader, of a famous saying: “While Rome burned, Nero fiddled.” The similarities here, leader, are that Nero also was an ineffectual leader in a time of crisis.

Leader, what does this say about the Prime Minister’s priorities that he chose to be in New York today, hanging out with celebrities and attending luncheons and receptions in Manhattan instead of working to fix the mess that he, leader, has created in our country?

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Honourable senators, I wish to draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Jacqueline Nicole Benson, Neva Lynn Fondacaro and James Allen Wallace. They are the guests of the Honourable Senator LaBoucane-Benson.

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

Senator Gold: It is my understanding that these provisions currently appear both in Bill C-46 and in the budget implementation act, which we will be debating. If and when this bill passes, there are provisions that will be removed from the budget implementation act, but they are accounted for in budgets in one form or another. When we pass this bill — if we do, and I hope we will — it will be able to be removed from the budget implementation act.

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Honourable senators, I wish to draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of participants in the Parliamentary Officers’ Study Program.

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

Senator Batters: Thank you. So it sounds like it’s $4.5 billion. If there is something else, can you please let us know? Also, I’m wondering if that cost was already included in the budget that the Trudeau government just presented, or if this cost is yet to be included in a budget.

Senator Tannas: Those are very good questions. There is not a similar bill like this in the Senate, as you mentioned. There isn’t one in the House of Commons because they defeated it, so it has been tossed.

Again, the principles that brought me to my position were, first, what the success chance is. I think it is zero. I think we are wasting our time with the bill. There may be some merit in having young people come to a committee and talk about it. We could do that with a study. We could perhaps put out a document that the House of Commons could read and maybe reconsider.

But we also have the issue of this prior question. We could get it all the way over there, spend all the committee time, listen to all these folks, raise their hopes that this bill will be passed and just have it dismissed. That’s the likely outcome. The prior question is something that’s pretty clear.

Third, we have a limited amount of time where the committees can do their work. And we’re running out of time, I suggest, certainly in this session of Parliament. Maybe there will be prorogation. Maybe there will be an election. Who knows? But we are all getting a sense that we are running out of time in this Parliament.

I think we have to be mindful of what we spend our time on. It is for those reasons that I am making the recommendation.

Senator Tannas: Thank you for the question, Senator McCallum. I’m not arguing that there is anything other than common sense preventing us from pressing ahead. We could pass this bill through second reading. We could consider it at third. Let’s say we pass it; that does not get the bill passed.

So if it is an academic exercise to go through, if that’s what the idea is, I suggest we do a committee study rather than a bill that will be dead on arrival in the House of Commons.

Senator Lankin: I am channelling former Senator Fraser at this particular moment. With a report like this one, which is looking for budgetary funds, she would always ask how much you are looking for. I will ask you that, but I will also ask this question: As we continue to talk about carbon footprints, and as we talk about challenges in terms of fiscal expenditures and reining in spending, why is it necessary for your committee to travel? Why couldn’t a series of appropriately established meetings be done over Zoom or some such function?

Senator Lankin: I am channelling former Senator Fraser at this particular moment. With a report like this one, which is looking for budgetary funds, she would always ask how much you are looking for. I will ask you that, but I will also ask this question: As we continue to talk about carbon footprints, and as we talk about challenges in terms of fiscal expenditures and reining in spending, why is it necessary for your committee to travel? Why couldn’t a series of appropriately established meetings be done over Zoom or some such function?

Senator Klyne: Thank you for the question. It is a good and valid question and one that we asked ourselves. The primary reason for the in-person format is that with these committees, it is very sensitive material they are dealing with in terms of internal audits and so on and so forth. They don’t keep public records on these things. Therefore, we can’t review or watch what they are doing. We will probably have some very confidential discussions with them face to face, during which they will share some information with us in that regard. So it is important to do that face to face.

They have a lot of lessons learned. They’ve been operating for 10 years now, and they will fully admit that the first few years were very difficult years. We would like to garner those lessons learned and bring them back, and make sure that we don’t make the same mistakes.

The budget? No, unfortunately, I don’t have that number with me. It was in the report, and I gave the report away — $167,000. Thank you.

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Honourable senators, I wish to draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Tonja Stothart. She is the guest of the Honourable Senator Osler.

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

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): My question today is for the Liberal government’s leader in the Senate. We are now into the second week of the biggest federal public sector strike in Canadian history. The access Canadians have to many basic government services is being impacted, leader. For example, at 11 a.m., a taxpayer calling the Canada Revenue Agency for help filing their taxes had to wait for 2 hours and 18 minutes. The CRA’s helpline for businesses has been shut down entirely during the strike.

As well, the Wheat Growers Association and Keystone Agricultural Producers of Manitoba are very worried about the impact of this strike on the ability of our farmers to have their grain weighed and inspected for export abroad.

Leader, given all of this, why is the Prime Minister in New York City today?

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Well, thank you for your question. The negotiations that are continuing between the unions and the government are being handled by a professional negotiating team, reporting to the minister responsible.

The business of the country carries on, notwithstanding the strike, and the Prime Minister is representing Canada in New York, as prime ministers do.

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Honourable senators, I wish to draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Sue Murray and Don Botten. They are the guests of the Honourable Senator Hartling.

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

Hon. Pierre J. Dalphond: Honourable senators, on behalf of Senator Cotter, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the twelfth report of the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs entitled Self-induced Extreme Intoxication and Section 33.1 of the Criminal Code.

(Pursuant to the order adopted by the Senate on Thursday, June 23, 2022, the government is requested to provide a complete and detailed response within 120 calendar days, with the response, or failure to provide a response, being dealt with pursuant to the provisions of rules 12-24(3) to (5).)