Hon. Senators: Agreed.

(At 7:10 p.m., the Senate was continued until Tuesday, September 19, 2023, at 2 p.m.)

Senator Housakos: Let me get this straight: After your first carbon tax, where you pummelled middle-class Canadians into the ground, forcing them to become poor, while you have had no impact on your environmental targets — you’ve hit none of them; it’s zero — you are telling me that a second carbon tax to continue your insanity in your failed policy of saving the environment — by killing poor and middle-class Canadians — is somehow a magic bullet. Congratulations — you have failed on your environmental targets; you have succeeded in setting record-high inflation; and you have succeeded in growing the number of poor Canadians in this country, as well as the dwindling middle class. The question is simple: Will your government, at least, try some of these common-sense policies that we are putting forward as an opposition, and put a pause on this second carbon tax in order to give badly needed relief to middle-class and poor Canadians who are suffering while we go on vacation?

Senator Gold: Thank you for the question. Of course, the government considered all relevant constitutional positions, doctrines and interpretations, and those of leading experts. I’m pleased that you mentioned the late Professor MacDonald. He was a colleague and a friend, as was the late Peter Hogg.

I’m not going to repeat the analysis that Senator Cotter provided. I agree with him. It is 100% clear that the ancillary doctrine only applies in the context of federal legislation under a federal legislative power. The spending power does not give Parliament the ability to legislate, and so the ancillary doctrine, therefore, does not apply. Though it is true that constitutional doctrines evolve, this one hasn’t. This one has been clearly established for decades and decades and is independent of whether or not cooperative federalism or the understanding of it ebbs and flows.

I could go on at great length. The arguments have been made. The government considered it. I believe the government made the correct decision with regard to the constitutionality. I’m also confident that the government, in its negotiations with the provinces and territories, and that the provinces and territories, in negotiations with private companies, will do the right thing by way of protecting those persons receiving benefits under this important program.

Senator Pate: Thank you very much for that. Since our debates on Bill C-22, we have heard from a number of experts that some of the arguments put forth around the lack of constitutionality of the amendment proposed and rejected by the government was actually a red herring. The argument was not that the federal government has jurisdiction over regulating contracts, but, rather, that the argument as we were indicating is that the ancillary powers doctrine allows the federal government to legislate otherwise invalid provisions in order to achieve the objective, which, as you have pointed out, was the primary objective of the legislation — to achieve its valid exercise of spending authority to lift people out of poverty.

Many of these experts have quoted Professor Roderick MacDonald regarding the federal spending power. He talked about the fact that, historically, the “watertight compartments” metaphor of the division of powers has now been increasingly replaced by a more flexible doctrine that doesn’t take such a bright-line approach and is most significantly capable of enlarging the reach of the federal spending power:

As the Supreme Court moves to an expansive reading of the ancillary and national dimensions doctrines, the limits of jurisdiction in each order of government become much more difficult to pin down.

I’m curious whether the government considered this perspective before putting people’s access to the Canada disability benefit at risk by rejecting that amendment. And if so, why did they reject that analysis?

Hon. Andrew Cardozo: I rise today to speak about welcoming week in Ottawa. This week, I had the pleasure of speaking at the launch of Welcoming Ottawa Week, or WOW.

Welcoming Ottawa Week was created by the Ottawa Local Immigration Partnership, or OLIP, which aims to convey to newcomers Ottawa’s respect and genuine welcome and create diverse opportunities for newcomers to connect with the Ottawa public across the city, institutions and local organizations. This year, we celebrate the tenth anniversary of WOW.

The Ottawa Local Immigration Partnership is an impressive multi-sectoral partnership of 64 Ottawa organizations working in diverse sectors such as settlement, language, training, interpretation and economic integration. United in the mission of building Ottawa’s capacity to attract, settle and integrate immigrants, it links newcomers to employers.

[Translation]

The Ottawa Local Immigration Partnership is an initiative funded by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada. Thanks to the success of this social cooperation model, there are local immigration partnerships in 87 cities and towns across the country.

[English]

Yes, 87 cities and towns across the country use this collaborative model.

Here is the important thing about successful immigrant integration: I recall a conversation with Jason Kenney some years ago when he was federal immigration minister. He was noting proudly that Canada had retained its high immigration levels through the 2007-08 recession while the rest of the world was shutting their gates. He noted that the public support for immigration had remained high in Canada because we work on integration so successfully. Successful integration not only helps the newcomers of today but it continuously creates public support for future immigration, thus making for a more harmonious society and one that will continue to welcome immigrants.

This said, we should never rest on our laurels. We must continue to do and support the hard work, especially as there remain many gaps. As a caution, we must always be watchful of the polarization, opposition, misinformation and disinformation regarding immigration and diversity that is rampant in many countries, including the U.S., and is certainly creeping into Canadian society.

May we spend this summer thinking about how we can continue to improve this peaceable kingdom we call Canada.

Thank you.

[Translation]

Senator Gold: My responses to your earlier question and to this question are not responses to “partisanship.” It’s simply to provide an accurate economic analysis. The fact is that mortgage rates are a function of not only interest rates but also house prices or the amount that one pays.

Canadians are suffering with higher interests rates and facing challenges with affordable housing, but as I have said on many occasions, that is a function of many factors that have nothing to do with the government’s monetary or fiscal policy.

The government has provided assistance to individuals in this country and is providing support for the building of more low-cost housing. It is simply incorrect to attribute the increasing share which Canadians unfortunately have to pay to sustain their mortgages to government spending alone. It is a function of far more market forces and others than anyone can fairly see.

[Translation]

Senator Tannas: I would also like to thank our tireless Speaker pro tempore for the terrific work that she does in supporting the chair.

Senator Saint-Germain: We’ve had an eventful and busy end to the session. Generally speaking, we’ve accomplished what we needed to accomplish with skill, dedication and diligence, as I said earlier.

[English]

Much has happened since last September. Strong debates were held, and sometimes tensions were palpable between some of us — yes, including myself. I would like to propose that we all take this time — away from the Senate — as an opportunity to reflect on the contribution to democracy in our country, and on what we might do to better serve all Canadians. A lot more unites us than divides us. This should reflect in the way we act and work as senators.

As such, I would like to echo the comments made by two respectable departing parliamentarians in the other place — Marc Garneau and Erin O’Toole — in calling for more civility and dignity in our debates. We are not nominated to the upper house of Parliament to generate endless social media engagement, but rather to work diligently on legislation, as well as bring a complementary and added value to the work of the elected House of Commons.

Recently, we bid farewell to a Speaker and welcomed a new one. Speaker Gagné has embraced her new role, and acted with tact and efficiency. However, the responsibility to uphold order and decorum is not only for her and for our Speaker pro tempore, Senator Ringuette — it is, rather, the duty of all senators. It is, I believe, the brand of this chamber and part of what distinguishes us.

There is always a place in the Senate for different opinions — actually, that is kind of the point — but divergent views must always be expressed with respect. As so eloquently expressed by Senator Shugart in his maiden speech:

. . . whether it is what we say to or about each other, or how we learn again to listen and dialogue with others who don’t share our outlook, or how we guard the health of our institutions — we need to relearn the virtue of restraint.

And I would add this: the virtue of respect.

To my very dedicated and capable colleagues in the Independent Senators Group, and to all colleagues from all caucuses and groups, I wish you a wonderful summer. Let’s take this time to think and reflect while enjoying the good weather and relaxing. I’m looking forward to seeing all of us in good spirits in the fall. Thank you. Meegwetch.

Hon. Colin Deacon: Honourable colleagues, technological change is accelerating. The benefits, disruptive effects and risks are spreading faster and deeper than ever before. Each month, we learn of another emerging technological advancement.

Many are large global experiments in real time that our regulatory systems are entirely unprepared to manage. But we have to find a way. Deep fake videos and photos can be created for a few dollars, but cause lasting harms. Cybersecurity threats and autonomous vehicles are just the tip of the iceberg.

What to do? We regulate in decades, and these technologies are changing each month.

Governments currently do not have the legislative or regulatory processes or capacity to catch up or keep up with these increasingly rapid changes. So here are two initiatives that I think offer some hope.

One was inspired by MP Michelle Rempel Garner when she proposed the formation of a new Canadian Parliamentary Caucus on Emerging Technology, which I am delighted to co-chair along with MPs Brian Masse and Anthony Housefather. You are invited to join other interested parliamentarians to learn from experts about the implications of artificial intelligence, blockchain technologies, quantum computing and the increasing use of personal data. As we rise soon and take a well-deserved break from the legislative agenda, we have to face the uncomfortable fact that technology will not pause.

Last month, the announcement of this caucus received a lot of positive response and tremendous interest. Our vehemently non‑partisan caucus of parliamentarians hopes to better understand the issues and learn from regulators, industry experts and international bodies.

The second initiative offering hope emerged from debates led by Senator Woo’s sponsorship of Bill S-6, An Act respecting regulatory modernization. As our committees studied and we debated this bill in the chamber last spring, some practical opportunities emerged as to how we could alter how we regulate at a federal level.

One idea was to create a whole-of-government framework to guide both the consistent use of regulatory sandboxes and the use of standards as a method for updating regulations while continuing to provide the necessary protections to citizens.

Regulatory sandboxes enable regulators and innovators to learn from one another, and incorporating standards as being equivalent to regulations provides a way for us to start to keep up while still using robust processes that engage innovative new entrants, incumbents, academics and regulators. Treasury Board is currently examining these opportunities, which is good news.

Canada can become a trusted leader in the deployment and use of innovative technologies in the future, but it requires our parliamentarians and regulators to keep trying new approaches and to not let past practice prevent us from implementing best practices.

Thank you, colleagues.

Hon. Senators: Hear, hear.

[Translation]

Senator Carignan: Thank you for your answer. I’m glad you’re letting the chamber know that you misspoke that day. I also learned of your misspeaking from the press.

Do you often misspeak? When you do misspeak, perhaps it would be best to notify the chamber right away rather than waiting two months to tell the press?

Hon. Senators: Hear, hear!

Hon. Ratna Omidvar: Honourable senators, I first want to thank Senator Boisvenu for his relentless advocacy on behalf of victims of sexual crimes. I wish I could rise after that with somewhat more elevating words, but I can’t because tomorrow is June 23. It is a day that is seared in our national memory by a profoundly solemn and horrifying day from our past.

Thirty-eight years ago, on June 23, Air India Flight 182 was brutally torn apart by a bomb explosion over the coast of Northern Ireland. All 329 passengers on board, including 82 children, 6 babies and 29 entire families, lost their lives in this heinous act. This devastating event remains the most atrocious act of terrorism in the history of Canada.

The families of the victims remember this tragic day every year. Most Indo-Canadians — and I look around to my Desi colleagues, who are nodding their heads — remember exactly what we were doing at that moment when we received the news. We recall the phone calls that we made to sons and daughters, mothers and sisters, fathers and brothers, and wives and husbands, as we wrapped our arms around them.

Just last night, I was with a friend whose uncle was the pilot on that ill-fated flight.

Subsequently, inquiries and criminal investigations were launched. Miscommunication and competition between Canada’s security agencies were disclosed, but justice was not done. The Indian-Canadian community of victims organized and agreed to memorialize June 23 as the National Day of Remembrance for Victims of Terrorism. I commend them for being inclusive of other victims of terrorism.

But this inclusion has come at a cost to them. Angus Reid Institute released a poll today that said that 9 out of 10 Canadians know little or nothing about the largest successful terrorist attack against Canadians — and those who were lost are likely to be forgotten.

In 2018, I wrote to Canada Post, requesting them to memorialize the Air India victims, in particular, through a stamp. I received a note back from the Director of Stamp Services saying they would bring it to the attention of the Stamp Advisory Committee. It has been radio silence since then.

I have undertaken to rise as many times as I can to mark this day. In this chamber, at least, colleagues, let’s remember, let’s honour and let’s keep their memory alive.

[Translation]

Hon. Tony Loffreda: Honourable senators, I rise today to pay tribute to Montréal International, Greater Montreal’s economic promotion agency, whose objective is to help build the city’s international reputation and prosperity by acting as a driving force for economic development.

[English]

Montréal International has had another record-breaking year in attracting direct foreign investments, international organizations, entrepreneurs, talented workers and international students to the region. Since 1996, the non-profit organization has been successful in positioning the city as a top destination for foreign investments. In 2022, Montréal International helped facilitate nearly $3.6 billion in foreign direct investment. According to its annual report, 102 projects will benefit and over 8,000 jobs will be created at an average annual salary of $88,000. A record‑setting 21 projects will be in communities outside Montreal.

Beyond good-paying, family-supporting jobs, what else do these foreign investments mean for residents of the city and Canadians in general? They add up to no less than $500 million in tax revenue for governments and over $80 million in property taxes. This is money that can go back into our communities.

Montréal International is more relevant than ever, considering the global competition to attract investments. In fact, without its support, 82% of foreign direct investment projects would not have happened, would have been smaller or would have incurred delays or higher costs. Montréal International gets things done.

Honourable colleagues, I may be biased since I spent 13 years on its board as treasurer of the organization, but I think Montréal International is one of the best and most effective agencies of its kind thanks to the talent, know-how and expertise of its staff and board of directors. Many agree: In 2020, it was recognized as the best economic development agency in the world and also earned top marks for best investment promotion agency.

Recently, Montréal International launched a talent recruitment website that has already benefited countless businesses. The organization is committed to international mobility and supporting employers who want to hire foreign talent.

Honourable senators, please join me in celebrating the work of Montréal International, thanking them for their countless contributions to our economy and encouraging them to continue its ambitious agenda of attracting more foreign investments to Canada.

Thank you.

[Translation]

Hon. Tony Loffreda: Honourable senators, I rise today to pay tribute to Montréal International, Greater Montréal’s economic promotion agency, whose objective is to help build the city’s international reputation and prosperity by acting as a driving force for economic development.

[English]

Montréal International has had another record-breaking year in attracting direct foreign investments, international organizations, entrepreneurs, talented workers and international students to the region. Since 1996, the non-profit organization has been successful in positioning the city as a top destination for foreign investments. In 2022, Montréal International helped facilitate nearly $3.6 billion in foreign direct investment. According to its annual report, 102 projects will benefit and over 8,000 jobs will be created at an average annual salary of $88,000. A record-setting 21 projects will be in communities outside Montreal.

Beyond good-paying, family-supporting jobs, what else do these foreign investments mean for residents of the city and Canadians in general? They add up to no less than $500 million in tax revenue for governments and over $80 million in property taxes. This is money that can go back into our communities.

Montréal International is more relevant than ever, considering the global competition to attract investments. In fact, without its support, 82% of foreign direct investment projects would not have happened, would have been smaller or would have incurred delays or higher costs. Montréal International gets things done.

Honourable colleagues, I may be biased since I spent 13 years on its board as treasurer of the organization, but I think Montréal International is one of the best and most effective agencies of its kind thanks to the talent, know-how and expertise of its staff and board of directors. Many agree: In 2020, it was recognized as the best economic development agency in the world and also earned top marks for best investment promotion agency.

Recently, Montréal International launched a talent recruitment website that has already benefited countless businesses. The organization is committed to international mobility and supporting employers who want to hire foreign talent.

Honourable senators, please join me in celebrating the work of Montréal International, thanking them for their countless contributions to our economy and encouraging them to continue its ambitious agenda of attracting more foreign investments to Canada.

Thank you.

[Translation]

Hon. Pierre-Hugues Boisvenu: Honourable senators, I rise today with a great deal of emotion and pride to pay tribute to someone who is an important source of motivation for me and who has been guiding my steps in the Senate of Canada for almost 14 years now. I am talking about my daughter, Julie.

Every June 22 for the past 21 years, I have written a letter to my daughter Julie to let her know about our hard-won achievements, what we have accomplished as part of my mission and her mission. It is important for me to share it with you since this year will be our last June 22 here in the chamber with you.

My dear daughter, you were such a positive woman so full of energy. You were a shining light who never hesitated to reach out to others and wrap them in your big smile and infectious energy. The happiness of others brought you happiness.

On the evening of June 22, 2002, you and your friends were celebrating your recent promotion to manager at a Sherbrooke business. I was so proud of how far you had come, even though you would occasionally come to me with your doubts and insecurities about not living up to your bosses’ expectations. I would always remind you that success was not an end in itself, but rather the path you had taken to become a better person. I remember how, after our talks, your doubts would fade away and you would kiss me on the cheek before you left and say, “Thanks Dad.”

At the end of that evening on June 22, as you were making your way to your vehicle, little did you know that a sexual predator, recently released from prison, was on the hunt for his next victim. That predator was in the wrong place at the wrong time. He most likely called out to you and, realizing your intent to flee, kidnapped you. Like many women who are raped, you probably thought that if you didn’t resist, you would survive. He didn’t want a witness to his heinous act, nor did he want another conviction, so he murdered you and hid your body.

The other thing about this tragedy that enrages me is that this sexual predator had been stopped by police twice that evening before he abducted you. Back then, the officers didn’t have a search tool like the National Sex Offender Registry, so they didn’t dig any deeper and let the to-be killer go. Had his name been on a registry, that would surely have saved your life.

My dear daughter, you and my colleagues know how deeply committed I am to defending victims’ rights. The reason I’m so focused on the plight of female victims of violence in particular is that your fate sealed my own.

Julie, your murder made it clear to me that our justice system was not doing enough for victims and their families and, unfortunately, 21 years later, it is still not doing enough.

When the justice system ventures into victims’ territory, it does so so timidly that the changes are almost unnoticeable. For victims of crime, these changes that trickle in are hard-won through suffering and revictimization.

This year, finally, after eight years of hard work and effort, we managed to come together to pass our bill on the wearing of electronic bracelets. If it had been passed in 2002, it might have saved your life. Now and in the future, you will save the lives of dozens of abused women.

My dear Julie, this afternoon, when I give my speech as the critic for Bill S-12 on the National Sex Offender Registry, give me the wisdom to speak to my colleagues from the heart, to raise their awareness and make them understand — and I know that many do or will understand — that the fight to defend women’s right to protection is so difficult that, without their solidarity, far too many women will continue to live in fear and others will tragically lose their life, as you did.

Julie, thank you for the journey we have taken together, and, as I was saying earlier, we still have a long way to go. I’m sure that we will continue to carry out our mission every step of the way. Thank you.

The Hon. the Speaker: Is leave granted, honourable senators?

The Hon. the Speaker informed the Senate that a message had been received from the House of Commons with Bill C-42, An Act to amend the Canada Business Corporations Act and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts.

(Bill read first time.)

The Hon. the Speaker: Colleagues, I would like to recognize the dedication of the Senate Television Director, Pierre Ménard, who is retiring after more than 31 years on the Hill.

After a successful career with the CBC Parliamentary Television Network, Pierre joined the House of Commons staff in 1992. Over the decades that followed, his role in the television control room helped shape the way Canadians see their parliamentarians. With his dynamic filming style, he could always capture the energy of debates and the dignity of proceedings.

[English]

Pierre is the only television director, to date, who has worked extensively in both houses of Parliament, as well as in committees of the Senate and the House of Commons. Throughout his tenure, he directed ceremonial events and addresses to Parliament by numerous world leaders. He holds the distinction of helming the first televised broadcast of the Senate Chamber.

[Translation]

Anyone who has had the pleasure of meeting Pierre will be familiar with his unparalleled passion for the work of the Senate and all things parliamentary. Please join me in recognizing and paying tribute to his sincere commitment to excellence in Senate broadcasting, as he shared the important work we do here with Canadians.