Hon. Jean-Guy Dagenais: My question is for the Representative of the Government in the Senate.

Barely 10 days ago, the Prime Minister announced an additional $650 million in aid to help Ukraine in the war against Russia. That brings Canada’s assistance to Ukraine to $9.8 billion in less than two years.

My question relates to economics and is very specific. Does Canada have an unlimited budget for assisting Ukraine? Giving $10 billion to Ukraine, when the new President of the Treasury Board Secretariat is asking your government to trim its spending by $15 billion, is not inconsequential for anyone who knows how to count.

How can we ensure that Canadians are not ultimately deprived of government services because the Prime Minister wants to help Ukraine?

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Canadians were not lied to by the government or the CRTC. My understanding is that this is the first stage within the regulatory process, and the criteria that will ultimately develop, as I understand it, will include — as colleagues would recall from our debates — the extent or degree to which initiatives on platforms can be considered properly broadcasters, and that also includes the extent of their reach and of their revenues. Therefore, it is simply not correct to attribute this stage of the regulatory process as a lie.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for the question and thank you for highlighting the importance of ensuring that our Armed Forces continue to have the resources we need to be protected.

That being said, as I’ve explained on a number of occasions, there are certain choices that a responsible government must make in the current economic situation. This applies not only to National Defence, but also to every aspect of the government’s budget, which is now being examined so that we can find the savings needed to remain prudent and responsible. Once again, as I’ve said in this chamber, the government will take a prudent and responsible approach.

Hon. Pierre-Hugues Boisvenu: Senator Gold, to follow up on your response to Senator Patterson’s question yesterday, I don’t believe that your government is approaching its spending thoughtfully and prudently. Our national debt has nearly tripled in eight years. The recent revelations of General Eyre, Chief of the Defence Staff, clearly demonstrate that the Canadian Armed Forces are facing enormous challenges, ranging from an ammunition shortage to a lack of housing for troops. These challenges are amplified by your government’s recent request to cut the National Defence budget by $1 billion.

Given the situation, Senator Gold, how does your government justify such a budget cut — which would be very detrimental to the preparation, training and well-being of our Armed Forces — while claiming that national security and the well-being of our soldiers are priorities?

The Hon. the Speaker: Thank you, Senator Martin.

Hon. Percy Mockler: Thank you very much, Senator Woo. I think it is an important question.

Last night I answered that question during the Agriculture and Forestry Committee. I’ll take this opportunity to answer the question more specifically.

As we all know, chairs of committees and senators are masters of our committees when it comes to proceedings and studies. On that, before I speak about the mandate, Senator Woo, please permit me to add that the steering committee met twice to consider the agenda of the Finance Committee. We decided unanimously that Bill C-234 could not be studied by the Finance Committee.

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the government leader in the Senate. Information released through the Access to Information Act shows that since 2019, the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada, or FCAC, failed to follow up on any of the over 27,000 complaints it received from Canadians about breaches of the Bank Act. The agency claimed it doesn’t know how many of these complaints it has investigated since 2019, saying it doesn’t track that information. This is an odd response given that its 2021-22 annual report says that in that year alone, the agency received 295 complaints “related to consumer protection measures that FCAC oversees.”

Leader, has the Trudeau government done anything in response to the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada’s inaction regarding complaints from Canadians about their banks?

Hon. Jane Cordy: Senator Gold, by the government’s own estimation, one third of Canadians do not have dental insurance and one in five avoid dental services because the price is prohibitive. We know that dental care is health care. Poor oral health can lead to a myriad of other health issues and a deterioration of quality of life. I applaud the government for its commitment to providing financial assistance to those Canadians who face barriers in accessing dental services by bringing forward the new Canadian Dental Care Plan.

My question today is from Cliff Williams, a Nova Scotia senior, who is relying on the new program to access dental services. To date, the government has been vague with specifics about when the benefit will be available to all eligible Canadians.

Senator Gold, could you tell Mr. Williams when he and other Canadian seniors will be able to access the dental services under the new Canadian Dental Care Plan?

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your question. Canadians should be satisfied that there is in place, through legislation that we enacted some years ago, nationwide consumer protection provisions that affect the banking system and which were made more robust through legislation that this government introduced and this chamber passed.

With regard to your particular question, senator, I will certainly bring that to the attention of the relevant minister. I really don’t have further information about those incidents at this juncture.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you very much for your question. Every Canadian deserves to have access to good oral health care. Yet the government knows — and Canadians know — that approximately one third of Canadians cannot visit an oral health care professional because they don’t have dental insurance.

I’m advised that the first phase of the government’s plan, the interim Canada Dental Benefit, has already helped over 366,000 children under the age of 12 get the dental care they need.

To answer your question, I am further advised that the Canadian Dental Care Plan is expected to begin rolling out by the end of this year, and by 2025, the Canadian Dental Care Plan will be fully implemented to cover all uninsured Canadians with an annual family income under $90,000. This government remains committed to ensuring that Canadians can get access to quality dental care, which is important, colleagues, as we know, not only for oral health but for overall health. Thank you.

An Hon. Senator: Question.

Some Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Hon. the Speaker: Your time is up, Senator Gold.

[English]

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): Government leader, I hoped that the Trudeau government would have come to its senses by now and abandoned their changes to our passports, but they never, ever admit a mistake.

The Trudeau government has claimed that removing images of Canadian history from our passports occurred after 10 years of consultations. In June, you said it reflects the feedback the government heard from an extensive process of consultation. A written answer tabled in the other place indicates that this consultation, leader, was with four federal entities and through annual telephone surveys of passport holders. That’s it; that’s all.

Why did the Trudeau government mostly just consult with itself and decide it was okay to erase our history from Canada’s passports?

Hon. René Cormier: My question is for the Leader of the Government in the Senate. I would like to come back to the question that my colleague, Senator Carignan, asked yesterday in the Senate. The question had to do with the fact that senior officers at RCMP headquarters hold bilingual positions even if they don’t speak French or even have access to language training. In the media, a lawyer who specializes in language rights, Mark Power, thinks the Treasury Board needs to intervene to resolve this situation at RCMP headquarters.

My question is the following: What clear deadlines has the government set for drafting the necessary regulations and orders to fully implement the modernized version of the Official Languages Act?

The Hon. the Speaker: Are senators ready for the question?

An Hon. Senator: On division.

(On motion of Senator Martin, debate adjourned, on division.)

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Carignan, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Plett, for the second reading of Bill S-221, An Act to amend the Governor General’s Act (retiring annuity and other benefits).

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your question. I don’t believe you were implying that consulting Canadians through surveys on an ongoing basis was somehow not a worthwhile exercise or that the voices of individual Canadians should not count.

As I mentioned in this chamber, when passports are redesigned every 10 years or so, the images are changed. The governments of the day make their choices. It is simply not the case that the passport images — with which we have become familiar over the last 10 years and which many of us hold dear — necessarily reflected the full diversity of our history, and certainly not a history or an image of Canada in which increasing numbers of Canadians could see themselves. The decision to change those images was made in the light of the changes in our country and after consultation with Canadians.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you. I want to reassure this chamber regarding the matter raised yesterday concerning the RCMP. The Minister of Public Safety will be discussing it directly with the Commissioner of the RCMP. Although I don’t have the timelines you’re asking for regarding the regulations, I have been assured that the government is approaching this exercise with the seriousness it deserves and has been doing so since the bill received Royal Assent.

I want to specifically point out that the government is working with the Commissioner’s office to ensure that it has the resources needed to do its work. The government is also committed to adopting the regulations on Part VII of the Official Languages Act and to consulting Canadians to define what constitutes a strong francophone presence, in order to give concrete expression to the right to work and to be served in French. The government expects the RCMP to live up to this principle and to fill bilingual positions with bilingual staff.