Senator Gold: Those are fair questions. Thank you for that.

The short answer to the latter part of the question is that the government sought a three-month extension, which was granted by the court yesterday in the latter part of the day. My office was informed of it midday today, and the first thing I did — as some of you would know, and I hope you shared it with your colleagues — was I spoke to all the leaders to inform them, and I also called Senator Dennis Patterson, who was the one who had raised this first. At the time he raised the question, I did not know that the government had sought an extension, and I still don’t know exactly when they made that decision.

But I can state with some confidence that when a request for such an extension is made, it does not come with an automatic date for the hearing, much less certainty of the conclusion. I strongly believe the government acted responsibly, as the deadline was approaching, to seek an extension — and they got it — in the event that circumstances in the other place, which are not always smooth sailing, were such that they couldn’t get it to us in time, or, indeed, whenever they could get it to us, we would not have time or the will to move quickly.

In that regard, I do also want to remind senators and thank them because when we did get the bill, and it was introduced in this place, I asked all leaders and all senators to study it properly, as we did — and we improved it — and to do so with dispatch so it could be sent back to the House before we rose for the summer.

Why did I ask that? Because the deadline was known, and I thought it was only appropriate that we give the House of Commons the equivalent amount of time to study the bill that we chose to take to do it. We didn’t rush our study, and they, as it turns out, spent less time on the bill than we were able to devote to it.

The only point of difference, Senator Plett, that I would take with your question — because it’s a fair question — is I don’t think we’re being asked to rush this. I think that our committee did tremendous work. Earlier in the week I circulated both to leadership and to all senators a high-level summary of the amendments that were accepted, tweaked and introduced in the other place.

We’re here on a Thursday. It’s 3:30 p.m. We have plenty of time for each and every senator to take the floor and debate it. I continue to hope that we will conclude the debate, send it for Royal Assent and complete the work that we began and that we began so well.

Thank you.

Senator Gold: Of course.

Senator Gold: Thank you, colleague.

As you know, the government has already implemented Canada’s first anti-racism strategy and is building on those efforts to develop a new strategy that includes an anti-hate action plan. This strategy is supported by close to $200 million in funding.

I don’t have a date for the launch of the national action plan, but the government has always been committed to supporting 2SLGBTQI+ communities and will always stand against hate.

Senator Gold: I will certainly inquire as to the status of the thinking of the government in this regard. Again, it is important that our public policy strike the right balance to support the charitable sector, but also to be appropriate in all other respects. I have every confidence that is the goal of the government.

Senator Gold: Of course.

Senator Gold: I apologize. Yes, they did. They sought and received a three-month extension.

I’m sorry if I wasn’t clear on that.

Senator Gold: Senator, I will read from the directive:

Chaplains shall endeavour to ensure that all feel included and able to participate in the reflection . . . no matter their beliefs . . . .

This is not banning prayer. To continue to suggest otherwise is not true and, indeed, insulting to those who would like to see their faiths and beliefs reflected in these important public pronunciations.

Senator Gold: The government supports grain farmers. They do important, noble work on all of our behalf.

The fact that the government has a position that is different in a bill that uses its right — our right as senators — to seek to improve bills is something that is totally appropriate, and the government makes no apologies for doing that.

Senator Gold: Again, Senator Marshall, I do not have the answer to that question, but it’s a legitimate one. I will certainly make inquiries so that I better understand the situation.

[Translation]

Senator Cormier: Thank you, senator Gold. It is a health issue and a matter of urgency, as you can understand.

Last Tuesday, October 17, 10 senators rose in this place to speak out against the growing hate targeting 2SLGBTQI+ communities, especially the trans community. Most of these senators urged the government to move forward with the development of the national anti-hate action plan announced in Budget 2023.

Senator Gold, when will this action plan finally be tabled?

Senator Gold: It’s a very good question. I will answer the question, and then I will comment.

I don’t know exactly what measures might be taken going forward, whether it’s by the federal government, the Crowns or those responsible for the administration of justice. It is still the case — notwithstanding that the committee deleted the amendment — that victims and witnesses are informed of the nature of publication bans and procedures. I’ll certainly make inquiries. It’s an important question for the simple reason that it’s one thing for some of us — when provided with such information — to know how to navigate it. It’s not always obvious to others either because of the circumstances or the stress they are under, or their lack of access to the kind of resources that some of us are more privileged to have.

It’s a fair question, and it’s the government’s position that the objective of this was laudable. But there were concerns that were raised in the other place. I believe it was unanimous, Senator Pate — all members of the committee voted to delete it. I’ll certainly do some follow-up to find out what, if anything, is being done, and to bring forward your preoccupations — which I’m sure you will also continue to advance — to the attention of the relevant minister.

Senator Plett: I have a brief follow-up question. You’re right, Senator Gold; you called us all at noon. We let our critic know, but, clearly, in light of time, we didn’t let everybody know, although you told me very clearly you would be addressing it in the chamber, so everybody would know before we got to a vote. I thank you for that.

My question is — and you answered part of it — you said they sought a three-month extension. Did they get a three-month extension?

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your question.

It is the position of the Government of Canada that it has both the interest and the right to take positions on legislation that is before the House or the Senate. This government does so. The vote in the other house reflects quite clearly some preoccupations that the government had with that private member’s bill. Although a handful of members of the governing party voted for it, a great majority did not.

The Government Representative Office in the Senate, just as the office of the opposition, has the right to send ex officio members to committees. We do so when we are advised that our counterpart attends. We were advised that would be the case, and we went there to listen to the debate and to express our views. In the first instance, my colleague abstained on an amendment in question. It passed nonetheless.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your question. It’s an important one.

The government has taken a public health approach to the regulation of cannabis. That was the hallmark of the legislation we passed in this chamber some years ago. The government, in terms of its responsibility, along with provinces and others, is disseminating clear, factual evidence and information to users and potential users as to the health risks, the potency of the products, their composition, the provenance and so on. In that way, Canadians of all ages are able to make informed choices as to whether they should consume, what they should consume and when they should consume.

The government will continue to make available public information to continue to educate and inform Canadians about cannabis. It supports and plays a role in a national dialogue about the health and safety of these products.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Well, it pleases no one, including the Government of Canada, I assume, and certainly not this office, to be reminded that the Government of Canada is not doing a better job. One thing we can say with certainty is that the performance of the government will not be blamed on your persistence —

[Translation]

 — and I commend you for it —

[English]

— in raising these questions in the chamber.

I am not going to speculate about the different ability, capacity and scope of — or challenges faced by — the federal government vis-à-vis smaller jurisdictions, but I will certainly bring this, although they are already aware of it, to the attention of the government and implore them to do better.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for the question. It is very important. Thank you also for your ongoing work on behalf of 2SLGBTQI+ communities.

I made inquiries with the government, colleague, but I have not yet received an answer, unfortunately.

What I can say is that the government has been very clear when it comes to human rights. The government doesn’t choose; it is there for all Canadians, regardless of who they are. The government will always stand with the 2SLGBTQI+ communities.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Every time I try to explain the multitude of factors that unfortunately contribute to the challenges facing Canadians — not just the poor, but also an increasing number of middle-class families — the government is accused of being irresponsible.

The government is doing its part to help Canadians who need help. It is encouraging producers and supply chain companies to ensure that price increases stop, and the hope is that we will see lower prices and other support programs for Canadian families who are struggling as a result of the rising cost of living.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for the question. The Government of Canada is doing everything it can to reduce wait times, eliminate processing backlogs and welcome more newcomers to Canada.

I am told that the government processed approximately 5.2 million applications, twice as many as the year before, and was able to restore the 60-day service standard for new study permit applications. That was made possible thanks to the digitization of applications, the hiring of additional staff and the streamlining of the application process.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your question, as well as for underlining this and for your work in ensuring that we have a robust sector that is supported not only by Canadians but by public policy as well. However, without the contribution of those supported by the charitable sector, so much of what we take for granted in Canada could not be accomplished, especially in these tough times.

I have not been advised as to what the plans of the government are with regard to that, but I will certainly take your preoccupations and legitimate concerns to the attention of the minister.

Hon. Leo Housakos: Senator Gold, over the last two years, your government paid a company called GC Strategies over $164 million for IT work. It is the same company responsible for the $54-million ArriveCAN app. This company has two owners but no employees. Neither of those two owners do any IT work. They subcontract all the work, and, of course, that’s a practice that allows the government to hide key information from public scrutiny.

Senator Gold, who in the Trudeau government made the decision to hire this company? Who in your government thought that the height of the pandemic was the time to go with a small, unproven company — with no employees and no expertise — to develop an app that you keep describing as being so pivotal in the government’s response to COVID? To which members of the Trudeau government are these insiders connected?