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

The Government of Canada recognizes that many sectors of our economy, and many individuals within those sectors, are facing challenging times. We came out of the pandemic in pretty good shape compared to most other countries, but that doesn’t mean it didn’t take its toll. Businesses are still living with that, whether it is the shortage of materials, supply chain problems that still plague us or human resources issues.

That said, the Government of Canada — in its Fall Economic Statement and in all of its measures — is doing its best to find the right balance of prudent fiscal management in a time of economic contraction while still providing the support necessary. The Government of Canada continues to believe that its price on pollution is an appropriate policy measure.

It believes the rebates offered to Canadians, whether generally or in sectors, do in fact mitigate to some degree the effect of those.

Hon. Frances Lankin: Senator Gold, thank you for your speech. You raised a number of important considerations that we all need to take into account. I appreciate all the other contributors to the conversation tonight.

I am, on the one hand, very attracted by the amendment — and by the essence, goal and spirit behind our approach in this chamber of supporting equality measures; however, I’m very troubled by the points that you bring forward with respect to federal-provincial jurisdictional issues.

Having been in a provincial government and knowing when we railed against the feds for stepping into our territory, and knowing this is the exclusive jurisdiction of the provinces, I think that we may be in danger of doing what we believe from a policy perspective would improve the bill. But is that our job here from a policy perspective? If it could endanger the bill or its effectiveness, I want to know more.

Can you be more explicit about why this could be detrimental to the goal that we’re all expressing support for here in terms of Senator Cormier’s amendment? Are there other related examples, like health care — where the provinces deliver most of it, but it is a bit of a shared jurisdiction compared to others — or immigration or climate control agreements with the provinces, or is there something different about how this has been constructed? If this is different, tell us. If it is not different, then I may start to question supporting the amendment because maybe it’s just not our jurisdiction.

Hon. Renée Dupuis: Would Senator Gold agree to take a question?

Hon. Rose-May Poirier: Senator Gold, would you take another question?

The Hon. the Speaker: Would you take a supplementary question, Senator Gold?

[English]

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): For once, I will be very brief with my answer.

No, I have no alternatives to propose. The government is of the view that this amendment is unnecessary and inappropriate. Ultimately, we will soon put it to the vote and see. At least I hope that’s the case. Ultimately, it is up to us to decide. I’ve done my best to explain the government’s point of view. Ultimately, we will proceed with the vote. If the amendment passes, the House of Commons will consider it with the respect it typically gives our amendments, and we will see whether a message comes back or not. That’s all I can say. No, I have no alternative to propose.

[English]

Hon. Brent Cotter: Will Senator Gold take a question or two on this bill and the amendment?