Senator Martin: Yes, thank you for the added information. Truthfully, I am not an expert in any of these areas. But I am aware of the importance of the institutions and the timing of what happens.

You are right that it seems unfair. The fact that — had there been stronger funding from all levels — they would not have been in this situation. Thank you for adding that bit of information for the chamber.

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): Honourable senators, I rise once again to speak to Bill C-39, an act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying), as the official critic of the opposition.

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): Honourable senators, I rise once again to speak to Bill C-39, an act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying), as the official critic of the opposition.

As I stated in my second reading speech, medical assistance in dying has been and remains one of the most complex and deeply personal issues for individuals and families across the country. There is a wide range of valid opinions in this chamber on what the appropriate parameters and safeguards should be as we continue to grapple with these questions in further development of our MAID regime.

However, colleagues, I believe we have gone too far with the proposed expansion to include those with mental illness as a sole underlying medical condition. I think the introduction of Bill C-39 is evidence that we have moved too far, too quickly, and is an attempt to put a pause on a policy that we should be repealing altogether.

This is an emotional topic for so many of us, yet the facts and expert evidence need to remain paramount to this discussion. The stakes are too high.

While little has changed since I last spoke on Tuesday, I do want to touch on some of the exchanges that took place during Committee of the Whole yesterday.

Senator Batters, a tireless advocate for mental health, asked the ministers about their 2021 election platform’s promise to establish and fund the Canada mental health transfer — a commitment of $4.5 billion over five years. According to their own platform cost breakdown, as Senator Batters noted, they should have already invested $1.5 billion in mental health care. Yet, they have not invested a single dollar to date. The state of mental health care in Canada is tragic, particularly given what is proposed in this expansion.

Minister Duclos retorted with, “. . . not only are we not breaking that promise, but we are enhancing it.” I think we need to be wary of funding promises announced as achievements — enhanced as they might be — when struggling, vulnerable Canadians are still waiting for improved access to treatment.

A common theme in these debates, both in this chamber and in the special joint committee, is that it remains impossible to predict irremediability with any certainty. Yet, the ministers dismissed these concerns by stating that if there is any question as to the irremediability of the particular illness, then that individual will not get MAID. In practice, we cannot be certain that this is what will happen. Expanding MAID for mental illness still poses risks that people are receiving assisted suicide prematurely or wrongfully.

When Minister Lametti was asked about the profound lack of consensus and discomfort among psychiatric experts in Canada, he pointed to the expert panel assembled by his government — which, of course, was not appointed to study the merits of the expansion but to provide a road map. What we know with certainty is that psychiatrists do not agree that one can ever predict irremediability of a mental illness. There is no consensus on this matter.

Minister Lametti also attempted to discredit the statistics resulting from the surveys conducted by the Canadian Psychiatric Association and the Ontario Medical Association by stating that the questions were based on disinformation. Those surveys are publicly available, and the questions are clear and straightforward.

For example, the statistic that was referenced from the Canadian Psychiatric Association was the result of this question: Should persons whose sole underlying medical condition is a mental disorder be considered for eligibility for MAID? I do not believe this could be reasonably interpreted as disinformation.

Honourable senators, I asked the ministers about how they will address jurisdictional concerns. The National Assembly of Quebec, after wide consultation, tabled Bill 11 and ultimately decided not to allow MAID for mental illness. Minister Lametti acknowledged the lack of professional consensus in this area when asked about this decision. Unfortunately, he was not able to provide a clear answer on how they plan to handle this, how they can prevent cross-jurisdictional doctor shopping or which sets of guidelines Quebec clinicians will be expected to follow. Before we proceed with this expansion, it is imperative that our own Attorney General is clear on the jurisdictional considerations.

(1630)

Also, since I spoke on Tuesday, Senator Gold distributed the Gender-based Analysis Plus, or GBA Plus, which indicates what impact, if any, this legislation will have on women and other vulnerable groups. Senator Jaffer asked a question related to this to the ministers as well.

While this concern was raised by several witnesses at the special joint committee, I was shocked by the findings in this particular report, considering the fact that the analysis is provided by a government department. The GBA Plus states:

In the Benelux countries, where eligibility for MAID is not limited to those suffering physically, there have been controversial MAID deaths that have occurred, and it can be expected that similar cases would emerge in Canada under this option. For example, in the Netherlands, MAID was provided to a patient in her twenties who had been sexually abused as a child because of the emotional suffering she endured following the trauma. There have also been cases of transgender individuals and people who identify as gay obtaining MAID due to the suffering associated with those aspects of their conditions.

The government’s own department is suggesting we should see an uptick in these types of cases.

The analysis also states:

It can be expected that should MAID be made available in Canada for individuals whose sole underlying condition is mental illness, we would see an increase in women seeking MAID for psychiatric suffering, and at younger ages.

This is extremely troubling. As Senator Batters said when she raised this with the ministers yesterday, on International Women’s Day, “That’s hardly the kind of gender parity that we want.”

Honourable senators, how can the government ensure that a year from now we will have the necessary data, resources and safeguards in place to protect vulnerable Canadians struggling with mental illnesses from premature death? There is no evidence to indicate that the difficulties around such important issues as predicting irremediability and the inherent risk to vulnerable persons will be resolved in a year.

Colleagues, the idea of a mental health patient receiving MAID when the irremediability of their illness is subjective and open to interpretation troubles me greatly. We are debating the circumstances in which vulnerable Canadians live and die. The experts remain divided, yet this government is moving forward with an ideological decision that will undoubtedly put vulnerable lives at risk, and this is before a single dollar has been invested in their promised mental health plan.

The lives of Canadians battling mental illness are not disposable.

In spite of all these concerns, I will reluctantly be voting for Bill C-39. A delay of one year is clearly better than the alternative: a dangerous MAID expansion to happen next week. Thank you.

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): Honourable senators, I rise today to speak to Bill C-39, An Act to amend An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying), as the official opposition critic in the Senate.

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): Honourable senators, I rise today to speak to Bill C-39, An Act to amend An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying), as the official opposition critic in the Senate.

Medical assistance in dying, or MAID, has been and remains one of the most complex and deeply personal issues for individuals, families and for our nation. The issue of expanding MAID eligibility to those suffering from mental illnesses is deeply personal for me as well, as I know individuals who have suffered and are living with complex mental illnesses, and I have witnessed first-hand what they and their families must endure in the process of finding the right treatments and solutions. Every case is unique. Assessments and effective treatments may take a long time, even decades, but I am grateful that MAID was never an option in their darkest hours, as it will be for others within a year’s time with the passage of C-39. Bill C-39 extends the exclusion of eligibility for receiving MAID in circumstances where the sole underlying medical condition identified is a mental illness until March 17, 2024 — a one-year delay from what is set out in the current law.

Bill C-7 expanded the eligibility for MAID to persons whose natural death is not reasonably foreseeable. Originally, the bill excluded eligibility to receive MAID in circumstances in which mental illness was the sole underlying medical condition. However, Senator Kutcher introduced an amendment at third reading to expand MAID to those with mental illnesses as a sole underlying condition, which was adopted with majority support in this chamber. The government accepted this amendment, and the law that was ultimately passed included a sunset clause date of March 17, 2023. This would mean that MAID for those suffering from mental illness would become legal next week unless we adopt the government’s eleventh-hour legislation, Bill C-39, to delay the expansion for one year.

With the expansion, Canada will become one of only four countries — including Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands — in the entire world to allow MAID for some of the most vulnerable people in our society. Canada becoming a leader in the world in our rapid expansion of MAID is not something most Canadians would want Canada to be known for, in my opinion.

As honourable senators are aware, I served as joint chair of the Special Joint Committee on Medical Assistance in Dying, along with Liberal Member of Parliament Marc Garneau and with senators in this chamber who have already been named. The committee recently tabled our final report after examining several topics and issues involving MAID. The issue of expanding MAID to those with mental illnesses as a sole underlying medical condition was studied in the interim report tabled in June 2022. It was a difficult subject matter then, and it remains difficult as we debate C-39 today.

The committee held 36 meetings in total, heard from close to 150 witnesses and received more than 350 briefs and submissions. We heard compelling and emotional testimony from mental health patients, patient advocates, scientists, psychiatrists, MAID assessors and providers and other mental health professionals. There was a wide range of views brought forward debating the science, ethics, practicality and readiness for this proposal. The witnesses on all sides of the issue were passionate and informative. The overarching takeaway, however, was that there is no medical or scientific consensus at this time on the concept of MAID for mental illnesses. Many of those who were in favour of this expansion acknowledged that we are not ready to proceed and recommended further delay of this expansion.

In fact, in December 2022, even the Association of Chairs of Psychiatry in Canada, which includes the heads of psychiatry departments at all 17 medical schools, issued a statement raising concerns about the looming March 17, 2023, deadline and the lack of readiness for this expansion to take place safely and reliably, calling on the Liberal government to extend the sunset clause for MAID MD-SUMC.

As reported in the National Post on December 15, 2022:

. . . a lack of public education on suicide prevention as well as an agreed-upon definition of irremediability, or at what point someone will not be able to recover, are important, unresolved issues.

“Further time is required to increase awareness of this change and establish guidelines and standards to which clinicians, patients and the public can turn to for more education and information.”

When we are discussing policy proposals in which the cost of getting it wrong is wrongful or unnecessary death, why would we even consider moving forward without overwhelming consensus among experts?

As Dr. Sonu Gaind, former president of the Canadian Psychiatric Association told our committee:

. . . our law does not say grievous and irremediable conditions are determined by an ethical decision. It should be a scientific decision.

The government did establish an expert panel to study MAID and mental illness as a sole underlying medical condition. However, this panel was created after the passage of the sunset clause and the members were not asked to consider whether Canada was ready, whether it is possible to do this safely or whether there was scientific consensus to justify this expansion. The expert panel was tasked with presenting recommendations on implementation. The work of the expert panel should not be misconstrued as expert consensus. In fact, even the panel’s final report indicated that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to predict irremediability with mental disorders.

(1650)

This view — the inability to predict irremediability — was a concern raised by several experts. If we do not have certainty of irremediability as a safeguard in our MAID regime, what meaningful safeguards against premature death do we really have?

Dr. Mark Sinyor, a professor of psychiatry, told the joint committee:

In physician-assisted death for sole mental illness, we have no numbers at all. Neither we nor our patients would have any idea how often our judgments of irremediability are simply wrong. This is completely different from MAID applied for end-of-life situations or for progressive and incurable neurological illnesses, where clinical prediction of irremediability is based in evidence.

In the context of physician-assisted death for sole mental illness, life or death decisions will be made based on hunches and guesswork that could be wildly inaccurate. The uncertainties and potential for mistakes in mental illness are enormous and, therefore, the ethical imperative to study harms in advance of legislation is accordingly immense.

Sean Krausert, Executive Director of the Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention, pointed out that a patient’s treatment refusal does not equal irremediability, as well as that when it comes to mental illness, irremediability must remain objective. He stated:

MAID should not be provided to patients suffering from a condition that does not have reasonable foreseeability of death, unless there is clear scientific evidence that the condition is irremediable. Irremediability must always be objective and never subjective. There is no evidence that concludes that mental illness falls into this category.

Our joint committee continued its work through the fall sitting of Parliament, hearing from more witnesses on this topic, and raising more questions than answers.

Dr. John Maher, a clinical psychiatrist and medical ethicist who appeared before the committee, said:

Psychiatrists don’t know and can’t know who will get better and live decades of good life. Brain diseases are not liver diseases.

Honourable senators, the idea of a mental health patient receiving MAID when the irremediability of their illness is subjective, and open to interpretation, troubles me greatly. Canadians share this concern. According to a recent national Angus Reid poll, although Canadians agree with MAID generally, only 31% agree with MAID for irremediable mental illness. We can only imagine how much that number would drop if Canadians were asked if they would support MAID for mental illness in cases where experts disagree on the irremediability.

Concerns were also raised at committee about the inability to distinguish between suicidality and requests for MAID. It is indisputable that mental health services in Canada are grossly insufficient. According to the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, only half of Canadians experiencing a major depressive episode receive “potentially adequate care.” One third of Canadians aged 15 or older who report having a need for mental health care say those needs have not been met. Seventy-five per cent of children with mental disorders do not have access to specialized treatment services. Aboriginal youth are about five to six times more likely to die by suicide than non-Aboriginal youth. Suicide rates for Inuit youth are among the highest in the world — at 11 times the national average.

These are very troubling statistics, and, based on the Indigenous witnesses at committee — who also expressed their deep concerns about the impact of MAID on their communities, particularly on Indigenous youth — we know that more consultations are needed, and careful attention must be given to safe and appropriate MAID expansion for Indigenous communities.

We know that one of the symptoms of many mental illnesses is the wish to die, and, yet, before the government has honoured their funding commitments to improve mental health care, they are moving forward with a policy that will offer assisted death. How can we be certain that we are providing mental health patients with a fair and honest choice? How can we be certain that feelings of suicidality associated with mental illness are not a factor in the request for MAID? As many experts told the joint committee, we cannot.

Sean Krausert noted that he likely would have chosen MAID in his “darkest days” of depression and anxiety, and now he has a rich life with successful medication and therapy. Similarly, Dr. Georgia Vrakas, a psychologist and professor, said:

In this context, giving people like me the green light to get medical assistance in dying is a clear signal of disengagement from mental illness. It sends the message that there is no hope and that we are disposable.

Colleagues, on February 2, the Honourable David Lametti, Minister of Justice, tabled Bill C-39 just weeks away from the March 17 deadline. Bill C-39 gives a one-year extension for mental illness as a sole underlying condition for MAID. But how can the government ensure that a year from now we will have the necessary answers, resources and safeguards in place to protect some of our most vulnerable people? There is no evidence to indicate that the difficulties around important issues, such as predicting irremediability and the inherent risk to vulnerable persons, will be resolved in a year.

The Liberal government has created Bill C-39 to attempt to fix the problems they created with their rushed approach to Canada’s MAID regime, but this is not an acceptable solution.

I will, reluctantly, support Bill C-39 because, without it, MAID for those with a mental illness as a sole underlying medical condition will be legal in 10 days. It is my sincere hope that this year will give parliamentarians a chance to pause and seriously reflect on the direction we are going. We would be proceeding with legislation with life-and-death consequences before we have any meaningful evidence to justify doing so. Canada is on track to be one of the jurisdictions referenced in other countries as a dangerous example.

Honourable senators, we have an opportunity to listen to the experts, and exercise the caution that this delicate issue requires. I hope many of you will join me in supporting my colleague in the House of Commons MP Ed Fast, and his private member’s bill, Bill C-314, which provides that the term “grievous and irremediable medical condition” — contained in Canada’s MAID regime — will not include mental disorders.

All policy should be based on evidence, and I cannot imagine a more crucial example than the policy around the MAID regime. I will question Minister Lametti tomorrow during Committee of the Whole on how he will ensure that the proper safeguards will be in place, and how concerns raised by experts and advocates will be fully addressed — or perhaps to re-evaluate expanding MAID if concerns remain within the year ahead.

I also look forward to working with my Conservative colleagues over the next year to put a stop to any dangerous expansion, and protect our most vulnerable Canadians.

Thank you.

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the government leader in the Senate.

On this Agriculture Day in Canada, it concerns a matter of importance for many of our farmers. It’s been almost a year since the Trudeau government imposed a 35% tariff on fertilizer imports from Russia, including fertilizer that had been ordered long before Vladimir Putin’s illegal war in Ukraine began. This tariff has punished Canadian farmers, as about $34 million has been collected by the Trudeau government.

Leader, in December, the Atlantic Grains Council, the Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario, the Grain Farmers of Ontario, the Grain Growers of Quebec and the Ontario Bean Growers jointly asked that this money be refunded to the farmers who paid it. What is the Trudeau government’s response to this request?

Senator Martin: Transparency is one of the many serious problems with the Canada Infrastructure Bank. For example, it was revealed late last year that the $1.7‑billion Lake Erie Connector project had actually been cancelled in July. However, if you check the Canada Infrastructure Bank’s website today, you can still see a press release announcing this project. There have been no answers to legitimate questions surrounding the awarding of Canada Infrastructure Bank contracts to McKinsey, which has extensive ties to this bank from its creation to this day, and now we have what looks like a mostly internal review process. So, leader, why is there so much secrecy surrounding this process? Could you tell us if the contract given to McKinsey by the Canada Infrastructure Bank will be part of the five-year review?

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): My question also concerns the Canada Infrastructure Bank. In fact, it is legislated for a five-year review. Minister LeBlanc is required to bring forward a report to Parliament by the end of June.

(1450)

According to documents obtained through Access to Information and Privacy and released last week by the Canadian Union of Public Employees, this review began in June 2022 but has had no public engagement and no public information on the process being followed. Yesterday, a senior official from Infrastructure Canada told our National Finance Committee that they have opened some public consultation.

Leader, could you tell us when this consultation began and if it’s still open? Were all Canadians invited to comment or just those groups and individuals chosen by the Trudeau government?

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): Leader, British Columbia’s world-famous wine industry has been hurt by the pandemic, supply chain issues and increased costs brought on by record inflation. As of April 1, the federal alcohol excise tax will automatically increase by 6.3%.

Last fall, Miles Prodan, the CEO of Wine Growers British Columbia, stated:

. . . we don’t see an opportunity for that excise escalator to decrease ever. It’ll just keep adding and adding and adding. So we think we should be exempt.

Leader, what is your response to growers in the Okanagan Valley and all across British Columbia who are concerned by what this upcoming tax increase will mean to their bottom line?

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): Honourable senators, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the second report of the Special Joint Committee on Medical Assistance in Dying entitled Medical Assistance in Dying in Canada: Choices for Canadians.

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): Honourable senators, I rise today to highlight two important milestone anniversaries in this banner year for Canada and Korea. This year, 2023, is the sixtieth anniversary of Canada‑Korea diplomatic relations, which was celebrated in January at a special event hosted by His Excellency Woongsoon Lim at the Embassy of the Republic of Korea. It was the first of many special events that the embassy will organize over the course of this year.

Canada’s relationship with the people of the “Land of Morning Calm” is over a century in the making, beginning with missionaries like Frank Schofield, a Canadian veterinarian and Protestant missionary. His support of the Korean people during the March First Movement for Korean independence from the Japanese empire sowed the seeds of a friendship that would grow and blossom between our two peoples. Canada would once again stand with Korea when Communist forces declared war against the South Korean people in 1950. Over 26,000 Canadians would serve in South Korea, sacrificing their youth and lives.

As a result of the war, 516 Canadians made the ultimate sacrifice, and nearly 400 Canadians are buried in the United Nations Memorial Cemetery in Busan, South Korea.

On July 27, we will commemorate the seventieth anniversary of the signing of the armistice. Korea would not be the country it is today, and we would not be celebrating the sixtieth anniversary of diplomatic relations between our two countries if it were not for our brave men and women who served and sacrificed during the Korean War.

Not surprisingly, our bilateral relationship has grown from a shared concern over defence to incorporate trade and people-to-people linkages as well. On March 11, 2014, in Seoul, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and President Park Geun-hye of South Korea announced Canada’s first and only free trade agreement in the Asia-Pacific region — the Canada-Korea Free Trade Agreement.

Canada and Korea’s people-to-people ties have grown exponentially in recent years, enhanced by increasing immigration and tourism flows, as well as business investments and joint ventures. South Korea has also long been and continues to be one of Canada’s top source countries of international students. Nearly a quarter million Canadians identify themselves as being of Korean origin. And over 27,000 Canadians currently reside in South Korea, including about 3,200 English language teachers.

Canada and the Republic of Korea are more than just two aligned international actors. Through sacrifice, understanding and mutual respect, our two nations have become more than friends; we are partners and allies. Please join me, honourable senators, in recognizing this banner year of Canada-Korea relations.

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the government leader in the Senate.

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada has given McKinsey & Company consultants contracts worth $24.5 million for so-called management advice. A public servant with this department told Radio-Canada last month:

We had a few presentations on very generic, completely vapid stuff. They arrived with nice colours, nice presentations and said they would revolutionize everything . . . In the end, we don’t have any idea what they did . . .

Leader, the wait times and backlog in this department in recent years are arguably the worst ever. Why did the Trudeau government give McKinsey millions of taxpayer dollars when whatever advice it was providing to the immigration department was obviously not working?

Senator Martin: This report also shows that, while the number of drug-impaired driving incidents increased, the number of active officers trained as drug recognition experts — speaking of testing — has decreased. There were 68 fewer of these officers across Canada in 2021 compared to the previous year.

Leader, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, capacity limits were placed on the number of officers that could be trained at certification events.

Could you make inquiries and let us know if the capacity limits have been lifted? What will your government do to ensure more officers receive this training, and are active in communities across our country?

Senator Martin: Leader, there are well over 2 million applications caught in the backlog at Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada. Today, according to the government’s own website, the application processing time for a skilled tradesperson seeking entry to Canada is 70 months.

Despite the massive backlog and little evidence Canadians are getting good value for money spent on the McKinsey contracts, the Trudeau government revised an immigration department contract during the pandemic to give McKinsey even more money.

Leader, could you tell us why your government believed McKinsey deserved extra money from Canadian taxpayers for a job done so poorly?

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): Leader, Public Safety Canada recently released its annual report on trends and patterns in drug-impaired driving. It shows that police reported 7,454 drug-impaired driving incidents in 2021 — an almost 60% increase in such incidents since 2018 when cannabis was legalized.

The report shows that daily cannabis users are more likely to think cannabis use does not impair driving. Only 25% of Canadians believe it is very likely they will get caught if they drive under the influence of cannabis.

The report points to a B.C. study published last year in the New England Journal of Medicine which showed that people injured while driving under the influence of drugs had higher THC levels in their blood since legalization.

Leader, many concerns that honourable senators have raised during our study of Bill C-45 and Bill C-46 have come to pass. How does your government respond to the report’s findings?

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): Thank you, minister. The mandate letter of your colleague Minister Freeland says that you are to assist her with the creation of a career extension tax credit of up to $1,650 for seniors. As you know, that was a promise your government made in the 2021 federal election campaign. Many were expecting to see it in last year’s budget; instead, it only contained a promise to engage with experts on the role this tax credit could play in boosting the labour force participation of seniors who want to continue working later in life.

Minister, since Budget 2022, have you engaged with experts on the creation of this tax credit, and, if so, who did you meet with? Did formal consultations with stakeholders take place? If not, why not? If so, were you involved? What is the current status of this promise to our seniors?

Hon. Yonah Martin: Minister, this question also comes from a senior living on a fixed income with his partner in downtown St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador. It recently cost about $1,000 to fill his oil tank. As of July 1, the Trudeau government’s carbon tax will drive up home heating oil by over $0.17 a litre, and at $2.03 per litre, a standard tank of 900 litres will cost about $1,800 — $800 more. Your government’s programs for home renovation and energy switches make it hard to improve old houses, which the programs want to make impossibly perfect. This senior cannot apply for those programs as his home cannot be brought into line with your government’s energy standards.

Minister, there is a saying: “Let not perfection be the enemy of good.” What are you going to do to advocate for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians caught in this situation who will soon have to pay a lot more to heat their homes?

As I said before, 8 out of 10 households will get more money back than they do currently. If there are any increases as a result of a price on pollution, that money — and, in many cases, more money — will be refunded back to them. That is how it will work.

Let’s not forget that the reality of the situation right now is that there is already a tax applied, and it goes to the general revenue of the province.

Hon. Yonah Martin: Minister, last week the Canadian Union of Brewery and General Workers sent a letter to the Prime Minister and Minister Freeland regarding the 6.3% inflation-based increase in federal beer taxes scheduled to automatically go into effect on April 1. The letter reads, in part:

We are headed into a recession. The Federal Government must avoid making the situation worse. It cannot rigidly stick to policies that raise prices and fuels higher inflation, which is exactly what raising federal beer taxes by 6.3 per cent will do.

Minister, what do you have to say to the 350 unionized workers employed at the Molson-Coors brewery in Toronto who may be very nervous about the security of their jobs due to the Trudeau government’s high tax policies? How does a massive increase to this tax help Canadians working in the brewing and alcohol beverage sectors keep their jobs?

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): Minister, oil and gas industry proponents have been asking for a 75% investment tax credit from the federal government in order to spur investment in carbon capture and storage technologies, which would reduce upfront capital costs involved in constructing this critical technology. However, your government’s announcement fell short, promising only a 50% tax credit. Many in the industry have stated that the size of the credit means that many of these planned projects will not go forward.

Minister, given the impact this technology could have on emissions reduction, does it concern you that many of these projects may now not go ahead?

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): Senator Gold, last week we learned that Canada’s new Arctic patrol ship HMCS Harry DeWolf will be out of service until April 2023 because of ongoing mechanical problems. Additionally, a second Arctic and offshore parole ship, HMSC Max Bernays, was accepted in September from Irving Shipbuilding despite a known problem with one of the vessel’s manoeuvring systems. The repairs for Max Bernays will be covered under warranty by Irving. However, those of Harry DeWolf will be made at taxpayers’ expense.

Leader, how much is the bill that taxpayers will be footing for these repairs?

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): Honourable senators, on behalf of the opposition and the Senate Conservative caucus, I am pleased to rise in this chamber to welcome our new colleagues, the Honourable Sharon Burey and the Honourable Rebecca Louise Patterson.

Let me begin by welcoming you and thanking you both for your previous service to the public through your respective professions.

Senator Burey, as a pediatrician in Ontario for more than 30 years, you have dedicated much of your professional life to helping and serving others. You also have dedicated your career “to equality, and to justice for those living in poverty, visible minorities, and other marginalized communities.”

According to the Windsor Star, your appointment was widely celebrated by Windsorites, as you are the first senator from Windsor in 40 years. As a senator, you will undoubtedly give voice to Windsorites as well as to your constituents beyond your region and continue your advocacy work in various ways.

Senator Patterson, I wish to thank you for your service in the Canadian Armed Forces. You have served in uniform in various leadership roles, particularly as a:

. . . Defence Champion for Women, and the first person with a military nursing background to ever lead at the rank of Flag (General) Officer.

Senator Patterson, I am uplifted and, undoubtedly, so are members of the Canadian Armed Forces to see that you will be representing them in this esteemed chamber. I trust that your past experiences and expertise uniquely position you to fight for our courageous military heroes with passion, as they deserve the highest recognition and representation.

Senators Burey and Patterson, I am truly pleased to extend to you both a very warm welcome to the Senate of Canada.

(1420)

As I’ve stated before, Canadians have increasingly been looking at the Senate not just for sober second thought and due diligence, they have been looking at the Senate for hope — hope that their voices are heard, that their concerns become ours and that together this chamber ensures the best path forward for everyone across our beautiful country. As parliamentarians, it is our duty to work and fight to represent the voices of all Canadians here in Ottawa. With your backgrounds and experience, Senator Patterson and Senator Burey, I believe you are well predisposed to do just that.

My colleagues and I look forward to working in collaboration with you both. On behalf of the opposition, and the Conservative caucus, I want to warmly welcome you to the Senate of Canada.

Senator Martin: Thank you for that.

Aside from the burden this will impose on taxpayers, it poses a much deeper issue, namely, Canada’s lack of military readiness, specifically in the Arctic. The Trudeau government’s total incompetence on military procurement leaves both us and our allies, who are looking to us to defend the North against rogue states like Russia and China, in a vulnerable position.

Senator Gold, Conservatives have asked this many times, but I will ask it again: When will the Trudeau government finally start taking our defence of the Arctic seriously?