Hon. Marilou McPhedran: Hello. Tansi. As a senator for Manitoba, I acknowledge that I live on Treaty 1 territory, the traditional lands of the Anishinaabe, Cree, Oji-Cree, Dakota and Dene peoples, and the homeland of the Métis Nation. I also want to acknowledge that the Parliament of Canada is situated on unceded and unsurrendered Algonquin Anishinaabe territory.

[English]

Honourable senators, today I rise in support of Bill S-243, An Act to enact the Climate-Aligned Finance Act and to make related amendments to other Acts. Senator Galvez has advised that her bill is complementary to our government’s current action plan, the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act — serving the dual purpose of addressing barriers to achieving our climate crisis commitments and protecting our nation’s financial system from climate-related risks.

Just days ago, we learned of the dubious distinction of the Senate’s banker, the Royal Bank of Canada, or RBC, leaping ahead of J.P. Morgan into the top spot as the biggest financier of the fossil fuel industry. The annual Banking on Climate Chaos report by the Rainforest Action Network — endorsed by 624 organizations from 75 countries — found that RBC funded fossil fuel companies in 2022 to the extent of $42.1 billion, including $4.8 billion for tar sands.

Also, the updated list of the top 10 such financiers includes another Canadian Big Five: Scotiabank. The study found that Canadian banks have provided $862 billion — that’s C$1.13 trillion — to fossil fuel companies since Canada signed the Paris Agreement.

Climate breakdown is claiming the livelihood and lives of millions globally. Vulnerable communities and — to use Senator McCallum’s term in her bill on environmental racism — “vulnerable environments” are disproportionately impacted negatively by climate change. Through her bill, Senator Galvez encourages the consideration of vulnerable communities and ecosystems, and sets particular safeguards for Indigenous communities. Although Indigenous people have contributed the least to this ever-growing problem, they face some of its worst consequences.

Northern communities are in the forefront of the assault of climate change. Melting ice caps and permafrost affect traditional food sources while driving up the costs of imported alternatives, and increase the risk to humans and wildlife. Food security continues to deteriorate, especially in isolated communities. The effects of climate change are not uniform in impact; however, one constant remains: Climate changes brought to our land, our water and our weather systems imperil long-established ways of life.

In other words, the climate crisis threatens ecosystems and human rights. Honouring our climate commitments means more than not exacerbating or contributing to the effects of climate change. It also means respecting human rights, including the rights of Indigenous peoples set out in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The declaration states that Indigenous peoples have the right to the conservation and protection of traditionally owned lands which hold strong spiritual and cultural significance.

The declaration also states that countries must recognize the contribution of Indigenous knowledge when formulating sustainable and equitable protection of our environment.

In line with this, Bill S-243 allows for the integration of the Indigenous perspective into decision making in two distinct ways: First, it proposes that certain boards of directors, including Crown corporations, have climate expertise — having knowledge of Indigenous ways of life and ways of being qualifies a person for this position. Second, it requires reporting on implementation to enable the cooperation between the Bank of Canada and representatives of Indigenous peoples.

Honourable colleagues, positive advancements toward a cleaner future are in the new Canadian action plan. These include increasing the price of carbon to $50 per tonne and facilitating the transition to electric vehicles.

These infrastructure investments are essential to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 40% to 45% below 2005 levels by 2030, crucial steps along Canada’s path to net-zero emissions by 2050.

This goal can only be attained if decarbonization takes place across all sectors and industries. After all, the effects of decarbonization in one sector can easily be offset by emissions in another. The current action plan fails to address this elephant in the room — the identification and restriction of investments into high-emission activities.

These investments not only put our financial system at risk with millions of dollars worth of capital invested into this unpredictable sector, but they also contribute to the negative impacts of climate change.

If only the more than $1 trillion of Canadian funds had been invested by our big banks into decarbonization.

As the United Nations body for assessing the science related to climate change, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or the IPCC, issued its sixth assessment report in February 2023 with the unequivocal conclusion that fossil fuels must be made extinct and never revived. The IPCC is clear: To stay below 1.5 degrees of warming as called for in the Paris Agreement, we need to slash CO2 emissions by 45% in the next seven years — by 2030.

Colleagues, in the best sense of the call from the Inter‑Parliamentary Union for parliamentarians to become champions for legislative initiatives to make real changes that will mitigate the damage of climate change, Senator Galvez has given us a substantive opportunity to be changemakers by supporting and facilitating this bill, which has gained international attention in finance circles worldwide.

In last year’s report, Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change, the IPCC highlighted that investments in high‑emitting infrastructure would act as a barrier to achieving Canada’s greenhouse gas reduction goals. Funding and subsequent development of green technology may be hitting record heights, but high-emission sectors continue to thrive and undercut progress being made. In other words, the default setting in our current legislative approach prioritizes the traditional polluting economy. Climate commitments are still on the back burner.

When thinking critically of Canada’s progress, we must be wary of greenwashing. For example, the thirteenth edition of the annual Banking on Climate Chaos report noted that investors in the tar sands increased their financing by 51%. That same year, however, these banks had vowed to become net zero by 2050, as they vow year after year.

One of the key goals of the act is to address the disconnect between financial institutions’ net-zero pronouncements and their continuing investments into high-carbon industries. Have no doubt: This bill will enhance accountability of the reporting entities which are subject to the act.

Colleagues, you may be quietly wondering why an engineer and a human rights lawyer think they are qualified to assess our economic system. Let me encourage you to recast that question, because our economic system is exacerbating our planet’s climate crisis. Indeed, if you are quietly questioning the qualifications of an engineer and a human rights lawyer, let’s add to that list a dentist with Senator McCallum’s bill on environmental racism.

We’re qualified because we’re mothers and grandmothers and global citizens and senators.

New voices must be heard in the financial world — voices from the world not insulated by wealth. Finance leaders in the financial system have lost touch with the reality of a planet with limits we must respect in order for human life — all our lives, colleagues, and those of our generations to come — to flourish.

This bill follows the money, addressing the reality of financial choices that wound Mother Earth and reduce capacity to sustain life. Abstracted numbers on a balance sheet help financial leaders to ignore crucial dimensions of the value of life on this planet.

The Greek root of the word “economy,” oikos and nomos — with all due apology to Senator Housakos if I have mispronounced those terms — literally translates as “good household management.” In this time of multiple crises where we have not managed our global household all that well, it is high time that divergent outside voices come to be heard by those who hold the reins of our collective purse — the select, highly paid, elite few who control billions of public and private dollars who seem to be having difficulty grasping the reality that our shared future is in peril now.

This bill rightly recognizes what experts in the scientific community have been saying for a long time. This climate crisis is unconstrained by geographic boundaries. This means that Canadian reporting entities have to account for their causally linked emissions wherever they occur.

As occupants of positions in the top 10 of fossil fuel funders, the Royal Bank of Canada and Scotiabank have demonstrated how Canadian financial institutions are investing globally and that what they do abroad is just as important as what they do within Canada.

This bill defines an entity that is aligned with climate commitments as one that respects the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The bill does not restrict the definition of Indigenous peoples to Canadians, meaning that the rights of Indigenous peoples have to be respected wherever they are.

This bill is as science-based as it is equity-based.

Honourable colleagues, aligning with climate commitments also means not fostering or exacerbating food insecurity or inequalities in society, and not causing significant harm to social and environmental obligations recognized already by Canada. That means we hope for a future where a low-carbon project does not run roughshod over human rights like we have seen with too many fossil fuel extractive and transportation projects.

Since women — especially poor women — are the primary victims of climate change, we would do well to add them as primary stakeholders in developing solutions worth investing in.

Since this bill was introduced a year ago, it has generated a bit of a buzz in Canada and beyond. Canada’s Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions published a climate guideline and the Bank of Canada just issued its first annual climate risk report.

But beyond our financial regulators finally using the buzzwords of the moment, significant change still seems to elude us. With a Canadian bank becoming the world’s top fossil fuel financier and backing a pipeline project which is turning the ancestral lands of the Wet’suwet’en — who are opposed to the project — into a militarized zone, this bill is more necessary than ever.

Colleagues, escalating environmental calamities are a time‑sensitive issue. Canada has, to date, never successfully hit any of its emissions targets since 1990. We simply cannot afford another decade of failed targets, measures and ambitions. We must address this concern as soon as possible to ensure that we reach our climate targets by the end of the decade.

By mandating a yearly public review process on the progress of the implementation of all provisions, Bill S-243 allows for iterative learning. It will allow us to learn from our mistakes in real time and adapt our approach to the results produced. We have to stay flexible to emerging research. As a leader in many other sectors, Canada must step up.

Honourable senators, the acceleration of climate change and its consequences is a human-induced problem. It requires human-led and innovative solutions to transition towards a cleaner and more sustainable economy.

As lawmakers acting in the public interest of all current and future Canadians, it is up to us to consider and implement research-backed and ambitious solutions to maintain a livable earth for our generation and those to come.

Senator Galvez, with her Bill S-243, gives us an excellent opportunity to do just that. Let us accept her invitation and support this life-saving bill. Thank you, meegwetch.

(On motion of Senator Seidman, debate adjourned.)

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Brazeau, seconded by the Honourable Senator Housakos, for the second reading of Bill S-254, An Act to amend the Food and Drugs Act (warning label on alcoholic beverages).

Hon. Marilou McPhedran: Thank you very much. I’m pleased to rise to speak today. Hello. Tansi. As a senator from Manitoba, I acknowledge that I am on Treaty 1 territory, the traditional lands of the Anishinaabe, Cree, Oji-Cree, Dakota and Dene, and the homeland of the Métis Nation.

I want to acknowledge that the Parliament of Canada is situated on unceded, unsurrendered Algonquin Anishinaabe territory.

I also want to acknowledge that we have people joining us from across Turtle Island who are located on both treaty and unceded lands.

[English]

Honourable senators, today I rise in support of Bill S-218. When she moved this bill, Senator McCallum — in resplendent yellow today — shared a wealth of experience and knowledge that skillfully demonstrated the importance of this bill. She issued a call for members of this chamber to add their supportive voices to hers, sharing their perspectives and stories.

Today, I heed this call by attuning to voices different than my own. I acknowledge that our lived experiences limit our perceptions of priorities and needs.

As senators, however, we have an obligation to be receptive to — to understand — the different needs of Canadians. We have an even greater responsibility to attend to the needs of those who are systemically marginalized and underprivileged.

In thanking Senator McCallum for her vision and persistence with this bill, I also thank her for introducing a number of Indigenous experts to this discussion.

Today, I wish to refer to analysis provided by Chastity Davis‑Alfonse, a mixed-heritage woman of First Nations and European descent, who is the Chair of the Minister’s Advisory Council on Aboriginal Women in British Columbia. She is on the leading edge of Indigenous gender-based analysis in Canada, helping the federal and provincial governments, the Tŝilhqot’in National Government and others to weave the Indigenous women’s lens into their daily practices.

I asked Ms. Davis-Alfonse the often-unasked question that seems to hover around this bill: Since there are lots of severely disadvantaged women in Canada, why should we be focusing on a bill that primarily addresses Indigenous women?

Here is what I learned from her response: Indigenous-specific legislation is needed to zero in on systemic, historical precedent in order to address and root out systemic failings in Canada, and that most legislation — for more than 150 years — actually codified and fortified the systemic failings. In other words, old, bad laws need to be fixed by new, corrective laws.

Since first contact, Indigenous women have been oppressed, and such oppression became an entrenched historical practice. A lot of early settler survival was due to Indigenous help, especially from Indigenous women. There has seldom been reciprocity by settlers for that kindness. Instead, the oppressive Indian Act stripped Indigenous women of status and bloodlines within their own communities by only recognizing men as leaders, thereby displacing matriarchal, matrilineal leadership structures.

Further, this legislated silence of Indigenous women extended to denying them tribal council leadership positions and federal suffrage. This week, we were delighted to welcome Dr. Gigi Osler to our chamber on Persons Day, October 18. I found myself thinking, as Senator McCallum and Senator Osler came into this chamber, about how much has changed since 1929 when the Persons Case was finally finished and the five women whom we often call the Famous Five actually succeeded in having the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in the U.K. overrule the Canadian Supreme Court. This ruling said that yes, indeed, Canadian women have the capacity to hold high office, including in the Senate — but not Indigenous women. That ruling did not extend to or include Indigenous women.

Indigenous women were among the last to be given their right to vote in this country. Suffrage was extended to them in 1960. The truth is that Indigenous women were among the last in Canada to be enfranchised because they were and are among the most oppressed, marginalized people in this country.

Here is why I hope you will join me in supporting Bill S-218. First, the bill, should it become law, will shed light on the imminent needs of underserved women, particularly Indigenous women and girls. The model of gender-based analysis as it stands does not sufficiently consider all elements of intersectionality.

As Senator McCallum coined it, it considers women as one “homogeneous group” with undifferentiated needs. This is a kind of essentialism — the assumption of homogeneity of those of the same sex — but it could not be further from lived reality. A witness at the Standing Committee on the Status of Women in the other place reminded that there is often greater diversity among women than there is between women and men. The practice of overlooking heterogeneity within a group is especially harmful to Indigenous and BIPOC women as they are often grouped together with no regard to the different struggles and experiences of different Indigenous peoples.

For queer people who are gender-fluid, non-binary or trans, it is hard to find any place within mainstream gender-based analysis.

We must thank the innate generosity of Indigenous culture for the term “two-spirited” that now is embedded in gender-based analysis plus.

Bill S-218 would put these questions of diversity within genders at the forefront. To effectively address a wrong, we must first identify the need. Bill S-218 will be a strong, effective step towards mending these gaps in knowledge, service and mutual respect.

Second, requiring the Indigenous gender-based analysis plus in legislation would address the gaps in application that we have observed over the years.

This was highlighted in the report by the House of Commons Standing Committee on the Status of Women, which underlined that some sectors, such as fisheries, national defence and infrastructure, are often far too quick to dismiss gender-based analysis plus as irrelevant to their areas of practice. Looking beneath the surface, we are able to identify the many ways in which Indigenous women and girls are disadvantaged as these sectors carry out their day-to-day business.

A good example of a thorough analysis is provided by paragraph 25(2)(a) of British Columbia’s Environmental Assessment Act, which requires all assessments to consider both the positive and negative direct and indirect effects, including environmental, economic, social, cultural and health effects and adverse cumulative effects.

B.C.’s Environmental Assessment Office has posted a detailed guideline on how to conduct this kind of analysis. It identified potential areas of study, such as employment, infrastructure, services, human health and culture. It asks questions like: How would the project affect Indigenous, local or regional employment? Which community services may be affected more acutely by project-related demands? Are there distinct subgroups that may experience adverse project-related health effects differently? These are excellent questions that need to be investigated in every area of work. Bill S-218 would help to ensure that kind of analytical consistency and accountability.

Third, given the historically painful truths being uncovered with the continued discovery of unmarked graves at residential school sites, about which residential school survivors have been telling us for years, it is more than appropriate that our Parliament further its commitment to consultation and inclusion with Indigenous peoples, especially women and girls. Incorporating those perspectives through gender-based analysis plus is a way of doing that.

Bill S-218 compels us to reflect and include the valid, unique and specific perspectives and needs of Indigenous women and girls, and to weigh these against any potential impacts and ramifications arising from decisions made. In so doing, we will move beyond words. We will act to mend some of the exclusionary wounds caused by colonialism, discrimination and cultural genocide.

Honourable senators, this chamber is rich with diverse voices and experiences providing us with the foundation to use the power entrusted to us as lawmakers. We can champion this straightforward and practical amendment that could spur catalytic changes for Canada, particularly all genders represented in Indigenous communities in Canada, and thereby strengthen our democracy. Thank you, meegwetch.