Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your questions and kind wishes. I appreciate it.

Senator, I don’t know what the current status is regarding the government’s plans around that bill. I’ll make inquiries and report back as quickly as I can.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for the question. It’s one that has been raised in the chamber several times in relation to various industries, beer and now wine. I understand the concerns. The government understands the concerns of producers.

All aspects of our economy are challenged by issues of price and supply chain availability. However, the excise tax, which is a regular feature of the industry, does not amount to an unsupportable addition to, ultimately, the price at which a bottle of wine may be sold. I have every confidence that the excellence of B.C. wines — and, indeed, the wines in other provinces — will continue to attract customers, even if the excise tax is maintained, as it will be.

Senator Gold: Thank you for the question. Bill C-11 has the support of the vast majority of people and cultural industries, especially in Quebec. It is a well-known fact to those who follow the news in Quebec and read the papers in Quebec, as I am sure you do, honourable colleague.

Bill C-11, which passed the Senate with several amendments, is now at the other place. We look forward to the message from the House of Commons. At that time, the debate will continue, I’m sure.

[English]

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

As we all know, the federal government announced the funding of $198.6 billion over 10 years, which includes $48.7 billion in new funding. The federal government also recognizes not only the primacy of provincial jurisdiction in health care but the fact that provinces and territories have their own unique circumstances and their own ways of doing things.

As such, the bilateral agreements — discussions around which are ongoing, as we know — are intended to be flexible and tailored so that provinces and territories can address the unique circumstances and needs of their populations and of their geography. As part of those bilateral agreements that are being discussed and negotiated, provincial and territorial governments are being asked to develop action plans that will describe how the funds will be spent and how progress will be measured. Action plans with targeted results and indicators will be made available publicly by both federal and provincial/territorial governments, and provinces and territories would and will publicly report those results to their own residents.

That is a first important step, and I think all Canadians hope and expect that the governments will work together to actually deliver the results that this new funding promises to secure.

Hon. Jean-Guy Dagenais: Honourable senators, I want to take a few moments today to share with you a few things that I noticed during our mission to observe the general election that took place in Kazakhstan on November 20, 2022.

At the invitation of the Ambassador of Kazakhstan to Canada, Akylbek Kamaldinov, Senator Oh and I were part of a group of foreign observers who were able to witness the country’s electoral process and assess and comment publicly on it. I’m sure it was just as rewarding of an experience for them as it was for us.

During that visit, I was able to see just to what extent Canada serves as an example to this country, which set up a democratic electoral system, a parliament and public institutions that are very similar to the ones we have here in Canada. After becoming independent from the Soviet Union in 1991, the Republic of Kazakhstan was quickly recognized by Canada.

The very next year, in 1992, our Progressive Conservative prime minister at the time, Brian Mulroney, established diplomatic relations with this very promising new country. Today, 30 years later, we can certainly say that he was right and that the Republic of Kazakhstan is a partner of choice for Canada and for many of our major businesses.

At the time of our mission, an economic forum was being held in the capital, Astana. This event, which Canadian ambassador Stéphane Dion attended, enabled me to see first-hand the importance of the Canadian trade relations that now exist with businesses in the Republic of Kazakhstan.

Let’s talk about aeronautics first. At that forum I met representatives of Bombardier, from Quebec, and De Havilland, from Alberta. These two companies supply aircraft to Qazaq Air.

An exporter of oil and natural gas, Kazakhstan has also become a major global supplier of uranium. The local uranium mine in Kazakhstan is operated by a company called Inkai. That company is 40% owned by Cameco, a large Canadian mining company from Saskatoon. This company alone produces 18% of the world’s uranium. I had the pleasure of meeting the president and CEO of Cameco, Tim Gitzel, and talking to him about the importance of uranium in the energy transformation taking place around the world.

Kazakhstan, like Canada, has vast agricultural lands. Agriculture employs 20% of the country’s workers and is therefore an economic sector where other Canadian manufacturers have found buyers for products made in Canada.

The Republic of Kazakhstan and Canada have something else that is very important in common: hockey. Astana has a team in the Kontinental Hockey League. After watching a game, I had the pleasure of meeting some of the players, including two Canadians from Saskatchewan. They were singularly proud to wear the Astana Barys uniform.

By the way, in Kazakhstan, hockey is not played in second-rate facilities. The arena where this team plays would certainly make some teams in our National Hockey League green with envy.

In closing, I want to add this: The modern urban facilities that I saw in this very young country are impressive. In my opinion, its new capital, Astana, is a true reflection of the ambitions of this country, which is landlocked between China and Russia. The leadership and the people of Kazakhstan have accomplished so much since 1991. I am especially grateful for the invitation from Ambassador Kamaldinov, which made it possible for me to see all this in person.

Thank you.

Hon. Andrew Cardozo: Honourable senators, I am pleased to rise today on the occasion of National Flag of Canada Day.

This day marks the fifty-eighth anniversary of the Canadian flag bearing the maple leaf, and it is an opportunity to stop and reflect on what the flag means to Canadians.

[English]

Fifty-eight years ago today, the flag was first raised on Parliament Hill, on a temporary flagpole just to the left of the Peace Tower, in the presence of thousands of celebrating Canadians.

A new Canadian flag was a long-time ambition of former prime minister Lester B. Pearson — one that would be free of any colonial symbols, and that would help national unity.

Canadians enthusiastically participated in the work of a special House of Commons committee, and they sent in thousands of contributions and suggestions. They sent in drawings and paintings with everything: the beaver, the moose, the Mountie, prairies, mountains and, indeed, maple leaves. Through that participatory process, the red and white flag was developed.

The political debate lasted many months, and was one of the most raucous in Canadian history. Changing the flag was vigorously opposed by former opposition leader John Diefenbaker. But, to his credit, once the debate was over, Diefenbaker accepted the result and went with Pearson to Buckingham Palace to witness the Royal Assent by Queen Elizabeth II.

Since then, the flag has come to be a symbol of a modern united Canada, where we value equality, harmony and prosperity. Indeed, every new Canadian gets a small flag at their Canadian citizenship ceremony, and adopts it with the greatest of pride. The flag is recognized positively around the world.

While my preference today would have been to speak of this anniversary only in positive terms, I have to say that over the past year the Maple Leaf flag has been appropriated by those who oppose many basic Canadian values — those who believe that a few hundred people can arrive in our capital city and, by brute force and intimidation, replace the elected government. For some, the flag has come to be a symbol of opposition to the Canadian state and government; opposition to all vaccines, including measles and polio; and opposition to many values that we, normally, believe to be basic Canadian values.

Some folks even feel free to deface the flag with messages of hate and anger, and to use the Maple Leaf to replace the letter “u” in the F-word on their protest flags. I don’t believe that is what Parliament intended back in 1965.

And here’s a troubling trend: We know that too many fair‑minded, peaceful Canadians have taken down their flags on the front of their homes so they are not mistaken to be supporters of the angry mobs. This should not be happening.

[Translation]

Colleagues, it’s time for the Canadian flag to once again become a symbol of respect, equality and unity. Long live the Canadian flag.

[English]

Hon. Senators: Hear, hear!

Hon. Victor Oh: Honourable senators, I rise today to speak about my trip to the beautiful country of Kazakhstan in November 2022. It was my honour to be invited by the Embassy of the Republic of Kazakhstan in Canada, by Ambassador Akylbek Kamaldinov, who is here with us today in the chamber. It was also a privilege to travel alongside my dear friend and honourable colleague Senator Jean-Guy Dagenais.

The purpose of the trip was to observe Kazakhstan’s presidential election as independent international observers and to partake in the Kazakhstan Canada Business Council meeting. As a Canadian, it was inspiring to witness the foundation of their democratic process in this young country.

As the voters walked to their private booths and cast their ballots into the boxes, I could sense the thrill and excitement of this monumental election and for the country’s bright future ahead.

This trip opened my eyes to the beauty and rich culture of this Central Asian country. As the ninth-largest country in the world, it encourages diversity and modernism while continuing to honour and celebrate its rich nomadic history.

The generosity and kindness we experienced from the Kazakhstani people were also a warm welcome after our long flights.

As Kazakhstan is rich in natural resources, including minerals and uranium, fostering ties at the Kazakhstan-Canada Business Council meeting was beneficial.

It is a great honour to have the ambassador join us here in the chamber today. I kindly invite everyone, if you have a chance, to please visit beautiful Kazakhstan.

Thank you.

[Translation]

Hon. Julie Miville-Dechêne: Next Wednesday, February 22, is National Human Trafficking Awareness Day. Human trafficking violates the fundamental rights of human beings and is unworthy of our civilization.

The number of victims of modern slavery has increased significantly over the past five years. It is estimated that 28 million people are subjected to forced labour and 22 million are trapped in forced marriages. Women and children are more vulnerable to human trafficking, which is increasingly moving online with growing sexual exploitation of children. The pandemic has made matters worse.

Unsurprisingly, human trafficking is more prevalent in poor and unstable countries. In contexts of war or extreme poverty, children become assets that can be sold and young girls are forced to marry, as a so-called solution to rape.

However, Canada is not immune to the scourge of human trafficking. There have been calls here in Canada to prohibit marriage for youth between the ages of 16 and 18 to limit forced or arranged marriages by families. The phenomenon is difficult to measure but some countries, like France and the United Kingdom, have already chosen to minimize the risks by raising the legal age of marriage to 18 almost without exception.

The fact that the number of images of the sexual exploitation of children online is doubling yearly, according to police, is another tragedy. We’re talking millions of images and tens of thousands of reports of child sex crimes every year. In a major investigative report by La Presse, a police officer summed up the situation like this:

We don’t have time to arrest everyone. The number of people who like to look at images of kids being raped is staggering. That is just a fact.

According to the Canadian Centre for Child Protection, 80% of the victims are under 12. Over half are under three.

At noon today, I met with a broad coalition of groups and survivors headed up by Courage for Freedom, whose mission is to eradicate the trafficking of girls and boys. Young migrant girls are particularly at risk because of their unfamiliar surroundings.

What can we, as individuals, do? Our laws prohibit these practices, but they are happening anyway. It is therefore everyone’s responsibility to pay attention to what is going on around us, be proactive and listen to survivors. That’s what the February 22 awareness day is all about.

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): Leader, my next question concerns the Canada Infrastructure Bank.

The Canada Infrastructure Bank CEO, Mr. Ehren Cory, appeared before the Senate’s National Finance Committee yesterday. Mr. Cory previously worked at McKinsey for 11 years. I’m sure the Trudeau government will tell us that is just a coincidence.

Honourable senators who were here in 2017 will remember that we were told repeatedly by the Trudeau government that for every dollar in federal investment, the Canada Infrastructure Bank would attract $4 to $5 from the private sector. Instead, it has failed to do so, and currently has a 1-to-1 ratio.

Mr. Cory told the committee yesterday:

. . . it will over the long term that we move toward that 4‑to-1 ratio. That’s an objective to move toward . . . That’s over decades.

I’ll repeat that, leader: It will take decades. Will you get rid of the failed and wasteful Canada Infrastructure Bank, and if so, when?

Senator Gold: Thank you for the question. Regarding the imposition of sanctions, as I have said on many occasions, honourable colleague, the decisions to list additional entities under the Criminal Code are all decisions that are taken by the government upon due deliberation, reflection and input from national security or law enforcement, as the case may be.

I will not comment on what investigations are being done with regard to any of these matters as it would be inappropriate in this chamber. I understand the importance of the issues as does the government. I understand your interest in continuing to raise them as it is your privilege. The government is doing everything that it can do to protect Canadians, but not everything that the government does in the area of national security or law enforcement is something that will be disclosed publicly in Senate Question Period.

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): Leader, I want to return to the answer that you gave Senator Miville-Dechêne last week regarding your government’s refusal to list the IRGC as a terrorist entity under the Criminal Code. I have raised this with you many times, leader, and I will continue to raise it until either your government does it or we have a new Conservative government that will honour the promise that all parties made in the House of Commons in June of 2018. You stated, leader:

. . . this decision must be . . . based on the counsel and advice of our international security agencies. To date, that isn’t what our experts have recommended that we do. . . .

Leader, I have asked in a written question for information on the process to list the IRGC. The response I received did not answer my questions. Now you are saying our security experts don’t recommend it. Did they produce a report? When did this occur, leader? It’s almost five years. Did any Minister of Public Safety bring a recommendation to cabinet?

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for the question and for giving me the opportunity to respond — and I assume you were quoting my exact words.

It was never my intention to comment on what advice might have been given to the government. That would have been inappropriate and if I did, my apologies to this chamber. I simply said and will repeat that decision is based upon — must be based upon and should be based upon — input from the national security agencies. The fact that the government has not yet listed that does not mean that it is not a subject of concern or consideration by this government.

Senator Plett: Leader, many Iranian Canadians, including family members of the victims of Flight PS752, have been targeted by members of the Iranian regime right here in our country. In October, the Prime Minister said:

We know there are people in Canada now who have benefited from the horrific regime in Iran to live a good life in Canada — well, we say no more.

Leader, since the Prime Minister said “no more,” what actions have been taken to give meaning to these words? How many criminal investigations have been opened, and how many people have been jailed? How many people with ties to the Iranian regime have been expelled from Canada since the Prime Minister said “no more”?

Senator Gold: Thank you for your question. Again, you are asking questions that are inappropriate to be answered notwithstanding the importance of the issues that underlie the question.

This gives me the opportunity to remind senators, because memories fade, that Canada has very robust measures in place to hold Iran accountable. Indeed, it has some of the toughest and most comprehensive sanctions in the world against Iran. The IRGC Quds Force is listed as a terrorist entity under the Criminal Code, as are three Iranian-backed regional militias. In addition, the government has designated the Islamic Republic of Iran — the Republic of Iran, including many senior officials and the IRGC — as a regime that is engaged in terrorism and gross human rights violations and has made them inadmissible to Canada. That is not to exclude other measures that the government may take upon due consideration.

Hon. Raymonde Gagné (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate): Honourable senators, I give notice that, at the next sitting of the Senate, I will move:

That, when the Senate next adjourns after the adoption of this motion, it do stand adjourned until Tuesday, March 7, 2023, at 2 p.m.

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): Senator Gold, let me start off by offering my sincerest condolences to you, your family and the family of your friend who passed away very suddenly and very unfortunately. Our thoughts and prayers are with you. I’ll be kinder in my questions to you.

Senator Gold, in June 2021, Royal Assent was given to Conservative MP Larry Maguire’s Bill C-208, which reduces the taxes paid when transferring family farms or small businesses to family members. The Trudeau government never supported it and, instead, created a lot of confusion around the bill after it was passed.

First, the Finance Department issued a press release saying they weren’t going to implement the legislation. Then, Minister Freeland changed her mind, and said she would introduce amendments in November 2021. When that didn’t happen, last year’s budget indicated they would consult on changes to Bill C-208. We have heard nothing since the consultation process ended in June of last year.

Senator Gold, will you give certainty to our farmers? What is the Trudeau government planning to do with Bill C-208?

Senator Plett: Leader, about six weeks from now, the carbon tax will once again increase, going from $50 to $65 per tonne. By 2030, it will reach $170 per tonne. Late last year, the annual food report from Dalhousie University, Canada’s Food Price Report 2023, stated that “by 2030, a typical 5,000-acre farm could see taxes of over $150,000 . . . .” Farmers have to dry their grain, and they have to heat and cool their livestock barns. This isn’t an option for them; they have no choice in the matter. Yet the Trudeau government continues to hurt them financially for that necessary work.

Leader, on this Agriculture Day, why should farmers believe that the Trudeau government understands and supports their work when there is so much evidence to the contrary, especially with regard to the carbon tax?

Senator Gold: Thank you for the question.

First of all, the government has done and will continue to do everything it can to support farmers and the related industries that support us, feed us and that are important components of our economy. I spoke to that aspect of it in a recent response to our honourable colleague Senator Black.

With regard to the carbon tax, as has been said many times in this chamber and far more eloquently and directly by Minister Seamus O’Regan recently here, the carbon tax is a necessary tool in this government’s effort to reduce emissions and to put a price on pollution.

The way the government has designed it puts money back into Canadian hands. That includes all Canadians across the country, as well as industries. The government is committed to continuing to assist Canadians as we make the transition to a more sustainable and greener economy.

[Translation]