Hon. Senators: Hear, hear.

Hon. Raymonde Saint-Germain: Honourable senators, through my voice, all members of the Independent Senators Group are delighted to welcome today our new colleague, the Honourable Senator Margo Lainne Greenwood. Senator Greenwood, I would also like to welcome your family members and loved ones who are with you today to celebrate this unique occasion.

Our new colleague is a full professor in the University of Northern British Columbia’s education program and the academic leader of the National Collaborating Centre for Indigenous Health. A recognized scholar of Cree ancestry, she has spent her career focusing on improving the health and well‑being of Indigenous children, families and communities through research and public and community services.

Senator Greenwood is far from being a novice in the study of legislation. Since 1992, she has been contributing to policy and legislation, both in her province of British Columbia and in the country as a whole. She has actively participated in the Expert Panel on Early Learning and Child Care Data and Research, held in 2019 by the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development at the time, as well as in the 2020 Public Health Working Group on Remote and Isolated Communities, to name only a few of her contributions to improving public policy.

The Senate has already had the privilege of benefiting from her expertise when she appeared as a witness in 2008 before the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology, which was followed by an informative report on early childhood and care. She has also been a strong ally of Senator Yvonne Boyer’s. They have worked together on issues related to reproductive justice and, notably, the fight against forced sterilization of Indigenous women. Now the Senate will have the opportunity to benefit from the contributions of this outstanding tandem on a regular basis.

Senator Greenwood, I could go on for hours listing the numerous and well-deserved awards and distinctions you have received throughout your career — but in three minutes, I can’t. However, I could not help but cite a passage from Places for the Good Care of Children, the doctoral thesis you successfully submitted for your PhD at the University of British Columbia. This excerpt resonates with me. Colleagues, the following words are hers:

The principles of respect, reciprocity, relevance and responsibility go beyond theory and practice to living life, to being in the world. A wise friend once told me that Indigenous ways of knowing and being in the world are not just for Indigenous peoples but are about humanity, about living with the world in a respectful and honouring way. . . .

Senator Greenwood, all members of the Independent Senators Group are looking forward to collaborating with you and benefiting from your passion and excellence in all areas of your expertise. Thank you. Meegwetch.

Hon. Jane Cordy: Honourable senators, on behalf of the Progressive Senate Group, I am once again delighted that we are welcoming another new senator into this chamber.

Senator Greenwood, your background, as has been well described already, is certainly impressive, and I have no doubt that your experience will be a great asset to the Senate Chamber.

Upon your appointment, the Prime Minister highlighted your “. . . academic expertise, commitment to health and education, and dedication to the well-being of Indigenous communities . . . .” Indeed, these attributes will not only serve you well in the Senate, but they will ensure that those from your home province of British Columbia are well served by your appointment.

Your arrival in this chamber at the beginning of December coincides with the start of one of our busiest times, when we often experience longer days amidst a crunch of legislation to be addressed before the year’s end. While it can be challenging, I’ve also found that it’s often a time when stronger relationships can be forged as we all work together. I know that I speak for all members of the Progressive Senate Group when I say that I look forward to working with you, even as we will be facing some hectic days.

As a former teacher, I would like to take a moment to express my appreciation in particular for all the work you have done with respect to children, and especially Indigenous children. Though we cannot change the past, we can set a new course for the future by the way we treat and raise the next generation. It is an important component in the work towards reconciliation, and I am very grateful for your efforts.

On behalf of the Progressive Senate Group, it is my pleasure to officially welcome you to the Senate of Canada.

Tawâw, Senator Greenwood. We look forward to working with you. Thank you.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Honourable senators, I rise today on behalf of my colleagues in the Government Representative Office to welcome Senator Margo Greenwood to the Senate of Canada.

Senator Greenwood has a lengthy record of achievement in leadership and in community service. As an Indigenous scholar of Cree ancestry, she has devoted much of her long career to the health and well-being of Indigenous children, families and communities.

Senator Greenwood was a professor in the education program at the University of Northern British Columbia, where her research included the historic and contemporary systemic and structural impacts on the development of early childhood programs and services in Canada and the social determinants of health, with particular emphasis on colonization and children’s rights. She also served as vice-president of Indigenous health for the Northern Health authority, where she provided executive leadership to the Indigenous Health portfolio.

[Translation]

Her accomplishments are many, and her expertise has informed legislation and government policy. She has sat on more than 75 national and provincial committees, including just recently the Expert Panel on Early Learning and Child Care Data created by Minister Duclos in 2019.

[English]

Senator Greenwood’s achievements have been recognized by both Indigenous and non-Indigenous groups in Canada. When appointed as an Officer of the Order of Canada, it was in part for her “transformational leadership in Indigenous health policy.”

Colleagues, we are truly lucky to be welcoming Senator Greenwood in our midst today.

Hon. Tony Loffreda: Honourable senators, I rise to pay tribute to the 2022 Aurora Prize Laureate, Ms. Jamila Afghani, who joins us today from the gallery. I thank Senator Housakos for highlighting the significance of this prestigious award.

Earlier this afternoon, we hosted a reception in honour of Ms. Afghani’s outstanding humanitarian achievements and commitment to her people, particularly the women and girls of her native Afghanistan.

Ms. Afghani is an educator, a former deputy minister, a human rights defender and, perhaps more importantly, a strong voice of reason and strength for the women of her country, who have been silenced, degraded and stripped of their fundamental human rights by the discriminatory and inhumane Taliban regime.

Ms. Afghani currently leads the Afghanistan section of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom and she is also the founder and president of the Noor Educational & Capacity Development Organization. She has helped empower and educate thousands of Afghan women and given them a sense of purpose and value by establishing libraries and home schools, arranging capacity-building training and psychosocial wellness sessions, offering support and guidance to women-led businesses and providing humanitarian and financial aid to families in need.

In a moving video tribute by the Aurora Humanitarian Initiative, Ms. Afghani shares her heart-wrenching story and reminds us that she has been a refugee a total of six times in her life. Thanks to the generosity and kindness of countless individuals, Jamila, her husband and children have successfully made their way to Kitchener, Ontario, where, despite being nearly 10,000 kilometres away from home, she continues her advocacy.

Ms. Afghani recently explained that she hopes to return to her country to continue her work in support of women’s rights. We all hope that day is soon, but we urge you to consider your safety and well-being above all before returning home. Until then, I know all honourable senators join me in reminding you of how lucky we are to have you here in Canada. I hope you and your family have felt welcomed, appreciated and respected.

Ms. Afghani, your service to humanity and your desire to do good for the women and girls of your country are admirable and certainly deserving of the 2022 Aurora Prize.

I stand here before you, in the Senate of Canada, a place where freedom is protected, where democracy is upheld and where peace is valued, in admiration of your many achievements and in solidarity with you, your people and your country. You are truly an inspiration.

I conclude with a quote from Randy Pausch:

In life you cannot choose the cards you are dealt but you can and do choose the way you play the hand.

Thank you for choosing Canada.

Hon. René Cormier: Esteemed colleagues:

I came into this world with the HIV virus because the health care system failed to give my mother the preventive treatment that would have kept me from being infected when she needed it.

If he could talk, that is what the baby born with HIV last October at the CHU Saint-Justine in Montreal might say.

In an interview with Le Devoir on November 3 in relation to this shameful situation, Dr. Isabelle Boucoiran said that she is concerned about the fact that a growing number of HIV-positive migrant women are being referred to the health care system too late. She believes that a significant administrative burden is to blame.

[English]

On this World AIDS Day and Indigenous AIDS Awareness Week, I stand up once again to say that the inequalities that persist relentlessly impede progress to end this virus, and I decry once again the devastation this epidemic is causing — more than 40 years after it first appeared.

One more time, I affirm that HIV is not a virus of the past. The fact that it continues to contaminate our youth in a troubling way is proof that it is still present, and persists in anchoring itself in our societies.

Every day, colleagues, 1,100 young people between the ages of 15 and 24 are infected with HIV worldwide.

[Translation]

Most people who were diagnosed with HIV in Canada in 2020 were between the ages of 20 and 49. To be more specific, the rate of infection for the age category of 20 to 29 was 6.2 new cases per 100,000 inhabitants per year.

Honourable senators, what will it take for us to finally take the appropriate action to protect our youth? It is clear that the solution lies with community organizations that educate and provide local services to young people and all Canadians who are most at risk. These organizations are already working miracles with the few resources they have. It is time that they had access to the funding they have been waiting for far too long.

[English]

Colleagues, you will remember that exactly two years ago today, I tabled a motion in the Senate that was adopted the same day — thanks to all of you — urging the government to increase funding for the Federal Initiative to Address HIV/AIDS in Canada to $100 million annually — a recommendation also proposed by the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health in 2019.

While applauding the recent efforts of the federal government, including the one-time funding for accessible testing and the historic increase in its contribution to The Global Fund, sustainable funding for community response here in Canada is still lacking, and inequities are growing.

[Translation]

Let me close by reminding you that UNAIDS and its member countries, including Canada, are committed to ending the AIDS epidemic by 2030. Eight years to eradicate this virus is not a long time, but I am hopeful.

Colleagues, the inequities that perpetuate the AIDS epidemic are not irreversible. We all have a role to play in addressing them. Let’s act together, now.

Thank you. Meegwetch

Hon. Diane Bellemare: Honourable senators, I rise today to pay tribute to caregivers. People don’t always choose to become a caregiver. It often happens naturally, and it’s not always easy.

In Quebec, the week of November 6 to 12 was a special time to highlight the work of caregivers and salute the community organizations that support them in their journey.

According to Statistics Canada, nearly one in four people in Canada is a caregiver, which represents roughly 25% of the population aged 15 and over, or 7.8 million Canadians. Caregivers are usually women between the ages of 45 and 65 who most often are taking care of a parent.

There is little government support for caregivers. According to a 2018 Statistics Canada survey, support for caregivers comes primarily from family members or friends. However, caregivers rarely receive financial support. Some 14% of caregivers receive financial support from family and friends, 8% receive federal tax credits, and 6% receive funding from government programs.

This is despite the fact that caregivers make a significant economic contribution. According to a study cited by Statistics Canada, caregivers in Canada contributed an estimated $26 billion in unpaid labour in 2009. Yet these caregivers receive little recognition for the support they provide.

My sister Sylvie looked after my mother every day for many years. When our mother could no longer live alone, Sylvie brought her into her own home. My sister had to leave her job and accepted all the consequences of that decision, which is difficult to imagine. I am very grateful to her, because, during that time, as a senator, I dealt with major societal issues.

It is urgent that we think about the essential services provided to older and very old individuals. The baby boomer aging wave is just beginning. Today, 19% of the population is over 65. When I visited various homes for seniors in Quebec this summer to find a suitable and, above all, available place for my mother, I noted that the robots of tomorrow will not really be able to take care of very old persons. We will have an even greater need of caregivers.

Honourable senators, as the song says, “Everybody wants to go to heaven but nobody wants to die.” I sincerely thank these earthly angels who watch over our loved ones day and night. Let’s recognize that they cannot live on thanks alone.

Thank you, meegwetch.

Hon. Renée Dupuis: Honourable senators, today I rise in support of Bill S-11, a fourth act to harmonize federal law with the civil law of Quebec and to amend certain acts in order to ensure that each language version takes into account the common law and the civil law. The bill’s full title speaks to the substantial relationship within our judicial system between federal law and provincial law, which is to say, Quebec’s civil law and other provinces’ and territories’ common law. This form of bijuralism is unique to Canada, where two completely different legal traditions coexist within the same judicial system. They are the foundation of the system we have today.

This bill is a technical bill containing 642 clauses that amend some 50 federal acts. Contrary to what one might think upon reading Bill S-11, its content does not consist solely of random words. When used in various pieces of legislation, these words convey legal concepts. They convey the values that Parliament has endorsed following often arduous legislative debate on complex and sensitive social issues. As such, this bill treats words as more than interchangeable concepts.

The bill’s sponsor explained the content of the legislation, and her words have informed our reflection. I would like to draw your attention to one fundamental aspect, specifically that this bill refers to an element of our legal system that is an integral part of what it has become today, and I would like to briefly recall the historical elements that help explain why such a bill is currently before us.

Canadian bijuralism, as a subject of legal study, developed in the 20th century, but its origins lie in earlier historic events, some elements of which I found important to highlight.

The first element is the system of civil law governing mainly private rights, established by the French and applied in their colony of Quebec in the 17th century.

The second element is the Treaty of Paris, signed on February 10, 1763, which recognized the victory of the British over the French in 1759 at Quebec City and in 1760 at Montreal. This was the treaty by which France ceded to Britain its countries, territories and islands in America.

The third element is the Royal Proclamation of 1763, endorsed at the Privy Council in London by King George III, who imposed common law in his new colonies in the Americas.

The fourth element is the uncertainty that has persisted as to whether common law has abolished the application of French private law.

The fifth element refers to the uncertainty at the time regarding the new British regime’s ability to impose its law given the resistance it encountered in its colony. This resistance only compounded the discontent that was being expressed in the other British American colonies and that eventually led to the U.S. War of Independence.

The sixth element is the passage of the Quebec Act of 1774. Section VIII of that act, which is an act of the British Parliament, repealed part of the Royal Proclamation and re-established previous French laws regarding property and the rights of citizens in Quebec, while maintaining the common law in criminal matters, thereby formalizing the coexistence of the traditions of civil law and common law in a constitutional document.

The seventh element is the Quebec Act, which actually represents a political concession that the British felt they had to give the French, who did not recognize themselves in the legal regime, the common law tradition, which was completely foreign to them.

The eighth element is the civil law, which became an integral part of the Canadian Constitution; in other words, the Civil Code of Lower Canada, passed in 1865, became the first codification of this civil law and would serve as the main reference before being completely overhauled and replaced in 1991 with a new civil code that took effect in 1994. In the new version, a preliminary provision of the code states the following, and I quote:

The Civil Code comprises a body of rules which, in all matters within the letter, spirit or object of its provisions, lays down the jus commune, expressly or by implication.

The ninth element is the Constitution Act, 1867 which creates a federal system dividing legislative responsibilities between two levels of government, the federal and provincial levels.

The tenth element is the confirmation of the coexistence of the traditions of civil law and common law within the framework of the exclusive legislative powers attributed to the federal Parliament in the Constitution Act, 1867 over aspects of private law, such as marriage and divorce, alongside the exclusive jurisdiction given to provincial legislative assemblies to legislate on property and civil rights in the province.

Finally, the eleventh element is the federal government’s adoption of a policy to harmonize federal legislation with Quebec’s civil law in 1993. This policy reflects the complementarity between federal legislation and civil law when it comes to interpreting and applying federal legislation in Quebec and amending federal laws that existed in 1994 to adapt them to the new law concepts introduced after the comprehensive review of the Civil Code in 1994.

Honourable senators, I invite the members of the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs to carefully review the 642 clauses of Bill S-11, because it deals with issues that are fundamental to us as we define the concepts and words that must reflect our constitutional system.

Thank you.

Hon. Raymonde Gagné (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate), pursuant to notice of November 30, 2022, moved:

That, pursuant to section 3 of the Statutes Repeal Act, S.C. 2008, c. 20, the Senate resolve that the Act and the provisions of the other Acts listed below, which have not come into force in the period since their adoption, not be repealed:

1.Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act, R.S., c. 33 (2^nd Supp.):

-Part II;

2.Contraventions Act, S.C. 1992, c. 47:

-paragraph 8(1)(d), sections 9, 10 and 12 to 16, subsections 17(1) to (3), sections 18 and 19, subsection 21(1) and sections 22, 23, 25, 26, 28 to 38, 40, 41, 44 to 47, 50 to 53, 56, 57, 60 to 62, 84 (in respect of the following sections of the schedule: 2.1, 2.2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 7.1, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14 and 16) and 85;

3.Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty Implementation Act, S.C. 1998, c. 32;

4.Public Sector Pension Investment Board Act, S.C. 1999, c. 34:

-sections 155, 157, 158 and 160, subsections 161(1) and (4) and section 168;

5.Modernization of Benefits and Obligations Act, S.C. 2000, c. 12:

-subsections 107(1) and (3) and section 109;

6.Yukon Act, S.C. 2002, c. 7:

-sections 70 to 75 and 77, subsection 117(2) and sections 167, 168, 210, 211, 221, 227, 233 and 283;

7.An Act to amend the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, S.C. 2003, c. 26:

-sections 4 and 5, subsection 13(3), section 21, subsections 26(1) to (3) and sections 30, 32, 34, 36 (with respect to section 81 of the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act), 42 and 43;

8. Budget Implementation Act, 2005, S.C. 2005, c. 30:

-Part 18 other than section 125;

9.An Act to amend certain Acts in relation to financial institutions, S.C. 2005, c. 54:

-subsection 27(2), section 102, subsections 239(2), 322(2) and 392(2);

10.Budget Implementation Act, 2009, S.C. 2009, c. 2:

-sections 394, 399 and 401 to 404;

11.Payment Card Networks Act, S.C. 2010, c. 12, s. 1834:

-sections 6 and 7;

12.An Act to promote the efficiency and adaptability of the Canadian economy by regulating certain activities that discourage reliance on electronic means of carrying out commercial activities, and to amend the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act and the Telecommunications Act, S.C. 2010, c. 23:

-sections 47 to 51, 55 and 68, subsection 89(2) and section 90.

13.Financial System Review Act, S.C. 2012, c. 5:

-sections 54 and 56 to 59;

14.An Act to amend the Railway Safety Act and to make consequential amendments to the Canada Transportation Act, S.C. 2012, c. 7:

-subsections 7(2) and 14(2) to (5);

15.Protecting Canada’s Immigration System Act, S.C. 2012, c. 17:

-sections 70 to 77;

16.Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act, S.C. 2012, c. 19:

-sections 432, 433, 459, 460, 462 and 463; and

17.Jobs and Growth Act, 2012, S.C. 2012, c. 31:

-sections 361 to 364.

She said: Honourable senators, I am speaking to you today in support of the motion that this chamber adopt a resolution, before December 31, to defer the repeal of one act and the provisions of 16 other acts that are listed in this motion. I am asking the Senate to resolve that this act and these provisions, which have not come into force since they were enacted, not be repealed by operation of the Statutes Repeal Act.

Before going into the details of this motion, please let me give you some general information about the Statutes Repeal Act.

[English]

The Statutes Repeal Act was enacted in 2008 and came into force two years later. The act is a housekeeping measure for federal statutes and seeks to ensure the effective maintenance of federal legislation through the regular repeal of provisions that are not in force and that are no longer needed.

Section 2 of the Statutes Repeal Act requires that the Minister of Justice tables an annual report before both houses of Parliament on any of the first five sitting days in each calendar year. This report lists the acts of Parliament or provisions of acts of Parliament not yet enforced that were enacted nine years or more before December 31 of the previous calendar year.

Under the Statutes Repeal Act, every act or provision listed in the report is automatically repealed on December 31 of the year in which the report is tabled unless it comes into force on or before that date or unless, during that year, either house of Parliament adopts a resolution exempting them from repeal.

[Translation]

The twelfth annual report under the Statutes Repeal Act was tabled on February 3, 2022 in the House of Commons and on February 8, 2022 in the Senate.

Following the tabling of the report, the Department of Justice contacted the departments responsible for the act and provisions listed in the report to verify whether their repeal should be deferred.

This year, certain provisions of six acts will be automatically repealed on December 31 by operation of the Statutes Repeal Act because the responsible ministers have not recommended that their repeal be deferred.

Thirteen ministers have recommended the deferral of repeal of one complete act and provisions of certain other acts for which they are responsible.

Honourable senators, before I continue, I would like to draw your attention to a background document my office has shared with yours. Since my allotted speaking time is limited, the background document explains the purpose of the Statutes Repeal Act and includes an annex that lists the one act and provisions of 16 other acts for which ministers have recommended the deferral of repeals, including the reasons for the recommended deferrals. I hope this will give both new and seasoned senators a better understanding of this annual statute repeal process. That being said, I wish to provide some general information about this year’s recommended repeal deferrals.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs is recommending the deferrals of repeal of one complete act, the Comprehensive Nuclear Test‑Ban Treaty Implementation Act.

The Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Infrastructure and Communities, the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry, the Minister of Labour, the Minister of National Defence, the Minister of Northern Affairs and the Minister of Seniors have each recommended deferral of repeal for certain provisions of one act under their responsibility.

The President of the Treasury Board, the Minister of Transport and the Minister of Public Services and Procurement are each recommending a deferral of repeal for certain provisions of two acts under their responsibility.

[English]

Finally, the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Justice are each recommending a deferral of repeal for certain provisions of three acts for which they are responsible.

The reasons for deferring repeal include that an external event must occur before the legislation can be brought into force or repealed, such as the coming into force of an international treaty or the enactment of legislation by the provinces and territories; proposed legislation repealing, replacing or bringing into force the not-in-force provisions is currently under way; matters currently being adjudicated must be dealt with; approvals are necessary for bringing the provisions into force or completing regulations; necessary policy work or consultations must be completed and failure to defer repeal could have a negative impact on international relations, relations with Indigenous peoples or with the provinces and territories.

The Statutes Repeal Act provides that repeal deferrals are valid for one year — so I’ll be back next year, hopefully. You never know, right? As such, any act or provision whose repeal is deferred this year will appear again in the next year’s annual report.

[Translation]

It is important that the resolution be adopted before December 31, 2022. Otherwise, the act and provisions of other acts listed in the motion will be automatically repealed by operation of the Statutes Repeal Act. This could lead to inconsistency in federal legislation. The repeal of certain provisions could also cause tension between the federal government and the provinces and territories and affect Canada’s international relations.

Furthermore, if the act and provisions of other acts listed in the motion were repealed on December 31, federal departments would need to address the resulting legislative gaps by introducing new bills. Those bills would have to go through the entire legislative process, from policy formulation to Royal Assent, which I am sure senators will agree would be a time‑consuming and costly exercise.

In conclusion, I am asking you to support the motion and vote in favour of a resolution that the act and provisions of other acts listed in the motion not be repealed on December 31 of this year by application of the Statutes Repeal Act.

Thank you. Meegwetch.

Hon. Senators: Hear, hear!

(On motion of Senator Cormier, for Senator Duncan, debate adjourned.)

[English]

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Jaffer, seconded by the Honourable Senator Miville-Dechêne, for the adoption of the eighth report of the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs (Bill S-210, An Act to restrict young persons’ online access to sexually explicit material, with an amendment and observations), presented in the Senate on November 15, 2022.

Hon. Stan Kutcher: Honourable senators, I rise in support of Bill S-241, the Jane Goodall act. The bill’s goals are to better protect wildlife in captivity, enhance public safety and support conservation. Today, following the debate format popularized by my friend and colleague Senator Cotter, I will address three points.

First, the relationship between federal and provincial jurisdictions with regard to wild animals in captivity; second, the quality of life of captive elephants in Canada; and third, the standards for designating zoos and other animal care organizations under the bill.

Before exploring these points, I acknowledge that the welfare of captive animals is a concern for many Canadians, including senators. Indeed, many of us share our lives with domesticated animals such as dogs and cats. Frankly, I am a dog-loving person, and I am always joyed by the greetings that our goldendoodle Mazie gives me when I return home, whether I have been away for three hours, three days or three weeks. I also note that my friend and colleague Senator Ravalia is an adopted uncle to Mazie, and I enjoy receiving photos of Mak, Senator Wells’ beautiful poodle.

As a young boy, I spent many summers living and working on a farm. Like some farm-raised senators here, I came away from that experience with wonderment about our relationships with those amazing creatures: cows, chickens, horses, pigs and others. However, my memories of shovelling out manure in the pigpens are, I must admit, not amongst the highlights of my childhood.

But wild animals in captivity are, to mix metaphors, a different kettle of fish. The relationship between humans and wild animals in captivity is complex and evolving.

In ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia, rulers and aristocrats kept private collections of wild animals, primarily to demonstrate owners’ power and status. The larger and more exotic the collection, the more powerful the owner. The word “menagerie” captures this reality. And such traditions echo today. Michael Jackson and Pablo Escobar, for example, kept extensive menageries on their estates.

Zoos with animals for public viewing are a more recent development. In the Western world, the first modern zoo opened in Paris in 1793. This was fundamentally a political act. The private menageries of the king and queen and various aristocrats were put on public display at the Ménagerie, the zoo of the Jardin des Plantes, a tangible evidence of Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité. But also a nod to providing entertainment for the populace.

Today’s credible zoos have evolved into settings that promote education, and some have a strong commitment to scientific research and conservation. Enclosures in many cases have been developed to more closely approximate natural habitats. The cramped tiger cage with its perpetually pacing cat and the monkey showing signs of boredom, anxiety and stress are, hopefully, much less common today.

Yet, this evolution has not yet concluded, and as our knowledge about wild animals improves, compassionate people will continue to find better ways to cohabit this planet with other species.

That’s why this bill is important. It’s a significant next step demonstrating Canada’s international leadership in creating a better life for wild animals in captivity. If passed, this bill will create a transparent and accessible legal standard for animal care organizations that meet five criteria: the highest standard of animal care, whistle-blower protection, no use of animals in circus-style shows, responsible acquisition of animals and additional government standards based on expert consultation.

We know from World Animal Protection Canada reports and numerous news stories that we need to do more to protect the well-being of wild animals in captivity, with a sense of urgency. Legislation is necessary to shepherd this work along, and this is why we should move the bill forward to committee as soon as possible.

I’m hopeful that study will commence early in the new year, and I look forward to hearing from Dr. Jane Goodall and other experts, including leading Canadian zoos and animal welfare organizations.

Now, the first of the three topics that I mentioned — the relationship between federal and provincial jurisdiction with regard to wild animals in captivity. This is a matter that Senator Plett has previously and appropriately raised with concern that much legislation relating to animal protection is in the provincial sphere. Others have informed me that there is also federal jurisdiction in this domain.

Now, in addition to our rural boyhoods, I believe Senator Plett and I share the distinction that neither of us is a legal expert. That said, I would like to make some observations on jurisdiction, but please, as I do so, keep in mind that although we physicians can hold a high and perhaps misguided regard for our expertise in various areas of life, such as international finance, foreign affairs, quantum mechanics or how to bake sourdough bread, I venture into this part of my speech with some trepidation. I note also that the committee can hear from experts on legal aspects of the bill.

Bill S-241 proposes animal welfare restrictions on the international and interprovincial transport of live wild animals from affected species by amending the Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act. As I understand it, trade across these boundaries is an area of exclusive federal jurisdiction under its trade and commerce power. For an example of animal welfare restrictions in federal trade laws, I refer us to section 23.2 of the Fisheries Act, restricting the import and export of live whales and dolphins, which was enacted in 2019.

Bill S-241 also exercises federal jurisdiction over criminal animal cruelty and public safety under federal criminal power.

Since 2019, section 445.2 of the Criminal Code has contained captivity-related offences with respect to whales and dolphins, prohibiting unlicensed breeding, as well as performance for entertainment purposes. This section protects these creatures’ physical health, psychological well-being and dignity from cruel or degrading treatment.

With this bill, Parliament would expand those captivity offences to provide additional protection for wild species, while allowing licences for justifiable purposes subject to potential conditions. Bill S-241 does not create new criminal offences, but modifies existing ones. Because many of the added species are dangerous, the bill also protects public safety.

Provincial jurisdiction on wild animals in captivity coexists via provinces’ property and civil rights power. Provincial legislation covers negligent treatment and patchwork regional ownership restrictions. However, all captive animals have long been subject to federal criminal animal cruelty restrictions on their treatment. In other words, as I understand it, the subject of captive wild animals is an area of both federal and provincial jurisdiction.

The bill’s preamble states that the subject of captive wild animals has what is known constitutionally as a double aspect of shared jurisdiction. I understand that the bill allows some dual licencing for that reason, following the same legal model as the whale and dolphin laws.

A committee can hear more, but we have not heard any arguments on debate that the federal trade or criminal jurisdiction is invalid. With Bill S-241, the question is not whether Parliament can help protect wild animals in captivity, the question is whether it should. In my opinion, the answer is that it must.

My second issue is the quality of life of captive elephants. Undeniably, the best place for elephants is in the wild or, if in captivity, in large outdoor spaces in a warm climate. They are highly intelligent, socially complex and physically wide-ranging. Elephants frequently experience physical suffering and psychological distress in captivity, exhibiting problems such as abnormal and repetitive behaviours, higher infant mortality and reduced life span.

In fact, according to a 2019 article in The New York Times Magazine, for every elephant born in captivity in North America, two have died. This same article describes the psychiatric disorder seen in captive elephants, one, frankly, I had not known about until I began to research the issue. It’s zoochosis, a form of mental illness that develops in animals held captive in zoos. It often manifests as unnatural, stereotypic behaviours that include rocking or swaying, pacing, self-mutilation and more. The article takes this further, stating:

One of the more disturbing manifestations of zoo-elephant psychosis is the high incidence of stillbirths and reproductive disorders among pregnant mothers. Even when births are successful, there are often instances not only of infant mortality but also of calf rejection and infanticide, something almost never witnessed in thousands of studies of wild elephant herds. . . .

In addition, we need to consider another reality for captive elephants in Canada: our cold weather. All four Canadian locations with elephants keep them indoors in the winter. These conditions are far removed from those that support their innate social, physical and psychological needs. According to the Born Free Foundation, the unnatural size of these enclosures and the conditions within them amplify the adverse psychological and behavioural impacts of captivity, and lead to other health problems including foot ulcers and obesity.

Honourable senators, toxic environments damage the physical and mental health of elephants just as they do for humans. In June, over 20 elephant scientists and other experts, including global leaders in their field, endorsed Bill S-241’s proposed phase-out of elephant captivity in Canada. In a letter sent to senators, they described elephants’ extensive health problems in captivity and the constraints on their needs, including keeping them indoors in the winter and the practice of chaining captive elephants.

Senators have received correspondence from many different organizations regarding the issues of the health and well-being of captive elephants. The committee will need to carefully consider all the evidence while, I trust, prioritizing the health and well‑being of these magnificent creatures.

Now to my third point. The executive director of Canada’s Accredited Zoos and Aquariums, or CAZA, has communicated to senators his desire for members of his organization to be deemed as animal care organizations under Bill S-241. For such a designation, the legislation requires organizations to administer “the highest professionally recognized standards and best practices of animal care” as well as meeting other criteria, such as refraining from performance for entertainment.

I have spoken to Senator Klyne about this issue as well as doing my own research on zoo accreditation. I also note that Senator Plett has recently, and appropriately, raised the issue of zoo accreditation with Senator Dean and Senator Sorensen in this chamber. I have learned that some consultations with stakeholders have indicated that the Canadian members of the Association of Zoos and Aquariums, or AZA, uphold higher standards and practices than those who only hold accreditation from a different organization — CAZA. Others have seen this issue from a different lens.

In my discussions with Senator Klyne, I have learned that he is open to an amendment that would provide for automatic designations of any Canadian zoos meeting AZA standards within the first number of years, as well as an independent review of CAZA standards and practices. Perhaps this is an important issue to be considered by committee.

Whatever the outcome regarding accreditation, this issue requires the in-depth analysis that only committee study can provide.

To conclude, in my view, the Jane Goodall act is a credit to the Senate and to Canada, showing that we can lead the way in protecting wild animals. I add my voice to those of the many colleagues here eager to move to our second reading and committee study of the bill. Thank you. Wela’lioq.

Senator Kutcher: Thank you very much for that important question, Senator Plett.

I understand that the legislation is not focused on closing zoos. You’re absolutely correct about that. You may want to make an amendment to it — thinking about it.

It is, however, focused on the protection of animals held in captivity and ensuring their well-being.

First of all, the bill will phase-out harmful practices. Second, it will encourage responsible relocations of animals. They won’t die in place. There are opportunities for responsible relocations. In my understanding, some zoos have already identified that they would be willing to take these relocations. Therefore, it’s an important consideration, but I think it’s one that zoos have thought about in preparation for this. It’s a good point that you make.

The bill also provides a mechanism of enforcement that will, over time, protect animals. I think that’s a good thing, and I think you would agree with me that’s a good thing as well.

Senator Plett: Senator Kutcher, Charles Gray is the superintendent of elephants at African Lion Safari. He has worked hands-on with elephants since 1982, has been the elephant manager at Africa Lion Safari since 1987. Charlie is a founding board member of the Elephant Managers Association, and he is a founding and current board member of the International Elephant Foundation. He has served on the American Association of Zoos and Aquariums’ Taxon Advisory Group for the Asian elephant species survival program from 1988 to 2019. He is a world-renowned elephant expert.

Mr. Gray told us, Senator Kutcher, that, contrary to what you have said and other so-called experts would have us believe, the elephants under their care and their love thrive in all four seasons. This is partly because most of the herd of Asian elephants were born and raised in Canada. They’ve never been to Asia. They are very acclimatized to our winters. In fact, Mr. Gray says their elephants actually prefer the cold to the heat partly because there are no bugs. They also love to run and play in the snow, to break the ice on the lake and go swimming. They have large, heated enclosures — they are not in cages — where they can come and go as they please. They have doors that they open themselves as they come in and out of the cold.

Now, have you spoken to any of these caregivers? I have visited more zoos in the last two years than I have been to in my life. These facilities are huge. These elephants are no longer being ridden, although certainly what they would experience in their home countries would include being ridden. They are used to haul stuff, to carry stuff, to drag stuff. Yet here they are being treated cruelly by not having to do any of that? They are living not in enclosures but in a wildlife environment —

Senator Gagné: What is your question?

Hon. Gudie Hutchings, P.C., M.P., Minister of Rural Economic Development: Thank you for that question, Senator Sorensen.

Many of you in the room may know that I have a deep passion for the tourism industry — it was my life for about 25 years.

As I noted, the pandemic was terrible, and no industry was hit harder than the tourism sector. We were there to help industry, employers and employees through the terrible pandemic to get back on their feet. I know the incredible work that Destination Canada is doing to showcase our provinces and the country, and the incredible products that we have, especially Indigenous products. I was in British Columbia last week; I went through Vancouver, and met with the president of Indigenous Tourism BC. The work they are doing is phenomenal.

You’re right; Canada has what the world wants. We all now have to work hard to get the industry back on its feet.

In my home province, at Gros Morne National Park, which I know you visited this past summer, tourism was up 30% this year. Now we all have to do our part and work together on accessibility, marketing and product development, as well as getting workers and immigration working to help workers into the tourism sector, especially in rural Canada.

I can tell you the world wants what Canada has, and I cannot wait to welcome the world to our country.

Hon. Scott Tannas: Honourable senators, on behalf of my colleagues in the Canadian Senators Group, I welcome Senator Margo Greenwood to the Senate. Senator Greenwood is described as an internationally recognized and highly respected Indigenous scholar of Cree ancestry.

It was lovely to see you take your oath in Cree today.

She is a researcher and an author with over 30 years of experience examining the health and well-being of Indigenous communities, families and, as has been said, especially children, with over 130 publications. Senator Greenwood is a leader in her field and has chaired many research institutes in Canada. The Senate and all Canadians will benefit from her analytical skills and her input into public policy.

Senator Greenwood, in addition to your academic credentials as a distinguished professor, you have something else to contribute. In an interview you gave to Windspeaker.com, you spoke about changing what you called “lived realities”:

The ability to dream is so fundamentally important, because we can, in our own ways, see a different reality. To be able to dream is to be able to hope.

“Change requires the ability to dream with the courage to act,” you said. I believe that this can apply to all of us. I hope that with your interventions in this place, you will help us all to dream better and to have the courage to act.

Senator Greenwood, welcome to the Senate. My colleagues and I look forward to working with you.

Hon. Leo Housakos: Honourable senators, I wish to take this opportunity to shine a light on the humanitarian success story known as the Aurora Humanitarian Initiative, which has rendered the world a better place since its establishment. The Aurora Humanitarian Initiative finds its roots in Armenian history and carries out its mission on behalf of the survivors of the Armenian genocide and in gratitude to their saviours.

The philanthropic vision of three great Armenians carries on this example of connecting a community of humanitarians from across the globe looking to serve the most destitute. At the core of the Aurora initiative lies a very simple but often forgotten principle — gratitude or, as they call it, gratitude in action. Through their work, they seek to recognize and support those who put themselves at risk to save the lives of those who are suffering as a result of violent conflicts, atrocities, crimes or other human rights violations.

To do this, they have established the Aurora Prize for Awakening Humanity, which every year awards $1 million to an exceptional humanitarian in recognition of their work and as an opportunity for them to carry the cycle of gratitude and giving forward.

Since it was launched, the Aurora Prize has changed the lives of over 1.1 million people around the world affected by war, conflict, displacement or persecution. I want to recognize this year’s Aurora Prize laureate Ms. Jamila Afghani, who is here with us today. Jamila has dedicated over 25 years of her life in defence of human rights and in the fight for access to education for women in Afghanistan.

I would also like to recognize Mr. Levon Afeyan, Honorary Consul of the Republic of Armenia in Quebec and board member of the Aurora Humanitarian Initiative, whose devotion to the Armenian community in Montreal and around the globe has inspired many of their accomplishments.

I share the honour with my Senate colleagues in welcoming this truly remarkable person, Ms. Jamila Afghani, in the company of the Ambassador of Armenia to Canada, and to highlight the incredible work that they carry out every day to extend a helping hand to those who need it the most. They are deserving of that and so much more. Congratulations and thank you for being here.

(Pursuant to the order adopted by the Senate on December 7, 2021, to receive a Minister of the Crown, the Honourable Gudie Hutchings, P.C., M.P., Minister of Rural Economic Development, appeared before honourable senators during Question Period.)

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): Welcome, minister.

Minister, part of your mandate is to accelerate the delivery of broadband service across Canada to ensure that all Canadians, no matter where they live, have access to high-speed internet. Yet I must note that this is another area in which your Liberal-NDP government has promised a lot of funding, but for which tangible results remain obscure. According to the Canadian Radio‑television and Telecommunications Commission, or CRTC, over 50% of rural households still do not have access to high-speed internet.

Minister, how much longer will these households need to wait?

Hon. Gudie Hutchings, P.C., M.P., Minister of Rural Economic Development: Thank you.

I would first like to acknowledge the new senator in the room, and welcome her to her seat. It is a pleasure to be working with you, Senator Greenwood. Welcome to the Red Chamber. It is also my pleasure to be here today.

With regard to your question, since 2015 we have supported projects that will bring improved connectivity to over 1.7 million people. In 2014, when we formed government, only 79% of Canadians were connected to affordable, reliable internet. Today, over 93% are connected. We have made $7.6 billion available to improve connectivity across the country.

I have made a promise to connect 98% of Canada by 2026. We are well under way to do that, and we will have the rest of the country connected by 2030.