The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: We will have a standing vote. We have an agreement on 15 minutes, with a standing vote at 3:50 p.m.

Call in the senators.

Motion agreed to and report adopted on the following division:

Leave having been given to revert to Presenting or Tabling of Reports from Committees:

Hon. Andrew Cardozo: Hello minister, I’m to your right. I don’t know if that’s politically or not, but —

Thank you for being here and answering our questions. I do appreciate the comments you made with regard to just transition, which is awfully important. I have a comment with regard to the program called carbon tax. As I see it, it is a carbon tax and rebate, and people tend to talk about it as the tax only and not the rebate.

My suggestion is that you call it that. You call it “carbon tax and rebate” or “price on pollution and rebate,” but use that word “rebate” more often.

I don’t say this so much as PR for your government but PR for this projet de société, which I think is the largest thing we’re doing in terms of the environment. It perhaps needs to be better explained to Canadians so people have a better sense of it.

Lastly, I wonder if you could just make a comment on the future of nuclear power and the energy mix going forward.

Hon. Salma Ataullahjan: Honourable senators, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the fifth report (interim) of the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights, entitled Canada’s Restrictions on Humanitarian Aid to Afghanistan, and I move that the report be placed on the Orders of the Day for consideration at the next sitting of the Senate.

(On motion of Senator Ataullahjan, report placed on the Orders of the Day for consideration at the next sitting of the Senate.)

[Translation]

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Audette, seconded by the Honourable Senator Mégie, for the second reading of Bill C-29, An Act to provide for the establishment of a national council for reconciliation.

Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson, P.C., M.P., Minister of Natural Resources: Thank you for the question, senator. It’s an important question, but not a very simple one. With green hydrogen, as some people call it, though I don’t necessarily like to describe it using colours because I think we should talk about the intensity of the carbon emissions during electrolysis instead, choices often need to be made during the process. In other words, we have to decide how we want to use the electricity, and that depends on the circumstances.

The Atlantic provinces want to use wind power to produce hydrogen, but Quebec has a different perspective. Quebec wants to use some hydrogen for domestic use, but it has very little interest in exporting it. As I said earlier, there are other solutions. In Alberta, for example, natural gas can be used to produce hydrogen that doesn’t create much CO₂.

Not all provinces and territories have the same perspective. Of course, we have to make some choices. Electricity costs more than natural gas, which is becoming a more economical choice for now. However, if the cost of electrolysis comes down in the future, this will change.

[English]

Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson, P.C., M.P., Minister of Natural Resources: I certainly agree with you that the training you mentioned is extremely important. I am more than happy to come back to you with how Natural Resources Canada is performing relative to other departments, if that would be of interest.

Natural Resources Canada has been a leader with respect to many issues. In fact, the portion of the department that used to be called the Major Projects branch is actually now named Nòkwewashk, which is an Anishinaabe word, and is really more about partnership. We have worked hard to ensure that we are thinking about this in a completely different way.

One area we are looking at is how we can ensure, on a go‑forward basis, that Indigenous communities benefit not just in terms of six jobs and three procurement contracts but in a long‑term, sustained way from projects that take place in their traditional territories. We also want to ensure they have a voice in terms of how these projects are undertaken.

So I am very supportive of the work you mentioned. Typically, though, directives to staff within the departments fall within the purview of the deputy minister, who is responsible for the employees. But each and every day, I am and my deputy minister is encouraging the department to do better on those issues. I would be very surprised if we were not one of the best departments in the system.

[Translation]

Hon. Mobina S. B. Jaffer: Honourable senators, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the ninth report of the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs, which deals with Bill S-205, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and to make consequential amendments to another Act (interim release and domestic violence recognizance orders).

(For text of report, see today’s Journals of the Senate, p. 1143.)

Hon. Pierre J. Dalphond: Would Senator Wells agree to take another question?

Senator Wells: Yes.

[English]

The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, when shall this bill be read the third time?

(On motion of Senator Oh, bill referred to the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology.)

(At 5:23 p.m., the Senate was continued until tomorrow at 2 p.m.)

Senator Housakos: Honourable senators, with leave of the Senate and notwithstanding rule 5-5(f), I move that the report be placed on the Orders of the Day for consideration later this day.

The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, when shall this report be taken into consideration?

(On motion of Senator Jaffer, report placed on the Orders of the Day for consideration at the next sitting of the Senate.)

[English]

(1520)

Senator Cotter: By way of background — and I think Senator Wells knows where this is coming from — you observed the part about employees getting a modest degree of super priority for unpaid wages and the Wage Earner Protection Program filling in some of that gap. The evidence from the Wage Earner Protection Program is that there is still a significant shortfall for employees. Indeed, that plan itself acknowledges that its recovery — subrogated, that is, in the place of workers — is a recovery of about 2% or 3%.

I recognize the dilemma you described about the other place, but when one thinks about workers who might lose some portion of the pension they will collect 20 years from now versus the shortfall of last month or the month before and paying the rent with credit cards, the attraction of a super priority seems to me to be compelling for the parts of wages they have not been able to get. I would be interested in whether you think that’s an appropriate issue to be considered in this exercise?

Senator Wells: It’s a really good point, Senator Cotter, and you and I have spoken about this. I read the transcripts from the other place where they addressed it. It was removed not because it was a bad idea. I think it’s a great idea. I agree that severances and unpaid wages may be even more important — they’re certainly equally as important.

I think it’s something we should explore further at committee. If there is an amendment to that, we will address it there. If there are some sharp edges that might suggest that it wouldn’t pass again in the other place, then we would have to deal with that. On principle, I think it’s an excellent idea. If this is the vehicle for it, then terrific. If it’s not the vehicle for it, then maybe that’s something this chamber should seek.

Hon. Dennis Glen Patterson: Minister, Nunavut has significant gold resources with four producing mines and more on the horizon. However, it also has significant infrastructure and transportation challenges.

I’m wondering if there is any consideration being given to adding gold to the critical minerals list.

Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson, P.C., M.P., Minister of Natural Resources: There is a definition of how we deem things to be critical, and part of it is the resource availability in this country. Part of it is also related to where we actually see skyrocketing demand on a go-forward basis, and that is largely driven by minerals that are going to be in some way tied to the energy transition — not solely those that are used in batteries but, for example, uranium, which is used in nuclear power.

At this moment, I don’t think gold would fit those criteria. However, what we have said is that the list is going to be reviewed every three years, and folks can make arguments. There are other minerals that are not presently on there that people are making the argument should be on there. That is why it is intended to be an evergreen list on a go-forward basis.

As you would know very well, senator, gold is one area where Canada has actually thrived in terms of being able to advance the industry. It is a pretty healthy sector. As I say, I would never say never. That’s the reason we made it an evergreen list.

Hon. Tony Loffreda: Minister, welcome to the Senate.

Exactly one year ago, you received your mandate letter asking that you establish a pan-Canadian grid council to promote infrastructure investments, smart grids, grid integration and electricity sector innovation.

Can you further elaborate on your update on the council, its establishment, structure, membership and the priorities it will have? I ask that question because, as a senator from Quebec, I am proud that 94% of our electricity is generated by hydropower. Canadians can be proud that over 80% of our electricity comes from non-emitting sources. However, according to some reports, despite major investments in recent years, we still need to invest about $200 billion by 2035 to meet current green grid goals and even more to accommodate rapid growth in electricity demand.

Hon. Raymonde Gagné (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate) moved third reading of Bill C-36, An Act for granting to His Majesty certain sums of money for the federal public administration for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2023.

(On motion of Senator Martin, debate adjourned.)

[English]

The Senate proceeded to consideration of the third report of the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications (Bill C-11, An Act to amend the Broadcasting Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts, with amendments and observations), presented in the Senate on December 14, 2022.

Hon. Claude Carignan: Minister, Nordgold is a company whose headquarters are in Moscow. It was owned by Russian oligarch Alexei Mordashov until early this year, when he transferred his shares to his wife to avoid sanctions.

Thanks to its subsidiary Northquest, Nordgold has a mining concession for a gold-rich site in Nunavut. Mr. Mordashov has been banned from entering Europe, the United States and Australia, but not Canada. Gold is not on the list of strategic metals announced by Minister Champagne.

What do you plan to do to prevent a friend of Vladimir Putin from continuing to slip through the cracks and operate gold mines in Canada?

Senator Dalphond: I suppose that is an aspect the committee will look at because provincial pension funds are regulated by provincial regulators and not by the superintendent here in Ottawa. It is a constitutional issue, as a matter of fact.

My other question is about the scope of that bill. I certainly understand and share the goal of the bill to protect retirees. They have worked many years, and they come to retirement having managed their retirement based on the retirement benefits they expect to receive. If there is a reorganization of the company for which they were working, they may end up receiving a lesser amount. You referred to Sears and Nortel. Algoma Steel also went through that process, but were able to reorganize the pension funds and re-establish the pension benefits.

You referred to the fact that this will apply — if I understand properly — only to those who are entitled to defined pension benefits, and you said these now represent less than 10% of the retirees in Canada. I also understand this bill will not come into effect right away if it is adopted. It will come into effect in four years — further to an amendment that was adopted in the House of Commons — in order to give a transitional period to the employers who are providing pension benefits. Do you feel that at the end of the day the number of people who will benefit from that bill will be even less than 10% of the retirees?

Senator Wells: It could very well be less than 10%. I think it is important to note that the defined benefit pension plans right now are funded to about 109%. That’s not to say that all the different pension plans are overfunded. They are not. Some are obviously below. Over time, you are right — that will decrease.

The whole idea of the four years is for a getting-up-to-speed for those that have to ensure that their pension funds are funded. That four-year period is to allow that to happen so there is no deleterious effect if a company has to reach in and pull out from some source — from revenues or asset holdings — enough to top up their plans. That four-year period is to allow that, and, of course, an important part of the bill is to allow that to happen without deleterious financial penalty by placing sold or liquidated assets or other revenues into that plan. It would essentially allow them to do it without a tax penalty.

Hon. Mary Coyle: Welcome, minister. I’m a proud Nova Scotian, but I’m concerned that in 2021, our provincial electricity mix included 47% — almost half — from coal. Our province just approved the reopening of the Donkin Coal Mine for seven more years. My colleagues — Senators MacDonald and Gignac — asked you about the Atlantic Loop, which will connect our grid to hydro power from Labrador and Quebec, as you well know. Emera has paused their spending on the Atlantic Loop in response to provincial electricity rate caps, as you know.

Minister Wilkinson, you reiterated the government’s commitment to the Atlantic Loop. Could you elaborate specifically on how you will work with Nova Scotia to move this critical project forward?

Hon. Leo Housakos: Honourable senators, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the third report of the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications, which deals with Bill C-11, An Act to amend the Broadcasting Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts.

(For text of report, see today’s Journals of the Senate, p. 1152.)