Hon. Josée Verner: Minister, the Hydrogen Strategy for Canada emphasizes green hydrogen because of Canada’s enviable hydroelectric resources, especially in Quebec. This is indeed very promising, but electrolysis is expensive and uses a lot of electricity, which is in limited supply.

In March 2022, Sophie Brochu, the President and CEO of Hydro-Québec, said that the province’s surplus of clean electricity will run out by 2027. What are your thoughts on this important issue? Does it make you think that it might be a good idea to revise the federal strategy in light of this important issue?

Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson, P.C., M.P., Minister of Natural Resources: It’s a very important issue. Certainly, the timeline is short for a project involving so much infrastructure. We have worked hard with our provincial and territorial counterparts. I have a meeting with Minister Fitzgibbon on Wednesday to discuss the issue. Of course, energy and electricity fall under provincial jurisdiction. We know that we have a role to play in supporting the project, particularly when it comes to funding.

Obviously, we can’t have a situation where there is a cost for the people living in the provinces and territories in question, and we have some tools that we want to use, but right now, we are negotiating with our provincial and territorial partners. I am very optimistic that we can come up with a plan that works for Canada and for the provinces and territories, including Quebec, since Quebec is where the energy is coming from.

Hon. Marty Deacon: Would the senator take a question?

Senator Wells: I will. Thank you.

Senator M. Deacon: Thank you for picking up the ball on this again and bringing it back to us to give it some thought.

My question is around the legal language in the bill and concerns around amendments to section 40 of the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985. The bill changes the language to say, as you mentioned:

The Superintendent shall . . . submit to the Minister a report on . . .

(b) the success of pension plans in meeting the funding requirements, determined in accordance with section 9, and the corrective measures taken or directed to be taken to deal with any pension plans that are not meeting the funding requirements.

Does this section give the superintendent power to compel these corrective measures to be taken, such as freezing dividend payments until a pension fund is solvent again, or is it up to the company in question whether they will take these steps or not?

Senator Wells: Thank you for your question, Senator Deacon.

The Superintendent of Financial Institutions is an arm’s-length federal regulator. Of course, regulators have laws enacted to permit regulations to be developed, and this is the supervisor or the superintendent of those regulations.

The Superintendent of Financial Institutions regulates financial institutions — banks, creditors and others. The rules under which they have to act are the regulations. The superintendent, on breach of regulations — and I’m fortunate enough to have been head of a federal regulator at one time, so I know how it works — if they don’t act in accordance with the regulations, penalties can be imposed. In that respect, they are compelled and can be compelled by the regulations.

Very often, because you might be dealing with a financial institution, the financial institution will know immediately what the regulations are and what their obligations are.

Can they be compelled? Yes, they can be compelled, but they’re compelled by the regulations that they’ve signed onto in their licensing.

Hon. Lucie Moncion: Will the senator take a question?

Senator Wells, we have discussed this before. I want to understand the number of people who have access in Canada to a defined benefit plan and which of it is publicly funded and which of it is privately funded.

Senator Wells: Thank you very much for your question. I do know that there is approximately $350 billion under defined plans now. I don’t know how many people that represents, and $350 billion is a lot of money, of course. The number of companies that go bankrupt every year is in the hundreds. Recently, it has been in the low hundreds. About 10 years ago, it was in the high hundreds. I hate to say that the numbers are quite low, but they are.

Again, I don’t know the number of people under private or public, but that is something we could explore at committee.

Senator Moncion: I just want to add to the last comment you made. It’s information that would be valuable to the members of the committee so that we have a better understanding of how many people have the golden benefits and how many are maybe not as well protected. Having these numbers often makes it easier for us to make a decision at the end of the process when this bill comes back to us — wouldn’t you think?

Senator Wells: I know that defined programs are obviously less and less these days — I think even less than 10%. But you’re right. We need to know the scope of this. However, colleagues, it’s also important to not forget the principle of the bill, and that’s to protect those who are at the end of the line and who have been paying into a pension. In fact, when you sign on with a company and you pay into a pension, it’s essentially a contract. It’s an agreement that you have — that’s one of the benefits, like your salary or your hours — when you sign up with a company. It’s that contract that this bill aims to protect.

[Translation]

Hon. Hassan Yussuff: Honourable senators, I find myself in this very interesting moment in my life. I’m the critic of a bill that I can be a critic of, so I will try my best to tell you the best story I can invoke as to why this piece of legislation before us is worthy of our consideration and support.

I rise today to speak to Bill C-228, the pension protection act. Although this bill deals with the complex, confusing and often hard-to-describe subject of bankruptcy law, fundamentally it is about something that everyone in this chamber can easily understand and wants not only for themselves, but for their children and grandchildren to retire with.

Simply, people want and deserve a dignified and respectful retirement. That is what this bill is all about. It ensures that people’s dignity and respect are not kept at the back of the line, but instead will be placed at the front of the line in a bankruptcy when their pension plan is not fully funded.

Senators, we have all heard the devastating stories of pensioners who worked all their lives for companies like Nortel, Sears Canada and White Birch on a promise that they would have security in their retirement, only to find that security replaced with fear, anxiety and uncertainty when their company faced bankruptcy and their pension plan was not fully funded.

Since 1982, more than 250,000 seniors have suffered pension losses when their company underfunded their pensions and went bankrupt. The current bankruptcy laws kept those quarter million pensioners at the back of the line when their company went into bankruptcy. Bill C-228 will change the status quo and puts workers and pensioners first in line when a company goes bankrupt.

Colleagues, today I want to talk about why we should support this bill. It is to ensure retirees can live with the dignity and respect they have earned and deserve in their retirement.

Senators, let me start with some context for this bill. Bill C-228 deals with employer-sponsored pension plans, particularly defined benefit plans. Data shows there are currently some 1.2 million Canadians in private sector defined benefit plans, and it is estimated that 2.8 million retirees have the same.

Employer-sponsored pension plans are part of the collective bargaining process and agreement between employees and employers. They are negotiated and agreed to in the same way as wages. Workers will often agree to lower wage increases, preferring that money go into the pension plan to provide more security for their retirement.

What does that mean? In essence, pensions are deferred wages: Rather than being paid immediately, they are earned while working and payable upon retirement. Fundamentally, an employer-sponsored pension plan is a promise — a promise made between the employer and their employees. The employees commit to work to help their company succeed and grow today for their financial retirement security of tomorrow. The employer, in return, promises to fully fund their pension commitment. That is what is expected of each party — no less, no more.

Senators, I want to be clear that employee pension plan benefits are negotiated and earned. They are not a charitable handout. Employees negotiate and agree to have part of their wages being deferred to enjoy a better and more secure retirement — a retirement with dignity. That is the deal.

For retirees, the bankruptcy of their former employer whose pensions are underfunded can have dire consequences, not for a month or a year, but for the rest of their lives, as we have seen in past bankruptcies of other companies. It means their fixed income is reduced and it will be more difficult to pay for the necessities of life. Pensioners have had to sell their homes or their cars, or have had to choose between groceries, putting oil in the furnace, medication or even going back to work at a very late stage in their life despite the fact they had planned for their retirement.

So what will the amendments proposed in Bill C-228 do to help protect pensioners’ retirement security? This bill will give employer-sponsored pension plans a superpriority in the case of bankruptcy and insolvency. That means that when a company goes bankrupt or seeks to restructure under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, pension plan deficits will go to the front of the line, ahead of secured creditors, when funds are distributed.

The goal of the bill is to protect the pensions of retirees of companies that end up in insolvency, like General Chemical, Eaton’s and Co-op Atlantic. In those cases, there was not enough money left in the pension fund to pay all of the liabilities, and because pension plans are unsecured creditors under current bankruptcy laws, pensioners were left to take a very painful cut in their retirement income.

Critics of the bill say that giving superpriority to pensioners ahead of secured creditors like banks will have a negative effect on lending, either preventing companies from getting loans or increasing the cost of loans.

Here is the truth: Secured creditors make informed investment decisions and adjust the terms of loans based on the risk of the investment every day. That’s what banks do. They are sophisticated lenders that can easily assess risks even when they are hard to define or measure.

Workers and retirees, on the other hand, do not have the same opportunity or ability to diversify risk and pension investments. Pension plans are often their only savings, and they have no control over the investments. They have no option but to trust that the promise their employer made — that their pension fund would be fully funded — is kept. Their retirement future is dependent on that trust.

Unfortunately, for far too many, that trust has been broken. Bill C-228 is insurance for workers and retirees against employers breaking that trust and devastating their retirement security.

Here is another thing about superpriorities in bankruptcy law. The Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act already provides for a series of priorities that rank ahead of unsecured and secured debt, including taxes owing, Canada Pension Plan and Employment Insurance contributions, recently delivered goods and up to $2,000 in salary.

The banks and other secured lenders already must factor in these superpriorities when they assess risk and consider lending to a company. I am confident they have the expertise and sophistication to factor in a superpriority for pensioners.

However, I know this is a big change that involves complex laws. That is why it is a fair compromise to allow banks and the pension investment industry four years after the bill is passed to adapt before it comes into effect.

The bill also requires an annual report on federally regulated pension fund solvency to be tabled in the House of Commons to provide more transparency on the health of pension funds within the federal sector, because on the provincial side, of course, provincial governments have that authority.

Colleagues, over 250,000 pensioners have had their retirement future turned upside down over the last 40 years. I ask you a simple question: After a lifetime of hard work, should anybody have to struggle to make ends meet in their retirement? This bill ensures that the answer is “no.”

Critics of the changes to bankruptcy laws in this bill would often talk about the unintended consequences, so I want to take a few minutes to talk about that — not the unproven unintended consequences of passing Bill C-228, but the real unintended consequences of the current bankruptcy laws that will persist if this bill is not passed. The unintended consequences of the status quo have resulted in some 250,000 pensioners over the last 40 years having their retirement blindsided with devastating effect because their former employer went into bankruptcy, and the deficit in their pension fund was at the back of the line when it came to trying to recoup the money it was owed.

I know the former employees of Sears, Eaton’s, Caterpillar and Co-op Atlantic truly felt, and had to live their remaining years with, the unintended consequences of our current bankruptcy laws.

Imagine dedicating your working life to one company for more than 27 years, only to find out you are out of a job and won’t be getting the full pension you’ve paid into all your life. Is that fair?

That was the reality that was faced by 62-year-old Gail Paul of Corner Brook, Newfoundland, and more than 17,000 Sears workers across Canada who were either close to retirement or already retired, and who lost almost 20% of their pension income for the rest of their lives. That’s what they had to face when their company went bankrupt, because they were unsecured creditors and the assets of their bankrupt company were not going to go to fund their pension plan because they were not a priority of previous governments and legislators at the federal level.

Honourable senators, the pensioners of companies like Wabush Mines, Timminco, Smoky River Coal and other companies whose pension plans were slashed are real people. You know them. They are friends; they are neighbours. They are even family members. They have faced real hardship because of the current bankruptcy laws in our country.

I ask that you hear their stories because they have a lot to say about the unintended consequences of not passing this bill. If Bill C-228 had been the law, many of these retirees would have had a dignified and respectful retirement. That is what is possible if we pass this bill.

Colleagues, before I conclude, I want to acknowledge the activists and advocates who have worked relentlessly and tirelessly over the last two decades, fighting to make the amendments to the proposed Bill C-228 a reality. One of them is standing before you today. I want to start with the parliamentarians who began proposing private members’ bills and public bills going back some 15 years. They forged the path that eventually led to MP Marilyn Gladu working with all parties in the other place to achieve unanimous support to pass this bill last month in the other place.

I also want to recognize the labour groups such as the United Steelworkers, Unifor and the Canadian Labour Congress, who have fought for this day to come, not only for their pensioners but for their members who will one day rely on their pensions in retirement.

Finally, I want to recognize the pension advocacy groups who were here yesterday. They have never given up fighting for fairness and justice. These groups have fought not only for their own benefits — which they won’t get as a result of the passing of this bill — but for the next generation of pensioners should we pass this bill. I am speaking of groups such as CanAge; the Canadian Association of Retired Persons, or CARP; the Canadian Federation of Pensioners; the Canadian Network for the Prevention of Elder Abuse; Réseau FADOQ; the Congress of Union Retirees of Canada, or CURC; and National Pensioners Federation. I thank them for their hard work and their unwavering determination to change the laws that put them and their families at the back of the line.

In conclusion, colleagues, I want you to think about the unfairness in the current bankruptcy laws, which have caused so much pain for people who only wanted to retire with dignity and respect. These men and women have worked all their lives expecting the secure retirement that was promised to them by their employer-sponsored pension plan.

I want each of you to think about what it would be like for you and your family if, after working your entire life and retiring believing you have a guaranteed retirement income to rely on, you found out the company you worked for went bankrupt, and your pension will be cut 20% or more because the company pension plan was underfunded and in deficit. Your pension savings go to the back of the line during the bankruptcy proceedings.

That is the reality right now because of the current bankruptcy laws, laws that do not protect the interests of pensioners when companies go bankrupt or reorganize. Companies make promises to employees that they accept as being true: that they will have a guaranteed retirement income when they retire. The pension is a condition of employment to which both the employer and the employees contribute. An employer who fails to properly fund their pension plan is at fault in the same way as an employer who fails to pay workers their agreed-upon wages.

Senators, we would find it unacceptable to allow an employer to not pay their employees the wages that were earned and owed. Allowing companies not to pay deferred wages should be equally unacceptable. You will hear from the critics of this bill, who will talk about potential unintended consequences. I want you to remember that the unintended consequences of the current laws are already known all too well by pensioners whose dignity and respect have been placed at the back of the line for far too long.

Colleagues, a lifetime of work should not leave someone to face insecurity and poverty in retirement because of an unjust law in this great land of ours. This bill can change that. I urge you to support it to get it to committee, where we will hear the witnesses. More importantly, it will come back to you for a final vote. I am hoping that, after decades of history, we can finally write the law in the way it was intended, to ensure that workers can have dignity and that companies can continue to be successful and to contribute to this great land of ours. Thank you so much.

Hon. Percy E. Downe: Honourable senators, I just realized, in listening to the last speaker, that we are almost in a conflict of interest because if the Government of Canada goes broke, our pensions will be protected under this provision.

Colleagues, we’ve all heard the stories: A company goes under, the creditors line up, and the workers and retirees of that company find themselves at the very end of that line. After those creditors are done, the workers and retirees get what is left. If what’s left isn’t enough to fund their pensions or health benefits, well, that’s the way it goes.

We all remember Nortel. At its peak, they employed almost 95,000 people — 25,000 in Canada alone — but that all ended in 2013. Whatever the cause of Nortel’s collapse — mismanagement on the part of senior executives or the Chinese government hacking and selling trade secrets — it is the impact of their bankruptcy that informs the bill we are debating.

Colleagues, similar bills have been brought forward in the past. In preparing this speech, I looked at correspondence I received during one such debate, correspondence from former Nortel employees facing financial hardship, if not ruin, as a result of its collapse; stories of workers unable to work due to disability. Family members wrote to me, saying:

He thought himself very fortunate that he had been working for a company that supplied the wonderful pension benefits held by Nortel. Can you imagine his shock when he was told that these benefits, in fact, did not exist?

They used words like “nightmare,” “desperation,” “shock and horror,” “financial destruction,” but there was another theme as well — anger — anger at seeing senior executives walk away with bonuses and severance packages while employees and pensioners found themselves at the end of their ropes and at the end of the line.

It happened again with Sears. The company goes under. It is revealed that the pension fund had been grossly underfunded, even though, between 2005 and 2013, Sears Canada paid about $3 billion in dividends to shareholders. The employees, current and retired, are left in the lurch. In fact, the story of Sears is even more shocking. Whereas the fate of Nortel may be attributed to market forces, there was something else at play with Sears Canada.

I mentioned the $3 billion in dividends starting in 2005. That year, its American parent company was purchased by a billionaire hedge fund manager. From events that followed, one can assume that the “management” of Sears Canada had a job not so much to build the company as to strip it. Flagship stores in major cities, the financial services branch, which was a money‑maker at the time, and other assets were sold off, providing a dividend yield to shareholders much higher than what other companies were providing at the same time.

And yet, all this time, Sears Canada’s pension fund was underfunded by hundreds of millions of dollars, a situation that continued despite numerous warnings from Sears employees and pensioners. When the end finally happened, when there were no more assets to sell off, the company filed for bankruptcy in 2017, and creditors lined up, with pensioners at the end of the line again.

So the person selling couches or fridges in the Sears outlet in Charlottetown lost almost everything, but the hedge fund manager could buy a 300-foot yacht — not that I begrudge him his 300-foot yacht, but I do begrudge the lost pensions and benefits that paid for it.

Honourable senators, as was stated repeatedly during study of this bill in the House of Commons, pensions are not gifts provided at the whim of some employer. They are wages earned by employees, deferred until their retirement.

This bill, like those that came before it, seeks to recognize their contribution in a tangible way, by ensuring that, in the case of a company that has failed, those who worked to build that company have a greater claim on those assets that remain than those who would profit from its demise.

Honourable senators, this bill passed 318 to 0 in the House of Commons. That burst of energy, activity and even manic behaviour by the members of the House of Commons, after years and years of refusing to take any action, requires a sober second review by the Senate. Having said that, I believe this bill is long overdue, and the Senate may find ways at committee to improve it and correct any errors or omissions.

I take no joy in the anticipated final passing of this legislation. Parliament should be ashamed that it has taken so many years to do the right thing, and the sadness that connects to its eventual passing is that so many hard-working men and women, and their families, suffered so much while waiting for Parliament to finally take action.

Thank you, colleagues.

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

(On motion of Senator Gold, bill placed on the Orders of the Day for second reading two days hence.)

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

(Motion agreed to and bill read second time.)

Hon. Clément Gignac: Honourable senators, on behalf of Senator Mockler, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the ninth report of the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance entitled Supplementary Estimates (B) for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2023, 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 Gignac, report placed on the Orders of the Day for consideration at the next sitting of the Senate.)

[English]

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Are senators ready for the question? It was moved by the Honourable Senator Housakos, seconded by the Honourable Senator Martin that the report be adopted.

All those in favour will please say, “yea.”

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): Minister, your government’s environmental plan is estimated to cost tens of thousands of good-paying jobs across the energy sector. Your mandate letter says that you must, “Work with the Minister of Labour in moving forward with legislation and comprehensive action to achieve a Just Transition. . . .” for these workers. One year later and your colleague, minister, has tabled no such legislation.

Minister, has your government abandoned the idea of coming up with a just transition plan for workers in the energy sector? How much longer are Canadian oil and gas workers, whose jobs are on the line, supposed to wait to see a meaningful plan from your government?

Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson, P.C., M.P., Minister of Natural Resources: Let me just start by thanking the honourable senators for having me here today. I acknowledge that this session is taking place on the ancestral and traditional territories of the Algonquin Anishinaabeg people.

Thank you, senator, for the question. I would actually challenge one of the things you said at the very beginning, in that most forecasts say we will gain far more jobs than we may lose through the process of the energy transition.

I would also say that many of the jobs that we will see in the future, such as in the production of hydrogen or biofuels, from a skill set perspective, do not look much different from the types of skills that are required in the existing energy sector within this country.

But we are working on the discussion around the just transition. That includes an economic plan for a future economy that will be prosperous and strong in the context of a lower‑carbon future. It is also about adjustment in cases where there is displacement of workers, like coal-fired power plant workers. That is certainly something we’re working on, and we intend to introduce legislation in the new year.

Senator Plett: Minister, the fact of the matter is 300,000 Canadians working in the oil and gas sector have already lost their jobs since your government took office. Your colleague the Minister of Labour says that industry workers need to know how much we appreciate their talents and how valuable they are. With Christmas just around the corner, these workers need certainty that their jobs are safe, and that they will not be forced out of their rural communities to obtain employment.

Minister, can you assure energy sector workers today that their jobs will be protected during these already difficult economic times?

Yes, we are firmly committed to that. But with regard to your comment about the loss of jobs in this sector, at this stage the loss is primarily, given the volumes being produced, the result of automation.

Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson, P.C., M.P., Minister of Natural Resources: Thank you for the question. Yes, the Just Transition, sometimes referred to these days as a plan for sustainable jobs, is something that we have been working on very actively — certainly not just myself, but also Minister O’Regan, Minister Qualtrough and, of course, our counterparts in the New Democratic Party who are part of the Supply and Confidence Agreement.

That is something that we intend to deliver early in the new year with respect to introduction of legislation, but also the release of a draft action plan outlining a number of the elements — not only on what we’ve done, but where we’re going. That will include a whole range of things that came out of the consultations that we held over the past couple of years, very much including the labour movement.

It certainly is not just about skills training and adjustment. It’s also about building an economy that will create good jobs for Canadians as we move forward.

We certainly are reflecting on the coal-related work that was done previously. I know you were very actively involved in that, senator. Some of those have already been acted on, but certainly we are looking at the remainder of those recommendations as we go forward with the broader plan, which is meant to address not just coal workers but others as well. As you know, even the funding that was put into place for coal workers expires at the end of 2023.

There is obviously time between then and when some of these plants will shut down, so there’s a broader conversation that needs to happen.

Hon. Patricia Bovey: Honourable senators, it was a shock on Monday to learn of the passing of Jim Carr. A proud Manitoban, Canadian, member of Parliament and former cabinet minister, he had the best interests of all at heart.

In each of his careers, he built on his myriad of skills and interests, and was a true Renaissance man.

I met Jim 50 years ago. He was working in communications for Manitoba’s Assistant Deputy Minister for Cultural Affairs, Mary Elizabeth Bayer. I was organizing an exhibition for her to send to France. Jim was my public relations go-to person.

Jim was a superlative oboist and played with the Winnipeg Symphony Orchestra. He also served as CEO of the Manitoba Arts Council. He was a Member of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba, founder of the Business Council of Manitoba, adviser to the University of Manitoba and, most recently, a member of Parliament and cabinet minister.

Our work, friends and lives overlapped for many years, more so when he was in the other place and I was here in the Senate. I was delighted that he agreed to sponsor Bill S-208, an act respecting the declaration on the essential role of artists and creative expression in Canada. He spoke of a Winnipeg Symphony Orchestra quartet visiting his Grade 3 class and its transformational effect on him. My experience, also in my Grade 3 class, was similar with a visit from the Winnipeg Art Gallery.

He well knew the importance of the arts, the challenges of arts cultural organizations and the very real needs of artists themselves. Those issues were the focus of many of our conversations in committee, in the airport and over lunch, along with conversations about our magnificent province.

Colleagues, I will miss this bridge builder, this author of a book on Senator Charles Dufferin “Duff” Roblin, this legislator who bridged our province to others and to the federal government, this community leader who bridged the arts and business, business and government and community and universities and this proud Jewish man who built interfaith bridges in Manitoba, on Parliament Hill and internationally.

Jim adored his family, and he smiled broadly when he talked about his grandchildren. In our last chat less than two weeks ago, he was looking forward to their Carr family holiday celebrations and an upcoming trip to Mexico with his wife, Colleen.

My heart goes out to his wife, Colleen, his children, grandchildren and many, many friends.

Thank you, Jim — dear friend, dear colleague — for your years of giving in so many ways to our community at home and nationwide.

Bless you.

Hon. Elizabeth Marshall: Welcome, minister, to the Senate of Canada. I have read your Critical Minerals Strategy and I watched your press conference. Given the billions of dollars to be devoted to this strategy, when will you begin to report to Canadians on the progress of the strategy; the money spent, which will be in the billions of dollars; and the strategy’s achievements? I’m looking for accountability.

Hon. Sabi Marwah: Honourable senators, I rise today to speak about Julia Levy, who was just announced as the newest Rhodes Scholar from British Columbia.

The Rhodes Scholarship is one of the most prestigious postgraduate awards for study at the University of Oxford. Established in 1902, it is the oldest graduate scholarship in the world. Key criteria for the Rhodes Scholarship includes academic excellence, leadership ability and commitment to service with a focus on contributing to positive change in the world.

Julia meets all these requirements and then some. She is a scientist, artist and activist, and she is also the first trans woman to be awarded the Rhodes Scholarship in Canada.

Julia graduated with a major in chemistry and a minor in visual arts from the University of Victoria. During her second year, she combined the two fields of study and invented a virtual reality program to help chemistry students visualize molecules in a better way. She went on to develop an augmented reality format for visualizing complex molecules. Professor Jeremy Wulff said in a statement on Julia that she is “destined for greatness.”

Julia also worked with the university’s Vancouver Island Drug Checking Project and the Gender Generation Project for trans youth and their families.

I spoke with Julia yesterday and asked her if there was a message she wished to share with Canadians. She said:

I want to celebrate how far we have come. Being a transgender woman is the most beautiful and joyous experience of my life.

Transgender people have something vital to contribute to our national community, and I hope that in receiving this award I will have a positive impact on the lives of others.

I am incredibly grateful to share these words with you; as a transwoman, a British Columbian, and as a Canadian. I hope and intend to impact the world in a way that will make Canada proud.

Colleagues, as many of you know, the Rhodes Scholarship comes with a dated set of rules and a history of racial inequality, gender and class discrimination.

Elizabeth Kiss, warden of Rhodes House in Oxford, acknowledged that the Rhodes Trust is grappling with its history. But the negative aspects of the founder’s vision for the scholarship have been rejected, except for the core values that still make sense. For example, Kiss says that Rhodes wanted to develop people with “an energy to lead and a kindness for others.” Levy has that in spades, Kiss said.

As Canada’s first trans woman to be awarded this scholarship, Julia is proving that excellence and success are accessible to everyone regardless of their gender expression or sexual orientation. Thank you.

Hon. Yuen Pau Woo: Apologies to Clement Clarke Moore.

’Twas the week before Christmas, when all through the Senate

Members were stirring for a way to adjourn it.

Speeches were made in the chamber with care,

In hopes that minds would be changed both here and over there.

A report on C-11 had been put to bed,

While visions of 3rd reading danced in the GRO’s head.

As dry leaves that before the wild hurricane fly,

When they meet with an obstacle, mount to the sky,

And so it was with the Broadcasting Act,

Yet “discoverability” was saved, as a matter of fact.

The Speaker in his robe and three-cornered hat,

Had settled down in the chair where he sat.

When out in the foyer there arose such a clatter,

Pages sprang up to deal with the matter.

With Black Rod in charge, so lively and quick,

I knew in a moment it wasn’t St. Nick.

The moon on the breast of the Ottawa snow

Gave lustre of mid-day to objects below,

When, what to my wondering eyes should appear,

But six new senators, bright eyed and clear.

More rapid than eagles the sponsors they came,

as they whistled, and shouted, and called out by name:

“Now, Shugart! now, Osler! now, Greenwood and Burey!

On, Cardozo! on Patterson! Shake hands with Furey!

We welcome you to the hallowed red chamber

And pray the PM will fill the remainder.

And then, in a twinkling, we received a note

From Clerk Gerald, and thusly he wrote:

“When Christmas is over, this Christmas will be

the last of our Christmas for Christmases to see.”

We awed at this portent and wondered who?

It was Dan, our senator and friend from Membertou.

He was humble and wise, and a right jolly old elf,

with a name like Christmas, he could hardly help himself.

The gifts he left us are abundant and rare,

Above all, kindness and patience and, well, savoir faire.

When we return, he will have retired,

But his example for us will long be admired.

As we spring to our sleighs, and give the whistle,

before we fly away like the down of a thistle.

We will exclaim, ere Dan leaves our sight,

CHRISTMAS is ever with us because he did right!

Happy holidays to one and all.