The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: No, but we’re looking for a question from you, Senator Plett.

Senator Plett: I’m going to do that, but not before I have visited as many zoos and aquariums as I think will help to educate people here about the zoos. Is Senator Dean’s time up?

The Hon. the Speaker: I’m sorry, Senator Batters, but Senator Klyne’s time is about to expire.

Are you asking for five minutes to answer questions, Senator Klyne?

Hon. Marty Klyne: Honourable senators, this item is adjourned in the name of Senator Busson, and I ask for leave of the Senate that, following my intervention, the balance of Senator Busson’s time to speak to this item be reserved.

Senator Kutcher: I am.

Hon. Raymonde Gagné (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate), pursuant to notice of November 23, 2022, moved:

That, when the Senate next adjourns after the adoption of this motion, it do stand adjourned until Tuesday, November 29, 2022, at 2 p.m.

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Is leave granted, honourable senators?

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): I do have questions, if Senator Dean would take a question or two.

Senator Dean: We all have to do what we have to do, and you must do that, too. I am sure I will not be able to discourage you from that. I would say again that I think it’s important that we get this to committee. I’m happy for you to visit as many zoos as you wish, obviously.

Senator Plett: Are there others wanting to ask questions? I will finish.

Senator Dean, do you not think that it’s appropriate to find as much information as we possibly can before we take it to committee so we can all speak with as much knowledge as possible?

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Colleagues, the time has expired.

(On motion of Senator Clement, debate adjourned.)

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Wallin, seconded by the Honourable Senator Tannas, for the second reading of Bill S-248, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying).

The Hon. the Speaker: Minister, I’m sorry, but your time has expired.

Hon. Claude Carignan: Honourable colleagues, I would like to pay tribute to a great servant of Quebec and Canada, Gilles Loiselle, who passed away on September 29.

Mr. Loiselle was born in Ville-Marie, in the Abitibi-Témiscamingue region. Although his career took him all around the world, he never forgot his roots. He always made a point of returning to Abitibi from time to time.

Mr. Loiselle began his career as a journalist at Le Droit and later became a correspondent for Radio-Canada. He was known as a hard-nosed journalist. While covering international politics in the 1960s, he, along with so many other illustrious journalists, participated in exploring the world that francophone Quebecers were creating.

Gilles Loiselle was then recruited by Daniel Johnson to join Quebec’s public service. He first started as press secretary for the Délégation générale du Québec in Paris and then became a diplomat, serving as Quebec’s delegate general in London during the talks on the patriation of the Constitution. Of note, Mr. Loiselle worked for three different political parties, which is a testament to his professionalism and his expertise.

It was Brian Mulroney, together with his old friend Marcel Masse, who convinced Mr. Loiselle to enter politics. He was elected as a member for the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada in the federal riding of Langelier in 1988. He served as Minister of State for Finance and President of the Treasury Board in Brian Mulroney’s cabinet and as Minister of Finance in 1993, in Kim Campbell’s cabinet.

Mr. Loiselle’s major accomplishments include the consolidation of laws governing major financial institutions, which helped the economy withstand the global financial crises that followed, and the modernization of the public administration, together with the establishment of a stricter expenditure control regime.

After his defeat in 1993, he was an advisor to Paul Desmarais for approximately two decades. Mr. Loiselle thus participated directly, and in several different roles, to Quebec’s remarkable development since the 1950s. This man from a large family that lived in a remote area represented Quebec in the great capitals of Europe, in Paris, Rome and London. He helped put in place major consequential policies for the Canadian economy as well as the free trade deal with the United States and the creation of the GST.

He tried, much like his Progressive Conservative colleagues in Quebec, to correct the mistakes of the elder Trudeau and enable Quebec to sign the Constitution with honour and enthusiasm. After a very full public life, he became an adviser to one of the greatest businessmen Canada has known.

On behalf of myself and the Senate, I extend my sincere condolences to his wife, Lorraine, his children, Frédéric and Anne, and all his family members and friends.

Thank you, Mr. Loiselle, for you contributions to Quebec and Canada. Rest in peace.

(1410)

[English]

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): Welcome, minister. Last week, the Auditor General of Canada tabled a fairly scathing report on your department’s poor performance in supporting First Nations communities with respect to emergency management. The report stated:

Overall, Indigenous Services Canada did not provide the support First Nations communities needed to manage emergencies such as floods and wildfires, which are happening more often and with greater intensity.

The report also found that the department’s approach was reactive rather than preventative which cost taxpayers 3.5 times more money as a result. First Nations communities identified many preventative infrastructure projects to mitigate the impact of emergencies, yet 112 of these projects that have been approved by the department have yet to be funded.

So, minister, who is responsible for this gross mismanagement costing taxpayers 3.5 times more money? Why is your government not acting on the 112 prevention-focused infrastructure projects identified by First Nations communities?

(1440)

The Hon. the Speaker: Thank you, minister.

Senator Klyne: Thank you for that question. I agree with everything you said in your statement and question.

I wish I could tell you that there is an update. As you might recall, I asked the government, through our Government Representative, to provide us with an update. There was a mandate letter in 2019. It was a very simple mandate that said, “Make the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Heritage Centre a national museum.” That was lost in 2020. I couldn’t find it in anyone’s mandate letter, nor in 2021. But, as I understand it, it’s still a mandate that, nonetheless, was delivered by the Prime Minister. I’m still waiting to hear upon whose desk that lies.

Thank you for reminding us.

(Debate adjourned in the name of Senator Busson.)

(At 4:44 p.m., the Senate was continued until Tuesday, November 29, 2022, at 2 p.m.)

Hon Senators: Agreed.

(Inquiry withdrawn.)

[English]

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Patterson (Nunavut), seconded by the Honourable Senator Tannas, for the second reading of Bill S-228, An Act to amend the Constitution Act, 1867 (property qualifications of Senators).

(On motion of Senator Martin, debate adjourned.)

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Klyne, seconded by the Honourable Senator Harder, P.C., for the second reading of Bill S-241, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act (great apes, elephants and certain other animals).

Senator Kutcher: Thank you.

Legislating two independent witnesses, as this bill does, may add an additional safeguard to mitigating the possibility of coercion. Alternatively, or as a complement to that, there could be guidelines embedded in standards of practice for MAID providers. These, and other options, need to be closely examined at committee.

My fourth consideration was that the request has been made in due recognition of the impact of the passage of time so that the MAID provider has comfort that the request is current. Proposed paragraph 241.2(3.22)(b) of the bill addresses this issue, requiring that an advanced request be no more than five years old. Senator Wallin has told us that the five-year timeline was chosen following consultations with various stakeholders, but that she is not wedded to that number. Personally speaking as a clinician, I would suggest a shorter time period, perhaps two years. However, whatever the window chosen, it would be essential that the updating be signed by the individual, clearly confirming the specificity of the intolerable suffering criteria for that individual and that a clinical assessment of decision-making capacity be appended to the update.

Honourable senators, this is an important piece of legislation, and it requires our careful and critical consideration. I recall in our debates during Bill C-7 that one reason presented for not legislatively addressing the issue of advance requests was that this issue had not had sufficient study in committee. Colleagues, now is the time for us to do just that.

Thank you, wela’lioq.