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

Hon. Pierre J. Dalphond: Honourable senators, I see that this item has reached its fifteenth day. Accordingly, with leave of the Senate, I propose that study of this item stand until the next sitting of the Senate.

The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, the time for Question Period has expired.

I know all senators will want to join me in thanking Minister Lametti for being with us today. Thank you, minister. We look forward to seeing you again.

(At 4 p.m., pursuant to the order adopted by the Senate on September 21, 2022, the Senate adjourned until 2 p.m., tomorrow.)

The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, I wish to draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Zeb Jiva. He is the guest of the Honourable Senator Ravalia.

On behalf of all honourable senators, I welcome you to the Senate of Canada.

Hon. Claude Carignan: Minister, on April 26, you testified before the Special Joint Committee on the Declaration of Emergency, at which time you were asked for several documents that were used to support the decision-making process, and you invoked cabinet confidence privilege multiple times.

On June 28, the Public Order Emergency Commission issued a press release that read as follows:

The Government of Canada has responded to a request from Commissioner Paul Rouleau and agreed not to claim Cabinet privilege over the documents that Cabinet considered in making the decision to declare a public order emergency . . . .

I will also quote the statement by the commission’s counsel that was reported in the press release:

This exceptional step recognizes the fundamental importance of the Commission’s work and how critical these documents are in inquiring into why the Government declared a public order emergency . . . .

How do you explain this double standard? Cabinet privilege was waived for the Rouleau commission, but not for the joint committee.

Is that not disrespectful to the institution of Parliament?

Hon. David Lametti, P.C., M.P., Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada: Thank you, senator, for this important question.

Naturally, the act provided for a study. We have started the process for this parliamentary study with a former deputy minister who will look into several issues, including the one you raised, medical cannabis, and the potential circumvention of the regulations for other purposes.

He will be addressing that issue and investigating it. We are awaiting his report. I can tell you that I will examine and read this report carefully to find the answer to that question.

Senator Ringuette: I’m sorry. I understand I was asking a question and requesting an answer, but as far as I know, there is nothing in this bill that says that the new one-zone island will be at the lowest denominator. Anyway, I hope that you as the sponsor of the bill will seek clarification to the question I’m asking. Thank you for looking into it.

The Hon. the Speaker: I’m sorry, senator, but your time is up.

Hon. David Lametti, P.C., M.P., Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada: Thank you, senator. What I can commit to is moving forward with the perspective that you just mentioned. As I said in another answer today, we have already taken steps to better educate new judges. Rona Ambrose introduced a bill to that effect that I strongly supported in both houses. It should help to better educate judges.

We have made changes to the legislation itself to build a better framework for sexual assault laws. That needs to continue. We are trying to incorporate the perspectives of women and other individuals who are marginalized by the justice system. Obviously, we are committed to continuing to make changes that will improve the justice system.

The Hon. the Speaker: Senator Plett, thank you. Minister Lametti, please go ahead.

Hon. Salma Ataullahjan: Minister, recently your government appointed Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime Benjamin Roebuck, whom I wish to congratulate on his new role. I am, however, concerned that this position was only filled after a 361‑day vacancy. During this time, a year’s worth of legislation impacting victims was not reviewed by an ombudsman for victims of crime. Alternatively, the position of the ombudsman for federally sentenced offenders was filled the day after it became vacant in 2018.

Why did it take your government so long to fill this critical position, and what message does it send to victims of crime that filling the position for ombudsman for federally sentenced offenders was clearly a greater priority for your government?

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

[English]

Hon. David Lametti, P.C., M.P., Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada: Thank you, senator, for the question. I obviously won’t divulge any cabinet confidences, because I can’t. What I can say is that we are aware of the factors that you have cited in your question. As an example, I will talk about something that has happened very publicly: We have moved with our allies in a very concerted manner with respect to the situation in Ukraine. I think that in both material terms and leadership terms, the Ukrainian government of Volodymyr Zelenskyy would say that Canada has been one of the main contributors and leaders with respect to that current situation. It has been done through cooperation with NATO and G7 allies, and it has been coordinated.

I think it is fair to say you can expect the same kind of actions and the same kind of leadership from Minister Joly and the rest of our government.

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): Minister, my question for you is in the context of your role as vice-chair of the cabinet committee on Canada and the World.

Today, we are confronted with an unprecedented rise of a totalitarian axis of countries — that includes Russia and China — clearly prepared to use military force to achieve their ends. Most democratic states — Germany, the United Kingdom, Australia, India and Japan — are responding to this threat by refocusing on national security and building up their defence capabilities. Apart from a long-overdue and inadequate announcement on the North Warning System, Canada is doing absolutely nothing. Minister, what accounts for this total inaction?

Hon. Brian Francis: Minister Lametti, prior to the coming into force of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act in June 2021, the Standing Senate Committee on Indigenous Peoples heard from many witnesses who were critical of the federal consultation process.

Could you tell us what steps you and your department have taken in the last year to ensure that Indigenous people have the capacity to adequately and meaningfully participate in the co‑development of upcoming legislation as well as the action plan? I also want to know whether you have a plan to increase the use of mediation with Indigenous communities to prevent and resolve disputes and avoid the use of costly and time-consuming litigation.

Hon. Lucie Moncion: Thank you for being here in the Senate today. My question is about assistance for jury support organizations.

Organizations with a mission to provide support to jurors need funding to implement the recommendations set out in the 2018 report of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights in the other place, entitled Improving support for jurors in Canada.

The report takes into account jurisdictional issues that limit the support the federal government can provide. Federal funding for non-governmental entities is therefore a critical part of successfully moving this issue forward.

Could you tell us how your department supports these organizations?

Hon. David Lametti, P.C., M.P., Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada: Thank you for that question, senator, and I share the place from which that question comes.

As a government, we have committed to implementing the Calls to Action of the TRC. You have cited one of them. That one will require, in particular, work with the Minister of Health as we move forward, as well as cooperation with the provinces, which administer the criminal justice system across Canada as part of their constitutional responsibilities.

But I commit to being an active participant in the implementation of that as we move forward.

I will be honest that, for the time being, my goal is to get Bill C-5 over the finish line, which also responds to a TRC Call to Action regarding the overrepresentation of Indigenous people in the criminal justice system, to take one measure.

There are other measures that need to be taken, and I strongly feel that the question of fetal alcohol spectrum disorder will also be something that comes up both in the context of our elaboration of an Indigenous justice strategy and a Black justice strategy, and then in concert with the Minister of Health we can move forward.

Hon. David Lametti, P.C., M.P., Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada: Thank you, senator. I said at the committee, and I will repeat now for the whole of the Senate, that I think this is what is possible now. There are a number of mandatory minimum penalties which I think the vast majority of the Canadian public would not agree to repeal — sexual assault offences and sexual offences against children, for example, are things that I think the Canadian public would not accept — or there are other questions that would need to be addressed first. For example, in the North, we need to address housing quite badly before we can think about certain mandatory minimum penalties because there aren’t options for places to go that are safe. We have invested in shelters and that sort of thing in the North, but more work needs to be done. I sincerely believe this is where we are now.

Hon. Kim Pate: At the Legal Committee last week, you discussed with Senator Cotter the fact that every major sentencing law reform Indigenous inquiry has called for the repeal of all or at the very least this clause for structural discretion of the type that former Chief Justice McLachlin recommended in Lloyd, yet you have decided not to implement that. What is your government planning to do to remedy this situation? And have you considered a reference to the Supreme Court of Canada on this issue?