Hon. David Lametti, P.C., M.P., Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada: I read that report and I share your concern, and it is something that I will raise in the appropriate channels.

I can say that within the justice department we are moving in the right direction both in terms of — on the Attorney General side — implementing the litigation directive that my predecessor, the Honourable Jody Wilson-Raybould, brought in and with respect to the policies that we develop at the justice level.

For example, with UNDRIP we have created a secretariat, and I can say that there is real enthusiasm within that secretariat — not to put it too bluntly — to right the wrongs of the past. I’m hoping that’s something we can expand across government.

I agree. I read the report. I was concerned in the same way that you’re concerned, and I will do my best to help change that.

[Translation]

Hon. Jean-Guy Dagenais: Still on the topic of organized crime taking advantage of gaps in the legislation, some Canadians are persistently trying to smuggle cannabis across the American border, so cannabis seizures have skyrocketed and seem to be out of control. The office of the Quebec Minister of Public Security said that it has informed your department of the situation several times, but it is still waiting for your response. Would I be wrong to think that, as with the handgun issue, your government is trying to shirk all responsibility by shifting it elsewhere, rather than engaging in a serious fight against organized crime?

Hon. David Lametti, P.C., M.P., Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada: Thank you, senator, for your question. Obviously, I share your dedication to the cause. As for the timeline, it will be as soon as possible. The consultations will seek to determine what should be done. A parliamentary committee studied precisely that, but its answer was not necessarily well received by experts in the community. Understandably, we would simply like to ask the experts what they think of the committee’s report and what we should do to avoid unintended consequences. It is a final update, if you will. I know it will take a little bit longer, but the consultations will be done in partnership with the expert community.

[English]

Hon. David Richards: Thank you, minister, for being here. Minister, there have been a number of criminal investigations initiated over the last few years. One was over the coastal pipeline that suffered damages costing multi-millions of dollars. Another was about the burning of a dozen or more Catholic churches out West. Where do these investigations stand in the file? Are there still ongoing investigations, and can you give us an update on how they are proceeding?

Hon. David Lametti, P.C., M.P., Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada: Thank you, senator. With all respect, in Canada, the way we have divided up our system — and I congratulate the previous Conservative government for having done this, as I thought Minister Nicholson did a great job with it — is that the investigative function is undertaken by the place of jurisdiction, whether it be the RCMP or another police force. So those investigations would be undertaken independently by the police force of jurisdiction.

The prosecutorial function is then independently done by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada if it’s covered by the federal prosecution or — in most cases of criminal offences — by provincial prosecution services. Again, those are independent — and I think they should be independent — of the office of the Attorney General.

So I’m not in a position to comment on any of those questions, nor should I be, given the way our system has evolved. I quite frankly think the system as it currently stands is working reasonably well.

Hon. Rosa Galvez: Welcome, Minister Lametti. I’m sure you are aware of increasingly diversified litigation on intrinsically related environmental matters that impact our already overloaded judicial system. To name a few, environmental activists, Indigenous leaders and Black communities are being arrested for defending their land, water and air from pollution. There have been lawsuits from provinces for too much action against climate change, lawsuits from citizens for not enough action on climate change, rural communities potentially suing oil and gas companies for unpaid taxes and lawsuits against corporations for misleading and greenwashing.

My question is: How is your government comfortable with the clarity of present environmental laws, its ability to meet its climate commitments and implementing the “polluter pays” principle?

Hon. David Lametti, P.C., M.P., Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada: Thank you, senator. I mentioned a moment ago that every mandate letter for every minister contained a clause on reconciliation. The other mandatory clause has been climate. Everything that all of us do is filtered through the lens of fighting climate change and protecting our environment. You’ve asked a very complex question, which I can’t possibly answer in a minute and a half because of its complexity, and it touches not just what I do but what all of us do here as well.

We are trying on multiple fronts to fight climate change. We have put a price on pollution as one element of a climate change policy, but it will also involve an economic transformation. In a positive sense, there is a new green economy that Canada is uniquely positioned to lead on, and sometimes we have to go to court to defend that vision, which we have done successfully and which we will continue to do successfully. I take a strong hand as Attorney General in the way those cases devolve.

But we will continue. And it requires working with Indigenous peoples; it requires working with business; it requires working with community groups; and it requires working with municipalities, provinces and territories. It’s complex and it touches the work that all of us do, but we don’t have any options.

Hon. Jane Cordy: Honourable senators, I rise today on behalf of my colleague Senator Wanda Thomas Bernard, who is unable to be with us today:

Most Maritimers will remember the third week of September because of the damage caused by Hurricane Fiona; however, many in East Preston will remember it as a week that we lost two phenomenal women: Mary Colley and Doris Evans. They were both bright lights in their community and a constant source of support and kindness.

Mary Colley was known as “Big Momma,” a name that reflects who she was at the core, a true community mother. Big Momma relied on her faith to bring her through tough times in life. She was known for her generous spirit and her dedication and commitment to her family and community. I will miss her ability to make me smile and laugh even when I did not feel like doing so.

Doris Evans was a retired school teacher, church elder, writer and dedicated lifelong learner and educator. She inspired hope in her young Black students at Partridge River School, the segregated school in East Preston. She strongly believed she could make a difference in their lives through the power of education. Her motto was, “If I can help somebody as I go along, then my living shall not be in vain.” Even after retirement, she continued tutoring adults and children who needed extra academic support.

Honourable colleagues, I offer sincerest sympathies to the Colley and Evans families. I encourage my community to honour the legacies of these women while we grieve their loss. The memory of Doris and Mary’s love and support rippled through every member of the community of East Preston, and their legacies will live on.

Honourable senators, on a personal note, I taught in East Preston for many years. The community has many strong, supportive and active women like Mary Colley, Doris Evans and, indeed, our colleague Senator Wanda Thomas Bernard. They have made East Preston a wonderful place with a strong sense of community.

Thank you. Asante.

Hon. Senators: Hear, hear!

Hon. Dennis Glen Patterson: Honourable senators, I rise to pay tribute to Paul Aarulaaq Quassa, who has had a huge role in the successful negotiation of the landmark Nunavut Land Claims Agreement in 1993 and the consequent establishment of the Nunavut territory in 1999.

Mr. Quassa was born in Manitok, a hunting camp near Igloolik, and raised in a very traditional way on the land. At the age of six, he was taken far away to a residential school in Churchill, Manitoba, where he spent the next 13 years far away from home. Throughout that time, he focused on his studies while working hard to retain his identity as an Inuk.

It was also at residential school that Mr. Quassa and other Inuit leaders who initiated the Inuit land claims movement in the 1970s first met and discussed their dreams of establishing an Inuit homeland carved out of the Northwest Territories. In 1972 he became a land claims field worker in Igloolik and went on to become president of Tunngavik Federation of Nunavut, signing the final land claims agreement.

Achieving the commitment to the creation of Nunavut within the land claims agreement was an exceptional achievement, since the federal government’s comprehensive claims policy at the time did not permit political development to be part of land claims negotiations. Under Mr. Quassa’s leadership, Inuit refused to accept a land claims settlement that separated land rights and political development. Their 25-year campaign involved a strategy to subdivide the Northwest Territories to establish a Nunavut territory with its own public government. This took negotiation, extensive community consultation in both the eastern and western regions of the Northwest Territories and appeals to the Canadian public.

Pivotal developments included two successful territory-wide plebiscite votes in the Northwest Territories, endorsing the principle of division in 1982 and ratification of the boundary for division in 1993. In this connection, I was privileged to have worked very closely with Mr. Quassa in my capacity as a member of the Legislative Assembly and then Premier of the Northwest Territories.

Mr. Quassa has also had a notable political career, having been elected mayor of Igloolik, then being elected to represent his home region of Aggu in 2013 in the Nunavut legislature and then having been selected to be Minister of Education, where he pushed to implement bilingual education in territorial schools in English and Inuktitut.

He was re-elected in the 2017 election and was subsequently selected by his peers to be Premier of Nunavut. Later, in 2020, he was elected as Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of Nunavut.

Having not run for re-election in Nunavut, Mr. Quassa is now elected to Iqaluit City Council and is active as a senior adviser to the massive Baffinland iron ore project at Mary River on Baffin Island, one of the largest employers in Nunavut. He is pursuing his vision for Nunavut: of Inuit becoming self-sufficient and self-reliant through responsible resource development on Inuit lands.

Thank you, Paul, for your great contributions to Nunavut.

Qujannamiik. Taima.

Hon. Pat Duncan moved third reading of Bill S-236, An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act and the Employment Insurance Regulations (Prince Edward Island), as amended.

She said: Honourable senators, I rise today on the traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabe Nation to speak to third reading of Bill S-236, An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act and the Employment Insurance Regulations (Prince Edward Island).

This bill was introduced by our former colleague Senator Diane Griffin of Prince Edward Island. I offered to continue the sponsorship of this bill in the Senate upon her retirement. I want to thank Senator Griffin for allowing me this tremendous responsibility, and I want to thank Senator Poirier for her work as the bill’s critic. I also want to extend special thanks to members of the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry and its chair, Senator Black, for their timely and able study of this bill, which resulted in an amendment.

As we heard during the debate at second reading, Prince Edward Island has two different Employment Insurance, or EI, zones. This results in a very skewed and unfair arrangement for those who live on the Island.

During the current period — from September 25 to October 8 — the unemployment rate is 4.4% in the Charlottetown zone, which includes the towns of Cornwall and Stratford. The unemployment rate is more than double that — 9.1% — for the rest of the province outside the Charlottetown zone.

Honourable senators, the system of two EI zones leads to the following differences in the number of hours worked to qualify for benefits, as well as for the length of time one can receive benefits: In Charlottetown, a person has to work 700 hours to receive up to 36 weeks of benefits. Outside of Charlottetown, a person needs to work for 560 hours to receive a maximum of 44 weeks of benefits. Let me remind you that this is based on the applicant’s residence — not their place of work.

Two colleagues at a seasonal workplace will receive very different benefits based on where they live. Practically, those who reside in the Charlottetown area often work outside of the zone where they live. The reverse is also true: Individuals might work in one economic zone and live in another.

Also, because the Charlottetown zone is demarcated the way it is, someone within that zone may have a longer drive — maybe three times the distance — to a workplace in the downtown area than someone who lives in the P.E.I. zone.

This is the situation that prompted me to take on this bill. It is a completely unfair situation that exists in the receipt of EI benefits on Prince Edward Island.

Honourable senators, such divisions exist in other places in Canada, including in the Yukon. What stands out is how small P.E.I. is in land mass by comparison. Its small size is what makes the current arrangement of a rural regional zone completely unfair.

For example, in the Yukon, the capital — Whitehorse — is one region, and the rest of the territory is another. That makes sense. The bulk of the population lives in Whitehorse. Whitehorse is the seat of territorial, First Nations and municipal governments. The Yukon Legislative Assembly, the Kwanlin Dün First Nation and the Ta’an Kwäch’än Council all have offices in Whitehorse.

In addition to the seats of these governments, Whitehorse also has a busy international airport, the Yukon’s largest hospital and a retail catchment area that includes the whole of the Yukon, southeast Alaska and the northernmost home communities of Inuvik and Tuktoyaktuk in the Northwest Territories.

This separation of economic regions in the Yukon is understandable. Employment opportunities in Whitehorse are far different from those in Carcross or Teslin — 170 kilometres away in the case of Teslin, and more than 150 kilometres away in Haines Junction. There are very few areas of P.E.I. that are 100 kilometres away from Charlottetown.

Honourable senators, former member of Parliament Wayne Easter, now a farmer, was a witness at the Agriculture and Forestry Committee. He described the Charlottetown zone with his deeply rooted local knowledge. For most who do not know the province well, it might not make as much sense to read his description based on local street names and areas. However, if honourable senators take a look at the map, Mr. Easter’s conclusion is very telling. He said:

. . . the Charlottetown zone isn’t really the Charlottetown zone at all. . . .

Look at the map, understand it and you will have to ask yourself: Who the heck dreamt up this line and this zone, and why?

Wayne Easter described some of the issues he had dealt with as the member of Parliament for Malpeque. His former riding has some parts in either zone. He said:

. . . this is a small province, and seasonal tourism is the second-biggest industry.

I received the most complaints from the Riverdale Road area. It is the break line between zones 1 and 2, starting in the southern part of the riding. Neighbours on opposite sides of the road both work at New Glasgow Lobster Suppers, but at the end of the season, the worker in zone 2 qualified for EI. The neighbour across the road in zone 1 did not. Some managed to get other employment and gain their EI.

Others who lived in the city and drove to work at the tourist businesses were met with the same fate. The situation not only hurt workers, it also affected the ability of tourist operators to attract needed workers. The bottom line is that it’s unfair and inequitable, and it makes no sense.

Interestingly, Pierre Laliberté, Commissioner for Workers for the Canada Employment Insurance Commission, emphasized that the 2014 decision to create two Employment Insurance zones was not based on their review. It was a decision made by the sitting government at the time. As he told the Agriculture and Forestry Committee:

Had we proceeded according to the usual process . . . it is likely that this would not have been done.

Honourable senators, the Agriculture and Forestry Committee also heard from representatives from labour and chambers of commerce. They supported this bill to rectify the unfairness and divisions this causes in the relatively small community of P.E.I. The current system also creates labour shortages. Several witnesses mentioned that employers ask applicants in a job interview where they live. This affects their hiring decisions. Anecdotally, it leaves the question of the benefit of being honest about where one resides.

Honourable senators, it is clear that the two Employment Insurance zones in P.E.I. create real and deep divisions among neighbours and communities. It pits neighbour against neighbour and community against community. This is not a time when we need division in any part of our great country.

As honourable senators know, the bill returned from committee with one amendment and I would like to briefly explain what that amendment does. Senator Black, the committee chair, asked the government official if there were any challenges to implementing the measures in the bill if it were to receive Royal Assent. During clause-by-clause consideration, Senator Colin Deacon noted the lack of a clear answer from the official. He had thought of what could prevent or discourage the government from implementing this measure, especially because the government had been reluctant to do anything about this matter until now.

He, therefore, as elegantly and eloquently as always, moved an amendment delaying the coming into force provision of the bill. Rather than coming into force on the day it receives Royal Assent, it provides some time for the public service to make any necessary adjustments to their systems. The law will now, if made an act of Parliament, come into force on the first Sunday that is at least 30 days after the day on which it receives Royal Assent. I want to thank Senator Colin Deacon for this very thoughtful amendment, which I wholeheartedly support.

Honourable senators, in my second reading speech, I referenced committees from both houses of Parliament that have recommended P.E.I. return to one Employment Insurance zone. Most witnesses appearing before the Agriculture and Forestry Committee were in strong support of this bill. Two were not, although they were not opposed to it. I believe it is time for the Senate to do its job and adopt this bill so we can send it to the House of Commons for them to debate.

Honourable senators, let me conclude with the words of our former P.E.I. Senate colleague Diane Griffin, who introduced this bill here. She has always been a stalwart for her province. During her committee testimony, she said:

While it is the smallest province, Prince Edward Island is still an equal partner in Confederation. This issue needs Senate action, with the goal of sending the bill to the House of Commons. It’s a way for the Senate to serve one of its constitutional roles of giving a voice to regional interests, especially for regions with smaller populations.

Honourable senators, I echo her words and urge you to support this bill at third reading. Mähsi’cho, Gùnáłchîsh, thank you.

Hon. Pierrette Ringuette: Would Senator Duncan answer a few questions?

Senator Duncan: Yes, I will try.

Hon. David Arnot: Honourable senators, I rise today on the occasion of World Teachers’ Day, a day celebrated in Canada every October 5 since 1994.

On this day, we acknowledge three essential and related facts: First, education is a human right; second, every child has the right to be educated about their rights; and third, teaching is the profession — and the critical public service — that supports those rights.

Every school day, Canadian teachers work with our children, giving them the essential knowledge, information and social experiences they need.

I have profound respect for teachers, based on my personal experience in working with dedicated teacher groups in Saskatchewan as they prepared comprehensive curriculum resources on such important topics as treaties, the treaty relationship, democracy, civics and citizenship education.

Teachers breathe life into the past, reveal the present and work hard to shape the future for our children. Behind such public service, there are many late nights and innumerable hours of curricular and extracurricular oversight, including in the arts, music, drama and sports, as well as science, technology and mathematics.

Teachers need proper resources to support the fundamental learning, understanding and knowledge to advance social progress and ensure a more diverse, equitable and inclusive future.

We cannot forget the unprecedented challenge teachers faced during the pandemic, particularly during the isolation periods. Similarly, we cannot ignore the ongoing, related and new challenges teachers will face in the future.

I am sure all of us in this chamber remember teachers who helped and inspired us in our past. Today teachers are inspiring the next generation to succeed as global citizens. Every day in Canada, teachers are our front-line heroes.

Honourable senators, on this World Teachers’ Day, please join me in thanking our Canadian teachers, past, present and future.

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): Minister, your government is proposing to extend conditional sentence eligibility for serious offences including sexual assault through Bill C-5. Women’s groups and victims’ groups have expressed great concern about an abuser’s ability to serve his sentence from his home or in the victim’s community.

Jennifer Dunn of the London Abused Women’s Centre stated in the House Justice Committee on April 29, 2022:

. . . Women and girls are five times more likely than men to be victims of sexual assault, and sexual assault is a violent crime on the rise in Canada. With conditional sentencing, many women will be stuck in the community with the offender, which places them at even higher risk.

Minister, what message is your government sending to victims of sexual assault by extending leniency to sexual abusers?

Hon. Elizabeth Marshall: Honourable senators, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are proud of their military heritage and served with distinction in both world wars. Since we did not join the Canadian Confederation until 1949, Newfoundlanders’ involvement in both world wars was different from other Canadians. While many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians served in the Armed Forces of Britain, Canada and other allied countries, we also had our own regiment that served as part of the British Army during the First World War.

During the Great War, the Newfoundland Regiment fought first in Gallipoli, Turkey, and later in Europe. In 1917, its brave actions earned it the title of “Royal” — an honour no other British regiment received during the First World War. The Royal Newfoundland Regiment was the only regiment from North America involved in the Gallipoli Campaign.

After the war, five battlefield monuments were erected in France and Belgium to commemorate the sacrifices of the Royal Newfoundland Regiment. The monuments are in the form of a caribou — an animal indigenous to Newfoundland and Labrador and familiar to all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. The caribou was the emblem used on the badge of the Royal Newfoundland Regiment.

With a bronze caribou at each of the five sites in France and Belgium, it became known as the Trail of the Caribou. However, with no caribou monument at Gallipoli in Turkey, the Trail of the Caribou was incomplete. For many years, there were discussions and efforts to commemorate the Royal Newfoundland Regiment’s involvement in the Gallipoli Campaign of the First World War with a sixth caribou monument at Gallipoli.

Last month, through the efforts and cooperation of the governments of Canada, Newfoundland and Labrador and Turkey, a dedication ceremony was held for the sixth Royal Newfoundland Regiment monument in Gallipoli. The monument, a bronze caribou weighing 1,500 pounds and standing eight feet tall, now stands proudly in Gallipoli to commemorate the sacrifices made by the Royal Newfoundland Regiment in the Gallipoli Campaign of 1915-16.

I was honoured to have participated in the dedication ceremony in Gallipoli along with our Honourable Speaker Senator Furey; the Honourable Lawrence MacAulay, Minister of Veterans Affairs; members of Parliament Clifford Small and Rachel Blaney; and representatives of the Royal Newfoundland Regiment.

Honourable senators, join me in celebrating this historic occasion. The Trail of the Caribou is now complete.

Hon. Nancy J. Hartling: Honourable senators, I rise to pay tribute to the late Senator Mabel DeWare from Moncton, New Brunswick. Mabel led an extraordinary life full of accomplishments. I believe she will be remembered most fondly for her warmth and ability to make every person she met feel like they were truly important.

I had the honour to attend her funeral in August, when her life was celebrated by family, friends, colleagues and community leaders. She lived until she was 96 years old, and maintained her sense of humour until the very end.

Mabel spent the better part of her life working or volunteering to improve her community and her province, in addition to being a loving mother to 4 children, grandmother to 9, great‑grandmother to 14 and devoted wife to Ralph.

Many first learned about Mabel during her rise in curling. She skipped her Moncton team to many championships. In 1963, her team became New Brunswick’s first women’s national curling champions. She was inducted into the Canadian Curling Hall of Fame and the New Brunswick Sports Hall of Fame for the feat. In 1979, she helped establish the World Women’s Curling Championship.

Although Mabel had a career as a dental assistant, her passion for public service led her into provincial politics. In 1978, she was elected as the MLA for the Moncton West riding in the Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick, and she served for two consecutive terms. She was a trailblazer, becoming the first woman to be Minister of Labour and Manpower, later becoming Minister of Continuing Education and then Minister of Advanced Education and Training.

In 1990, she was appointed to the Senate of Canada by Brian Mulroney, serving until 2001. In this place, Mabel was remembered for her compassion and kindness. She was the first woman to become Opposition Whip, and is remembered by her caucus colleagues as good-humoured and sunny. Her tradition of donning a blue Santa Claus suit each Christmas was a particular crowd pleaser.

Former Senator Erminie Cohen said it best:

To every position she holds, she gives everything she has. Mabel is a people person. Her warmth and friendly disposition, the twinkle in her blue eyes and the smile on her lips endear her to everyone. She loves a good party, enjoys a good laugh and tells a mean joke.

One of her practical jokes was to remove five red light bulbs from the Senate Christmas tree and replace them with “Conservative” blue bulbs.

Her wit was legendary. Once, during her tenure as Minister of Labour, she visited a mine in northern New Brunswick. She was asked dismissively before an assembly of men what she, a woman, could possibly know about labour. She replied without hesitating, “I know more about labour than any of you ever will! A woman in labour always delivers!!”

A few years ago, I had the pleasure to meet Mabel’s granddaughter at an event where I was speaking about workplace harassment. Her granddaughter told me how much Mabel wished she could have attended, but that her health wouldn’t permit it.

Senator Mabel DeWare has been a great role model for me and an example of how forging friendships based on mutual respect and compassion can reach across all political boundaries.

She will be missed by our community, but especially by her family.

Thank you for serving Canada.

Hon. Mohamed-Iqbal Ravalia: Honourable senators, I rise today to recognize the heroism of the first responders and health professionals of Clarenville, Newfoundland and Labrador, whose quick thinking and collaboration saved lives following an explosion at the Come By Chance Refinery on September 2.

Just after 4 p.m., an explosion rocked the refinery, injuring eight people — some critically. As reports trickled out, paramedics from Fewer’s Ambulance Service were already en route to the scene, bringing the victims to the Dr. G. B. Cross Memorial Hospital in Clarenville.

On-site at the hospital, the senior site manager, Dion Park, called a rare Code Orange, meaning a mass casualty event. According to Dr. Etienne van der Linde — the site lead for the hospital’s emergency division — once the call went out, nearly every health care worker in town flooded into the hospital to do their part.

But as more casualties began arriving, it became clear that the Clarenville hospital, with its eight-bed ICU, did not have the capacity to treat all the victims on its own. Most of the patients would need to be sent to the Health Sciences Centre, or HSC, in St. John’s, which is a 2-hour journey by ambulance or about 30 minutes by helicopter.

Dr. van der Linde and his team collaborated with the HSC to seamlessly transport these patients to St. John’s.

By 8 p.m., staff in Clarenville had stabilized three patients to the point where they could fly, but there was a problem: The hospital only has a small helipad — not big enough to land the kind of aircraft needed to transport the patients, along with the medical staff and equipment that needed to accompany them.

Thinking quickly, the police blocked off the road around the hospital and cordoned off the Sobeys parking lot next door. Reports indicate that by 8:45 p.m., helicopters were touching down beside the Sobeys, and the first three patients were loaded aboard for transport, flanked by health care workers.

This event demonstrates the superior skill, resourcefulness and tenacity of first responders and health professionals in my province, as well as the support staff, including volunteers, working in rural communities. But it also exposes the vulnerabilities that persist, including a lack of resources, lack of funding and, unfortunately, staffing shortages.

I applaud the actions of Dr. van der Linde and his entire team. People living in rural and remote communities need — and have the right — to access proper and capable emergency care, regardless if their local hospital is next to a Sobeys.

On behalf of our Newfoundland and Labrador colleagues, I wish the victims a quick recovery, and my thoughts are with them and their families.

Thank you, meegwetch.

Hon. Raymonde Gagné (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate): Honourable senators, I give notice that, at the next sitting of the Senate, I will move:

That, when the Senate next adjourns after the adoption of this motion, it do stand adjourned until Monday, October 17, 2022, at 6 p.m.; and

That rule 3-3(1) be suspended on that day.

[English]

Senator Ringuette: I understand the logic of the Island being one zone. It’s only logical. But it’s counterintuitive if the study of the bill did not entertain the PBO report and did not entertain the fact that over five years, once this bill is passed, there would be $76.6 million less going to the unemployed citizens of P.E.I. That is a concern. I really believe that. If it has not been, it should be looked at before we proceed to third reading.

The other thing is that in order to reverse the loss of income for unemployed P.E.I. citizens, the bill should include provisions that the Employment Insurance program for this one zone is at the lowest denominator in regard to provisions to acquire Employment Insurance.

Senator Duncan, I hope that you understand the scope of the question and my concern. As an Atlantic Canadian, I can relate to the citizens who are on Employment Insurance and how tough it is, so I certainly would not want this institution to pass a bill that would remove some financial income for unemployed P.E.I. citizens.

If you can tell me that has been corrected, then I would say fine. But if it has not, I think we have to do another review. Thank you.

Senator Duncan: Thank you for the question. I believe what I did was revert to a former habit, perhaps one might say, of not answering the question in Question Period.

The PBO report that you referenced, I’m advised, was not available at the time of the study. The other point I hear you raising is a concern that there will be Islanders who are now collecting fewer benefits and there will be fewer benefits paid as a result of going to one zone. My understanding is that it could be possible, if it were one zone, to be paid at the higher zone. Is that not a possibility? That’s the very question I raised, and I believe that would be the best end result.