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.)

[English]

Leave having been given to revert to Government Business, Motions, Order No. 62:

Hon. Raymonde Gagné (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate), pursuant to notice of October 5, 2022, moved:

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.

Hon. Pierre J. Dalphond: I am a bit younger than Senator Plett, but not by that much, but by a few years. I saw in my classroom, of course, the strap and I also saw the three-foot-long ruler that was really to rule the class and not to take any measurements. I’m glad my children were not exposed to it. I must say I think we have moved as a society toward a better approach to education.

That leads to my question. I remember that with a previous iteration of a similar bill I met with a representative of the Canadian Teachers’ Federation who was opposed to the repeal of that section because they had the impression that it might expose them to criminal charges. Did you have any contact with the association?

Senator Kutcher: Thank you for that question, Senator Dalphond. I certainly agree with you that our understanding and our changes in parenting practices have evolved over the last 20 or 30 years, and I think they are evolving still and they are evolving to a good point. I do want to comment that we just can’t sit by and let things evolve; we need to help them on their way. I did talk about the importance of bringing in positive parenting programs and parenting supports such as Strongest Families, which is on the Wellness Together app that any Canadian can access for free.

Yes, we are meeting with the Canadian Teachers’ Federation tomorrow. I know the Honourable Senator Sinclair met with them a number of times. I spoke to scores, almost hundreds, of teachers whom I know personally from many parts of this country in doing my research on the bill. Most of them were shocked to learn about section 43. They didn’t know about it.

(1610)

I have spent the last 20 years working in schools all across Canada and other parts of the world with mental health programs in schools. I have been really struck by how teachers care for their kids. They want the kids to do well. They want to use the best interventions to help the children succeed and flourish and do the best they can. They don’t want to hit kids.

I think we as a society have to make sure we are supporting our teachers, that we’re giving them the resources they need, the in-classroom supports and the professional supports. We just had World Teachers’ Day. Teachers play such an important role in helping us raise our kids. They’re so important to our kids that we have to support teachers more. We have to give them more tools. Why do we have 30 kids in a classroom, for crying out loud? It’s so hard to teach. Senator Martin is a teacher, Senator Cordy is a teacher and Senator Deacon is a teacher; they can tell us what it’s like. I’m a university teacher. It’s not quite as challenging.

I thank you for that question. I’m looking forward to this bill going to committee so that the committee can do a deep dive on the issues Senator Plett raised, which are important concerns. I respect Senator Plett for raising them and challenging us to think about them, because we have to think about them. They’re important. Hopefully, the committee can come up with some really good thinking about this bill. Thank you very much, Senator Dalphond.

(On motion of Senator Martin, debate adjourned.)

[Translation]

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore informed the Senate that a message had been received from the House of Commons with Bill C-30, An Act to amend the Income Tax Act (temporary enhancement to the Goods and Services Tax/Harmonized Sales Tax credit).

(Bill read first time.)

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Honourable senators, is it agreed to suspend the sitting until 6 p.m., when we will resume for Committee of the Whole?

Hon. Salma Ataullahjan: Honourable senators, I rise today to speak as critic of Bill S-208, An Act respecting the Declaration on the Essential Role of Artists and Creative Expression in Canada. I would like to begin by commending Senator Bovey on introducing such a comprehensive and ambitious bill.

At first glance, Bill S-208 may seem idealistic, but at its core it simply requires the government to apply an art lens to its operations. We have already spoken on the importance of using Gender-based Analysis Plus to take a gender- and diversity-sensitive approach to our work. In fact, the Government of Canada committed to using GBA Plus to advance gender equality in Canada in 1995, but lacks any legislation to enforce its active use in policy-making.

Unlike GBA Plus, Bill S-208 will make the application of an artistic lens to all legislation mandatory by putting the onus on the Minister of Canadian Heritage to develop an action plan to operationalize the declaration in order to recognize the essential role of arts to society, increase access to the arts and events, improve the ability to engage in the arts, improve the ability of artists to benefit from their work while freeing them from cultural appropriation, address disability barriers and encourage investments.

To do so, the Minister of Canadian Heritage will be called upon to consult with key stakeholders, including the Ministers of Labour, Crown-Indigenous Relations, Justice, and Health, as well as with many other interested organizations and artists. The minister must also convene a conference with stakeholders and ministers in order to develop an action plan.

Bill S-208 is also about governmental accountability and transparency. At the end of each fiscal year, the minister must prepare a report that sets out the implementation of the action plan and the activities undertaken by the department to achieve the objectives of the declaration as set out in the bill. This will ensure a constant evolution of the action plan by identifying its progress and its weaknesses.

I believe Bill S-208 has merit, namely by inviting ministers to work together, as the government is well known for working in silos. Honourable senators, Bill S-208 is important to our collective future as it will give Canadian artists the recognition they deserve. Thank you.

Hon. Salma Ataullahjan moved:

That the fourth report of the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights, entitled The Scars that We Carry: Forced and Coerced Sterilization of Persons in Canada — Part II, deposited with the Clerk of the Senate on July 14, 2022, be adopted and that, pursuant to rule 12-24(1), the Senate request a complete and detailed response from the government, with the Minister of Health being identified as minister responsible for responding to the report, in consultation with the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, the Minister of Indigenous Services and the Minister for Women and Gender Equality and Youth.

She said: Honourable senators, as Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights, I wanted to take a few minutes to speak to you about the committee’s report entitled The Scars that We Carry: Forced and Coerced Sterilization of Persons in Canada — Part II. This report highlights the experiences and perspectives of survivors and outlines solutions that the committee believes are needed to bring an end to this practice.

Our study found that the practice of forced and coerced sterilization of persons in Canada is ongoing, and that law and policy changes are needed to prevent it from being inflicted on others.

As part of the study, the committee heard from academic and civil society representatives, as well as survivors of forced and coerced sterilization, and wishes to extend its deepest gratitude to these witnesses. Their testimony not only confirmed the ongoing practice of forced and coerced sterilization in Canada, it also described various forms of coercion used by medical personnel to obtain consent.

Our report provides 13 recommendations that can only begin to address the issue of forced and coerced sterilization in Canada. We are hopeful that this report and its recommendations can help lead to meaningful change by finally stopping the practice in its tracks. Thank you.

Hon. Ratna Omidvar: Honourable senators, my question is for Senator Gold and it is about Iran and hope — specifically the hope that we are seeing based on the actions of courageous Iranian women and girls who are fighting and demonstrating for their freedom.

Canada is helping. We have sanctioned 34 more Iranian officials, adding to the 41 who were already sanctioned along with 161 entities. That is good, but I think that we can do more. You will remember, Senator Gold, that in the Budget Implementation Act that we passed in June of this year, Canada has the authority to confiscate and repurpose sanctioned assets back to the victims. I think this is a glorious opportunity for Canada to step forward in this way.

Can you confirm whether Canada will use this new tool and move to confiscate Iranian assets to help the victims of this oppressive regime?

Hon. Jean-Guy Dagenais: Honourable senators, my question is for the Government Representative in the Senate.

Leader, gang-related murders continue to terrorize parts of Montreal and Toronto. The situation isn’t changing despite lofty promises from politicians. There have already been 32 fatal shootings in Toronto this year, one more than in 2021. In Montreal, there have been 95 in the first six months of this year, which is a 15% increase over 2021. I was shocked to learn yesterday that the Minister of Foreign Affairs has been working with the United States and Mexico on a plan to impose sanctions on street gangs that are wreaking havoc in Haiti — not Canada, Haiti.

My goodness, leader, they are doing in Haiti what they are unable to do in our own country. How credible is this statement by Minister Joly?

Senator Ataullahjan: Government leader, Mr. Saberi is one of many Afghans. If you remember, I raised the case of Mr. Haqmal, the interpreter who was stuck in Ukraine and who has since moved to Germany. He is still waiting for his papers. These people risked their lives working alongside our soldiers and diplomats. Yet, they have been effectively abandoned by your government and are now being targeted by the Taliban. After the Taliban’s takeover, the Trudeau government promised to rescue 40,000 Afghans to Canada, but IRCC says only 19,395 Afghans have arrived since August 2021.

Why is your government not doing everything in its power to bring these people to safety? Do you not realize that their lives are at stake?

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Well, honourable senators, I cannot comment on specific cases, even if I had the information.

This government is working very hard and under extraordinarily difficult circumstances to bring home those who have assisted us and those who were seeking refuge in Canada. To date, we’ve helped airlift over 3,700 people, dating from August 2021.

The challenges are well known in this chamber. I will not repeat them. I understand that the logistical challenges of identifying and providing an ability for them to provide safe passage out of the country have been exacerbated in no small measure by the insistence of the Taliban that they have certain travel documents. We can all well understand how reluctant someone might be to present themselves at a Taliban-run station to explain why they want to leave the country.

The government is working as hard as it can with its partners and will continue to do so.

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): Would the senator take a question?

Senator C. Deacon: Certainly.

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

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

[Translation]

Hon. Leo Housakos: Honourable senators, my question is for the government leader in the Senate. Senator Gold, in a recent report to Parliament in response to a question from the opposition, your government misleadingly stated that the deeply flawed ArriveCAN app had cost taxpayers a total of approximately $29.5 million for developing, maintaining and promoting this app. What the report did not make clear is that the amount only covers the cost for the fiscal year that ended last March and that an additional $25 million has been approved for the current fiscal year by the CBSA — which expects to use that full amount — bringing the total closer to twice what the government reported in their parliamentary report.

Senator Gold, why does your government have such difficulty providing truthful and forthright responses to questions on behalf of hard-working Canadians who want to know where their money is going? I know that sometimes you are frustrated by the question, but is it simply that the government does not know how to count or that they deliberately fudge the numbers in order to give a false representation of the facts?

The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, I have the honour to inform the Senate that a message has been received from the House of Commons which reads as follows:

Wednesday, October 5, 2022

EXTRACT, —

That, notwithstanding paragraph (e) of the order made Monday, May 2, 2022, the deadline for the Special Joint Committee on Medical Assistance in Dying to submit to Parliament a final report of its review, including a statement of any recommended changes, be no later than Friday, February 17, 2023; and that a message be sent to the Senate to acquaint Their Honours that this House has passed this order.

ATTEST

Charles Robert

The Clerk of the House of Commons

(1500)

[English]

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Bovey, seconded by the Honourable Senator Gignac, for the third reading of Bill S-208, An Act respecting the Declaration on the Essential Role of Artists and Creative Expression in Canada, as amended.

Senator Plett: Well, I’m not sure what the answer was because your mic wasn’t on, and there is a reason why I am a little loud sometimes, not because I try to be, but because I cannot hear very well. I am assuming, though, that with your smile you decided to take a question. Thumbs up I can see.

Senator Kutcher, before I ask you a question here, the fact that this has been attempted, as you say, 17 times before over a number of different parliaments and, indeed, different governments should maybe give one an idea that there might not be as much appetite for it as some people would say there is.

I want to read a little bit about what the Supreme Court of Canada considered in whether section 43 was constitutional and consistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights. They say:

Physical punishment cannot be used on a child in anger or in retaliation for something a child did.

Objects, such as belts or rulers, must never be used on a child and a child must never be hit or slapped on the face or head.

Any use of force on a child cannot be degrading, inhumane, or result in harm or the prospect of harm.

The Supreme Court further states:

The seriousness of the child’s misbehaviour is not relevant to deciding whether the force used was reasonable. The force used must be minor, no matter what the child did.

And lastly, I will say:

Parents/caregivers can only use corrective force (or physical punishment) that is minor or “transitory and trifling” in nature. . . .

And you have repeatedly, Senator Kutcher, at least implied that any form of physical punishment is abuse. With these guidelines here, how is using force to pick up a child who is throwing a temper tantrum and forcefully putting that child into a car seat, or taking a 5-year-old who is throwing a temper tantrum because he or she doesn’t want to go to school and picking up that child forcefully and putting that child into the back seat of a car and taking them to school considered, in your opinion, physical abuse? That is all part of child rearing.

Senator Kutcher: Thank you very much for that question, Senator Plett. Like you, I do have problems in hearing but I didn’t have a problem hearing you.

You ask a very important question and one that bedevils people in this discussion all the time. What are the limits to appropriate interaction with your children when they are misbehaving or having difficulties? That’s a fundamental question, and everyone in this chamber who is a parent has struggled with that question. I know that. I struggle with it.

I can very well remember when I was interning at The Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto and my wife and, at that time, our 2‑year-old son came to see me because we used to work 48-hour shifts. There we were in the rotunda in the middle of the world’s most prestigious children’s hospital and our son decides he is going to have a temper tantrum. I was sitting there in my white pediatrics coat, my kid is having a temper tantrum and everyone is walking by looking at me, wondering, “What kind of a parent is that?” We just let him finish.

You know, like many of us in this chamber, I was not immune from receiving corporal punishment as a child. A lot of us had it. I will tell you, Senator Plett, some of the corporal punishment that I received no one would want to have. I made a vow, as many others here probably did, that when I was going to parent I wasn’t going to do the same thing. Those of us who are lucky enough to have grandchildren all want them to grow up to not be hit for any reason, and that is what this bill is trying to address.

Thank you very much for your question.

The Hon. the Speaker: Pursuant to the order of Tuesday, October 4, 2022, I leave the chair for the Senate to resolve into a Committee of the Whole on the subject matter of Bill C-30, An Act to amend the Income Tax Act (temporary enhancement to the Goods and Services Tax/Harmonized Sales Tax credit). The Honourable Senator Ringuette will chair the committee.

[Translation]

On the Order:

The Senate in Committee of the Whole in order to receive the Honourable Chrystia Freeland, P.C., M.P., Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, accompanied by no more than two officials, to consider the subject matter of Bill C-30, An Act to amend the Income Tax Act (temporary enhancement to the Goods and Services Tax/Harmonized Sales Tax credit).

(The sitting of the Senate was suspended and put into Committee of the Whole, the Honourable Pierrette Ringuette in the chair.)

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for the question. It is an important question, but I respectfully don’t agree with the premise.

We all know that we have to find the right balance between real measures and effective measures to combat climate change — not only for our sake but for the sake of future generations — while still developing our country, our economy and our resources, including the energy sector, in a responsible and sustainable way.

In that regard, the Government of Canada is pleased to have Indigenous partners and Indigenous communities participating to a growing degree in resource projects. That is a good thing for the country and for those communities.

The government is pleased that Indigenous communities are our partners in developing new strategies for combatting climate change, benefiting from Indigenous knowledge and practices so that we can have a strong, robust economy, including an energy sector, which is in transition — the corporate world and capital investment sometimes speak louder than we can in this chamber — and do so in a way that works for the benefit of all Canadians.

Senator Plett: I’m going to simply ask one more, because I do not want this to become a debate. I will probably be speaking to the bill, as I have in the past. As a matter of fact, I was the critic of it in one of its iterations.

Again, I fully support the fact that you let your child finish their temper tantrum and it worked for you. You did not tell me what would have happened if that child hadn’t finished his or her temper tantrum. I absolutely 100% support that it would be wonderful if there were any way of raising a child without ever being in any way forceful. You’re right when you say you may have been disciplined in a way that you should never have. I was disciplined in a way that for years has been illegal, not by my father but by teachers. I don’t know why. I thought I was a model student, but some teachers didn’t agree with that. I had a physical education teacher hold me down on a chair physically while the principal beat the tar out of me with a leather belt.

Here I am; I’m still a senator. I’m a mad senator, I guess, at times. Maybe it’s because of that beating. I don’t think it is.

When I was the critic of this, I had my granddaughter, who was 13 or 14 at the time, write a letter to the Senate, telling the Senate that she supported a form of spanking if children didn’t behave. It’s not that all children don’t believe in it. I don’t think she had ever been spanked. I don’t know, maybe she had. But she thought that was okay.

Even now, in your answer to my question, you used the extreme, which is why I have a problem with this. We’re always using the extreme when we do this about how forceful we are. That on the bum isn’t forceful; that means “Move, you’re holding up traffic.”

We need to talk about what’s legal now, when we talk about this bill. The assault that you and many speakers are referring to has been illegal for years, as I just read. I’m sorry, there was no question there. I will stop there. You can comment. I will take an opportunity to speak to this down the road.

Senator Kutcher: Thank you very much. I think that people in this chamber might be shocked that Senator Plett and I had a lot of commonalities in our growing up.

I still have — as many of you may have noticed — quite severe attention deficit disorder and a learning disability. I always had the seat of honour in the classroom, Senator Plett, which was right next to the teacher’s desk where I could be hit by the medical intervention of the day, which was the yardstick. It was frequent. Whenever I would get it more than four or five a day, I also got to go down to the principal’s office for the — I blame my Dupuytren’s contracture on that. But I’m not talking about that.

The research also shows us that just a mild corrective action, like the spanking that you were talking about, has a profoundly negative impact on kids. The Supreme Court didn’t know that in 2004, because that research is new.

What we need to focus on here is also thinking about children in other parts of the life cycle. If your mom or my mom were having a problem with dementia and they ran out into the street and we grabbed them and spanked them, people would say, “Whoa, what’s wrong with that guy?” If our kid runs out, we grab the kid and we spank the kid, that’s perfectly fine. I don’t think that’s perfectly fine, Senator Plett. I think both are wrong.

Senator Gold: All Canadians have the right to express their views on YouTube or TikTok — or any of the other platforms that some of us spend time on — as they are doing before the committee, through email campaigns and through other communication that we’re receiving. I have every confidence that this chamber can separate truth from rhetoric, as well as separate facts from exaggeration. Again, I have confidence that, when it comes to both the study and our debate in this chamber, we will make the right decision on behalf of all Canadians.