Hon. Peter M. Boehm, pursuant to notice of October 6, 2022, moved:

That the Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade be designated to conduct a comprehensive review of the provisions and operation of the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law) and the Special Economic Measures Act, pursuant to section 16 of the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law);

That, in accordance with subsection 16(2) of the Sergei Magnitsky Law, the committee submit its report on this review no later than June 23, 2023.

Senator Audette: I want to ensure I understand. If it’s not a former partner or lover, but someone whom the woman doesn’t know but who has already had a complaint lodged against them, someone that has gone to prison, been released and come back to harass, intimidate or assault the woman in question, is it possible that the individual could be forced to wear a monitoring device?

Senator Dalphond: Based on my understanding of the amendment to Bill C-75, the person must have been convicted of intimate partner violence. This time, the onus will be on the offender to show that they can be released without jeopardizing the safety of any person. It will be up to the offender to convince the judge, who may propose that the offender be ordered to wear a device in order to secure their release.

(On motion of Senator Martin, debate adjourned.)

[English]

The Senate proceeded to consideration of the seventh report of the Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade (Budget—study on foreign relations and international trade generally—power to hire staff and to travel), presented in the Senate on October 6, 2022.

Senator Batters: Is there a definition that already exists under Bill C-7 or Bill C-14 or something that it’s referring to or is this an extra definition? That’s what I’m wondering about. Maybe you can find that out and let me know if you’re not sure, because there could be a few different definitions. It might be that that person is not entitled to benefit under the estate, or it also might be someone who is not related to that person. I’m wondering about that because it’s an important definition.

I’m also wondering if it would be correct that under your bill it would be the “medical practitioner” who certifies that under subparagraph 3.22(e)(iii), “each witness is an independent witness as described in subsection (5).”

What I’m wondering there is: How would a medical practitioner be able to determine that? By the way, it’s important to recall that such a medical practitioner under the medical assistance in dying laws could be a doctor or a nurse practitioner. I’m wondering how a medical practitioner would have that level of knowledge. Thank you.

Senator Gold: Thank you. Let me, in answering this question, provide a little bit more clarity on your first question. I apologize that I didn’t do it on the spot.

First of all, the CRA employees are highly experienced professionals, and they are proud of the service they provide to Canadians year-round. The government continues to invest in the improvement of CRA services and the government is looking forward to positive results. I’m assured from the CRA perspective that they are working diligently to put people first and provide high-quality services in a timely fashion.

Senator Plett: Leader, this mess just points to yet another government failure in ensuring the smooth functioning of basic government services. Not only are our passport offices in a shambles, your government can’t even keep immigrant workers in Canada amidst a severe labour shortage.

Leader, we are talking about highly skilled individuals with Canadian work experience who could help fill these shortages, grow our economy and strengthen our communities. It isn’t like these shortages — or this backlog, for that matter — were created overnight.

What exactly has your government been doing?

Senator Gold: Thank you for your question. One of the things that this government is doing is continuing to attract skilled immigrants from around the world. The government, notwithstanding the pandemic, was able to make over half a million decisions and welcomed over 405,000 new permanent residents in 2021 — the greatest number of newcomers in one year in Canadian history.

In addition, the government is prioritizing workers in specialized essential occupations such as health care, and is investing over $3.5 million to support the labour market integration of internationally trained nurses by providing employment support and work experience, as well as improving the foreign credential recognition processes.

The government continues to work toward a more integrated, modern and centralized work environment in order to help speed up the application process globally.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for the question and for highlighting the issue, the problem and the challenge, as you have done a number of times, much to your credit.

As I have noted several times, certain sections of the Criminal Code prohibit several aspects of this shocking practice. You have also introduced a private bill that we are considering.

That said, the federal government has a limited number of tools at its disposal to enact legislation governing everything that happens or appears on the internet.

However, I will ask the government for a progress update on this.

Hon. Larry W. Smith: Honourable senators, just before the break I had the privilege and honour of visiting Iqaluit with my colleagues Senator Downe and Senator Black. In addition to attending National Day for Truth and Reconciliation marches, we met with community members, elders and business leaders and took part in the Arctic Sovereignty and Security Summit organized graciously by Senator Patterson. The only thing more inspiring than the rugged beauty of the vast tundra was the passion, determination and pride of the Inuit people themselves.

In particular, I would like to highlight the work of Kirt Ejesiak, who operates Arctic UAV, a 100% Indigenous-owned business specializing in aerial photography, video surveillance and data mapping using remotely piloted aircraft systems.

Located on the shores of Baffin Bay inside a former Hudson’s Bay trading post, we were in awe of the equipment Kirt and his team had invested in and were testing and operating in the harsh and often unforgiving northern climate. This included using drone technology to map major mine sites, study the effects of shipping on marine migration and detect thermal hot spots at waste sites, just to name a few.

Like many young Inuit leaders, Kirt’s knowledge of the land on which he grew up, coupled with his desire for creating a better Nunavut, was evident in our discussions with him. Kirt was bursting with ideas and practical solutions to many challenges facing communities in Nunavut by underscoring that policies for the North must be developed in the North and by the North.

As an example, Kirt and his team have proven to be nimble, retaining the expertise needed to respond to the issue of Arctic surveillance, a critical area of focus for policy-makers today.

Honourable senators, please join me in recognizing Kirt and Arctic UAV for the extraordinary work they do in Nunavut and across the North.

Thank you.

Hon. Tony Loffreda: Honourable senators, I rise to draw your attention to the 25th International Metropolis Conference held in Berlin last month.

I was honoured to attend in a personal capacity this forum that reunited experts, policy-makers and business leaders to discuss issues related to migration, mobility, integration and inclusion.

Our very own Senator Omidvar was a keynote speaker. I was proud to join her for various events and workshops, and I must admit she was welcomed like a rock star in Germany. When Senator Omidvar spoke, people listened. Her expertise is second to none, and Canada is lucky to have her in the Senate.

For me, the conference was an opportunity to immerse myself more fully in matters of migration and integration. There are two things I took away from the conference. One was that Canada has a lot to share with our international counterparts in terms of best practices. Our immigration system is not perfect, but it’s still the envy of the world and we should be proud.

Two, the global competition to attract immigrants is on. Canada is in a good position because we’ve always been an attractive destination with successful integration policies. However, we need to accelerate; otherwise we risk losing ground to other nations.

[Translation]

Canada’s prosperity will depend heavily on increased immigration. We need new Canadians to fill current and future labour shortages.

Immigration already accounts for almost 100% of Canada’s workforce growth.

[English]

As our population ages and retires, this pool of talent will be front and centre as we grow our economy. Right now, about 6 in 10 immigrants are selected for their positive economic impact.

Inflation and labour shortages are top of mind these days, and there is a correlation between the two. Immigrants can help address these shortfalls. As the Century Initiative recently reported, “Growing our population through immigration contributes to a larger GDP” and could also increase GDP per capita if we adequately leverage the talent and skills of immigrants.

Honourable senators, “business as usual” is no longer acceptable. Our meetings in Berlin confirmed the urgency for Canada to do better and faster.

As the Century Initiative reminds us:

Canada is ranked as the world’s most accepting country towards immigrants, its policies to integrate migrants are considered among the best in the world, and immigration has widespread public and political support.

We must capitalize on this stellar reputation. Our economic prosperity literally relies on it. Thank you.

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): Leader, I trust that you had a great Thanksgiving and are in good spirits and will answer some questions today.

Leader, a recent article in The Globe and Mail reported that, due to a backlog created by federal government policy decisions, thousands of highly skilled immigrants are being forced to return to their home countries as their work permits expire. In the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, we saw a steep drop in the number of immigrants being granted permanent residency in Canada, and your government introduced measures to supposedly reverse this trend, except the opposite happened, leader.

Canada’s immigration bureaucracy wasn’t able to keep up with the influx of applications, and Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, or IRCC, imposed a year-long pause on new applications from people who already lived and worked in Canada. Now thousands of immigrants with Canadian work experience are waiting in limbo and may very well have to leave Canada if their work permits expire before they get their invitation to apply to become permanent residents — for many, this is happening very soon.

Leader, why isn’t your government doing everything in its power to clear the backlog and fix the mess that it created?

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your question. I hope as well that everybody had a nice Thanksgiving.

Yes, I’m happy to answer your question. The answer is that the government is doing everything they can. Immigration clearly plays a key role in combatting our labour shortage, and I’m advised that the government is prioritizing its work permit processing for in-demand occupations — over 394,000 new work permits from January to August this year, which is more than double the number of work permits processed during the same period last year. That’s important and good news for our economy.

The government is also taking measures to reduce wait times, and I’m assured that the government will be doing even more to tackle the backlog in the short term while making our system more sustainable in the long term.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your question. As I have said many times, as is well known to the chamber and to all Canadians, putting a price on pollution is a central component of any rational, efficient and effective plan to tackle climate change, and it is one of the elements in this government’s plan to do so.

As we know, and we’ve said many times in this chamber, the tax on pollution to those provinces that do not have a credible plan of their own results in money being returned, in large measure, to those families who have to pay it. Under the plan that’s in place, the majority of families in those jurisdictions where the federal price on pollution is present will actually receive more money than they pay.

The answer to your question is, no, the government does not have plans to cancel or freeze its price on pollution.

Senator Gold: Thank you for your question and for underlining the real impact the increase in prices generally is having on all Canadians, especially those in more vulnerable situations, whether Indigenous or remote communities, those who rely upon the provision of basic necessities by boat or by long chains of supply.

The government has a suite of measures to help Canadians through this, including major investments with Indigenous communities and Indigenous partners. Included in these measures, of course, are measures that we’ll be debating later today and, indeed, which will also form part of a bill that we expect to receive later this month dealing with affordability issues.

The Canadian government is committed to, and engaged in, helping Canadians get through this difficult period.

[Translation]

Senator Gold: As I already said, I will do my best to try to get an answer and come back to the chamber with that information as soon as I have it.

[English]

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your question. The government takes responsibility for the strong economic growth in this country. It takes responsibility for the fact that our gross domestic product, or GDP, growth remains strong. Recently, our AAA rating was affirmed by S&P Global Ratings with a stable outlook.

The government also takes responsibility and credit — to the extent that credit and blame are two sides of the coin; you’re looking for blame. The recent Parliamentary Budget Officer’s Economic and Fiscal Outlook states:

. . . For the current fiscal year 2022-23, PBO projects the deficit to decline to $25.8 billion (0.9 per cent of GDP) under status quo policy. . . . the budgetary deficit is projected to decline further . . .

Canada came into this crisis with the lowest net debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7. In fact, Canada has increased its relative advantage through this pandemic.

I think Canadians should be pleased that the government has steered our economy through this, notwithstanding the very true and disturbing fact that the cost of living is imposing significant strains on households across this country. That’s why the government is responding with the targeted measures that I mentioned earlier and that we’ll be debating in this chamber.

Hon. Leo Housakos: My question is for the government leader in the Senate.

Government leader, Canadians from coast to coast to coast are facing unjust inflation rates in this country. More than ever before, we see cell bills, energy costs, rents and food costs climbing to an extent where middle-class Canadians are being devastated. We see the housing bubble. Recently, I read an article about how Vancouver and Toronto are among the five cities facing the biggest housing bubble in the world. Imagine housing costs higher than in New York, London or Tokyo. All of this because of a government that has been irresponsible in dealing with the economy. We have had as recently as a year ago the Governor of the Bank of Canada, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance saying that the big problem facing Canadians is stagnation, not inflation. Boy, did they get this wrong.

I have been asking my question for a number of weeks. Who is going to be held responsible for this devastating result? Don’t tell me it’s a worldwide phenomenon, because France, Austria, Japan, Saudi Arabia and India are all nations who are performing better than Canada when it comes to inflation.

Who is responsible for this? Who will take responsibility for this catastrophe?

Senator Housakos: Government leader, the only reason Canada still has a half-decent debt-to-GDP ratio in the world is because your government inherited the best GDP-to-debt ratio in the world in 2015, which has been constantly going down over the last seven years.

Furthermore, the other things you are champions of are setting record-high debts and deficits in this country and, while doing all that, running up inflation that is devastating middle-class Canadians and those working hard to join it.

My other question for you is linked to this inflation problem we have. Energy costs are scheduled to skyrocket this winter. Again, you’re going to say I’m looking to hold somebody responsible. No, I am trying to figure out the reasons for this so maybe your government can change course.

The Chancellor of Germany was here in Canada recently. He called on Canada to provide more liquefied natural gas, or LNG, and more clean, Canadian energy to Europeans in this time of need. Canada doesn’t have the infrastructure or capacity to do that today.

The question is, in large part, because your government has been very irresponsible and lacking balance in dealing with our energy sector and the environment thanks to policies like Bill C-69 and Bill C-48 that your government passed.

Will you acknowledge that your lack of balance in dealing with the energy sector and the environment has led to the catastrophe of higher energy prices that are around the corner, coupled with the inflation from this government?

Senator Gold: Thank you for the question. No, I do not acknowledge that. With all respect, Senator Housakos, that’s just a distortion of economic reality and a distortion of the facts.

This government has pursued a balanced policy, trying to steer a proper and sustainable course forward in terms of sustainable development of our energy sector and protection of our environment.

I will remind the honourable senator that some of the difficulties, especially with exporting natural gas to our European allies — a subject, by the way, which Minister Freeland addressed eloquently in her speech in Washington — were decisions made by our province in Quebec and other provinces who, rightly or wrongly, have felt it unacceptable for pipelines to be built in their jurisdictions.

That said, I am encouraged with developments in New Brunswick where there are discussions. The government is engaged with the proponents of a LNG receiving terminal in New Brunswick by the Spanish energy company Repsol. This government is committed to do what it can to help its allies. It is committed to doing what it can to provide a sustainable and dynamic energy sector.

I simply do not accept the basic premise of your question, as I have tried to explain.

Senator Plett: The answer to my question was obviously no. It wouldn’t have taken that much time to say that. No, you don’t know how many.

Leader, your government’s lax approach to this is truly alarming. We’re talking about foreign criminals who are currently missing in our country with a high chance of reoffending, some of whom have already been convicted of multiple sexual offences. It isn’t enough for your government to simply say that it’s taking this seriously. Your actions clearly do not reflect that.

An Auditor General’s report on immigration removals from 2020 flagged serious concerns that the border agency had lost track of a large number of these individuals, sometimes for years. Even high-priority cases were stalled or inactive.

Leader, when will these dangerous individuals be removed from Canada? It is the safety of Canadians that is at stake here. Are we right in that?