The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Honourable senators, when shall this bill be read the third time?

(On motion of Senator Dean, bill referred to the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry.)

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Are honourable senators ready for the question?

Senator Simons: If I have time, absolutely.

Senator Jaffer: May I ask a second question Senator Simons?

Hon. Mobina S. B. Jaffer: Thank you, Senator Simons, for your speech on Edmonton, and Senator Cordy, thank you for your speech and also for starting this inquiry. I may have missed you saying it, but wasn’t the first Muslim mosque also built in Edmonton?

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Is it agreed, honourable senators?

Senator Lankin: Thank you very much. I can’t tell you how much I agree with what you said to Senator Downe. I thought it was right on point.

A lot of what we hear in terms of pushback to this idea comes from a sense of intuition and not from any evidence. The evidence that we have seen, whether via pilot projects completed or partially completed, shows the opposite.

But what we hear is that marginal effective tax rates will make it very difficult for us to determine where the clawback is or at what level to set the benefit. We hear that it would be a disincentive to work. I think some of the evidence you alluded to disproves that.

I wonder if you could just expand on that a little bit in terms of what we do know from the evidence and why this is worthy of the next step in a national collaborative study with P.E.I.

Senator C. Deacon: Thank you, Senator Lankin. I can only speak from personal experiences of times when my life was really tough. My ability to see opportunity and my willingness to take risks to step out of the circumstances that I found myself in — things just close in on you.

I don’t know how to quantify that at this point in time, but I believe that, personally. I see that with people in my life, where things just become overwhelming and their ability to see what might be obvious to you and me as a next step — they just can’t get there; they can’t imagine that change.

I look at my own community where there have been people who have had the courage to create new opportunities. Invariably, there’s been a little bit of a cushion underneath them that has allowed them to go and take a risk and maybe fail. But it’s that controlled risk that I think is essential for us to make progress in every community, in every life and every family.

I don’t know how to quantify it. I have the examples I gave. The Housing First example from Medicine Hat I found so inspiring. If I couldn’t have a good night’s sleep, a shower in the morning and a meal, how could I deal with any major issue in my life? Telling people they have to do X, Y and Z before they get that key element puts them in an impossible position.

I don’t have an answer, but that’s why we need to do a study.

(On motion of Senator Martin, debate adjourned.)

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Griffin, seconded by the Honourable Senator Tannas, for the second reading of Bill S-236, An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act and the Employment Insurance Regulations (Prince Edward Island).

Hon. Judith G. Seidman: Honourable senators, my question is for the government leader. The Tobacco and Vaping Products Act came into force on May 23, 2018. As part of this act, I introduced an amendment here in the Senate that three years after coming into force and every two years after that the Minister of Health would undertake a legislative review of the provisions and operation of this act. From March 16 to April 27 of this year, the Government of Canada conducted public consultations on the legislative review of the Tobacco and Vaping Products Act with a particular emphasis on the act’s ability to address youth vaping.

Senator Gold, according to the Tobacco and Vaping Products Act, the Minister of Health should have tabled a report summarizing the review’s findings in both houses of Parliament at the end of May. However, this has not yet happened. When can we expect this report to be published?

Hon. Diane Bellemare: Would Senator Deacon take a question?

Senator C. Deacon: Yes.

Hon. Marty Klyne moved the adoption of the report.

Senator Jaffer: Thank you. Senator Simons, I did mean to say that it was moved, and that it was the first mosque ever built is something that we Muslims celebrate. Of course, the women from that mosque are some of the most forward-looking, including Dr. Lila Fahlman who was sort of a matriarch of the women’s movement in the Muslim community. So thank you for raising that.

Senator Simons, I think you would agree that the Muslim community is still very vibrant in the Al Rashid Mosque.

Hon. Pamela Wallin: Honourable senators, I have the honour to inform the Senate that pursuant to the order adopted by the Senate on May 4, 2022, the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce deposited with the Clerk of the Senate on June 6, 2022, its second report, which deals with the subject matter of those elements contained in Divisions 5, 10, 11, 15, 16, 17 and 30 of Part 5 of Bill C-19, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022 and other measures.

Hon. Salma Ataullahjan: Honourable senators, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the report of the Inter-Parliamentary Union concerning the One Hundred and Forty-Second Inter-Parliamentary Union Assembly and Related Meetings, held by video conference from April 13 to May 27, 2021.

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): Honourable senators, my question is for Senator Gold, the Leader of the Government in the Senate.

Leader, while the Senate debated your government’s request for two pre-studies last Thursday, the House Finance Committee amended Bill C-19, including striking out a complete section of the bill — section 32 of Part 5. Government members supported most of these amendments, including throwing out section 32. The Senate Social Affairs Committee was scheduled to study section 32 on Thursday as part of their pre-study of Bill C-19. It had witnesses lined up, and senators made their travel arrangements accordingly. Less than two hours before the meeting was supposed to start, it was cancelled.

Last week, several senators raised the fact that pre-studying bills that could be amended in the House is a loss of valuable time and resources for the Senate. You brushed aside these concerns by saying that when doing a pre-study, the committee is studying the issues in general, not specifically the bill’s text.

Leader, why do you think the Social Affairs Committee decided to cancel its meeting? Isn’t this proof that we were right that considering pre-studies carries a risk of wasting resources on matters that will no longer be in the bill when the bill gets here?

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for the question. I will resist the obvious response about the use of this chamber’s time.

The fact is that pre-studies for budget implementation bills are a regular practice. The two issues to which you referred have related to different bills.

To your question, it is a measure of the utility of the pre-study of Bill C-19 that the issue about the section which was removed was raised by senators on the committee, indeed, and the views of the Senate were communicated to the government as they always are in these matters. In that regard, rather than a demonstration that it was futile or wrong to do it, this demonstrates the validity of the pre-study, and, I hope, as the pre‑studies that we in this chamber approve will demonstrate as well.

Senator Plett: Well, of course, they were set to study the part of the bill that was taken out, so I’m not sure how the Senate gave the instruction before they were even able to study it.

Senator Gold, as Leader of the Government in the Senate, you must have known the government would support deleting section 32 of Bill C-19. It had been discussed at another House committee on May 26, and this was supported by Liberal members there.

Why did you let the Social Affairs Committee organize a meeting on section 32 knowing that it would be deleted?

Senator Gold, you are not just a bystander in this Senate. You and your office have a role to play in making sure that the Senate is efficient and does not waste its time. Why didn’t you give more consideration to the witnesses and committee members?

Senator Gold: The senators who were studying this bill, as all senators, I hope — certainly senators with whom I’m familiar — do their homework well before a bill is actually to be studied on the day of the committee hearing. That is the partial answer to the first aspect of your questions, though views of senators were well communicated before the meeting.

As for the rest, I stand by my answer, honourable colleague. This was an example of the Senate working appropriately and collaboratively. As such, the bill that is ultimately passed is the best bill to serve Canadians.

[Translation]

Hon. Kim Pate: Honourable senators, my question is for Senator Gold, the government leader in the Senate. In light of the report released last week by the Auditor General chronicling the mass incarceration and disproportionate and discriminatory maximum security classification of Black and Indigenous peoples — most particularly Indigenous women, who are more than three times more likely than non-Indigenous women to be classified and released to the community for maximum security — my question is: Will the government commit to implementing the recommendations of the Senate Human Rights Committee report, as well as the measures proposed in 2019 by this chamber, to address these issues and ensure judicial oversight and effective remedial options for these and other miscarriages of justice?

Senator Pate: Thank you, Senator Gold, for that information. The Auditor General also expressed significant frustration that, on the same issues and concerns that have been reportedly identified by her office, the government has not acted to redress or even ensure accurate data collection and accountability also exists. In addition to the issues with corrections, the Auditor General also provided examples of the lack of data collected by the CRA and ESDC regarding who is eligible but unable to access programs like the Canada Child Benefit and GIS. What concrete and immediate actions will the government take to remedy these realities?