Senator Gold: Thank you for your question. I’m not sure that the 14,000 who were assisted would characterize it as a failure, but there is no question that the challenges facing first-time homeowners and, more broadly, Canadians if they own a home and wish to change homes are real and pressing and have been for some time. The Government of Canada evaluates the efficacy of its programs and makes changes where it is appropriate and will continue to do so.

Senator Ataullahjan: Leader, last month it was reported that just 66 homebuyers in Toronto have qualified under the First‑Time Home Buyer Incentive program since it was created in 2019. This is despite the fact that the Trudeau government made changes in the 2020 Fall Economic Statement that it claimed would increase eligibility for Toronto homebuyers.

Leader, when this program was created, the Trudeau government said it would help up to 100,000 Canadians become homeowners, but as of last November, fewer than 14,000 have been helped. Has your government done an analysis or review of the program to determine why it has been such a failure?

Senator Omidvar: Thank you, Senator Gold, for that update. It is encouraging.

Buried in the announcement was a tiny line that the government will consider providing pathways to permanency for temporary foreign workers, or as I like to call them, essential workers. These are essential workers. I will remind us all that this chamber unanimously passed a motion last year, I think, to provide pathways to permanency for these essential workers. But the government is moving slowly on this promise. Will those in so-called low-skilled sectors have an easier path to permanency soon, or should Canadians simply accept that this program is class-based?

Senator Jaffer: Thank you, Senator Campbell. Our committee follows the Marjory LeBreton rule of “no minister, no bill,” and we operate under that rule generally.

Our committee, through our clerk, works as closely as we can with departments to secure ministerial appearances. We have had issues securing ministers for appearances, most recently on our study of Government Motion No. 14 regarding the Saskatchewan railway. Officials were made available to us, but not the ministers. The only reason the committee decided to continue is because we had a very short time to report back to the Senate.

We continue to push for ministerial appearances. Most importantly, I can always rely on the Government Representative, Senator Gold, and his staff. They go out of their way to help us with the attendance of ministers at committee. I can assure this chamber that we will work hard to ensure that ministers appear in committee to defend their bills.

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): Honourable senators, my question today is for the Leader of the Government in the Senate. Leader, Canada’s inflation rate is currently at a 30-year high and shows no sign of climbing down on its own. This means that it is very likely that the Bank of Canada will be raising rates again, putting increased pressure on Canadians who are trying to pay off their mortgages.

On Tuesday, the Parliamentary Budget Officer testified before our National Finance Committee and said the following:

. . . it’s clear that the fiscal policy that tends to be expansionary, such as deficit financing, makes the job of the Bank of Canada more difficult when the economy is already running close to or at full capacity, employment growth is very strong and the unemployment rate is low. So running deficits that are significant makes the job of the Bank of Canada in taming inflation much more difficult.

Leader, does this NDP-Liberal government realize that its uncontrolled spending is fuelling inflation, or do you believe that the Parliamentary Budget Officer is misleading senators?

Senator Martin: I have another question about lapsed spending. In November 2018, the Trudeau government supported a motion in the other place that called upon the government to automatically carry forward all annual lapsed spending at Veterans Affairs to the next fiscal year, until the department meets its own service standards.

Instead of fixing the problem, this government has made the situation worse. Over the first four years of this Liberal government, about $477 million went unspent at Veterans Affairs Canada. The funding that lapsed at Veterans Affairs last year alone far exceeds that amount.

Leader, why did the Prime Minister not live up to his 2015 election promise to end this practice? And why hasn’t your government respected the motion passed in 2018? Does the Prime Minister still believe that veterans are asking for more than his government is willing to give?

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for the question, esteemed colleague.

I will begin by noting that on March 23, the Independent Advisory Board for Senate Appointments launched an official call for new applicants to fill Senate vacancies for British Columbia, Manitoba and Saskatchewan. The government makes sure that all provincial and territorial advisory boards are established efficiently and quickly to ensure that all applicants are assessed and that all provinces and regions are properly represented in this place.

As you know it is an arm’s-length process. The Government Representative does not have much say in the process. That said, I am hopeful that the process will move along efficiently and that several appointments will soon be announced. I have no further information to give you.

Hon. Mobina S. B. Jaffer: Yes, I would.

Hon. Pierre J. Dalphond: Esteemed colleagues, I am pleased to speak at second reading of Bill S-5, Strengthening Environmental Protection for a Healthier Canada Act. This bill would make various amendments to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, which came into force on March 31, 2000. Those who were here at the time will remember it.

First, I congratulate the government and in particular Minister Guilbeault, who, at the invitation of the Government Representative in the Senate, chose to introduce this important bill in the Senate. I also commend Senator Kutcher for agreeing to sponsor the bill.

As I mentioned in my speech on Bill S-4, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Identification of Criminals Act and to make related amendments to other Acts with respect to the COVID-19 response and other measures, when the government chooses to begin the legislative process in the Senate, we are called on to play a slightly different role than usual, that is, to carefully review a bill that has received the support of a majority in the House of Commons.

The fact is that we can make legislative amendments in keeping with the government’s intent and in cooperation with the minister responsible.

(1500)

Bill S-5 proposes adding to the preamble of the Canada Environmental Protection Act the recognition that every individual in Canada has a right to a healthy environment.

As a Quebec senator, I am pleased to see this principle recognized. In Quebec, the right to a healthy environment is recognized by the Environment Quality Act, which makes citizens the key concern and focus of all important decisions, including the protection of the quality of the air we breathe, the water we drink and the noise around us.

[English]

Bill S-5 will enhance the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, or CEPA, an important statute that has already been used to ban plastic microbeads in toiletries, to prohibit asbestos and to prevent the use of dangerous chemicals in baby bottles.

As drafted, Bill S-5 also presents the Senate with an opportunity to strengthen the legislation regarding toxicity testing on animals. This is a cruel practice that we should look to minimize and hopefully eliminate in our society. Indeed, during the 2021 election, the Liberal Party pledged to phase out chemical testing on animals by 2035.

However, Bill S-5 falls a bit short on that promise. As a matter of fact, it contains only a reference in the preamble, which is proposed to be added to CEPA. It reads as follows:

Whereas the Government of Canada recognizes the . . . importance of promoting the development and timely incorporation of scientifically justified alternative methods and strategies in the testing and assessment of substances to reduce, refine or replace the use of vertebrate animals . . .

However, Bill S-5, as I mentioned, does not contain any specific provisions to achieve that goal.

On March 3, in this chamber, I asked Minister Guilbeault whether the government was open to including in the bill specific provisions regarding animal toxicity testing. I was delighted to hear this response from the minister:

As a legislator, I’m always open to making my bills better, and I would invite you or any member of the Senate to come forward with proposals to improve and strengthen the bill as it moves forward.

. . . I welcome your proposals to improve the bill . . . .

Today, I’m pleased to report that four Canadian animal welfare organizations are working cooperatively to help us develop amendments to Bill S-5 regarding chemical testing on animals. They are Animal Justice, the Canadian Society for Humane Science, Humane Canada and Humane Society International/Canada.

I commend to you their policy expertise, including relevant scientific backgrounds, and suggest that representatives of these animal welfare organizations be invited to participate in the committee’s study.

From these groups, I have learned that toxicity testing is the most harmful and painful use of animals in scientific research. Toxicity tests impacted approximately 90,000 animals in 2019 alone. Moreover, such tests fall into the Canadian Council on Animal Care’s Category E tests. This is the most severe category of harm that animals can experience. Category E tests cause death, severe pain and extreme distress, and may include procedures such as inflicting burns or trauma on unsedated animals and forcing ingestion or topical application of deadly substances.

Personally, I was shocked to learn of the scale of this testing in Canada. I was also surprised to learn of the range of species involved in Category E testing. That includes guinea pigs, rabbits, mice and other small mammals, pigs, sheep, beavers, chickens, turkeys, hummingbirds and many species of marine and freshwater fish.

Despite all this suffering, it is noteworthy that animal testing is often a poor predictor of human outcomes, and alternatives are increasingly available. According to Dr. Elisabeth Ormandy, Executive Director of the Canadian Society for Humane Science:

Non-animal testing methods are becoming increasingly available, and are often more reliable, as well as more time- and cost-effective. . . .

The methods include in vitro testing of human cells, computer models, open source data and bioinformatic methods.

In this context, south of the border, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has committed to reducing its request for, and funding of, mammal studies by 30% by 2025 — two years from now — and to ending the use of chemical testing on mammals by 2035. In Europe, the Netherlands has committed to phasing out most types of animal testing by 2025, and the European Union has developed strong legal tools to reduce and replace the use of animals in toxicity testing.

Canada can take guidance from these examples in implementing the governing party’s undertaking to phase out toxicity testing on animals by 2035. The Senate now has the opportunity to help to achieve this goal.

Changes to strengthen the bill could include, for example, the following five ideas: a statutory recognition of the principle that toxicity testing on animals should be a last resort in considering scientific alternatives; a legally mandated strategic plan to reduce and replace testing on animals for chemical safety assessments under CEPA towards 2035; legally mandated reporting tools on progress, such as required annual reporting to Parliament by the minister; consideration as to whether Bill S-5’s language should cover all animals, not just vertebrate animals, and in the context of any potential harmful testing, such a change could recognize evolving scientific knowledge about creatures like the amazing octopus, as profiled in the Academy Award-winning Netflix documentary My Octopus Teacher; and finally, the committee could consider establishing an enforcement mechanism in the legislation with a coming into force of 2035, such as a prohibition on toxicity testing with a requirement for ministerial authorization for exceptional cases after that target date. In the U.S., the Environmental Protection Agency plans that any mammal studies beyond 2035 would require approval on a case‑by‑case basis.

It will be very helpful to have the input of government on the best approach to achieve the shared goal of a 2035 phase-out as well as incremental progress in the meantime. Collaboration with the government can serve senators well in providing — in this case — not sober second thought, but rather more proactive policy contributions to Bill S-5 with no need for amendments to go back and forth between both chambers.

[Translation]

With Bill S-5, we have the opportunity to put an end to the terrible suffering inflicted on tens of thousands of animals each year in Canada and to become a society that is more humane and respectful of the other living beings around us that complete our ecosystem.

As I said before, some categories of animals that are used for testing product toxicity are also pets for children and even adults. This has to stop.

In 2015, the Quebec National Assembly unanimously passed Bill 54, An Act to improve the legal situation of animals, which took effect on December 5, 2015.

(1510)

That legislation, based on provisions that already exist in Manitoba, Ontario, British Columbia and France, changes the legal status of pets from “things,” or property, to “sentient beings.” Accordingly, it states that owners must ensure that animals are cared for based on their biological needs, including exercise — which is good for us, too.

Right here in the Senate, over the past few years, bills that have put an end to animal abuse have been passed into law. I am thinking of the legislation to end the captivity of whales and dolphins, sponsored by Senator Sinclair and, before him, Senator Moore.

I also want to acknowledge the work done by Senator Carolyn Stewart Olsen, whose Bill S-214 called for a ban on the use of animals for testing cosmetic products. This initiative was included in the Liberal Party’s platform during the last election campaign, and the government has promised to implement it by amending the Food and Drugs Act shortly.

One of the bills currently being studied by this chamber, sponsored by Senator Klyne and entitled the Jane Goodall act, proposes measures to protect wild animals in captivity and ensure their conservation and welfare.

The fact is that, as scientific knowledge about animals increases, the circle of empathy towards them widens. In that regard, the Senate has played, and I hope will continue to play, an important role in enhancing respect for the species around us and in recognizing that, in the ecosystem that sustains us, they deserve our respect, as First Nations peoples understood long before us.

In conclusion, I invite all senators to pass Bill S-5 at second reading as soon as possible so that it can be referred to committee for further study, including consideration of proposed amendments, particularly with respect to animal testing. Thank you.

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

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

[English]

Leave having been given to revert to Notices of Motions:

Some Hon. Senators: Hear, hear.

(On motion of Senator Martin, debate adjourned.)

(At 3:13 p.m., pursuant to the orders adopted by the Senate on November 25, 2021 and March 31, 2022, the Senate adjourned until 2 p.m., tomorrow.)

Hon. Senators: Hear, hear.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your question and for underlining the very challenging problem — there is no better word for it — for the younger generation seeking the same advantages we had when we were at that stage of life.

The government has put forward programs to help and will continue to work closely with provincial, territorial and municipal governments to do what it can within its jurisdiction to assist young people to be able to find and acquire their homes.

Hon. Salma Ataullahjan, Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights, presented the following report:

Wednesday, April 6, 2022

The Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights has the honour to present its

FIRST REPORT

Your committee, to which was referred Bill S-211, An Act to enact the Fighting Against Forced Labour and Child Labour in Supply Chains Act and to amend the Customs Tariff, has, in obedience to the order of reference of December 14, 2021, examined the said bill and now reports the same with the following amendments:

1.Clause 6, page 4: Add the following after line 21:

2.Clause 11, pages 6 and 7:

(a)On page 6, add the following after line 25:

(b)on page 7, replace line 12 with the following:

Respectfully submitted,

SALMA ATAULLAHJAN

Chair

(For text of observations, see today’s Journals of the Senate, p. 446.)

Hon. Diane Bellemare: Honourable senators, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the third report (interim) of the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament, entitled Amendments to the Rules — Committee mandates.

(For text of report, see today’s Journals of the Senate, p. 446-9.)

Hon. Diane Bellemare: My question is for the Government Representative in the Senate.

Senator Gold, there are currently 15 vacant seats in the Senate, which represents 14% of all seats. There are four vacancies for Ontario, five for the Western provinces and six for the Atlantic provinces. More and more vacancies keep popping up. By May we will be up to 16 vacancies.

We all know that Canadians may apply through an open application process. The website currently indicates that there were some provincial and territorial members appointed to the Advisory Board recently, but there are still positions open.

What stage are we at with the appointment of members to the Advisory Board and, most importantly, appointments to the Senate? Is the process ongoing?

Hon. Claude Carignan: My question is for the Leader of the Government in the Senate.

Leader, there was some good news for the economy today. The occupancy rate in Montreal hotels sits at 80%. These hotels have been rented out by the Montreal Integrated University Health and Social Services Centres, or CIUSSS. The occupancy rate is 80% because these hotels are being used to house the illegal refugees crossing at Roxham Road. As of early December, there were 8,000 of these illegal refugees.

How does the government plan to put an end to this illegal immigration?

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for the question.

Of course I do not believe that the Parliamentary Budget Officer is misleading senators. He is expressing his opinion based on his experience and in recognition of the challenge, which we all recognize, of coming through the pandemic and responding to the calls of industry, businesses, individuals, working Canadians and Canadians who are unable to find work for assistance through these difficult times, coupled, happily, with a strong economy — as you pointed out properly, colleague — and low unemployment.

It is an enormous challenge to balance all the competing needs, desires, aspirations and responsibilities of government. The Government of Canada, which will be presenting its budget tomorrow, believes that it is firmly on track to provide what Canadians and our economy need to move forward and to build a better future for all Canadians.

Senator Plett: We are all anticipating this NDP budget that we’re going to receive tomorrow.

According to the Canadian Real Estate Association, the average price of a home in Winnipeg has gone up almost 30% in three years. According to Statistics Canada, the cost of household appliances has gone up over the last year. The cost of a refrigerator increased by more than 15%; ovens, dishwashers, and laundry appliances all went up more than 9%. And, of course, the cost to feed a family went through the roof last month, up over 7%, the largest yearly increase since 2009.

Leader, these are not just statistics. These are real costs borne by real Canadian families. The PBO says your government’s uncontrolled spending is going to make life harder for him. Is this NDP-Liberal government listening to the Parliamentary Budget Officer?