Senator Gold: Thank you for your question.

Though I am not aware of what Global Affairs may be doing with regard to these, I can advise this chamber — and I have been advised — that the government is very much aware of the bills that are currently before both the legislatures of California and New York. They are in close contact with industry with regard to those bills.

As colleagues know, our legislation governing forestry are amongst the strictest in the world. We’re a climate leader. The U.S. and Canada have always collaborated closely on forest management, notwithstanding the differences that often arise between us and our trading partner in the United States.

The government, as I said before, will continue and will always defend the forestry sector and its workers.

An Hon. Senator: On division.

(Motion agreed to, on division, and report adopted.)

(Accordingly, the Senate adopted the motion that it agree with the proposed resolution to amend the Constitution.)

Hon. Colin Deacon: Honourable senators, on March 22, the Associate Minister of Finance, Randy Boissonnault, announced that Abraham Tachjian will be the open banking lead in Canada. His task is to lead the creation of an open banking system that gives individuals greater control over their financial data and access to the benefits that those data can deliver. This is great news.

This week, Pollara Strategic Insights released a comprehensive survey examining how Canadians feel about traditional banking and newer financial technology products. Pollara found that 84% of small business owners and consumers feel that bank fees are too high, and more than half feel stressed when interacting with the banks. For marginalized Canadians, this stress can be even greater. Maybe that’s why more than two thirds of Canadians told Pollara that they think more competition will lead to greater product choices and lower fees. Of those who already use new financial technology products, 91% say they’re easy to use, 82% like the lower fees and 73% say these products help them save money.

By contrast, our big banks introduced fee increases mid-pandemic. For example, one bank’s chequing account transaction fees increased 56% –- from $1.25 to $1.95 per transaction –- but with no corresponding increase in service. Quite the opposite. The minimum deposit required to avoid paying these fees also jumped — from $2,000 to $5,000. This pricing policy disproportionately impairs the financial health of the already marginalized. It also really improves bank profits. The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives just reported that the 2021 profits of the five big banks were 40% higher than their pre-pandemic average in 2018-19. That’s six times the rate of inflation. The five big bank CEOs saw, on average, a 23% increase in personal earnings in 2021. That’s almost four times the rate of inflation. In a few hours, the Government of Canada may impose an excess profits tax on the Canadian banks. My profound preference would instead be to accelerate and broaden regulatory reforms like open banking.

The reason is that markets work best when innovators — the makers of better mouse traps — are rewarded. Markets fail to serve citizens when regulatory moats protect incumbent businesses from that competition in ways that enable them to increase prices and profits while still selling the same old mouse trap.

Colleagues, as you may expect, I am thrilled about the implementation of open banking and the consumer-centric financial opportunities it will unlock, and also about the progress in the related areas of payment modernization and digital identity. There are challenges ahead, but we’re finally moving in the right direction.

Hon. Tony Loffreda: Honourable senators, Russia’s reprehensible invasion of Ukraine continues amid mounting atrocities, making it more important than ever to promote international peace, security and prosperity, particularly to our young people who may not comprehend just how serious the consequences of this kind of conflict can be.

That is why I immediately agreed to participate in the second International Forum on Peace, Security and Prosperity, a hybrid event happening today and tomorrow. Hundreds of participants are gathered in Italy for the occasion.

[English]

For two days, the Peace, Security & Prosperity, or PSP, Forum will unite military and political leaders, policy-makers, researchers, students and the wider public to explore the role of the military and the institutions of public order and justice in establishing the basis for flourishing peace, stable security and increasing prosperity. In other words, what does it take to make, and, more importantly, to keep and protect, world peace?

As Canadians, it’s easy to take for granted these three elements that are part of our DNA. We are privileged to live in a just and democratic society where the rule of law prevails and our rights and freedoms are protected under the Constitution. Recent world events have shown us just how precious and fragile democracy can be.

In just a couple of years, Stephen Gregory, the co-founder and chairman of the forum, and his dedicated team of officials and volunteers have successfully and considerably expanded the reach of this event. Today’s forum will feature representatives from 32 countries, 23 military academies and approximately 75 high schools representing some 2,000 students, along with many distinguished guests, academics and military personnel.

Beyond the various panels and keynote speeches, one of the highlights of the forum is a student essay and video contest that I will be moderating. Students have been given three topics to choose from with the focus of civil-military cooperation. It will be an honour for me to engage with these students tomorrow morning and exchange ideas on how to achieve and maintain peace in the world.

In my view, the Government of Canada should take note of this important conference and consider establishing a more formal partnership, financial or otherwise, with the PSP Forum, so it can continue to offer high-value educational opportunities for our youth and build strong links with citizens around the world who share the common goals of promoting peace, improving security and ensuring prosperity.

Honourable senators, please join me in congratulating the organizing committee for hosting the second International Forum on Peace, Security & Prosperity and for assembling such an impressive program.

Thank you.

[Translation]

Hon. Paula Simons, Deputy Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, presented the following report:

Thursday, April 7, 2022

The Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry has the honour to present its

SECOND REPORT

Your committee, to which was referred Bill S-227, An Act to establish Food Day in Canada, has, in obedience to the order of reference of March 3, 2022, examined the said bill and now reports the same without amendment, but with certain observations, which are appended to this report.

Respectfully submitted,

PAULA SIMONS

Deputy Chair

(For text of observations, see today’s Journals of the Senate, p. 456.)

Hon. Marilou McPhedran: Senator Galvez, thank you for this initiative.

I want to frame my question as a result of a recent report from the Sierra Club and six other non-governmental organizations that reported fossil fuel financing from the world’s 60 largest banks reached US$4.6 trillion in the six years since the adoption of the Paris Agreement. As you noted, the latest report from the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, released just three days ago, warns us that the time is now — that we just don’t have any more time.

I note that in the Sierra Club report, three Canadian big banks are specifically named among the “dirty dozen” of the top international fossil fuel financiers from 2016 to 2021. Number 5 on that list is RBC, number 9 is Scotiabank and number 11 is TD.

Senator Galvez, could you please inform us as to your intention with this bill in responding to that kind of factual demonstration of how banks are not acting now or rapidly in the way the experts say must happen?

Senator Galvez: Thank you so much for the question, Senator McPhedran.

I can tell you that this is a concept of double materiality. That means that, on one hand, the financial sector acknowledges and says that the climate risk is systemic and, whether it is through the transition or the physical risk with all these extreme weather events that have been very destructive, they turn assets into stranded assets. On the other hand, they are financing the fossil fuel industry. They call this double materiality.

Now, the standards on sustainability — and this is on a global scale — they are saying this concept needs to be studied and the disclosure cannot only be voluntary. It has to be more complete in order to assess the risk more precisely and to apply the remedy because the risk, as you were saying, is there, and it’s growing; it’s alarming. It can bring us to a very difficult point of a different nature than other financial crises. People tend to think this could be very similar to the 2008 financial crisis, but it’s not. This is an external crisis coming from several factors that are cumulative and convergent.

I hope I answered your question.

Senator Moncion: I am referring to environmental disasters that occur suddenly and were not expected. In the financial system, a black swan is an economic disaster that was not expected, such as the situation in 2008. We now speak of black swan events associated with climate change.

Senator Galvez: You reminded me that at some point we were talking about “unknown unknown” risks. We were talking about radical uncertainty. As an engineer, I know how to manage risk when we are able to measure it, model it, and predict it. That is what we do in engineering when we adapt our infrastructure.

The problem, financially speaking, is that according to experts, this risk is unknown. We cannot really measure it, because these factors are convergent, cumulative and exponential, and they are truly very difficult to predict. That is why experts are telling us that we must use microprudential and macroprudential approaches to ensure we can resolve the problem both on an individual entity level and on a systemic level, because the risk is systemic.

Hon. Julie Miville-Dechêne: First, very briefly, I want to congratulate you for the boldness, the determination and all the work behind your bill. I believe that we will indeed have a robust debate.

For the past few years we have been hearing about initiatives to make financial institutions and businesses more transparent. I understand that your bill goes much further, suggesting that these disclosures are inadequate.

Could you explain why these disclosures do not work and how your bill affects existing initiatives to enhance climate disclosures made by businesses?

Senator Galvez: Thank you very much for your question and for appreciating the work that has been done.

So far, the reporting of climate risks is just a recommendation and it is voluntary. Experts have said that just 9% of the entities monitored produced a report on their climate risks. Among that 9%, just 2% took action in response to the risks they identified.

There is another criticism that, because there are no strict requirements or guidelines to disclose these risks, this ultimately just serves as a sort of greenwashing. Some entities are taking advantage of this situation to overstate how much they are doing, but no one can validate the claims.

Our bill seeks to improve the disclosure of climate risks, but it goes much further than that, because the entities must prove that their efforts are in line with climate commitments. This means that they not only have to disclose the risks, but also have to offer solutions. Disclosure and solutions became mandatory with our bill.

Hon. Clément Gignac: Senator Galvez, I echo Senator Miville-Dechêne in congratulating you on your excellent work. As the former governor of the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England said, the energy transition will neither materialize nor succeed without a significant contribution from the financial sector.

You mentioned the three committees that could be interested. I have reviewed the procedures of this chamber, and my understanding is that the leaders will decide. Don’t you think this item should be sent to the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce? I’m suggesting this quite neutrally because it is my privilege to be a member of the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance, the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce and the Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources.

You’re talking about amending the Financial Institutions and Deposit Insurance System Amendment Act. A number of bills governing the financial sector were mentioned. Do you have an opinion about this with respect to the committees, given that we know it’s the leaders who will make the decisions and decide which committees should study your bill?

Senator Galvez: I don’t know whether you follow budget news, but the issue of sustainable finance is one aspect of the budget. That’s good, and I would point out that in the last election, several of the political parties’ platforms included sustainable finance elements to develop, so that’s very good.

Ultimately, it is true that this bill may be of interest to the three committees I mentioned, but obviously, as you said yourself, it is not my decision to make. Everyone will speak with their facilitators or leaders and ultimately they will be the ones to decide, but certainly the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce and the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance are the two committees . . .

The other reason I can say this is because our bill is agnostic when it comes to technology. It does not say whether or not to use a certain technology. We are asking the entities to show us the efforts they are making to align their activities with Canada’s domestic and international climate commitments. So long as they are doing just that, we have nothing to say about the technology they use. I would say that the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce and the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance are the two committees that I would favour.

(On motion of Senator Moncion, debate adjourned.)

[English]

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Marwah, seconded by the Honourable Senator Deacon (Nova Scotia), for the adoption of the second report of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration, entitled Senate Budget 2022-23, presented in the Senate on February 24, 2022.

Hon Senators: Agreed.

(Notice of motion withdrawn.)

(At 6:20 p.m., the Senate was continued until Tuesday, April 26, 2022, at 2 p.m.)

Hon. Margaret Dawn Anderson: Drin Gwiinzii, honourable senators.

It is my privilege to rise today to congratulate the Gwich’in of Aklavik, Inuvik, Teetl’it Zheh and Tsiigehtchic on the thirtieth anniversary of the Gwich’in Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement.

The agreement, signed on April 22, 1992, granted the Gwich’in ownership of 22,330 square kilometres of land in the Northwest Territories and 1,554 square kilometres of land in the Yukon, including the subsurface rights to 6,158 square kilometres of land in the Northwest Territories. The agreement also secured the Gwich’in economic benefits, the exclusive rights to be licensed to conduct commercial wildlife activities on Gwich’in lands and formalized Gwich’in participation in land‑use planning and the management of renewable resources, land, water and heritage resources. This included a commitment to negotiate self-government.

Since receiving the original $75 million of capital transfers between 1992 and 2007 secured through the land claim agreement, the Gwich’in have increased these funds to over $165 million while supporting their people and communities.

The recognition and affirmation of Gwich’in rights secured through the land claim agreement have also supported Gwich’in initiatives around conservation and sustainability. For example, the Gwich’in have been able to maintain the Porcupine Caribou Herd as one of the largest and healthiest international barren-land caribou herds in the world — a critical and vital resource for the Gwich’in.

Over the last 30 years, the Gwich’in have, through their Department of Cultural Heritage, been working to preserve culture, language and traditional knowledge for future generations as well as develop programs appropriate for Gwich’in needs. Some examples of their work include recording the life stories of many Gwich’in elders and collaborating on second-language curriculum for kindergarten to Grade 12 students in the Beaufort Delta Region.

Finally, the move toward Dinjii Zhuh government will ensure the Gwich’in can continue to undertake occupancy and harvesting activities for generations to come while blending their historic leadership structures with contemporary forms of governance.

I wish to congratulate the Gwich’in and their communities and organizations on their achievements over the past 30 years. I know the Gwich’in Tribal Council will continue to prioritize their people, communities, culture, spirituality, language and values as they move toward Dinjii Zhuh government. It is indeed time to define “Your future, your way.”

Mahsi’cho, quyannaini. Thank you

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your question, senator. I’m not yet privy to the budget, so we’ll have to wait one more day to find out what the government is proposing.

The comparison with the Canada Infrastructure Bank is an interesting one. Despite the fact that the projects are not yet completed, there are 35 projects under way, as I think I mentioned at another time, and they are important projects, Senator Plett. They include the Manitoba Fibre broadband project that will bring broadband services to nearly 50,000 households in rural Manitoba, an issue that our colleague Senator Patterson has underlined on more than one occasion. It also includes work to advance the Kivalliq Hydro-Fibre Link, which will provide a vital energy and communications link between Manitoba and Nunavut.

Every dollar that Canadians are being asked to spend through the government on those infrastructure projects is creating jobs, attracting investment, fighting climate change, promoting social equity and building the economy of the future.

Hon. Denise Batters: Honourable senators, we have all seen the horrific images broadcast from Ukraine, the record of a people under siege. Reports speak daily of thousands killed and thousands more wounded, the bombing of schools and of a children’s cancer hospital, apartments and other buildings obliterated while hundreds of Ukrainians are trapped in bunkers beneath and of unspeakable horrors on the streets of Bucha.

After seeing these images and after President Zelenskyy’s heartfelt address to our Parliament, it is impossible not to be moved. We all want to help, and we all feel helpless. In this kind of chaotic emergency, medical assistance is badly needed.

That is why a group of Canadian MPs and senators — including Senator Larry Campbell and I — have paired up with Health Partners International of Canada, or HPIC, a Canadian charity licensed by Health Canada that handles and distributes medical supplies into crisis zones like this one.

Supplied by major medical and pharmaceutical partners, HPIC is working in partnership with Canadian Medical Assistance Teams to deliver their Humanitarian Medical Kits into needed regions in and around Ukraine. For a sponsorship cost of $600, each medical kit contains about 600 treatments — a value of about $6,000 per box. The current medical kits to Ukraine contain supplies like antibiotics, antihypertensives, anti‑inflammatories, analgesics and products to treat dermal infections, asthma, heart conditions and first aid. HPIC has set a goal to mobilize 400 medical kits for Ukraine and refugee camps in neighbouring countries in the next few weeks with a donation target of $240,000.

Many of you have charities you support generously, but we ask you to consider this one. If many senators and MPs donated to this cause, we could make a huge impact.

Honourable senators, it is an extraordinary privilege for us to sit in this chamber of democracy. Recently, five Ukrainian members of parliament travelled here to Parliament to show Canada how critical it is that Ukraine receives more help. I was able to meet them. They were all moms who had to leave their kids behind in Ukraine to travel to Canada. One MP received an air raid siren notification on her cell phone during her Parliament Hill meetings, notifying her that her child would not be going to school that day but, instead, to a bomb shelter. It’s unimaginable.

Honourable senators, let us, as Canadian parliamentarians, join hands to help ease the pain of the Ukrainian people at this dire time when they need it the most. If you are able, please donate a medical kit at hpicanada.ca or by contacting Senator Campbell or me. It’s a great way to make a meaningful contribution to the people of Ukraine.

Hon. Denise Batters: Senator Gold, as Senator Plett mentioned, it is being reported today that members of the NDP were briefed earlier this week on measures that will be found in this afternoon’s federal budget. It has also reported that the NDP briefing came before members of the Liberal caucus received their briefing on the contents of this “NDP budget.”

Senator Gold, you are the Liberal government’s representative in the Senate, so could you tell us if you have received a budget briefing yet? If so, did it take place before or after the third place opposition party in the House of Commons received theirs?

Hon. Mary Jane McCallum: Honourable senators, I thank the Canadian Senators Group for giving me space to speak today.

When I was in residential school, I began to disbelieve this Catholic God that the nuns and priests spoke of. How could a good and just God see me as a savage when he made me? When I went to confession at the age of 12, the priest asked if I let boys do bad things to me. I rarely entered the church after that and never went back to confession, thinking, “Why should I confess to another sinner?”

Over the decades, I didn’t believe I needed an apology, but, in listening to the words of the Pope on Friday, I was shocked when I burst into tears. Unexpectedly, it brought me peace and relief. Through this acknowledgment of past harms, people can finally accept that something life-changing and devastating happened to us at the hands of Church representatives. We are no longer burdened with the task of trying to convince others.

Do I forgive the Church? Not at this moment, and I’m okay with that. It took me 62 years to forgive the nun who had caused me immense and violent trauma at residential school. After going through a ceremony two months ago, I was finally able to let go of that violent energy I carried with me most of my life. I believe this is why I was able to embrace the Pope’s apology in the way that I did.

Now, I and other former students need the space to sit with his words, free from perspectives, dissecting it from a place of colonial thinking. In speaking to many former students, we are all at different stages of understanding the apology’s impact. There is discussion of whether it was needed and whether it is accepted. Despite our shared experience, we all have our own interpretations and lingering impacts.

I have had hate directed at me over my lifetime due to narratives thrust upon me simply because I am Cree. These narratives still exist in Canada today. However, I echo intergenerational Cree knowledge keeper Deborah Young, who states:

Despite all these atrocities and genocide that our people have endured and survived, my heart remains full of love and hopefulness because if I lose hope or love, there is nothing.

Kinanâskomitin. Thank you.

[Translation]

Senator Batters: Senator Gold, you need to answer for us whether you have received a budget briefing, after all, you were sworn in as a Privy Council member and the NDP are not.

I noticed recently also that you’re no longer listed on the PMO website as a member of the Trudeau government’s Cabinet Committee on Operations. Is this actually true? If so, why? Did Jagmeet Singh take your spot? Why does this Trudeau government have more respect for the NDP, which holds only 25 seats in the House of Commons, than it does for its own government leader in the Senate and by extension the entire Senate?

Senator Gold: Thank you for your question and for your concern about the respect with which I am held. But your facts are wrong. I remain a member of the Operations Committee, I attended most recently on Monday. I can’t explain the website. I have other things to do than look for myself on the web.

I repeat, senator, with respect, my understanding is that there was a conversation, there was no formal briefing. Neither I nor my team nor anybody else — unless we attended the budget lock‑up which we organized for all senators, I gather, one senator attended. But apart from that, no, I did not receive any briefing, as none of us would have. Thank you.

Hon. Mary Coyle: Honourable senators, my question is for the representative of the government in the Senate.

Senator Gold, we know that Russia has been spreading false propaganda about its brutal and illegal invasion of Ukraine, and that it and other non-state actors are using social media to amplify these messages as well as other messages which specifically target Canadian domestic issues as well.

Overall, we’re seeing a rampant uptick in the spread of misinformation, intentional disinformation and what some experts are calling malinformation — all very dangerous to our democracy and global stability.

Our colleague, Senator Simons, spoke to the many emails we have been receiving around Bill S-233, An Act to develop a national framework for a guaranteed livable basic income and the impact those disinformation campaigns are having on misleading Canadians.

In my climate solutions inquiry, I highlighted my concerns about the dangers of disinformation as it relates to undermining public confidence in scientific, evidence-based climate data, climate policy and climate actions.

In response to Senator Housakos’s recent question regarding Russian propaganda, you noted that the Communications Security Establishment, CSIS and the RCMP and others are working with the government and partners to ensure that we remain safe.

Senator Gold, given the very real consequences of a rise in this type of disinformation, what else is the Government of Canada doing to counter these well-orchestrated campaigns and what concrete actions are being taken to promote awareness of these dangers amongst Canadians active on social media platforms? Thank you.

Hon. Pierre-Hugues Boisvenu: Honourable senators, I rise today to pay tribute to a victim of crime and to her family, who have been struggling for years to ensure that her memory is honoured.

In October 2007, Francesca Savoie, who was only 17 years old, died suddenly and tragically in a car accident in Bas‑Caraquet, New Brunswick. The accident was caused by an impaired driver.

Since that tragic day, Francesca’s mother has had lingering questions about the circumstances surrounding her beloved daughter’s accident. For 15 years now, she has been fighting to obtain information from the RCMP investigation file in order to gain a better understanding of the circumstances surrounding her daughter’s death, so she can finally grieve in peace as she deserves.

At this point, there are still some unknowns about what happened on that night. Francesca’s mother just wants to be told the truth about her daughter’s death. Her legitimate and entirely understandable efforts have been blocked by the RCMP, which denied her request on the grounds that the victim’s personal information is protected under the Access to Information Act, and that disclosing it would be an unreasonable invasion of the deceased girl’s privacy.

The RCMP’s response, which was confirmed by a Federal Court ruling, is an assault on the supra-constitutional principle of the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights and, more specifically, on the right to information that Francesca’s mother is asserting.

Honourable senators, the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights was created to redress the perpetual injustices inflicted on victims’ families and to prevent them from having to endure a lengthy process to have their rights respected. This sad story is just a reflection of a system that does not take the suffering of these families into account. It is another indication that there is still a lot of work to do to enforce the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights.

The RCMP is not above federal and constitutional laws, as we heard last week from Marco Mendicino, the minister responsible for the RCMP.

The courts have a duty to enforce laws democratically passed by the Parliament of Canada, and this additional assault on the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights is simply outrageous.

As we approach the second anniversary of the Portapique massacre, my thoughts are with all these families who should not have to fight to be respected by federal institutions. I offer my support to all these families, and I will fight to ensure that the Senate of Canada, the upper house of Parliament, upholds their rights and the rights of all victims of crime. Thank you very much.