The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?

Hon. Rose-May Poirier: I will continue from where I left off.

With Bill S-227, An Act to establish Food Day in Canada, as proposed by Senator Black, we are celebrating our local food, but it is also an occasion to strengthen our bonds with our neighbours.

We are encouraging you to support your local food markets, your local farmers, because they are integral to our communities. What better way to spend a Saturday morning picking up fresh produce for the week, a prepared meal for the day and, by doing so, supporting your community.

It is important to strengthen the bond between farmers and Canadians, because when we need them, they are there for us. And so, to show our appreciation for what they do for us, a day like the one Senator Black is proposing is an excellent way to say thank you to them. In a time where we as a society are trying to be greener and more environmentally friendly, supporting local food is one way that we can also support our local environment.

According to a study by the Columbia Climate School, buying local food could reduce the average consumer’s greenhouse gas emissions by 4% to 5%. But more importantly, according to the same study, small farmers already adopt environmentally friendly practices. They often rebuild crop and insect diversity, use less pesticides, enrich the soil with cover crops and, most importantly, produce tastier food.

Finally, I want to share a bit more about the local in my community. By living on New Brunswick’s east coast, our local food is more from fishing, as we have a lot of fishing communities. So on the first day of the lobster fishery in the spring, a lot of people gather at the wharf to see the boats off for the first time in the season. Around Mother’s Day weekend, the tradition is to have lobster; it coincides with the first harvest. At the centre of this tradition in my community is the lobster. It is one of the many examples of how food brings people together. It creates bonds between us and gives a strong sense of belonging.

Honourable senators, local food keeps local land in production, local money in our community, often costs less and builds community relationships. Let’s take a moment to recognize the crucial contribution local farms make to our communities and have a food day every year to thank and support them. I support this bill and urge senators to send it to the committee for further study. Thank you.

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

(Motion agreed to.)

[Translation]

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

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

Hon. Diane F. Griffin moved second reading of Bill S-236, An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act and the Employment Insurance Regulations (Prince Edward Island).

She said: Honourable senators, I rise today to speak to Bill S-236, An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act and the Employment Insurance Regulations (Prince Edward Island). This will be the very last time I speak to a bill in this chamber during my tenure as a senator. This bill serves as a coda for my Prince Edward Island advocacy but, more importantly, it serves as an opportunity for senators to champion a cause for Canada’s smallest province.

Last spring, I spoke to Senator Gold’s inquiry on the 2021 federal budget to bring the Senate’s attention to the flawed policy of two Employment Insurance regions in Prince Edward Island. The 2021 Budget Implementation Act entrenched in statute this unnecessary division of my province. Since 2015, the vast majority of Islanders have repeatedly called for change under the simple mantra of “one island, one zone.”

The division of P.E.I. into two economic zones creates a fundamental unfairness for workers, especially those who live in the Charlottetown zone but work outside the capital region. For example, this February, workers who lived in the capital region had a minimum of 14 weeks of benefits, while those who lived in the non-capital region had 20. Many folks who work for the same company will have widely different benefits simply because of an arbitrary dividing line of where they live.

Senators, I am thankful for your collective support last spring, and especially to Senator Mockler in his capacity as the chair of the National Finance Committee for inviting the mayors of Charlottetown, Stratford and Cornwall to speak to this issue during the committee’s pre-study of the BIA. In a sign of bicameral advocacy, our proceedings inspired Green Party MP Elizabeth May to move an amendment to the House of Commons Finance Committee to unify Prince Edward Island into one EI economic region. Although Elizabeth May’s efforts did not secure sufficient votes to pass, the entire episode brought new information to light.

The government provided several reasons why it could not support the amendment to the BIA last year. The first was Employment and Social Development Canada’s antiquated computer systems, which operate the EI program. At the time, officials indicated that it was not possible for the EI system to have a single EI zone for seasonal workers and two zones for regular EI applicants. Further, in the ministerial briefing binder, the government said that due to temporary COVID measures artificially increasing unemployment rates, a change in the spring of 2021 was not warranted as the two regions were de facto temporarily the same.

Honourable senators, those temporary measures have expired and this bill would solve the computer system issue by amending both the Employment Insurance Act and the regulations at the same time. It would further prevent the federal cabinet from making regulatory changes to P.E.I.’s EI zone without future parliamentary approval.

For over seven years, the federal government has promised Islanders a return to one EI zone, and this change has often been premised under the framework of a larger review of the EI system. Most recently, ESDC indicated in December 2021 that the review is ongoing, but there was no mention of changing the EI regions.

In a June 2021 report, the House of Commons Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, chaired by Charlottetown MP Sean Casey, issued a separate recommendation that ESDC, “reinstate a single Employment Insurance Economic Region for Prince Edward Island within 12 months.” Eight months have now passed with no response from the government.

Honourable senators, in the best of times it is difficult for matters impacting P.E.I. to be satisfactorily elevated for a decision at the federal cabinet level. I only have to remind you of the ongoing pleas by both farmers and the Government of Prince Edward Island for more direct involvement by the federal government in ending Canada’s self-imposed P.E.I. potato export ban. As is often the case, the ever-growing House of Commons gradually lessens the influence of P.E.I.’s four members of Parliament.

Local politics also frustrates a return to one EI zone. P.E.I.’s westernmost riding of Egmont is the only riding exclusively outside of the Charlottetown zone. It is understandable for any MP of any political stripe representing Egmont to defend the status quo, as it could result in a reduction of benefits for their constituents. This lack of unanimity of Island MPs has complicated a return to one zone. Cabinet does not wish to cause political turmoil and thus far has not taken action despite multiple electoral promises to do so.

This issue may not be the most important issue facing the country; however, it is important to the renter in Charlottetown, to the recent immigrant in Cornwall and to the seasonal worker who lives in Stratford but works at a fish plant outside of the area. Therefore, this issue is important to me.

Why is this bill before us in the Senate? As stated much earlier today by Senator Plett, the Senate is free from the day-to-day burden of electoral considerations. We can examine the return to one Employment Insurance, or EI, zone in more detail in committee and amend the bill to ensure a proper coming-into-force alignment with Economic and Social Development Canada computer systems. If the Senate chooses to send this bill to the House of Commons, it will, for the first time, force the other place to consider the idea of one EI zone for Prince Edward Island via an up-down vote, without the need to balance other national priorities.

I strongly support Senator Pate’s goal to have Prince Edward Island serve as a pilot for guaranteed livable income. But until that day arrives, EI is very much the social safety net of Islanders — not by choice, but by necessity. Consequently, there is a moral obligation to do what we can in Parliament to ensure that Employment Insurance is fair for all Islanders.

Honourable senators, as I mentioned earlier today, it is a privilege to have served with you over the last five and a third years. It is my hope that Bill S-236 can serve as a reminder of this important P.E.I. issue long after my retirement.

Prince Edward Island is the smallest province, but it is also an equal partner in Confederation. I encourage any of you in this chamber to help champion this important provincial cause, with the goal of sending the bill to the House of Commons. It is a way for the Senate to serve one of its constitutional roles of giving a voice to regional interests, especially for regions with smaller populations. Thank you.

Senator Pate: Thank you very much. Before I ask my question — which you sort of answered, but sometimes I can be a bit slow, so I will make sure I clearly understood — I want to take this opportunity to say a few words.

In addition to your golfing, birdwatching and hosting of incredible dinners of goose and lobster, to your incredible collegiality and your kind and generous offers for all of us to come and visit — which, as you know, I have taken you up on several times — I want to thank you for the incredible work you have done historically in P.E.I. When I visited there, I realized that it was you who had developed all of this recycling that led the country in many ways and led many of the environmental initiatives. That was fantastic, and then to see the work you have done in your local community, but also provincially, regionally and now nationally. It has been such a privilege and honour to be your colleague for the last five years, and I know I share that sentiment with everyone else in this place.

I wanted to confirm, just to be clear. You’re very keen, I think, and my question is this: Are you hoping that Charlottetown and P.E.I. will now be the birthplace of yet another incredible national rollout that could be a plan for the country and one that illustrates the brilliance of Prince Edward Island to have led the way in demanding a guaranteed livable basic income?

Senator Griffin: Thank you for the question. Yes. The premier and the legislature have unanimously endorsed the concept of elimination of poverty by working in collaboration with the federal government to institute a guaranteed livable income. Prince Edward Island would be the test spot to run it out, work out the kinks and then — to use a Senator Deacon phrase — scale it up to the rest of the country.

(On motion of Senator Wells, debate adjourned.)

[Translation]

Hon. Pierre-Hugues Boisvenu moved second reading of Bill S-238, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights (information about the victim).

He said: Honourable senators, my thoughts are with the families of victims of crime as I rise today to speak at second reading stage of Bill S-238, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights (information about the victim).

This bill, which I introduced in the last Parliament, is more important than ever, because it honours the memory of the victims and ensures respect for their families.

This bill bears the name of a victim of domestic violence who perished at the hands of her husband, as so many women in Canada do. Her name was Véronique Barbe, and this bill is dedicated to her memory and the memory of far too many victims of crime.

I would have liked to show you her photo today, but the Senate Rules do not allow me to do so. It is very important to put a face to a victim, because unfortunately, they are often forgotten too quickly.

Véronique Barbe was a 41-year-old woman, a mother whose life tragically ended on September 14, 2017, when she was killed by her husband at their home in Saint-Eustache, in Québec. I also want to pay tribute to Yvon Lacasse, who was also brutally murdered by this same murderer during his deadly rampage.

According to her mother Claudette and her father Pierre, Véronique Barbe was a smiling, happy and loving woman. She loved life and shared her happiness and love with her children, who were always her top priority.

According to her mother, Véronique was a caring mother who spoiled her children, as her mother told me, and a ray of sunshine to the whole family. Her sense of humour enlivened family meals.

Unfortunately, like many women in Canada, Véronique was a victim of domestic abuse and found herself unwillingly trapped in a downward spiral for many years, dominated by a violent spouse. She had previously taken steps to contact the police, seven years before she was murdered. In 2010, she began reporting what was happening to her, including the episodes of violence. These serious incidents of physical and psychological abuse should have been taken seriously by the authorities at the time. Despite her cries for help, our criminal justice system failed to offer her assistance, protection or freedom from this toxic relationship.

In Quebec, 26 women were murdered in 2021, and the vast majority of these murders were committed in a context of domestic violence. This is the highest number since 2008. According to a preliminary report from the Canadian Femicide Observatory for Justice and Accountability, 160 women were killed in Canada in 2020, half of them in a domestic violence context. I want to reiterate that it is essential and urgent that the Senate study and quickly pass my Bill S-205, which seeks to combat the scourge of domestic violence. The preliminary data on femicides in 2021 clearly show that this number will be greatly surpassed.

Coming back to the case of Véronique Barbe, the murderer has since been convicted and is currently incarcerated. However, showing no respect for the memory of Véronique and her family, this coward continued to post images of himself and Véronique, his victim, on his Facebook page, despite the family’s many attempts to get the web giant to permanently shut down his account.

Facebook denied the family’s many requests without explanation. Facebook did not respect the principles of the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights, which is a supra-constitutional law in Canada. It took a lot of media pressure to get the murderer’s profile taken down for good and to get Facebook to apologize to the family. I want to thank Le Journal de Montréal for also denouncing Facebook for its lack of cooperation and for helping the family prevail over this web giant. Apologies do not go far enough to ease the pain of Véronique’s family, who had to fight hard to get that Facebook account shut down out of respect for their daughter. It was outrageous for the murderer to do this, and it was a serious failure on the part of Facebook.

I would like to quote a statement made by Véronique’s mother about this bill. She said:

It was very hard on the family to see photos of Véronique with her murderer on social media, but with Senator Boisvenu’s help, we managed to close his account on Facebook with this long-awaited bill. I am grateful that it is named in honour of Véronique. Victims of crime and their families have the right to expect respect for any information and images pertaining to them.

I also heard from a father in Montreal who lived through a terrible family tragedy almost two years ago. This man lost his 11-year-old daughter, who was murdered, sadly. This bill is also dedicated to the memory of that girl. The man’s second daughter, just five years old, was almost killed, and she’ll be traumatized for life by these tragic events that should never have happened. The girls’ mother, who was found not criminally responsible for these crimes, still has a Facebook profile and still posts pictures of her murdered daughter, which causes the father much suffering and rage.

I would like to share a moving statement he sent me, which is addressed to this house. He said:

Today, I just want to share what my two daughters mean to me. They have been my everything since the day they were born. They were and will always be my greatest pride and my most wonderful accomplishment. I’ve never made anything as beautiful, as good, as wonderful or as important. In other words, my life revolved exclusively around my two girls, and they are the ones who truly taught me to love and to give unconditionally. I also want to say that I somehow found enough strength — and love — inside me to take care of myself and my youngest daughter, who is still in shock, and to keep doing what I’ve always done for my girls: defend and protect them. That’s why I have spoken to the media numerous times to condemn the sharing of photos of my daughters on social media sites . . . of the accused and her family.

For many people, posting pictures of their children on social media sites like Facebook is totally normal. But for me, for us victims, the fact that pictures are being posted of my two daughters, especially the one who was killed, is intolerable, hurtful, painful and even revolting, since I believe, in addition to the flagrant lack of respect towards the memory, the life and the legacy of my deceased daughter, that the images of my two daughters, who are minors and victims of an extremely violent criminal act, should remain private and do not belong in the public sphere. . . . That being said, nearly two years after the tragedy, I still want to fight to protect the dignity, the image, the memory, as well as the integrity of my daughter who was killed, to speak only of her, because I miss her so much. . . . I therefore ask you today, very humbly, to pass Senator Boisvenu’s bill, since it aims, first and foremost, to truly protect the dignity, memory and images of all victims of crime in Canada, by prohibiting and criminalizing the dissemination of their images and information on social media by criminals. As for my youngest, who survived, I keep telling her every day, “I love you.”

It is in this context and at the request of these two families that I decided to introduce this bill to amend the Criminal Code and the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights in order to reinforce the right to better protection for victims and families in similar situations. The Association des familles de personnes assassinées ou disparues believes that this is an important bill that will guarantee the dignity and protect the memory of victims who are ruthlessly murdered.

This bill amends the Victims Bill of Rights by adding a paragraph to section 11, entitled “Privacy,” which would require the criminal justice system to take measures to prohibit an offender from posting any images or information about their victim on the internet and on social media. This reinforcement will be included in the section on the right to protection in the Victims Bill of Rights. This bill also amends the Criminal Code to prohibit any offender or accused from posting images or information about their victim or keeping existing images of their victim on social media either during legal proceedings or after being convicted.

An accused or offender who is ordered to comply with such a ban or who commits to complying will be at risk of being indicted on new charges if they fail to comply. The burden will be on the accused or offender to remove any information, images or videos about the victim they may have posted. That way, the participation and collaboration of social media networks such as Facebook or other sites such as YouTube will no longer be required. This will undeniably be a major advantage for achieving the desired effect, because we all know that it is nearly impossible for victims and their families to get these social media networks to cooperate in taking down offensive content, despite existing internal policies on content distribution.

The changes to the Criminal Code will revolve around the addition of a section to every stage set out in the Criminal Code with respect to an accused’s legal proceedings, including the issuance of an undertaking to appear by police, an interim release while awaiting trial ordered by a justice, detention pending a bail hearing, or detention during legal proceedings.

I believe that this new provision does not violate the constitutional protections afforded by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and that a certain number of rulings along these lines have already been made by the courts. These rulings have made it possible to impose restrictions on the freedom of expression of the accused to ensure safety and privacy for the victim.

I plan on doing the same with the Criminal Code section governing offenders convicted of a criminal offence, in particular for probation orders, conditional sentences and detention sentences. This new section also applies to everything concerning 810 orders, such as the general order, fear of forced marriage or marriage under the age of 16 years, fear of a sexual offence or where there is fear of serious personal injury.

To conclude, there is also a provision for a person found not criminally responsible. In that case, a review board is established and a hearing is held to determine the safety risk that the offender may represent and to impose conditions. I am of the opinion that the provision I am proposing must also be added to this section of the Criminal Code. I remind senators that the second case I mentioned in my speech involved a mother who was found not criminally responsible for the murder of her daughter.

Honourable senators, I would like to take this opportunity, as I did in my previous speech, to talk to you about the importance of improving the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights. As you know, I was the co-founder of the bill, which was passed nearly seven years ago in June 2015. For victims of crime, the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights is, first and foremost, a recognition of their rights within the criminal justice system. Let’s not forget that this bill of rights is supra-constitutional and consists of four pillars based on four fundamental rights that actors in the criminal justice system have an obligation to uphold: the right to information, the right to participation, the right to protection and the right to restitution.

This bill that I am speaking to today is the only one in the past six and a half years that seeks to amend the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights to improve and enhance it. Unfortunately, according to the many accounts that I hear every week, this bill of rights is all too often applied inappropriately and not complied with, as in the example I shared about Facebook. It is therefore urgent that Parliament undertake the five-year review of the legislation and get victims to actively participate in this legislative exercise. I spoke to Minister David Lametti about this during a private meeting we had this morning.

Bill S-238 reminds us that we have a Victims Bill of Rights that has the force of law in Canada and applies equally regardless of gender, religion or community. Legislators like us must use it more, respect it more, and the Senate of Canada must ensure it is applied across the country out of respect for all victims of crime and their families.

Esteemed colleagues, I know you care about protecting and respecting victims’ rights. That is why I invite and urge you to take part in improving the bill of rights by amending it every time you feel victims’ rights were not respected. Victims should not have to fight hard, over and over, when there is already a tool that should keep victims and their loved ones from being re‑victimized.

This morning, I also reminded the minister that it is unacceptable that victims and their families, like the ones in Portapique, do not have access to a government-appointed ombudsman. I think this situation sends a very negative message and shows that the government lacks empathy for victims and their families. Contrast that with the correctional investigator position, which has never been vacant for more than 24 hours.

In closing, honourable senators, in memory of Véronique Barbe, in memory of the young girl who lost her life at the tender age of 11, and in memory of the many other families of victims you may know, I ask you to pass the bill at second reading so it can be sent to the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs for prompt consideration.

Thank you.

(On motion of Senator Duncan, debate adjourned.)

[English]

The Senate proceeded to consideration 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. Margaret Dawn Anderson: Akana, honourable senators. I rise today on Treaty 7 territory, the traditional territories of the Blackfoot Nations, including Siksika, Piikani, Kainai, the Tsuut’ina Nation, Stoney Nakoda First Nation and the Métis Nation Region 3 to speak to Motion No. 7 moved by Senator Galvez.

I rise today in support of this motion and to share how climate change affects the residents and communities within the Northwest Territories, or the N.W.T. We are on the forefront of climate-driven change and global warming. It severely threatens our people, culture, community, landscape, ecosystem and way of life.

According to Susan Nerberg, a science and environmental journalist:

For people living in the Arctic, climate change is hacking away at their foundation. It drives storm surges, washes out roads and clogs rivers with sediments. It produces sinkholes and triggers landslides capable of altering the topography and tilting houses. The climate crisis is even seen by some as a form of environmental racism — a problem created down south and suffered up north.

Although the N.W.T. is responsible for less than 0.2% of Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions, some places in the N.W.T. have already experienced significant warming in mean air temperature. Since 1957, in the Beaufort Delta, the territory’s northernmost region, Inuvik’s average air temperature has warmed by 4.4 degrees Celsius, while in Hay River, located in the southern part of the territory, the average air temperature has warmed by 2.7 degrees Celsius. To provide context, the Paris Agreement, adopted by 196 parties at COP21 and entered into forced on November 4, 2016, set a goal to limit global warming to 2 degrees Celsius. The North’s temperatures are indicative of a larger global issue.

On June 22, 2020, I spoke about the experience of climate change in my home community of Tuktoyaktuk and the impact on community infrastructure. That spring the hamlet had relocated four privately owned homes inland from the point of Tuktoyaktuk because the shoreline was eroding under their piling foundations due to rising sea waters and permafrost melt. The relocation of four homes from the point is just the latest chapter in the lived experience of climate change in Tuktoyaktuk. In my lifetime, I have witnessed the loss of the community’s curling rink, relocation of the community school and the RCMP detachment, as well as several metres of land loss around the perimeter of the community.

The one-kilometre sized island where my mother grew up and which, in my lifetime, always provided protection to the harbour of Tuktoyaktuk is also falling victim to erosion and rising water.

The Government of the Northwest Territories, or the GNWT, anticipates that further community infrastructure — including the landfill, several community buildings and cemeteries — will need to be relocated due to coastal erosion and sea level rise. This is not a simple task.

Coastline erosion is a divisive issue for my community. It is not simply a matter of relocating buildings and residences. Our cultural heritage, including our graveyard, is threatened by encroaching sea. The monetary costs of relocating them are difficult to weigh against the cultural costs of them washing away. There are also significant and legitimate concerns about the loss of historically important Inuit cultural sites. The GNWT is working to assess how erosion of the Arctic coast and glacial recession are affecting artifacts and key archeological sites. We are facing not just a loss of land and resources, but significant loss of our historical and cultural landmarks as well as a lifestyle which defines us. This loss is immeasurable.

According to the GNWT:

Infrastructure and processes that rely on weather, such as ice roads, building seasons, supply chains, and community access for residents are becoming unreliable.

This means the annual window of opportunity to get critical goods into communities is shrinking. This creates new challenges, financial implications and affects food supply, building seasons, fuel resupply and capital infrastructure.

Much of the N.W.T. is underlain by permafrost, and climate change is decreasing its thickness. As the layer of seasonal thaw in the ground increases, so too does the need for deeper piles to support infrastructure, raising building and maintenance costs. The vast majority of highways and municipal roads are constructed and surfaced with gravel. Permafrost thaw causes subsidence and sinkholes in the roads, which requires financial investment and maintenance to keep them safe and useable.

Near Fort Simpson, in the southern part of the N.W.T., discontinuous permafrost has decreased by 38% over the last 61 years. Permafrost thaw on hills has resulted in an increase in large landslides that are up to 40 hectares, with head walls up to 25 metres, resulting in sediment affecting streams and aquatic life.

These landslides are also occurring further north. In September 2017, I witnessed four landslides within hours while at the historical Inuvialuit site of Reindeer Station and along the Mackenzie River. The landslides not only uprooted trees, dumping them in the river, but also destroyed a historic cabin as well as channel markers along the river.

Events like these are occurring all over the territory. In the Gwich’in Settlement area, subsidence is outpacing our ability to map the occurrences. Subsidence and sinkholes on the Dempster Highway also affect the integrity of the highway connecting the N.W.T. to the Yukon. Slumps in lakes run the risk of connecting the lakes to rivers and draining them. Residents of Fort McPherson have observed this phenomenon in the lakes around their community.

The warming climate is disturbing habitats in the N.W.T., and invasive plants and animals have been observed in many communities. From Into the Arctic:

My eighty-two-year-old mother loved to fish. Regardless of the weather or season, she would set her net in the ice, or water just off the shore that lies within steps of her home. A tangible and vital connection to her past and our culture. My brother sets the net now and we follow in her footsteps. The same place, same net and same waters. There has been one notable difference, salmon, a fish once foreign to our nets and diet is now in our waters.

Cougars and magpies, species that have historically not been present in the N.W.T., have also been observed.

Warmer temperatures are making weather patterns less predictable, endangering traditional lifestyles and livelihoods. The number of days below freezing can be used as a measure of the season for travelling over ice. Historically, in Fort Simpson this is about 221 days. By the end of the century, it may decrease to only 176 days if nothing changes.

In the Beaufort Sea, a decrease of 8.3% in summer ice per decade, combined with rising sea levels, has accelerated coastal erosion and is impacting community infrastructure. Since 1968, the Beaufort Sea has experienced a total loss of 204,000 kilometres squared of sea ice. This is an area almost three times the land area of New Brunswick.

The GNWT notes that the loss of sea ice caused by the carbon emissions of industrialized nations destroys 30 square metres of Arctic sea ice annually.

As the Arctic sea ice melts, potential shipping lanes will open allowing for reduced transit times for global shipping. This is particularly relevant for shipping between Europe and East Asia, as it would allow shipping to occur throughout the Northwest Passage, rather than through the Suez Canal.

The N.W.T. is also experiencing more extreme weather during the summer months, making wildfire management more challenging. In 2014, 3.4 million hectares of boreal forest burned in the N.W.T. This is six times the normal amount and 2.5 million hectares more than annually burns in Canada. That same year the drought caused the Yellowknife hydroelectric facilities to run dry. Because Yellowknife is not connected to the grid, $15 million in diesel fuel was burned to generate and provide power.

According to the GNWT, ecosystem modelling suggests that the boreal forest located in the southern Northwest Territories will be replaced with grasslands by the end of the century. This is attributed to climate changes, including drought, wildfires and insect infestation. Water levels have been recorded in the N.W.T. since 1939, with the highest water levels recorded in 2021. Although there have been historical flooding and high water levels in N.W.T. communities located near water bodies, the high water levels that we are seeing now are unprecedented.

In May 2021 extreme flooding led to the complete evacuation of Jean Marie River and displaced over 700 people in Fort Simpson, causing millions of dollars in damages. In Jean Marie River, the water levels rose so high and so quickly that the fuel tanks were uprooted, cell service disrupted, the power plant damaged, and the only access road to the community was cut off. The Canadian Rangers were deployed to help assist those affected by the flooding.

Another rare weather event occurred on June 29, 2021. A downburst, one of the first ever recorded in the N.W.T., ripped through and uprooted a patch of trees some 60 kilometres long and 9 kilometres wide when it struck the Dehcho region east of Fort Liard. It is believed that the wind speeds during the Dehcho storm reached up to 190 kilometres per hour.

On January 24, in a conversation with Brigadier-General Pascal Godbout, Commander of Joint Task Force (North) located in Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, I was apprised of Operation LENTUS. Operation LENTUS is the Canadian Armed Forces response to natural disasters in Canada. Brigadier-General Godbout noted that within the last year they have responded to three major events across the three northern territories: the floods in Jean Marie River, Yukon floods and the Iqaluit water crisis. He added that this is the first time in 15 years that Operation LENTUS has responded to requests and noted that these were unusual and reflective of the increased climate impacts we are seeing in the North.

Given that Joint Task Force (North) is responsible for emergency responses across the Northwest Territories, Nunavut and the Yukon, this poses an additional burden on their ability to serve the North and places an additional demand on the Canadian Armed Forces resources.

In the N.W.T., responding to climate changes means balancing adaptation to and mitigation of the significant impacts we are already seeing. With our population of 44,000, we will not be able to support the logistical and financial challenges of adapting and mitigating without a Northern-specific approach to climate change. This must also incorporate national and international advocacy and partnerships.

As Inuvialuit, we have survived epidemics, mass deaths, colonization, residential school, as well as relocation; yet, with climate change, the Inuvialuit are facing one of the greatest challenges of this century. I venture to say that this goes beyond the Inuvialuit. As a country, and collectively a world, we are facing the challenge of our lifetime.

In the words of Hans-Otto Pörtner, a co-chair of Working Group II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, “Any further delay in concerted global action will miss a brief and rapidly closing window to secure a liveable future.”

My 16-year-old daughter wrote an assignment for her Canadian and World issues class with Ashbury College, and it was entitled “Tuktoyaktuk: Evidence and global climate change.” I share her words for two reasons. Firstly, it is telling that it is important and relevant to a teenager. At 16 years of age, I never wrote or thought about climate change. Secondly, I believe that her words are timely and valid. These words are as follows.

This issue in the Arctic transcends all boundaries. It is a global responsibility and given we created the problem; we must also create the solution.

The importance is not lost to her. It should not be lost to us as decision makers and as parliamentarians. I urge you to support this motion. Quyanainni, mahsi’cho, thank you.

Some Hon. Senators: Hear, hear.

(On motion of Senator Wells, debate adjourned.)

Hon. Pierre-Hugues Boisvenu: Honourable senators, I rise today to support the motion presented in the Senate on November 25, 2021, by Senator Dalphond. First, this motion would have the Senate recall that section 55 of the Constitution Act, 1982 requires the Constitution to be fully written in both official languages, that is, in French and English. At present, this provision is not being respected. Of the 31 enactments that make up the Constitution, 22 have not yet been translated, including almost all of the Constitution Act, 1867.

Second, this motion seeks to include in the Official Languages Act a requirement for a review, every five years, of the efforts made by the Government of Canada to comply with section 55 of the Constitution.

The Constitution is the foundation of our federation. It is commonly known as the foundational text and sits at the very top of our hierarchy of norms. It provides subtle coordination of our institutions and always manages to balance each of their powers. The Fathers of Confederation worked hard on it, often at their peril, and a failure to respect the Constitutions or one of its provisions would be a betrayal of their efforts. The basic text of the Canadian Constitution came into force in 1867, after long negotiations among the four founding provinces: New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Ontario and Quebec. This foundational text, which was called the British North America Act at the time, is the bedrock on which the federation was built.

In 1969, the Parliament of Canada decided to enact the Official Languages Act for the first time, to officially recognize bilingualism within Canadian federal institutions. The repatriation of the Constitution in 1982 allowed Canada to definitively break from the United Kingdom and enshrine the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which states the following in section 16:

English and French are the official languages of Canada and have equality of status and equal rights and privileges as to their use in all institutions of the Parliament and government of Canada.

In order to uphold section 16 of the Constitution and end the injustice toward francophone communities, section 55 of the Constitution reads as follows:

A French version of the portions of the Constitution of Canada referred to in the schedule shall be prepared by the Minister of Justice of Canada as expeditiously as possible and, when any portion thereof sufficient to warrant action being taken has been so prepared, it shall be put forward for enactment by proclamation issued by the Governor General under the Great Seal of Canada pursuant to the procedure then applicable to an amendment of the same provisions of the Constitution of Canada.

As Senator Dalphond said in his speech, section 55 is not currently being respected because only 9 of the 31 constitutional texts have an official translation in French.

In an October 2018 brief entitled “Access to Justice in French and English in the Context of Modernizing the Official Languages Act,” the Canadian Bar Association did a great job of explaining how harmful this failure to uphold section 55 is for francophone communities in Canada.

According to the report, francophone communities in Canada face a serious barrier to access to justice and defending the rule of law. The constitutional texts are not officially translated, and the unofficial translations do not have force of law. When courts render constitutional decisions in French, they refer to the unofficial French translations, which do not have the same legal or constitutional force as the wording in the official English version.

As a result, French-speaking jurists and litigants are at a disadvantage in the discussions on the interpretation of the constitutional texts that set out the fundamental principles of our rules-based state.

I would remind senators that Canada’s history acknowledges three founding peoples: the British, the French and the Indigenous people, or rather, the Indigenous peoples.

These three peoples have contributed to the construction, culture and development of today’s Canada. The province of Quebec and Canada’s francophone minorities total 10 million people. The federal government must fulfill its duty to ensure that bilingualism is recognized, as enshrined in our Constitution, because by ignoring the importance of the French language, it is contributing to the rejection of national unity and dismissing the identity, culture and social mores of millions of French Canadians.

The Supreme Court of Canada stated the following in Mahe v. Alberta:

Language is more than a mere means of communication, it is part and parcel of the identity and culture of the people speaking it. It is the means by which individuals understand themselves and the world around them.

In his speech, Senator Dalphond pointed out that the first obligation imposed by section 55 of the Constitution, namely that of drafting an official translation of the constitutional texts as soon as possible, was fulfilled back in 1990.

Unfortunately, the implementation of this provision has been met with a series of failures and setbacks in the negotiations between the federal government and the provinces. It has now been more than 20 years since the federal government last resumed negotiations. That is how long it has been shirking its institutional obligation to uphold section 55 of the Canadian Constitution.

In closing, I fully support Senator Dalphond’s motion. It is based on the second recommendation in the brief submitted by the Canadian Bar Association and proposes that the federal government include in the official languages bill, which it announced in the last Speech from the Throne and which should be introduced shortly in the other place, if it has not been already, a requirement that a report be submitted every five years detailing the efforts made to comply with section 55 of the Constitution Act, 1982.

I invite you, colleagues, to support Senator Dalphond’s motion to have the Government of Canada do its homework and implement the provisions of our Constitution to ensure that the rights of francophone Canadians are finally respected. Thank you.

(On motion of Senator Wells, debate adjourned.)

[English]

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Deacon (Nova Scotia), seconded by the Honourable Senator Kutcher:

That the Senate adopt the following Environmental and Sustainability Policy Statement, to replace the 1993 Senate Environmental Policy, adopted by the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration:

The Senate of Canada is committed to reducing the Senate’s carbon footprint to net zero by 2030 and to implement sustainable practices in its operations. Achieving this goal requires a whole-of-organization approach which prioritizes reduction of outputs and utilizes standard-leading emission offsets. The road to net zero will include quantifiable regular reporting on progress towards target. These actions are to demonstrate leadership as an institution on climate action, to encourage accountability of federal institutions and to inform the legislative process.

The Senate is committed to achieving its objective through adherence to the following principles:

That the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration examine the feasibility of implementing programs to establish:

(a)an accountability framework and annual reporting cycle;

(b)the promotion of climate-friendly transportation policies and reduced travel;

(c)enhanced recycling and minimizing waste;

(d)a digital-first approach and reduction in printing;

(e)support from central agencies to allow the Senate to charge carbon offsets as part of operating a sustainable Senate; and

(f)a process for senators and their offices to propose environmental and sustainability recommendations; and

That the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration acquire any necessary goods and services to examine the feasibility or to implement these recommendations.

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Honourable senators, it is now six o’clock. Pursuant to rule 3-3(1) and the order adopted on November 25, 2021, I am obliged to leave the chair until seven o’clock unless there is leave that the sitting continue.

Accordingly, the sitting is suspended until seven o’clock.

(The sitting of the Senate was suspended.)

(The sitting of the Senate was resumed.)

[English]

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Boyer, calling the attention of the Senate to the positive contributions and impacts that Métis, Inuit, and First Nations have made to Canada, and the world.

Hon. Colin Deacon: Honourable senators, in Motion No. 7, Senator Anderson provided a powerful first-hand account of how climate change is affecting her territory. It is, for me, a very important context within which to provide the speech I’m about to give. I’m thrilled to rise on debate to move that the Senate of Canada adopt a new environmental and sustainability policy statement. This is a call to action for our institution.

As you learned from Senator Griffin during her excellent speech on Tuesday evening, adoption of this motion will guide the Senate as it reduces its carbon emissions to net zero by 2030. This ambitious but achievable goal will enable the Senate to demonstrate leadership on climate action, encourage accountability of federal institutions and allow us to gain first‑hand experience that will inform us in our legislative process as it relates to this existential issue.

Colleagues, I will elaborate on what exactly is being requested from this chamber and why adoption of this motion is needed for us to fulfill our unique parliamentary role. I will also outline a proposed road map or next steps if it is the will of this chamber to adopt this motion.

Before I begin, please allow me to briefly explain how we got here. Last May, the Standing Senate Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration, or CIBA, unanimously granted Senators Griffin, Carignan, Anderson and myself with the opportunity to form an Advisory Working Group on Environment and Sustainability. I will be referring to this working group as the AWG.

The AWG’s order of reference was to examine and report on the existing Senate of Canada environmental policy, which dates from 1993, and to recommend short-, medium- and long-term actions. We were grateful to be provided with this important challenge, and the AWG members submitted a unanimous report last November. This report, with its 11 recommendations, was made public last Thursday and is now available on the CIBA website.

The report and the motion before you today resulted from a consultation that reached across our organization and beyond. To this end, please allow me to acknowledge the insights and the incredibly wise counsel provided by my three colleagues on the AWG and their tireless teams — a lot of work was put in on this, and I’m grateful for all the effort; the Senate Administration, from the leadership right through staff across each directorate helped enormously; the Library of Parliament analysts and specialists from Public Services and Procurement Canada.

Lastly, I need to acknowledge our dedicated Senate clerks, whose considerable wisdom helped us to navigate the constraints that can sometimes emerge from within the Rules of the Senate, as well as the steering committee and membership of CIBA who reviewed and supported the motion I am tabling here today.

I am grateful and honoured to present the product of these collective efforts that we are now asking the chamber to adopt. The AWG report informs the rationale behind the recommendation to adopt a new principles-based policy statement. This recommendation has the intention of replacing the 1993 policy of the Senate. We have proposed a principles-based policy statement rather than a policy. This policy statement is not prescriptive, but empowers each directorate, senator or staff member to do their part in enabling us to achieve our collective goal of net zero.

Our research has not identified any other national parliamentary body that has chosen to adopt a comparable target and plan. That is why it is important for this motion to be debated in and, I trust, adopted by this chamber so that CIBA will then be empowered with the authority to further examine and consider the range of recommendations in the AWG’s report.

So that’s the “what.” Now I’d like to speak to the “why.” Since the adoption of the current environmental policy of the Senate three decades ago, the Senate has advanced various initiatives aiming at reducing the environmental footprint of this institution. In addition to these efforts, the Senate has also been cooperating with Public Services and Procurement Canada as part of the Long Term Vision and Plan. That is why one of the AWG’s first activities was to examine the actions taken by the Senate over the years in order to identify the current environmental and sustainability initiatives that might be under way across the Senate directorates.

The AWG also reviewed environmental policies and actions taken by other legislatures, both domestically and internationally. It was clear that a lot of efforts were undertaken by the Senate but, equally, that many complexities associated with achieving progress remained, in particular as it relates to our capacity to benchmark and systematically reduce our organization’s carbon footprint in an effective and cost-efficient manner.

That is why we concluded that this new policy statement needed to enshrine a mandate for the Senate of Canada that shifts from a nice-to-have to a must-have commitment where a clear and auditable whole-of-organization commitment to sustainability is embraced.

It must also provide a principle-based policy statement designed to guide the formulation of specific policies across the Senate directorates and Senators’ offices into the future. This would allow for flexibility, creativity and inclusivity in our implementation efforts.

Finally, we need to enshrine a robust accountability framework. The policy from 1993 had an accountability structure but was never integrated thoroughly into our operations. These new targets must be defined and reported on regularly and transparently.

Perhaps most importantly, what became clear to our working group was that the Senate of Canada must demonstrate leadership on this existential issue. Why? Because the road to net carbon neutrality is so challenging, that’s why. If we do not act, how do we hold the government and its officials to account? None of us are fans of saying, “Do as I say, not as I do.” That approach does not honour our important role and responsibilities. It doesn’t provide us first-hand knowledge and credibility, which is something we need if we are going to effectively review the government’s efforts and hold them to account.

Climate change is an intergenerational crisis with a rapidly closing window for action. Our children and grandchildren, and the world’s children and grandchildren, are now being described as a vulnerable population. This is because we already know what will happen to our planet if our generation doesn’t just act, but unless and until we actually succeed in reversing climate change.

We have no greater responsibility.

The advisory working group, or AWG, members began our November 2021 report to the Committee of Internal Economy with a unanimous statement intended to drive this message home. I’d like to read it to you now:

Increasingly, we are experiencing the devastating effects of climate change. In 2021 alone, Canadians have seen a killer heat dome, catastrophic wildfires, drought conditions that have tested the resilience of even the strongest western grain farmers and cattle ranchers, and increasing levels of shoreline erosion and permafrost melt that are threatening northern communities. Election 2021 also saw every major federal political party acknowledge the existential risks created by climate change. The Senate of Canada has a responsibility to demonstrate leadership and action by committing to do its part in creating a more sustainable environment, while demonstrating the action necessary to hold other federal institutions to account for their efforts.

Colleagues, the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development in the Auditor General’s office submitted a report last year called Lessons Learned from Canada’s Record on Climate Change. They identified as the first lesson that “stronger leadership and coordination are needed to drive progress towards commitments.” We all know that little is accomplished in this world without it. In that light, the AWG concluded unanimously that in order for us to do our job, the Senate must demonstrate to the rest of Canada that progress can be made towards net zero. Additionally, how can we achieve our parliamentary responsibilities without more fully understanding the conditions necessary to actually achieve progress, versus our sadly too-frequent tradition of only announcing intentions? That’s why the AWG believed that the Senate of Canada, like every organization in Canada, needs to become a net-carbon-neutral organization.

Now, I’m going to focus on three of the key outcomes we’ll see by adopting this motion to give you sense of the road ahead. If adopted, the Internal Economy Committee would further examine the recommendations included in the AWG report to, first, secure external expert advice; second, empower the directorates of the Senate, senators and their staff; and third, integrate a robust accountability framework into Senate governance.

First, let me explain the need for us to secure external expertise. I mentioned that the AWG canvassed the Senate’s directorates. Some fabulous ideas were brought forward. However, the organization does not have the expertise needed to assess which actions would produce the most effective and cost‑efficient results. Like far too many organizations, the Senate does not currently have the capacity to measure its total carbon footprint and specific sources of emissions. Without data, we cannot begin our journey.

Let me give you an example of where data informed a complex cost-benefit challenge. The state of California recently announced their intention to ban the use of gas-powered leaf blowers. This is because the emissions produced by one leaf blower in one hour is equivalent to the emissions produced by a 2017 Toyota Camry travelling 1,700 kilometres. I would never have guessed that, not in a million years.

The Senate’s path forward has to be investing in upfront costs to secure expert support to, first, measure and benchmark the emissions resulting from the Senate’s current activities; second, glean insights to direct our efforts in an effective and cost‑efficient manner; and third, track our reduction of those emissions over time. The AWG concluded that this approach will deliver the best return on investment. That’s because this initiative isn’t about spending more but spending smarter. Achieving our 2030 goal simply throwing more taxpayer money at the challenge will not be acceptable to any of us, and that approach won’t help us to demonstrate that Canada can tackle the climate change crisis while improving our prosperity.

This motion includes a request that the Internal Economy Committee, as the Senate’s management body, use its expertise to secure and manage this expert support. Additionally, we can learn from others as we’ve found at least one provincial legislative body that is working in a similar direction as us, that being the National Assembly of Quebec. They have made great progress, and I am certain there is much we can learn from their efforts. That’s our first step as an institution.

Second, the AWG has recommended an approach that empowers the Senate directorates, senators and their staff. I’m going to offer a personal comment here. My experience is that the fastest-growing companies, those that are rapidly and continuously improving productivity, have a culture that invites incremental change from across their organizations. That buy-in and engagement are essential to identifying opportunities and successfully implementing solutions.

Third, I want to highlight the AWG’s recommendation to integrate a robust accountability framework into the Senate’s governance. This is the direction the Senate is already heading in establishing the Audit and Oversight Committee. We want to adopt world-leading standards of transparency and accountability, and we believe we can do that as we benchmark and track our progress towards net zero.

I think we all appreciate that the Senate will not be able to reduce its carbon output to zero. As a result, we must ensure that the Senate’s carbon output reduction is achieved as cost effectively as possible. This will provide us with the resources to offset the balance of the output with carbon credits.

I want to wrap up by reinforcing the importance of our being ambitious in our timeline. Recently, in partnership with the Bank of Canada, the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions, or OSFI, released a report examining the economic risks associated with climate transition. One finding in particular is important when considering this motion. These two institutions with the primary responsibility of overseeing the stability of our financial system looked at the financial risks associated with two different approaches to confronting the climate crisis. The Bank of Canada and OSFI found that on our path to achieving net zero by 2050, acting later with a shorter transition time to net zero introduces much more risk of financial and overall economic volatility. In short, the later we act, the higher the ultimate economic cost.

Additionally, the Office of the Auditor General stated, “Climate change is an intergenerational crisis with a rapidly closing window for action.” I believe I am far from alone in agreeing with that powerful statement. Canada’s future generations need our generation to act now.

Honourable senators, I hope that you will follow Senator Griffin’s parting advice and support this motion, so we can pass it swiftly and begin the vital task ahead.

Thank you colleagues.

(On motion of Senator Wells, debate adjourned.)

[Translation]

Hon. Mary Jane McCallum: Honourable senators, I rise today to speak to Inquiry No. 3, which calls the attention of the Senate to the positive contributions and impacts that Métis, Inuit and First Nations have made to Canada and to the world. I would like to thank our colleague Senator Boyer for introducing this inquiry, as it is of great importance that senators, and all Canadians, become familiar with the critical work done by the Indigenous peoples of Canada.

I am pleased to use this inquiry to highlight the work done by three strong, intelligent, resilient First Nations women who hail from my home region of Manitoba. The tireless work and effort put forth by these women have improved the lives of First Nations in Manitoba and beyond for many years. While I would love to have the ability to highlight many, many more Indigenous women through this inquiry, I am sure you will find these three individuals very deserving of the following recognition and acknowledgment.

These three women, Dr. Catherine Cook, Dr. Marcia Anderson and Ms. Melanie Mackinnon, are leaders in the health field in Manitoba, specifically as it relates to First Nations’ health. While the positive impacts these women have had on their communities is immeasurable and the hours of dedication they have put into their work is incalculable, they are each incredibly selfless and humble individuals. Most recently, they have been involved in different capacities in addressing, analyzing and responding to the impacts that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on First Nations in Manitoba.

Colleagues, as you may know, similar to the H1N1 pandemic, First Nations remain incredibly vulnerable to the impacts of such a virus. Due to the crowded and inadequate housing and community infrastructure; the lack of essentials, including access to clean water in some instances; and the other myriad social determinants of health, First Nations begin from a position of severe deficit as they face the same pandemic-related challenges as every other Canadian. It is through First Nations’ strong leadership, spearheaded in part by women like Cathy, Melanie and Marcia, that has enabled First Nations to endure through the ongoing storm.

Of great importance, these women also work to identify and address gaps in programming and services that erode equity and lead to institutional racism. It is through the work of women like these that there exists cause for hope and optimism that these barriers can be detected and eradicated to make quality health care more equitable and culturally appropriate for all.

Honourable senators, the first woman I would like to acknowledge and recognize is Dr. Catherine L. Cook, MD, MSc, CCFP, FCFP. Dr. Cook is Métis and grew up in northern Manitoba. She received her undergraduate and postgraduate medical education at the University of Manitoba — her MD in 1987 and MSc in 2003 — and has been employed by the university since 1987. She is an Associate Professor in the Department of Community Health Sciences, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences. She most recently served as head of Ongomiizwin – Indigenous Institute of Health and Healing, and as Vice-Dean of Indigenous Health, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences. She was also provincial lead of Indigenous health at Shared Health until taking on the role of Vice-President Indigenous full-time in April 2020 with the University of Manitoba.

Dr. Cook has focused on Indigenous health as a priority in her career. She practised as a family physician in remote Northern nursing stations for several years before focusing on public health practice and, more recently, health administration and management. She has taken a leadership and operational role in the development and implementation of Indigenous health programs and services that focus on addressing the gaps and barriers to equitable access to quality health care for Indigenous people in Manitoba.

At Shared Health, Dr. Cook co-chaired the development of an Indigenous partnership strategy framework and the development of a health care system that recognizes and addresses the need for comprehensive quality health care for Indigenous people as close to home as possible.

At the university, Dr. Cook took a leadership role in the creation of Ongomiizwin — the Indigenous Institute of Health and Healing in the Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, which was officially approved by the Senate in 2017.

Dr. Cook serves on several national boards and committees, and has received many national and local awards, including the Indspire Award for Health 2020, the Calvin L. Gutkin Family Medicine Ambassador Award from the Canadian College of Family Physicians in 2020, the Dr. Thomas Dignan Award for Indigenous Health from the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, the WXN Top 100 Women in Canada in 2017, the Health Administration Award from Doctors Manitoba and the May Cohen Award from the Association of Faculties of Medicine of Canada.

Dr. Cook has been a strong contributor to the University of Manitoba, both within her home faculty and across the university. Her insights have been widely sought after by governments, boards and agencies, and she has excelled as a leader, an adviser and a collaborator. She brings this stellar record to her new and important role, as well as her deep commitment both to the community and to the University of Manitoba.

Honourable senators, the next woman I would like to recognize is Dr. Marcia Anderson. Dr. Anderson is Cree-Anishinaabe and grew up in the north end of Winnipeg. Her family roots go to Peguis First Nation and Norway House Cree Nation in Manitoba. She practises both internal medicine and public health as a Medical Officer of Health with Indigenous Services Canada, Manitoba Region. Within this role, Dr. Anderson focuses on health equity; health public policy; and Indigenous health, specifically focusing on Indigenous youth health, healthy sexuality, harm reduction and partnerships with First Nations communities as well as urban Indigenous and community-based organizations.

As announced just this week by the University of Manitoba, Dr. Anderson has been appointed as Vice-Dean of Indigenous Health, Social Justice and Anti-Racism at the Rady Faculty of Health Sciences. This new portfolio includes her existing duties as Vice-Dean, Indigenous Health and will now also include the Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion, the Office of Community Engagement, and Social Accountability.

Dr. Anderson has served as Chair of the Indigenous Health Network of the Association of Faculties of Medicine of Canada and as the Chair of the National Consortium for Indigenous Medical Education. She has also served as Executive Director of Indigenous Academic Affairs in the Ongomiizwin — Indigenous Institute of Health and Healing.

Through her work with Ongomiizwin, Dr. Anderson has provided leadership to aspects of Indigenous student recruitment and retention; Indigenous health curriculum; Indigenous workforce development; safety of the work-learning environment, including anti-racism across the Rady Faculty of Health Sciences. She also serves as the chair of the COVID-19 Health and Safety Committee and a member of the COVID-19 Steering Committee for the University of Manitoba.

Dr. Anderson was recognized for her contributions to Indigenous people’s health with a National Aboriginal Achievement Award in March 2011. In 2016, she was recognized with a CBC Manitoba Future 40 award in the teaching and health care category. In 2018, she was named one of the 100 most powerful women in Canada by the Women’s Executive Network. Dr. Anderson recently received the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons Dr. Thomas Dignan Indigenous Health Award.

Finally, honourable senators, I would also like to take time to recognize and acknowledge Ms. Melanie MacKinnon. Ms. MacKinnon is a Cree nurse and health care executive leader. She got her Bachelor of Nursing in 1996. She is a proud member of Misipawistik Cree Nation in Grand Rapids, Manitoba, with paternal roots in Pimicikamak Cree Nation and Wabowden, Manitoba.

Throughout the course of her 25-year career, she has served in many different roles within the health sector. As a senior health care administrator and advocate, her work has informed regional and national policy shifts and generated new program mandates that seek to improve and protect the health and well-being of the communities she serves.

Currently, Ms. MacKinnon has two principal positions. She is the executive director of Ongomiizwin Health Services and head of the Indigenous Institute of Health and Healing, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba. Also, she serves as a co-lead of the Manitoba First Nations COVID-19 Pandemic Response Coordination Team on behalf of the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs.

She is a published author and international speaker on organizational design and changing conventional culture to be culturally safe. With her peers, community and health leaders, she continues to advocate for the rights and equitable access to quality health and social programs and services for Indigenous peoples in Manitoba, Canada and around the world.

Her recent recognitions for dedicated service to Indigenous communities include: WXN Top 100 Most Powerful Women, 2021; the Circle of Excellence Award, First Nations and Inuit Health Branch, Manitoba Region, Indigenous Services Canada, 2021; the Co-Game Star 2021 National Hockey League Healthcare Heroes award, Winnipeg Jets; the co-recipient of the Dr. and Mrs. Ralph Campbell Outreach Award, the university’s premier award in recognition of outstanding outreach activities by a member of the university; and the recipient of the 2021 Frontier Achievement Award, an award that recognizes former Frontier students for demonstrating commitment and excellence in their career and community.

Her mission to create space for Indigenous knowledge and rights in mainstream structures continues to be guided by her family, colleagues, mentors and elders, of whom she remains grateful.

Honourable senators, I cannot say enough about the quality and calibre of these three women. I am honoured to have had the opportunity to recognize them here today to the benefit of senators and all Canadians.

Their grace, determination and resilience are qualities that I admire deeply. I uphold and carry these women and countless others like them in the work that I do in the Senate. They, in part, are who I reference when I speak of “the collective Mary Jane.” I would like to thank them from the bottom of my heart for not only what they mean to me but what they mean to all First Nations in Manitoba and beyond. They are proof positive, colleagues, of the power and capability that First Nations — and specifically First Nations women — can have in this great country when given the chance to thrive.

Kinanâskomitin. Thank you.

Hon. Brian Francis, pursuant to notice of February 21, 2022, moved:

That the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples be authorized to examine and report on the federal government’s constitutional, treaty, political and legal responsibilities to First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples and any other subject concerning Indigenous Peoples;

That the documents received, evidence heard and business accomplished by the committee since the beginning of the First Session of the Forty-second Parliament be referred to the committee; and

That the committee submit its final report no later than December 31, 2023, and that the committee retain all powers necessary to publicize its findings for 180 days after the tabling of the final report.

Hon. Diane Bellemare, pursuant to notice of March 2, 2022, moved:

That, pursuant to rule 12-18(2), for the remainder of this session, the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament be authorized to meet at their approved meeting time as determined by the third report of the Committee of Selection, adopted by the Senate on December 7, 2021, on any Monday which immediately precedes a Tuesday when the Senate is scheduled to sit, even though the Senate may then be adjourned for a period exceeding a week.

She said: Honourable senators, I move the motion standing in my name.

(On motion of Senator Wells, debate adjourned.)

[English]

The Hon. the Speaker: Is leave granted, honourable senators?

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

The Hon. the Speaker: Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?

The Hon. the Speaker: Is leave granted, honourable senators?