Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate) moved:

That:

(a)pursuant to subsection 5(1) of An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying), S.C. 2021, c. 2, a Special Joint Committee of the Senate and the House of Commons be appointed to review the provisions of the Criminal Code relating to medical assistance in dying and their application, including but not limited to issues relating to mature minors, advance requests, mental illness, the state of palliative care in Canada and the protection of Canadians with disabilities;

(b)pursuant to subsection 5(2) of the act, the committee be composed of five members of the Senate, including one senator from the Opposition, two senators from the Independent Senators Group, one senator from the Progressive Senate Group, and one senator from the Canadian Senators Group, and ten members of the House of Commons, with two chairs, of whom the Senate chair shall be from the Opposition and the House chair shall be from the governing party;

(c)in addition to the chairs, there be one deputy chair from the Senate, from the Independent Senators Group and three vice-chairs from the House;

(d)the five senators to be members of the committee be named by means of a notice signed by their respective leader or facilitator, or their respective designates, and filed with the Clerk of the Senate no later than 5:00 p.m. on the day after this motion is adopted, failing which, the leader or facilitator, and, in the case of the Independent Senators Group, the deputy facilitator if appropriate, of any party or group identified in paragraph (b) that has not filed the name of a senator with the Clerk of the Senate, shall be deemed to be named to the committee, with the names of the senators named as members being recorded in the Journals of the Senate;

(e)pursuant to subsection 5(3) of the act, the quorum of the committee be eight members whenever a vote, resolution or other decision is taken, so long as both houses are represented and that one member from the Senate, one member of the governing party in the House, and one member from the opposition in the House are present and that the chairs be authorized to hold meetings, to receive evidence and authorize the publication thereof, whenever six members are present, so long as both houses are represented and that one member of the Senate, one member of the governing party in the House and one member from the opposition in the House are present;

(f)for greater certainty, changes to the membership of the committee on the part of the Senate be made in accordance with rule 12-5;

(g)until Thursday, June 23, 2022:

(i)where applicable, the provisions contained in paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of the order adopted by the Senate on February 10, 2022, respecting the participation of senators in hybrid meetings of standing joint committees, shall apply to senators on this committee; and

(ii)senators, members and departmental and parliamentary officials appearing as witnesses before the committee may do so in person, as may any witness invited to appear before the committee;

(h)the committee have the power to:

(i)meet during sittings and adjournments of the Senate;

(ii)report from time to time, to send for persons, papers and records, and to publish such papers and evidence as may be ordered by the committee;

(iii)retain the services of expert, professional, technical and clerical staff, including legal counsel; and

(iv)authorize video and audio broadcasting of any or all of its public proceedings and to make them available to the public via the Parliament of Canada’s websites;

(i)a report of the committee may be deposited with the Clerk of the Senate at any time the Senate stands adjourned, and that any report so deposited may be deposited electronically, with the report being deemed to have been presented or tabled in the Senate;

(j)pursuant to subsection 5(5) of the act, the committee submit a final report of its review, including a statement of any recommended changes, to Parliament no later than June 23, 2022; and

(k)pursuant to subsection 5(6) of the act, following the tabling of the final report in both houses, the committee shall expire; and

That a message be sent to the House of Commons to acquaint that house accordingly.

Hon. Dennis Glen Patterson: Honourable senators, I rise today to speak to Motion No. 14, Senator Kutcher’s motion regarding further study of the federal government’s Federal Framework for Suicide Prevention.

While I applaud the intent, I do have concerns with about this motion. Suicide is a very important issue, but I am wary of yet another study. My constituents in Nunavut, who are dealing with suicide and its impacts every day, need action instead of more studies. We now face a plethora of strategies: the Federal Framework for Suicide Prevention, the National Inuit Suicide Prevention Strategy, the First Nations Mental Wellness Continuum Framework, Changing Directions, Changing Lives: The Mental Health Strategy for Canada, and so forth. Many of these frameworks, strategies and studies are designed by southern non-Inuit.

The actions that my constituents in Nunavut need include multi-year, flexible federal funding and a whole-of-government approach. I would rather hear more about the specifics of what they need so that we know exactly what to push the government for. It removes the subjective markers of what is counted as progress and what isn’t. Instead, the question is: Did you deliver the funding or the programs that people are clamouring for?

I wish to thank the Senate for allowing me to speak to my constituents in their first language, no doubt haltingly. I will now speak in Inuktitut. There is an interpreter here. I thank the Senate for arranging that.

[Editor’s Note: Senator Patterson spoke in Inuktitut — translation follows.]

I will be speaking to what is being done in Nunavut. We don’t just want more studies. We want our knowledge. We have lost our own loved ones to suicide, and some people whom we know. This has been happening for a long time now. There are many people from Nunavut who have experienced suicide. There are many reasons why people commit suicide, and I, along with all the people of Nunavut, am affected negatively when a suicide happens.

People have come to me and asked for help to prevent more suicides. There are many reasons behind a suicide, but we do not really know what triggers a suicide. One of the many reasons is trauma. Other reasons are residential schools, the relocation of people, the massacre of dogs, tuberculosis and other things such as mental illness and the banning of the seal skins by people such as Greenpeace. These have greatly affected the lives of Inuit. Those are just some of the reasons. Another factor is a lack of housing and other major gaps in the quality of living that we endure daily.

Since the root cause of most suicides among Inuit is trauma, the best programs to deal with the loss, anger and harm it causes to Inuit are programs led by Inuit.

The Inuit should be involved in administering programs or delivering programs based on their knowledge, based on Inuit knowledge, because they know their land and their environment best.

Longtime northerners know what those programs should be because we have heard the decades of discussions and read many studies that all say the same thing. Nunavummiut need programs that help them learn cultural skills and get them back on the land. They need supports to continue learning vital cultural skills, like sewing, sealskin preparation and hunting. They need to learn about the manufacture and maintenance of hunting equipment.

They need to learn cultural skills, a large part of their culture and hunting skills. These are the skills that sustain the lives of Inuit and have sustained the lives of Inuit, for they are survival skills. While this may not seem connected to suicide prevention, it is important to know that all these skills are ennobling and uplifting. A deeper connection to one’s culture gives strength and stability. Trades and hobbies give purpose, as opposed to folks seeking to fill the void with drugs and alcohol.

[English]

Additionally, high unemployment and overcrowded housing means that people are simply surviving instead of living. If we’re able to tackle these issues, it gives people space to then focus on healing and wellness. Programs must be delivered in Inuktitut so that people can speak with their hearts as opposed to trying to explain complex feelings and thoughts across a language and cultural barrier.

Training and involving Inuit in the delivery of these programs is necessary. When you are at rock bottom, you need people who will provide support and walk with you, guiding you along the way. When you’re disconnected, it can be quite confusing. We need people there in communities and available 24/7. We need to acknowledge that our elders are our knowledge keepers and they know what community members are experiencing. Our 25 communities hold people who can do this work with training and support.

I will close in Inuktitut with some comments from an elder.

[Editor’s Note: Senator Patterson spoke in Inuktitut — interpretation follows.]

An elder has said to me that we need to start using our cultural perspectives again to help prevent more suicides. We need to stand on what we know as Inuit, to stand up again.

[English]

So when we call on our Social Affairs, Science and Technology Committee to study a subject as important as preventing soul-destroying suicide, I think we need to keep in mind that the review of programs and initiatives must include a Northern Canadian lens and may need to be expanded to other programs and initiatives that southerners may not classify as related but that Inuit would certainly view as integral to fighting the suicide epidemic we face in the North.

I would close by flagging that what Senator Kutcher has proposed is a thorough, academic fact-based study of the federal approach to suicide prevention and review of 20 years’ worth of programs. At least that’s how I see it. If followed to the letter, however, it would take up a significant amount of time in a committee that, like all committees, currently meets only once a week and will likely be bogged down with legislation in the foreseeable future. I would caution against spending an inordinate amount of time studying something that people need action on now.

In Nunavut, we cannot wait for more recommendations. Every year without action is another year of lost lives and pain. Qujannamiik. Taima.

(On motion of Senator Brazeau, debate adjourned.)

(At 7:08 p.m., pursuant to the order adopted by the Senate on March 31, 2022, the Senate adjourned until Tuesday, April 5, 2022, at 2 p.m.)

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

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate) introduced Bill S-7, An Act to amend the Customs Act and the Preclearance Act, 2016.

(Bill read first time.)

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): I thank the senator for his question.

The government is extremely concerned about the current humanitarian situation in Ukraine and neighbouring countries. I have been told that Canada is providing financial assistance to organizations such as the Red Cross, which is sending key equipment and trained staff to deliver aid, in particular to people with illnesses, as quickly and efficiently as possible.

The government is a strong supporter of AIDS programs around the world. I will point out that it provided $930.4 million from 2020 to 2022 to support the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria and $20 billion in base funding to UNAIDS from 2017 to 2022.

[English]

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): I thank the honourable senator for his question.

Transparency in our courts is a fundamental principle of our justice system, as you rightly pointed out.

I’m told that the minister is aware of the media reports on this trial, which was held in Quebec, and that he finds it deeply troubling. Court orders prevent me from commenting further. I was, however, informed that the minister has spoken with the Director of Public Prosecutions to shed some light on what has been reported.

Senator Gold: I will have to ask the government and get back to you with an answer.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Again, I will simply say that we will have to await the budget to know exactly what measures the government is taking going forward, including the measures to continue to assist Canadians through this difficult economic time.

The Prime Minister has made it clear — the government has made it clear — that the carbon tax will remain in place. Those provinces who, in their own wisdom, have decided not to have measures in place that are equivalent and therefore are subject to the carbon tax — as you know, in our home province and many others, the change tomorrow will have no effect because of the decisions that the Quebec government and others have taken to do their part to reduce the impact of carbon emissions on our climate. In that regard, the Government of Canada remains committed to its strategy to address climate change through the most effective, efficient and market-sensitive mechanisms.

Hon. Leo Housakos (Acting Leader of the Opposition): Honourable senators, my question is for the government leader in the Senate. Tomorrow, April 1, Canadians across several provinces will pay more for the Prime Minister of Canada’s carbon tax. Canadians will also pay more through the alcohol escalator tax. As I have mentioned many times in this place, this is on top of taxes that were already raised on the first of January, including the Canada Pension Plan payroll tax. The Employment Insurance maximum insurable earnings also increased on January 1, meaning workers and employers pay more right across this country.

The NDP-Liberal government has been given opportunities lately to make life easier for Canadians, but they choose not to. For example, the opposition in the other place asked to suspend the GST on fuel or to suspend the carbon tax. Government leader, it’s becoming excessively harder for middle class and poor Canadians to pay for groceries, shelter, fuel for their cars to drive their kids to and from school and pay for medication.

The question is very simple: How much more do you think the Canadian public can pay for the NDP-Liberal coalition, and how much more will they be asked to pay in next week’s budget because of that coalition?

Hon. Raymonde Gagné (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate): Honourable senators, pursuant to rule 4-13(3), I would like to inform the Senate that as we proceed with Government Business, the Senate will address the items in the following order: third reading of Bills C-15 and C-16, followed by Motion No. 28, followed by second reading of Bill S-4, followed by consideration of the message from the House of Commons, followed by all remaining items in the order that they appear on the Order Paper.

[English]

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Gagné, seconded by the Honourable Senator Gold, P.C., for the third reading of Bill C-15, An Act for granting to Her Majesty certain sums of money for the federal public administration for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2022.

Some Hon. Senators: Nay.

Hon. Raymonde Gagné (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate): Esteemed colleagues, when we adjourned yesterday I was about to conclude my speech. I simply wanted to remind you, one more time, that GC InfoBase is available for you to consult online. It makes it possible for parliamentarians and Canadians to access information on the estimates and other government financial and performance data.

I appreciate your attention. Thank you. Meegwetch.

Hon. Dennis Glen Patterson: Honourable senators, I would like to express my appreciation for the way in which Senator Dalphond, as sponsor of the bill, has clearly outlined its main provisions and urged that it be referred to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee for detailed study.

Senator Dalphond clearly outlined the main provisions of the bill, and he pointed out that since the bill is not a money bill and has been first introduced in the Senate, we have the freedom to make amendments if they seem appropriate. This is more freedom now than if the bill had originated in the other place. I believe that introducing government bills in the Senate is good practice for a government that says it wants thoughtful advice and constructive criticism from the Senate on legislation but often gives us very little time to do this important work. Such review of legislation in a less partisan atmosphere than in the other place is to the benefit of all Canadians.

I wanted to speak to this bill because, as Senator Dalphond said, the bill is about making the justice system more efficient using available technologies. Perhaps nowhere in this great country are there greater challenges of remoteness, adverse weather and air travel than in Nunavut’s 25 isolated, off-road communities in the largest jurisdiction in Canada.

In its first iteration, this bill was introduced in the House of Commons at least in part as a response to COVID; it was an attempt to minimize in-person contacts wherever possible in the justice system. The Nunavut Court of Justice, out of necessity, has always been on the forefront of trying to utilize technology to facilitate remote appearances because of the huge distances and costs resulting from our remote community locations across three time zones in an area covering one fifth the land mass of Canada.

The Nunavut Court of Justice is fundamentally a circuit court. The court travels to all of Nunavut’s communities, multiple times each year, to ensure Nunavummiut have meaningful access to justice at their doorsteps. There is a long tradition in the Northwest Territories and Nunavut of bringing justice to communities, beginning with legendary flying circuit court judges Sissons and Morrow. As a legal aid defence lawyer, I was privileged to travel on the circuit with Judge Morrow. This tradition is honoured today by judges, lawyers, prosecutors and court officers who travel courageously in challenging weather and small planes to bring justice to people’s doors.

Some observers of the Nunavut justice system are concerned that the ability of technology to facilitate remote appearances could have the unintended consequence of diminishing the public’s confidence in the administration of justice in Nunavut if the public sees the court as a purely Iqaluit-based or southern institution. It is seen as essential that lawyers be on the ground meeting and developing relationships with their clients who have matters before the court.

In Nunavut, where severe lockdowns and strict limitations on travel between communities were put in place by public health authorities, COVID shone a light on how valuable technology can be in enabling courts to proceed when personal appearances are not possible, which was very important during the pandemic. Additionally, increasing ways in which certain court appearances can be made without incurring expensive travel costs, which this bill allows, has obvious benefits.

However, a preliminary survey of individuals who work in the criminal justice system in Nunavut suggests that support for the efficient mechanisms offered by the bill still need to be viewed with caution. It was emphasized to me that, as good as the technology is — or can be — it should not be a replacement for in-person appearances when and where possible. This principle will require that attention be paid to the adequacy of safeguards around the use of technology for court appearances. As Senator Dalphond noted, trials and preliminary inquiries will be held only with consent of the accused, and the same safeguard of requiring the accused’s consent will apply to sentencing or pleas by teleconference.

While Bill S-4 is clear about the requirement of consent by both parties for the exercise of its provisions for virtual proceedings, obtaining true, informed consent from people in custody, or indeed anyone, may be made difficult by language and cultural barriers amongst our high-majority Inuit population. I would note that many lawyers for both the Crown and defence are based in Southern Canada and are non-Inuit, non-Inuktitut speakers.

These difficulties of communication are not resolved simply by face-to-face encounters between lawyers, clients and witnesses. Addressing the language and cultural challenges requires significant investment in interpreters and translators, as well as court workers.

Interpreters and court workers have been a mainstay of the system in Nunavut courts since the earliest days. It is encouraging that increasing numbers of young Inuit are entering the legal profession in Nunavut, but many more professionals are needed.

There is a fear that has been expressed about this bill that, without proper safeguards, technology has the potential to turn the court system in Nunavut into a satellite operation where counsel practice remotely in the territory from locations mainly based in southern Canada. This would have a negative impact on access to justice as vulnerable clients would miss out on personal interactions with counsel.

The other important reality that must be recognized in Nunavut is the limitations of the currently available communications technology. One experienced northern lawyer wrote to me saying:

We do want to share that we think Parliament should be wary of passing legislation that depends on technology that is not realistically available in every jurisdiction impacted by the new law.

Colleagues, you have heard me speak on the issue of unreliable connectivity in Nunavut several times, and I will definitely be speaking about this reality many more times. This past weekend, for example, when I went to buy gas and at a local store, the businesses were requiring cash only, since cash machines depending on the internet were either inoperative or painfully slow.

That the internet in Nunavut is not reliable is only one part of the problem. Experienced practitioners in Nunavut observe that we also operate in a jurisdiction that lacks sufficiently sophisticated expertise to deal with technical issues that arise, is disjointed in its technological rollout and generally apathetic about the impact of technological failure on the rights of individuals or the fairness of proceedings.

One practitioner said:

There is a very real risk associated with the new wording of s.650 that people will acquiesce to being physically absent for meaningful parts of their trial because they are (a) disengaged from and indifferent to the process and/or (b) believe that it will lead to expediency — a fast, if not fair, trial.

In this connection, the importance of language and cultural sensitivities is once again brought to the fore. It is notable that, despite two successful iterations of the Akitsiraq law program, which has graduated two cohorts of mostly Inuit lawyers, the defence bar has unfortunately attracted few Inuit lawyers. There is none at present.

It is said that some of those who have tried this work have found the experience triggering. Probably all of these young lawyers will have experienced or witnessed the traumas that lay behind so much of what ends up in court.

In closing, I’d like to express my thanks to Maliiganik Tukisiiniakvik legal aid clinic and the defence bar of the Law Society of Nunavut for their preliminary advice on this bill, which is so relevant in Nunavut, and to express the hope that the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee will seek their input and advice in its study of Bill S-4.

I support sending the bill for study by that committee.

Thank you.

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

Hon. Patricia Bovey: Honourable senators, “representation,” and “to be representative of” are at the core of arts programming challenges in today’s realities, and especially so with COVID-19’s current status.

Arts organizations are opening. Programming has begun and audiences are returning, though uncertain. At this time of reopening, many organizations are seriously working in new ways to represent and reflect their diverse communities.

Two recent visits in British Columbia were particularly inspirational for me. The University of British Columbia’s Museum of Anthropology’s exhibition Sankofa: African Routes, Canadian Roots, and the Art Gallery of Greater Victoria’s Denyse Thomasos solo exhibition. Both exhibitions were stellar and both presented artists we have featured in our installations honouring Canada’s Black artists.

Chantal Gibson had works in Sankofa, and the Thomasos exhibition featured paintings from the series now in our foyer.

The Thomasos exhibition was organized by Kleinberg’s McMichael Gallery and curated by Gaëtane Verna, Director of Toronto’s Power Plant Gallery, and she advised us on our current installation. The exhibition introduction noted Thomasos’s power, “to help us see human history in a new light.” She did, with strong work, and so too did that exhibition.

Sankofa included both African and Black Canadian artists with work from the museum’s collection and that borrowed from artists. Three sections in the show were curated by young Black curatorial students under the guidance of senior Museum of Anthropology, or MOA, curators. That exhibition effectively reflected on the past, the present and indeed the future. The introductory statements were stunning, and the facts presented were stark and demand reflection.

Quotes such as “A guiding light forward — permission to exist as a living ancestor” and “A past confronted with our future in mind” were poignant and germane.

Colleagues, the arts do and should reflect society. We, as viewers, are invited into the dialogue and reflections and are richer for those opportunities.

Dance, theatre and orchestras — large and small — across this country are, likewise, working in new directions with composers, musicians, writers, actors, choreographers and dancers to present unknown stories.

The representation of artists of colour is improving, and so too will the presentations reflecting our cultural diversities.

Again, I applaud and thank them all.

Thank you.

Hon. Salma Ataullahjan: Honourable senators, I rise today on behalf of the 24 million Afghans who are currently at risk of famine.

According to the United Nations Development Programme, by the end of the summer about 97% of Afghanistan’s population will plunge into poverty.

Since the Taliban takeover last summer, the Afghans’ desperate situation has intensified. While this was sadly expected, what I find truly upsetting is how quickly Afghanistan has been forgotten amidst other crises.

Currently, over 3.5 million Afghans are internally displaced, sleeping in the streets or public parks. Desperate parents find themselves forced to sell their daughters at an increasingly young age, often to families they do not know, because they cannot afford to feed them.

The desperation is palpable. Aziza, a young mother of three, is trying to sell her kidney to avoid having to sell her one-year-old daughter. Another Afghan woman, after selling her two young daughters, had no other choice than to sell her kidney to feed her family. The situation is so dire that she consented to the surgery, even though she was very sick. She said, “I told them I’m happy with my own death, but I can’t tolerate seeing my children hungry and ill.’”

And in a settlement near the town of Herāt, so many residents have sold their kidneys that it has become known as “one-kidney village.” Afghans are being preyed upon by organ traffickers who are responding to their desperation by purchasing kidneys for less money with no regard for the health risks, as these surgeries are not regulated.

Canada has made specific commitments to vulnerable Afghans. In September of 2021, the Liberal government committed to assisting and resettling 40,000 Afghans. To this day, only 9,560 Afghans have been resettled. Most of them had to get out on their own and through private NGOs. Many of these individuals left behind are those who risked their safety to help our forces in Afghanistan.

On March 4, the International Rescue Committee stated:

As the world’s attention shifts to the conflict and displacement crisis in Ukraine, the IRC calls on the world to not neglect Afghanistan. The international community should seize this window of opportunity in Afghanistan to prevent famine, save lives, and put an end to the horrific conditions facing women and girls.

Honourable senators, I cannot stand idly by as the Trudeau government ignores starving and suffering Afghans who have been left behind to fend for themselves. This government can and must do better.

Thank you.

Hon. Kim Pate: Honourable senators, for those of you who knew her, to meet Claudette was to engage with a force of nature. She loved and respected everyone regardless of social rank or economic means.

Many know Claudette Bradshaw as a former MP or minister; an advocate for the homeless; a promoter of literacy, a director for the Boys & Girls Club of Moncton; a co-founder, with her dear Doug, of the Moncton Headstart program; a member of the Premier’s Task Force on the Community Non-Profit Sector; a coordinator of the Mental Health Commission of Canada; launcher of Housing First; a mom to many children — besides those she birthed, her beloved Chris and Nick — an advocate for marginalized families and a selfless, kind and tireless community champion.

In 2009, she was inducted into the Order of New Brunswick, and she received the Order of Moncton in 2010 for her work throughout the community. Awarded honourary doctorates from the Université de Moncton and the University of Ottawa, Claudette was also a most deserving recipient of numerous additional awards.

We met in 1994 when we were both appointed to the National Crime Prevention Council where we became fast friends and immediately found a common cause. From there, Claudette went on to run for election where she served as Minister of Labour, Minister responsible for Homelessness, Minister responsible for the Francophonie, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for International Cooperation and Secretary of State for Multiculturalism and Status of Women.

Perhaps best known for her boundless generosity, unconditional love and trademarked full-body hugs, Claudette gained infamy in the Commonwealth when in 2002, after the Queen’s visit to New Brunswick, she ended the visit with one of her trademark bear hugs. Her son recalls exclaiming, “She’s going to hug that woman and they’re going to taser her in front of all of Moncton.” Completely unfazed, she did the deed and claimed the monarch was no different from you and me.

As our colleague Senator Mockler reminded us yesterday, Claudette made our country a better place to live, work and raise children. She was indeed very special and will be sorely missed. May we all take comfort in the knowledge that her work and spirit live on in the community and in countless numbers of people whose lives she touched and raised up. Meegwetch. Thank you.

Hon. Pat Duncan: Honourable senators, I am grateful to the creator for this day, humbled to be speaking from the traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabe and honoured to be of service to the people of Canada.

The Yukon Regional Chief Kluane Adamek shared with me that during strategy discussions with her team and the Yukon chiefs, they coined the phrase “A Yukon that Leads” to describe our region and the First Nations leadership and advancement.

We lost one of our leaders. Paul Birckel was born on the shores of Kluane Lake in the traditional territory of the Kluane and Champagne and Aishihik First Nations. His father, Paul Eugene Birckel, came from Rombach-le-Franc in the Alsace region of France. His maternal grandfather, Hutshi Allen, was Upper Tanana near Tetlin and Tanacross, Alaska.

Honourable senators, Elijah Smith and a delegation of Yukon chiefs, the authors of the document Together Today for our Children Tomorrow, tapped Paul Birckel to be the first Executive Director of the Council of Yukon First Nations, or CYFN, during the amalgamation of three organizations: the Council for Yukon Indians, the Yukon Association of Non-Status Indians, and the Yukon Native Brotherhood. The document Together Today for our Children Tomorrow, accepted by Canada in 1973, became the basis for the Umbrella Final Agreement, signed in 1993.

Paul went on from CYFN to serve as chief of the Champagne and Aishihik First Nations. Elected for five terms, he led his nation to be among the first to finalize a land claim agreement under the Umbrella Final Agreement. In 1996, he successfully negotiated an agreement to co-manage the Tatshenshini-Alsek Park, which covers over 6,000 square miles and spans the border of Yukon and British Columbia.

Instrumental in establishing the Yukon Native Language Centre and negotiating a child welfare agreement between his First Nation and the Government of Yukon, Paul was also an astute businessman, leading his First Nation and others to key business purchases and developments. In 1995, the Yukon Chamber of Commerce recognized Paul as Businessman of the Year.

Yukoners and Canadians are indebted to Paul’s family and friends for sharing with us his time, energy and dedication to ensuring a better future. Love, tolerance, patience and collaboration were the hallmarks of his own path to reconciliation. His family also said the most enduring legacy that Paul bestowed were a few simple teachings: give more than you take, treat people and animals kindly and trust that there are no limits to how much you can love.

On July 8, 2021, Paul Birckel travelled to the spirit world followed shortly after by his wife of 61 years, Kathy Birckel.

Honourable senators, Paul Birckel, a Yukoner who helped to blaze a trail in a “Yukon that leads,” has led us, the Yukon and Canadian society to a better place.

To quote the memorial service program, “gunalchéesh.” Thank you. Mahsi’cho.

Hon. Raymonde Gagné (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate): Honourable senators, with leave of the Senate and notwithstanding rule 5-5(j), I move:

That, for today’s sitting, and notwithstanding any provision of the Rules, previous order or usual practice:

1.the Senate not see the clock at 6 p.m.;

2.motion No. 14 under Other Business be called immediately after the Senate has completed consideration of Government Business;

3.when the Senate completes Government Business and proceedings on motion No. 14 under Other Business it adjourn; and

4.if the Senate has not completed Government Business and its consideration of motion No. 14 under Other Business by 9 p.m., the sitting continue until those items have been completed.