Senator Gold: I will ask the government what is available and appropriate to share, but that is all I can say right now without asking the government.

Senator Gold: Thank you. I will certainly pass that on to the government.

The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators will recall that, when we left off yesterday at 4 p.m., Senator Gold was using his time to answer questions, and I believe there was at least one other senator who wished to ask a question.

[Translation]

Hon. Renée Dupuis: Yes, I have a question for the Government Representative in the Senate, if he’ll take one.

Senator Gold: Yes.

Senator Dupuis: Would you agree to table in the Senate any legal analysis that may have been done by the Department of Justice regarding this constitutional resolution?

Senator Dalphond: Thank you for clarifying, Government Representative. It’s reassuring to see that we’ll have the time to do our duty as representatives of our region as well as fulfill our primary role, which is to carefully examine the bills put before us. I believe that is all the more important when we’re talking about a constitutional amendment.

I am pleased to see that, if the members of a provincial legislative assembly make a unanimous request, Ottawa will act on it quickly, no questions asked. However, as a senator, I would like time to read the documents and ask questions about Saskatchewan’s proposal. Quebec and other provinces will be making proposals too, and I would like them all to receive equal treatment from the perspective of defending regional interests, but only once they’ve been subjected to careful review.

Senator Cotter: I will ask and let someone say “no.”

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: There is already a “no.”

Hon. Renée Dupuis: Senator Cormier, I have a question related to the one posed by Senator Mockler.

Do you think that the study of this type of bill could be shared by more than one Senate committee, for example, the Committee on Official Languages and perhaps the Legal Affairs Committee? Do you think it would it be possible to split the study of this bill, as we have done on other occasions?

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Senator Galvez, I must interrupt you. You will have 12 minutes remaining in the next sitting.

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

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Senator Cotter, we have three senators who would like to ask questions. Would you accept questions? You have barely two minutes.

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Senator Cotter, Senator Griffin and Senator Tannas wish to ask questions. Are you asking for five more minutes?

Senator Plett: No.

Senator Quinn: Thank you for that response, which makes really good sense.

Hon. Pierre J. Dalphond: I believe I have understood the responses from the Government Representative, and I have done some research on this topic since yesterday. I obtained a copy of the ruling from the trial division of the federal court, which is 306 pages long. I admit that I fell asleep while reading it last night, but not because it wasn’t interesting. On the contrary, it was fascinating to read about the early days of Confederation and the railway.

(1530)

Am I to understand from your comments today that you insist that the Senate adopt the motion without delay and without senators having the time to read the ruling, hear witnesses and check the documents that Senator Dupuis is referring to, some but not necessarily all of which are found in the schedule to the ruling?

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Senator McPhedran, I’m afraid your time has expired.

Senator McPhedran: I ask for some additional time, please.

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Senator Moncion, there appear to be two senators who wish to ask questions. Would you take some questions?

Hon. Mobina S. B. Jaffer: Honourable senators, the United Nations has declared February 6 as the International Day of Zero Tolerance for Female Genital Mutilation.

I am truly disappointed to inform you that Canada’s record on prosecuting this horrific and excruciating practice is dismal. Although the Criminal Code was amended in 1997 to include female genital mutilation as a form of aggravated assault, to date there have been no prosecutions for female genital mutilation in Canada. Twenty-five years, no prosecutions.

Honourable senators, this is unacceptable, particularly given that the End FGM Canada Network under the leadership of Giselle Portenier, with whom I have been working closely, estimates that there are more than 100,000 survivors across Canada and thousands of girls remain at risk.

Girls like Serat who was born in Somalia, but grew up with her aunt in Ontario. When she was 13, she travelled with her aunt to Somalia to see her mother. Early one morning, three women burst into her home and grabbed her while she was sleeping. Serat started screaming and tried to run. The women caught her, pinned her down, spread her legs and subjected her to female genital mutilation. Serat passed out from blood loss and pain. When she recovered consciousness, her legs were tied together. When she returned to Canada a few months later, her aunt told her to accept what had happened and move on. How could she? Serat still talks about feeling ashamed and devastated. She did not reveal this terrible act that happened to her for over a decade.

(1420)

Who could she talk to when there remains a complete wall of silence, even in Canada, around FGM? Honourable senators, we need to break this wall. Our laws are clear. To make it illegal, remember that Canada has a clear law that would make genital mutilation a crime.

I stand before you, as I have many times on this issue, to say that if you are moved by Serat’s story, please act now. Please look out in your community for those vulnerable girls, and please remember that they are our girls. I ask you to support me to get the issue of FGM prosecuted in Canada. Thank you, senators.