Senator Gold: This government engages in consultations to learn from them; they don’t make up their minds before the consultations have been completed and analyzed.

Having said that, you asked for a simple answer. What will happen after the consultations is that decisions will be taken. When they have been taken, they will be announced.

Senator Housakos: Including with an often-repeated announcement of impending and upcoming public consultations.

I understand that online consultations are under way and that Minister Mendicino did meet with a group of people in British Columbia last week. Even then, members of the diaspora communities were afraid to be found out and to participate.

It doesn’t help when your government is raising the spectre of impending internment. It just completely creates an atmosphere of fear amongst Canadians in various diasporas.

Regardless, I’m looking for a straightforward answer here because surely they have a process in place, but my question is this: What happens after this consultative process wraps up on May 9? What are the next steps? Will you commit to tabling in this chamber before May 9 the actual steps that will be taken following consultations on the foreign agent registry and with a specific timeline?

Senator Housakos: Senator Gold, when it comes to combatting foreign intimidation and interference here in Canada with a foreign agent registry, your government has been kicking that can down the road for quite some time.

Senator Gold: Thank you for the question. I simply do not accept the characterization that this is patronage. You cited — as you have on many occasions — a flurry of things, which you continue to return to. I won’t answer each and every one of them.

The Prime Minister’s trip, his most recent vacation, was cleared by the former Ethics Commissioner before the fact. It is not a question of patronage, and I do take objection, frankly, and I’ll speak only for myself, to the way in which you characterize our former Governor General in this question and in others.

Senator Plett: Well, leader, the Prime Minister appointed an old family friend, neighbour and Trudeau Foundation member to investigate what the Prime Minister himself knew about Beijing’s interference, but it’s okay because of this man’s reputation.

The Prime Minister won’t say if he paid $80,000 in accommodations for a luxury vacation in Jamaica, but it’s okay because the resort is owned by another old family friend.

Minister LeBlanc awarded a fishing licence to his wife’s cousin, but it’s okay because he didn’t know the cousin all that well.

Mr. Hussen gave $93,000 in contracts to his staffer’s sister, but it’s okay because it was for communications services.

Ms. Ng gave $20,000 in contracts to her best friend for some Zoom calls, but it’s okay because it was for public relations advice.

Do you see a pattern here, leader? Canadians are sick and tired of this. When will this patronage end?

Hon. Mary Coyle: Honourable senators, this Saturday, people around the world will come together to celebrate the fifty-third annual Earth Day, a day initiated by American Democratic senator Gaylord Nelson and Republican congressman Pete McCloskey. The theme of that first Earth Day was “A Question of Survival.”

Colleagues, our planet Earth is the third planet from the sun and the only planet we know so far that is inhabited by living things, including us. It is the only planet with liquid water on its surface. The name “Earth” is at least 1,000 years old. Unlike other planets named after Greek and Roman gods and goddesses, the name of our planet is derived from a Germanic word which simply means “the ground.”

The theme for Earth Day 2023 is “Invest in our Planet,” aiming to raise awareness about the need for countries, companies and individuals to help build healthy, sustainable and equitable economies. Earth Day’s official website states:

There is no longer a choice between going green and growing long term profits. It is crucial for businesses of all sizes to act now.

According to Fatih Birol, Executive Director of the International Energy Agency:

We do not have to choose between responding to today’s energy crisis and tackling the climate crisis. Not only can we do both, we must do both because they are intimately linked. Massive investment in clean energy—including energy efficiency, renewables, electrification, and a range of clean fuels—is the best guarantee of energy security in the future and will also drive down harmful greenhouse gas emissions.

Canada’s independent Net-Zero Advisory Body’s annual report states:

Canada must remain at the forefront of the net-zero movement to ensure competitiveness in the global economy, sustain well-being, create good jobs, and attract investments to leverage competitive advantages. . . .

. . . success must be about the construction of a . . . net-zero future for all Canadians.

The Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters association says, “It is imperative that Canada and Canadian manufacturers become world leaders in the race to net zero.”

Colleagues, we know the business sector is central to the transformative green industrial revolution we are currently undergoing on our planet Earth. Also critical is the role of our governments at every level, of civil society and each of us as citizens. Colleagues, let’s take a minute this Saturday to reflect on how we can each invest in the well-being of our planet, for our own well-being and for the well-being of our future generations. And let’s just get out and enjoy the day. Happy Earth Day.

An Hon. Senator: Hear, hear.

Senator Cotter: But eventually that will occur. At that point in time, the opposition leader will cross over to another seat in this chamber; the government leader presumably will cross over to an opposition or other seat. And I imagine that, as they do, they will stop in the middle and exchange binders. The opposition leader will hand over his or her binder of questions and criticisms, and the government leader will hand over his or her binder of answers or, as Senator Plett might say, “non-answers.”

Senator Cotter: But eventually that will occur. At that point in time, the opposition leader will cross over to another seat in this chamber; the government leader presumably will cross over to an opposition or other seat. And I imagine that, as they do, they will stop in the middle and exchange binders. The opposition leader will hand over his or her binder of questions and criticisms, and the government leader will hand over his or her binder of answers or, as Senator Plett might say, “non-answers.”

When that happens, a more muscular and oppositional and less accountable Senate will have a licence, supported by this potential precedent, to relentlessly impede initiatives of that new government.

So, for senators inclined to oppose the will of the elected body here — and, to be honest, on one or two specific points, I would be tempted myself — it’s important to think about the downside long-term consequences of pursuing that which you might most profoundly desire today, potentially to your regret.

My final point is the degree to which there is a genuine link between the “will of the people” associated with a particular initiative, or whether this is so esoteric a thought, based solely on the fact that a particular government was elected — in some respects, this is the Achilles heel of the Salisbury principle.

Can we point to a particular initiative and evidence that that initiative is connected with the will of the people? There is no incontrovertible evidence, but there is at least a meaningful link if a government, when campaigning for office, committed to an initiative and got elected and is advancing that initiative.

So, added to the general principle, the closer to an electoral commitment the core of a government initiative is, the greater the justification for deference to the will of that other place.

That was the case here. A commitment to reform the Broadcasting Act was part of the governing party’s 2021 electoral platform and Speech from the Throne.

In conclusion, we as a chamber have done our work here. We have examined this legislation extensively and well, as nearly all of us have observed with respect to this legislation, both at committee and here in the chamber. We have offered a series of sober second thoughts, many of which were adopted, some rejected. We have worked out a small constructive non-legislative “sober third thought.”

Our work, within the limits of our constitutional authority, has been done and well done. Going further, resisting further, would be unwise, in my submission, and would push us, in my view, to exceed the limits of our institutional authority. We should celebrate this good work, congratulate those who led the work and pushed us hard to adopt Senate improvements and say yes to this amended message. We should agree to go to P.E.I. on vacation. Thank you very much.

Senator Cotter: Some hope either later or not at all.

Senator MacDonald: I thought of this amendment quite awhile ago, senator.

Senator Dasko: Thank you for the enthusiasm. Senator Plett, you have today offered high praise for the six amendments that were rejected by the House of Commons. You have lauded them, and you said that you insist on the entire amendment package.

However, senator, you did not support the bill with these amendments in it at third reading. I ask you, how can you urge us to insist on the 26 amendments when you yourself did not support them at third reading of the bill?

Senator Plett: Well, I hope you will be enthusiastic about my answer. The bill didn’t go far enough. The amendments didn’t go far enough. I said repeatedly in my speech that it’s still a flawed bill, even with the amendments, but the amendments make it a better bill.

Senator MacDonald: Certainly.

Senator Dalphond: Senator MacDonald, did you think about this amendment before the first amendment or after the first amendment?

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): Honourable senators, it is my duty as a senator and my honour as a grandfather to rise today and bring you the fourth instalment of “Myla Plett’s Curling Adventures.”

As you know from my last instalment, Myla and her team have been on an impressive winning streak. They won the Canadian Under-18 Girls Curling Championships in Timmins, Ontario, followed by a silver medal at the Canada Winter Games in Prince Edward Island in March. From there, they headed to Rouyn-Noranda in Quebec for the 2023 Canadian Under-21 Women’s Curling Championships.

Betty and I were not able to be there in person this time, but I understand that someone may have almost dialled 911 because Team Plett was on fire. They played 10 games in eight days and went 10 and 0 for a perfect winning record, clinching the gold medal after defeating Newfoundland and Labrador in the final! Following their earlier 9 and 0 streak at the Canadian Under-18 Curling Championship, that puts them at an incredible 19 and 0 between the two events.

Colleagues, Myla was extremely surprised and excited to find out that this victory was a historic achievement because it is the first time in Canadian curling history that a team has captured both the Under-21 and the Under-18 titles in the same year!

The Calgary Sun noted:

It’s another chapter in an astonishing and ongoing championship run for Plett, vice-skip Alyssa Nedohin, second Chloe Fediuk, lead Allie Iskiw —

— as well as their coaches, Blaire Lenton and David Nedohin.

I couldn’t agree more. Their achievements have been remarkable, and they have made history in Canadian curling. Team Plett’s win at the Under-21 Nationals means they will now spend the summer and fall training and then will be off to Lohja, Finland, for the 2023 World Junior-B Curling Championships as Team Canada. If they secure a podium spot there, they will be back in Finland in February 2024 for the 2024 World Junior Curling Championships.

Colleagues, Myla and her team are representative of Canada’s many amazing athletes. They have dedicated countless hours to their training and have worked tirelessly to perfect their skills. Their commitment to excellence is an inspiration to us all.

I also want to congratulate the Alberta men’s team for their incredible victory at the Canadian Under-21 Curling Championships as well. Skip Johnson Tao, third Jaedon Neuert, second Benjamin Morin and lead Adam Naugler demonstrated great skill, determination and teamwork to bring home the gold medal. Their success, along with Myla’s team, is a testament to the strength of Canadian curling and the talent of our many young athletes.

Colleagues, I invite you to join me in congratulating Team Plett on their historic win, along with the Alberta men’s team and all the young athletes who participated and continue to make us proud.

Hon. Diane Bellemare: On March 16, 2023, in Old Montreal, a terrible fire broke out in the early hours of the morning in a three-storey heritage building on Rue du Port, with 22 people inside.

After becoming trapped in windowless rooms without an emergency exit, some people made calls to 911 and family members. Others managed to flee or had to jump from windows to save their lives. Seven people did not make it out.

Camille Maheux, 76, was a cinematographer and videographer who was known in her circle as a “talented portrait photographer and pioneer of what came to be known as intimate documentaries.” She got her start in the 1970s photographing the feminist movement, the LGBT community and marginalized people.

[English]

Nathan Sears, 35, was a recent PhD graduate in political science at the University of Toronto. He was a Cadieux-Léger Fellow at Global Affairs Canada and a fellow at the Trudeau Centre for Peace, Conflict and Justice. Known by his peers and loved ones as a passionate academic with a promising career, he was in Montreal for the International Studies Association conference.

Dania Zafar, 31, was a young graphic designer, a free spirit and ambitious woman. She spoke to her father in Lahore, Pakistan, the day before the fire. She was on a spontaneous trip to Montreal with her friend Saniya Khan, also 31, who came to Montreal to visit a childhood friend. Saniya was completing a master’s degree in public health in Detroit.

An Wu, 31, was a young and promising neuroscientist who had obtained her PhD at 24 and worked as a project scientist at the University of California San Diego. She was visiting Quebec for the academic conference and workshop COSYNE.

[Translation]

Charlie Lacroix, 18, was a young woman who was described as a deeply caring social butterfly who adored art. She called her grandfather during the fire. Her friend Walid Belkahla, 18, was a young man with his whole life ahead of him.

For the families and friends of those who lost their lives, the several-day wait before the bodies were found in the rubble and identified was unbearable.

How could such a fire have happened in our community in this day and age?

The Chief Coroner of Quebec has ordered a public inquiry into the seven deaths.

These deaths should have never happened. Our thoughts are with the victims’ families and loved ones. They have my deepest sympathy.

[English]

Senator MacDonald: Could you repeat the question, please, senator?

Senator Dalphond: Thank you for agreeing to answer my question.

In a country where a majority government can be elected when one party wins between 37% and 41% of the vote, that means that 60% of the people did not vote for that government. Are you saying that if there are ever changes in government, we should speak for the 60% who didn’t vote for that government and prevent its bills from being passed?

Senator Plett: Yes.