Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your question.

The Charter has been a fundamental transformative element in our Constitution since its enactment in 1982, and in that regard, it has had impacts that even surpassed the expectations of those who lobbied for it and worked hard to see it come to light.

It has transformed the work that we do here in the Senate. It has been an increasingly present part of our discussions and our role as we see it as senators to make sure that the Charter rights of Canadians are taken properly into account and respected in the laws that we are called upon to study and ultimately pass.

It is true that the pre-emptive use of the “notwithstanding” clause is something that is a preoccupation to many of us and, indeed, this government, as the Prime Minister has announced on many occasions.

The “notwithstanding” clause is — we have to remind ourselves — part of the Charter and was part of the bargain that allowed the patriation of the Constitution to happen. It is the government’s position that it should be used appropriately, and not irresponsibly, and in that regard, this issue is currently before the courts, as you know.

I have confidence, though, that the Charter has transformed the way we Canadians see ourselves in many different ways, and I believe it is secure in that regard. It is certainly secure in this chamber.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Honourable senators, the question of whether and how to set up foreign registry is one upon which the government is consulting — and properly so. That there are divergent views within Canada by Canadians on this subject is also to be expected in a diverse society.

The Prime Minister is not speaking out of both sides of his mouth, nor is he acting as a mouthpiece, and to disparage those who are raising questions about the possible collateral impacts of such an initiative at this stage of the consultations, to brand them and sweep them under as a mouthpiece of a Communist regime, frankly, is a disservice to those Canadians who, in good faith, want to see us have the right tools — as this government does — to address foreign interference and to add to the tools we already have and are deploying.

Again, colleagues, the consultations are under way. The government is serious about pursuing this, but it is listening to Canadians, as we would expect it to do.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Wow, Senator Batters, to suggest that the Honourable David Johnston, the former Governor General, would be influenced by a per diem — and you were a lawyer, perhaps not on Bay Street — that is the equivalent of a few hours of work for professionals — but for any amount.

To suggest, imply or assert that somehow the Honourable David Johnston would be influenced by his per diem and that it would change the advice he would give the Prime Minister is really something that — I cannot find the parliamentary language to express how it makes me feel to hear this being treated with seriousness and that you are asking me to respond to a question like this. With all due respect, it does not dignify a response.