Senator Plett: Nevertheless, Your Honour, I have the utmost respect for you personally. I said I would try to respect your ruling. I will. However, at this point I will also exercise my right, Your Honour, and with the highest deference to your position, I find it sad that just weeks before your retirement, you have been put into a position that I personally don’t believe — would you like to speak, Senator Lankin? I will sit down and give you the floor.

Senator Lankin: To speak on your behalf? Absolutely.

Senator Housakos: Of course I have a question. I wouldn’t get up on my feet without having a question.

Senator Saint-Germain, at the end of the day, we’ve had many instances as a chamber where we put forward amendments, and the amendments put forward — that we supported as well — by your colleagues in your committee were watered-down amendments to protect user-generated content compared to the ones that were defeated.

So my question is: Why wouldn’t the Senate just insist one more time to the government to listen to those — as you pointed out — thousands of user-generated content creators and witnesses and tell the government that we insist on these reasonable amendments as proposed by the ISG senators and supported at committee by all of us and tell the government it is in the interest of the voices of reason in the country that they support those amendments?

Senator Gold: That, too, fails the test of common sense.

However, I am hopeful, as I expect that, in due course, this chamber will decide that there has been enough waiting. We have much work before us to continue to modernize the Senate of Canada. Let’s get to it.

Thank you, Your Honour, for indulging me.

Senator Plett: You would speak on my behalf. And you will put —

Your Honour, I ask that Senator Lankin refrain from interrupting me while I am speaking. I think this is a serious issue. She may not.

Your Honour, I have the utmost respect for you personally. I have the utmost respect for the position you have been put in and that you should not have been put in. I understand why you are in this position, Your Honour. I understand the pressures that you have been put under. You and I will leave this chamber tonight as friends, respecting each other. I will be your friend when you retire, and I will wish you all the best. But today, Your Honour, I find it necessary that, pursuant to Rule 2-5(3), I do wish to appeal your ruling.

Senator Plett: Minister, the terms of reference also state that the rapporteur is authorized “to receive written submissions on these issues from interested persons.” I would hope that “interested persons” include whistleblowers, candidates who were targeted by Beijing’s interference or Canadians who have been harassed and intimidated here in our own country by the Chinese Communist Party. However, minister, it’s impossible to find a mailing address or an email address where those submissions can be sent.

Minister, do you know how “interested persons” can get in touch with the Prime Minister’s Special Rapporteur?

He has reached out to me, and I have had an active discussion with him. On the one hand, we can’t say he has an independent role and have the government prescribe from whom and how he would receive information, but the ability for Canadians, including those identified by Senator Plett, to have access to the Right Honourable David Johnston and provide him advice and information is important, so I will ask the Privy Council Office that very good question of how people can offer advice publicly or submit evidence to him. That’s an important part of his work. I’ll also make sure that senators have that information.

Senator Gold: On the point of order.

My apologies, colleagues. Members in the opposition have been heckling speakers — whether it’s me or any members — for years and interrupting us when we try to speak. In this very debate, Senator Plett impugned my integrity. He said that I misled this chamber, which was not true. He said that I moved this for my own personal motives — “self-serving motives” was the term I believe he used. That is speaking very much to motives. It saddens me to have to rise to even remind this chamber of what we all heard.

I think that what happened after the vote is a matter that is something that grown-up parliamentarians can possibly tolerate. I do not think it rises to intimidation, as you have characterized it. In that regard, Your Honour, I hope that you can dispose of this point of order quickly.

This is just yet one other attempt by the opposition to delay proceedings, to deny us as senators our democratic right to pronounce on a bill that has been before us for a very long time. It’s standing in the way of the Senate doing its job on behalf of Canadians. Thank you.

(Pursuant to the order adopted by the Senate on December 7, 2021, to receive a Minister of the Crown, the Honourable Dominic LeBlanc, P.C., M.P., Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Infrastructure and Communities, appeared before honourable senators during Question Period.)

The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, we welcome today the Honourable Dominic LeBlanc, P.C., M.P., Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Infrastructure and Communities, to ask questions relating to his ministerial responsibilities.

Pursuant to the order adopted by the Senate on December 7, 2021, senators do not need to stand. Questions are limited to one minute and responses to one-and-a-half minutes. The reading clerk will stand 10 seconds before the expiry of these times. Question Period will last one hour.

Hon. Rosa Galvez: Honourable senators, I rise today in this chamber to talk about the importance of Earth Day, which was celebrated on April 22. Over 50 years have passed since the first Earth Day, and yet, the nine planetary boundaries that are necessary to our survival are under unprecedented threat. We are already existing outside the safe operating space for four of those boundaries, including the loss of biodiversity and climate change.

We cannot afford to delay taking action. Canada, like the rest of the world, must take bold action to deal with the climate crisis. As senators, we have a responsibility to act, not just for ourselves but also for future generations.

We need to adopt a new economic approach that is fair, sustainable and equitable. We need to transition to a low-carbon future, while ensuring that no one is left behind. That means that we need to invest in clean and resilient technologies and infrastructure and ensure a just transition for workers and communities.

[English]

Financial institutions have a catalyzing role to play in providing the necessary funding for this transition. We need a financial sector that is aligned with the Paris Agreement goals and that integrates climate impacts in decision-making processes. This will help us be more competitive with other jurisdictions, such as Europe and the United States, that have already modernized their regulatory frameworks.

Even the multilateral banks such as the World Bank, the Inter‑American Development Bank and the Asian Development Bank are already aligning their activities with the Paris Agreement.

We must also recognize the importance of protecting nature, biodiversity and the ecosystems that sustain life on earth and represent more than 80% of our GDP. This means preserving and restoring lands, reducing pollution and protecting oceans and forests.

Colleagues, the climate crisis is the greatest challenge of our time and will require an unprecedented transformation. It will take us out of our comfort zone, yes, but it is also an opportunity for us to come together and build a better future. Let us use this Earth Day to reaffirm our commitment to protecting our planet and to working together towards a sustainable future for us all.

Thank you, meegwetch.

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): Welcome, Minister LeBlanc.

Minister, the Prime Minister’s made-up Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference has been silent since being named to this post on March 15.

This is, of course, just what the Prime Minister wanted by naming an old family friend, neighbour and Trudeau Foundation member to the position. The terms of reference for the made-up Special Rapporteur say that he is “to provide reports on a rolling basis.” Minister, think about all the serious revelations about Beijing’s interference in our country that have been reported in the last six weeks. It is obvious that a public inquiry is required, yet we have heard nothing from the Special Rapporteur.

Minister, what communication has taken place between the Special Rapporteur and your government since March 15? Have any reports or recommendations been brought forward? Has he interviewed any ministers or their staff?

Hon. Senators: Hear, hear!

He has been hard at work. I have had a number of exchanges with officials supporting him, with counsel supporting him. He is meeting with me and cabinet colleagues in the coming days. I know he has been meeting with senior officials. As the Prime Minister indicated transparently at the time he was selected to do this important work, Canadians will see from him in the coming weeks a report on the question of whether further public or other inquiries would be helpful in reassuring Canadians about our democratic institutions. This will be an ongoing effort, and we expect him to be transparent and open with Canadians over the coming weeks and months.

Finally, I hope senators have taken note that his terms of reference were deliberately broad and inclusive to allow the Right Honourable David Johnston to follow the evidence, to go where he thinks it is important to go in order to provide the best advice to the government and to Canadians.

Hon. Dominic LeBlanc, P.C., M.P., Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Infrastructure and Communities: Your Honour, through you, obviously to Senator Plett asking the question, I hope you will indulge me a few moments at what may be the last time I have the privilege of being invited to your chamber with you as presiding officer. Senator Furey and I have been friends for over 30 years, and I’m only 55 years old. Senator Furey has been a political mentor for me and a good friend, and our families have become friends. Your Honour, I wanted to acknowledge your remarkable service to Canada as you prepare to leave this chamber and to say that it has been a privilege to work with you and see the first Newfoundlander and Labradorian preside over one of Canada’s parliamentary institutions. I wish you in your retirement, sir, nothing but success and good health and happiness.

Hon. Jim Quinn: Good afternoon, Minister LeBlanc. My question relates to the Chignecto Isthmus Climate Change Adaptation Project. Historically, the federal government paid 100% of the capital costs for dikes and dams in the Tantramar area under the 1948 Maritime Marshlands Rehabilitation Act.

The Parliament of Canada has the declaratory power such that the federal government will assume responsibility for works that are for the general advantage of Canada. This is a vital trade corridor and transportation link that benefits our national economy. The new Champlain Bridge, although located solely in Quebec, has been declared to be for the general advantage of Canada, and the federal government is paying 100% of the $4.2 billion cost of the bridge rather than 50%, and there are other examples.

The premiers of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia wrote to you on March 14 asking for the federal government to pay 100% of the cost of the Chignecto Isthmus project as part of the federal government’s constitutional obligations. As a fellow New Brunswicker and a key member of the federal cabinet, will you promote and support the premier’s request for 100% funding for the Chignecto Isthmus project?

Hon. Dominic LeBlanc, P.C., M.P., Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Infrastructure and Communities: Thank you, senator. Of course, I asked them. I had a lengthy meeting last Tuesday with both the Infrastructure Bank CEO and the board chair, Ms. Tamara Vrooman. We went over exactly that kind of question and others.

I still share the disappointment that a number of people have expressed regarding the ability of the Infrastructure Bank to leverage in the proportions that — you’re absolutely right, senator — were announced in the budget decision that created the bank. The ratios have not been reached yet.

I think the bank — and I’ve said so publicly — has had some growing pains. It was slow to get moving; it has been slow to stand up. I see and I hear from premiers, mayors and people in the energy sector of examples where it is becoming more accessible, more obvious and more available as a potential source of funding, but I still think they have work to do. I’ve shared that with the bank.

I am encouraged by the fact that they have now attracted almost $9.7 billion in private and institutional investments, and they have advanced work on 46 projects.

It’s never fast enough. Many of those are multi-year projects that require a considerable ramp-up. Regardless, I certainly share the concerns of Canadians that this is an interesting investment vehicle, but one that needs to be deployed more rapidly and more visibly.

I’ll continue to work with the bank. We’re going to name new directors, I hope, in the coming weeks as well, and that will certainly be my message to them.

[Translation]

Hon. Elizabeth Marshall: Minister, welcome to the Senate of Canada.

In the lead-up to the creation of the Canada Infrastructure Bank in 2017, we were told by your government that the bank would attract $4 to $5 of private investment for every dollar of government funding. As you know, this has not been the case — far from it, in fact. When the CEO of the Infrastructure Bank appeared before our Senate’s National Finance Committee in February, he told us that he believed that it would take decades to move to the 4-to-1 ratio.

When you appeared in a House committee in February of last year, you acknowledged you weren’t satisfied with the bank’s ability to raise funds from private investors. Therefore, minister, since you weren’t satisfied with the bank’s ability to raise funds from the private sector, have you asked the Infrastructure Bank when they expect to reach the 4-to-1 ratio? If so, what did they tell you? If you didn’t ask them, why didn’t you?

Hon. Raymonde Saint-Germain: Welcome, minister.

I am interested in federal-provincial affairs, intergovernmental affairs, that are part of your portfolio. In the emergency context of the pandemic, governments at all levels were forced to come together for the common good of the people and to come to an agreement while respecting jurisdictions.

I’d like to hear your vision for the future. Can we build on the achievements in federal-provincial relations that this pandemic has brought about? How do you envision the next steps in negotiating the most pressing files in a way that respects jurisdictions and is effective?

Hon. Dominic LeBlanc, P.C., M.P., Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Infrastructure and Communities: Thank you, Senator Cormier, for your question. I also want to commend the work you do for francophone minorities in the country, especially our dear fellow Acadians, as part of your service here in the upper chamber. I fully share your concern over the representation of minority groups here in the Senate.

I believe we are on the eve of making appointments and I hope you will be very pleased with the decisions the Prime Minister is making. I don’t want to elaborate, of course. I learned in politics that it is best not to speak for your boss and to allow his appointments to speak for themselves. Based on my discussions with him, he is aware of the constitutional principles you mentioned.

As far as the geography of our province is concerned, we could also discuss that at length. I think that linguistic balance is important. We might find different ways of adjusting the geography, the geographic specificity. Ultimately, we will see what happens in the Prime Minister’s appointments. I understand the urgency to take action. I’m not saying that we should fall behind, but the linguistic issue is important and we might disagree slightly on the geography, but we will see what happens when the appointments are announced.

[English]

Hon. René Cormier: Good afternoon, minister. Welcome to the Senate.

Minister, given that the Constitution guarantees the equitable representation of regions in the Senate and that you stated in this chamber that it is important that minority language communities be properly represented as senators are appointed;

Furthermore, given that there is a constitutional convention that francophone and Acadian communities have the right to representation in the Senate;

Given the constitutional specificity of New Brunswick on language rights and considering also the economic and social inequalities between the northern and southern parts of our province;

Finally, given that the seat of Acadian senator Paul McIntyre, who retired in 2019, has not been filled, depriving the regions of Restigouche and Chaleur in northern New Brunswick of representation in the upper chamber;

When will the Prime Minister recommend to the Governor General of Canada the appointment of a francophone senator from northern New Brunswick who will represent the interests of this region?

Hon. Dominic LeBlanc, P.C., M.P., Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Infrastructure and Communities: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you for the question.

You’re absolutely right. The COVID health crisis resulted in all levels of government working together in a way that had never happened before. It was in the best interests of Canadians.

I believe that it was a successful example of Canadian federalism. At one point, I was attending the weekly teleconferences with the premiers and Prime Minister Trudeau.

You’re also absolutely right that the federal government became the financier for all sorts of programs that, in the past, would probably have been well and truly under provincial jurisdiction. I see this in my work as an MP. Canadians increasingly see — and not entirely correctly — the federal government as a court of appeal for provincial decisions that are within their constitutional jurisdiction. I worry about returning to the proper way of doing things and obviously finding a way to work collaboratively with my provincial and territorial counterparts.

I recognize, however, that it is harder to go back. Canadians expect us to work together, including on child care, on infrastructure projects and on climate change. There’s a greater appetite to work together.