Senator Housakos: Please, her position is clear on it, and so is the position of many others. I guess everybody else who thinks there’s potential for censorship — haven’t they read this bill either? The truth of the matter, colleagues, is that a compelling case has been made that this bill has left out many important voices in this country. We are the last vestige of hope for these people to be defended.

Again, we had unanimous consent that this bill needed to be fixed by all groups. A concerted effort was made to fix it. The most important elements and amendments in this bill were ignored by the government. I’m pleading and asking this chamber to send it back one more time, to do our due diligence and to tell the government and insist that these are worth reconsideration.

Senator Quinn: Senator Plett, I hope that when you have the chance, you can reflect on what I said. What I said was that the blue wave was coming. I didn’t reflect on what you just said; I reflected upon the fact that there is a democratic process that lies ahead; it’s called an election. That election will take place in due course. I believe that’s what I said.

Senator Miville-Dechêne: I will nevertheless ask my question. Why are you so pessimistic about the future of Bill S-210? Do you have any information suggesting that this bill will not pass and that the amendment to Bill C-11 is the only way forward?

[English]

Senator Plett: Again, your question is not on Bill C-11, it’s on Bill S-210. My speech was on Bill C-11. I have no information that it will not pass. Again, as Senator Dalphond said yesterday, when it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s probably a duck. Our government has shown that they do not particularly care about the exploitation of children; they have shown it on Bill C-11. I have no optimism that they will show it on Bill S-210. I certainly support the bill.

[Translation]

Hon. Jane Cordy: Honourable senators, I would first like to acknowledge that we meet here today on the unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabe Nation.

I’m delighted to share that I am rising today to offer my congratulations to one of our colleagues who was honoured this morning.

The Moose Hide Campaign, a grassroots Indigenous-led movement that is dedicated to ending gender-based and domestic violence, has a campaign that features a moose-hide pin. I know many of you have seen these and, looking around now, I see that many of you are wearing one today. These pins aim to spark conversations and bring more awareness to these important issues that impact too many people. Working together, particularly by engaging men and boys, is a crucial component in the work to end domestic and gender-based violence.

To date, 4 million moose-hide pins have been distributed, and a ceremony was held earlier in the Senators Lounge to present the four-millionth pin. Our very own Senator Michèle Audette was the deserving recipient of that milestone pin. Her dedication to reconciliation is a model for us all.

Having these conversations is indeed important, but doing the work is the only way we will see change. Members of the PSG — the Progressive Senate Group — are inspired by the Algonquin word “mamidosewin,” which means “meeting place” and “walking together.” I am so honoured to be walking together with Senator Audette.

Honourable senators, please join me in congratulating Senator Audette for this recognition. Félicitations, mon amie. For all your hard work, tshinashkumitin.

Senator Carignan: I have no problem asking for five more minutes if Senator Miville-Dechêne would like to ask me a question, because she seemed to have one.

Senator Gerba: Senator Gold, why are these men and women who feed us and take care of us not allowed to settle in Canada?

Senator Carignan: Thank you for your question. It is interesting, because it shows how important it is for senators to be part of a caucus, like those in the House of Commons. What you may not know is that the other place consults senators. That way, we are able to help improve bills, give our opinion even before the bill reaches the Senate, and propose amendments.

That is what I did with regard to the electoral reform. I worked with my current leader, Pierre Poilievre, who, at the time, was the minister responsible for democratic reform and the Fair Elections Act. Even before the bill reached the Senate, I proposed several amendments that were added to the initial bill. That is the advantage of having access to the prime minister and cabinet, to the government. Obviously, that’s something you don’t have, because I am still waiting for an answer to my question about Prime Minister Trudeau’s much-talked-about credit card.

Senator Quinn: Thank you, Senator Housakos.

I think the committee has done an excellent job. I commend all the members of the committee and the ex officio members who participated, as well as the various witnesses we had. We have been a part of that democratic process as members of the committee.

But I’ve also come to this conclusion: There has been a lot of discussion here about the Constitution, the roles of senators and our rights. I think we have done our due diligence in having heavy debate during committee and in this chamber. I’m at the point where I’m saying that I am not elected. If this is something so dear to my heart, I think some of my colleagues said, “Go and run.” Run in the election. But I think my more valuable contribution in this institution is — I think you and I spoke on this — trying to do the sober second thought and trying to add value but also recognizing that the elected government has the right to govern, and it’s our job to challenge. We’ve challenged, and the mitigating factor for me is that we — all of us — agreed to a message that included public assurance that the government will not do what it said it wouldn’t do.

After 32 years in the public service, I have great confidence in that institution and I believe that the House and this institution will follow through and hold people to account, as the electorate should.

Senator Plett: Your Honour, Senator Miville-Dechêne said she wants to set things straight. That she can do during debate. If she has a question, I will answer it. If she wants to set the record straight, she can stand up during debate and do so.

[Translation]

Senator Miville-Dechêne: Senator Plett, you have quoted me extensively, and I thank you for supporting my initiative to protect children from pornographic content.

However, since this is a public debate, I would like to set the record straight. As you know, beyond this amendment, Bill S-210 is being introduced today in the House of Commons by Conservative member Karen Vecchio, who you know well. Both of us are hopeful that this bill —

[English]

Senator Housakos: Thank you, government leader, I will appreciate that. They’ve already filed this brief with Global Affairs Canada a number of weeks ago, and I think these Canadians of Turkish descent deserve an answer on these issues. We have an obligation.

Despite all the nice words from the current government in regards to human rights, we have a long list of inaction that illustrates a broader problem when it comes to our sanctions regimes. They’re used inconsistently and in a manner that is overtly politicized, in my opinion.

The Erdoğan regime has committed widespread and serious human rights violations for many years. Since 2016, it has detained over 300,000 people. Detainees were tortured and raped, and hundreds have died. The latest data from the UN Refugee Agency indicates that 1.3 million people have been forcibly displaced from Turkey, and over 4,000 of these refugees are living right here, thank God, in Canada. Yet the Government of Canada has failed to place a single Turkish official on the sanctions list. When will your government do the right thing, and when will we start using our sanctions tool box to protect the human rights of Canadians of Turkish descent?

Senator Gold: I am going to really try to show you the respect that I think we all deserve in this place, Senator Batters. I did not declare a membership in the Liberal Party because I was not a member of the Liberal Party. I am not a member of the Liberal Party.

I’m going to be very careful here. Your insistence on reading the Rules of the Senate independent of any principle of interpretation and independent of any sensibility that it is not simply the black-letter rules but what lies behind them, including the Parliament of Canada Act and our conventions and practices here, is surprising for someone with a legal background. You know better. The Rules of the Senate have to be, have been and will continue to be interpreted in light of the basic principles that define how we interpret normative texts, not only laws and not only rules of Parliament, but even literary texts. This is Law School 101.

Now, we’re in a political institution and we’re in a partisan environment, as you have celebrated, but it doesn’t change the facts. You asked me a question, and I’ve answered it. If you ask me again tomorrow, you’re going to get the same answer.

Senator Carignan: How can you not have that information? Why is it so hard to get such simple information? The credit card statements from December and January arrived weeks ago. How can you not have this information? This is a serious matter.

Senator Gold: Well, many of the premises, assumptions and assertions in your question are simply false, and I am not going to take the time to catalogue them.

The process of appointing senators — and the senators that were appointed according to that process — is a fair, open and transparent one. It has provided a diversity of views, backgrounds, expertise and perspectives unparalleled in the history of this Senate. If it is true that we are still embarked upon a slow and sometimes painful progress towards a more effective, efficient and less partisan Senate, it is not because of the imputations you made yesterday and again today of interference in this Senate by the government or the Prime Minister’s Office, whether it’s with regard to Speaker’s rulings and interpretation of the Rules.

Let us be clear. You are entitled, and I respect the position of the opposition. You know I do, and I said so publicly long before I took this position. I also respect facts, and I respect the fact — and these are facts on the ground — that we are serving Canadians well in this Senate, and it is thanks in no small measure to the devotion of the people sitting here, regardless of who appointed them.

[Translation]

Hon. Salma Ataullahjan: Honourable senators, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the report of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association concerning the Sixty-fifth Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference, held in Halifax, Nova Scotia, from August 20 to 26, 2022.

The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, when shall this bill be read the second time?

(On motion of Senator Gold, bill placed on the Orders of the Day for second reading two days hence.)

[English]

The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, I wish to draw your attention to the presence in the gallery of Lise Crouch. She is the guest of the Honourable Senator Busson.

On behalf of all honourable senators, I welcome you to the Senate of Canada.

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): Senator Gold, when you are questioned about the Prime Minister’s many ties to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation, you simply reply that there are no links between them and that I should stop asking you about it.

La Presse reports that the wall the Prime Minister said divides him from the Trudeau Foundation is found in his own office building down the street. On April 16, a meeting took place there between five deputy ministers and the foundation.

The wall between the Prime Minister and the Trudeau Foundation reminds me of the wall that exists between the Trudeau government and the new independent Senate. Both walls are so thin, they exist only in the Prime Minister’s mind and — quite frankly, Senator Gold — in yours.

Canadians see the truth for what it is. Time allocation votes always allow the public to see who represents the government and who doesn’t. Last night’s vote exposed that truth, didn’t it leader?