Leave having been given to revert to Senators’ Statements:

Senator Dupuis: Thank you. Senator Martin, I listened closely to your intervention and I thank you.

Regarding your second point, you say that there is no mention of economic reconciliation. When I look at the definition in clause 12, since you referenced it, it reads as follows:

(c) Indigenous organizations, as defined in section 2 of the Department of Indigenous Services Act, to reflect the diversity of arrangements that govern relationships between Indigenous communities and the Government of Canada;

In section 2 of that act, an Indigenous organization is defined as an “Indigenous governing body or any other entity that represents the interests of an Indigenous group and its members.”

Do you think the current wording of clause 12, which refers to section 2 of the Department of Indigenous Services Act, is not broad enough to include organizations that deal with economic reconciliation?

Thank you.

[English]

Senator Plett: Well, of course, then they could come back with a written answer saying, “We can’t answer your question.” Two and a half years, and I have no response, Senator Gold. Yesterday again you indicated we didn’t have respect for this institution. How is it showing respect to this institution when, for two and a half years, I have a written question, and you stand here and explain what the government is doing? Why is it so difficult to get an answer?

I also have a written question on the Order Paper regarding the former chief justice of the Supreme Court of Canada Beverley McLachlin’s role as an overseas non-permanent member of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal. My question asks if the Trudeau government believes former Chief Justice McLachlin’s membership on this court lends legitimacy to Beijing’s interference in Hong Kong’s legal system. Over a year ago, two British judges stepped down from this court. The U.K. government welcomed this decision, saying it was no longer appropriate for British judges to sit on this court, as their presence risked legitimizing oppression. My question, Senator Gold, has been on the Order Paper since last June.

Leader, you recently indicated that your problem with providing answers back to this chamber was not related to lack of resources. So what is the cause? Why won’t your government — why won’t you — answer simple questions rather than just defending their actions in here? Why can’t we not get questions answered, written questions, in over two and a half years?

Leave having been given to revert to Senators’ Statements:

Senator Gold: Again, senator, I do appreciate your question, and, more importantly, I empathize with those who are waiting.

I have no way of explaining why the data points have changed over this time. I repeat my undertaking to try to find an answer as quickly as I can.

Senator Gold: I certainly agree with the defence and protection of the Arctic and its people. It’s an ecosystem, and our sovereignty over the Arctic is of fundamental importance. My understanding is — and I’ve announced it many times, so I’ll be general here — that the Government of Canada has made serious investments on all of these fronts, whether it’s strengthening NORAD or investing in equipment so that we can actually assert and protect our sovereignty even more.

Again, these are matters I’m happy to discuss with you further, but the government is seriously committed to this. Its investments and engagements both in terms of budgets and in terms of our relationship with the United States and allies is a testament to that engagement.

[Translation]

Senator Gold: I have answered every question that you’ve asked me. You may not like my answers, and sometimes I don’t have the answers — and I say so in a spirit of honesty and integrity.

I will repeat this again: I am not aware of, and I have not been made aware of, any other threats, as was also stated yesterday.

Senator Plett, with regard to your assertion that the two statements cannot live together, you will forgive me for being slightly pedagogical in this chamber, but the reference to the CSIS statement was “Any time we receive threats against MPs, we brief the Prime Minister.” And unless I misunderstand your assertion — I don’t have the transcript to which you were referring — there was not a mention of this particular challenge.

The Prime Minister’s answer was with regard to the actions ostensibly taken — or threatened — against the family of Mr. Chong in Hong Kong; that answer was given clearly, and I repeat it here.

[Translation]

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): The Korean War saw more than 26,000 Canadian volunteers cross the Pacific Ocean to the Korean peninsula to protect the people of South Korea. For those brave men who would perish in combat, roughly 5% would come from one of the bloodiest battles for Canadians during the war, the Battle of Hill 187.

Hill 187 would witness the 3rd Battalion of the Royal Canadian Regiment’s heroic actions to hold their position while faced with a numerically superior force of Chinese assault troops determined to retake the hill. The battle would be one of the last engagements of the war.

Today, the battle is mostly forgotten — a tragedy considering the cost it took to hold Hill 187.

Within a few weeks of landing in South Korea, the 3rd Battalion, under Lieutenant-Colonel K.L. Campbell, would be tested by the enemy. On the evening of May 2, 1953, Lieutenant Gerard Meynell was out on patrol with his unit when they were suddenly under attack. He would be killed, along with half of his men being killed or wounded. The survivors retreated to their position just as the Chinese Advance Guard came upon the Canadians’ position.

Throughout the night and into the next day, the Chinese would throw wave after wave of men at the 3rd Battalion, all while under a constant barrage of artillery fire. As ammunition supplies ran low, Canadians were forced to fight in hand-to-hand combat in a desperate bid to hold their position. At one critical point in the chaotic melee, Lieutenant Ed Hollyer would call down artillery on his own position as over 800 Chinese assault troops threatened to overrun his position.

The late Don Sudden, a cherished friend and a hero of the Korean War, had volunteered to serve overseas and would find himself at the Battle of Hill 187 serving as a front-line gunner.

The regiment would do its duty and hold the hill, but it came at a cost of 26 Canadians dead, 27 wounded and 7 taken prisoner. For the soldiers at Hill 187, two Military Crosses, three military medals and five Mention in Dispatches were awarded.

When the battle was over, little press about it made it home to Canada, and only eight weeks later, on July 27, 1953, the armistice ending the hostilities would be signed.

Honourable senators, as veterans like Don Sudden are leaving us, it is more important than ever that we recognize and remember the sacrifices they made to ensure that we never forget the Canadian sacrifice and contributions to the preservation of peace and stability in South Korea. We will remember them.

Senator Dalphond: Senator Gold, in 2017, Parliament passed Bill C-37, allowing Customs officers to open mail due to the problem of fentanyl imports from outside of Canada.

Don’t you think the time has come for Canada Post inspectors to have the same power in connection with domestic letters?

Hon. Sharon Burey: Dear colleagues, today I rise to draw your attention to Children’s Mental Health Week, May 1 to 7, 2023.

Mental health exists on a continuum. Talking about mental health or illness can be stressful because it is so close to home for so many of us. Approximately 1.2 million children and youth in Canada experience a mental health disorder, but fewer than 20% receive appropriate treatment. Early intervention and supports for children, youth and their parents result in significant net cost savings.

The pandemic laid bare the systemic cracks in our public health, social welfare and education systems. Pandemic-spurred investments in mental health services are encouraging, but we will need data and accountability measures.

I devoted my career to some of these very issues. The Mental Health Commission of Canada, which originated from this very body and the work of Senator Kirby — who produced the landmark report Out of the Shadows at Last: Transforming Mental Health, Mental Illness and Addiction Services in Canada — continues to provide recommendations and a path forward.

Children with neurodevelopmental, reading and learning challenges are especially vulnerable to mental health problems. That is why as a pediatric community leader, I joined with many other advocates, led by the Ontario Human Rights Commission’s inquiry entitled Right to Read, to advocate for evidence-based, structured literacy interventions in all Ontario schools. This will reduce the development of mental health problems. This is now part of Ontario’s language curriculum. Sadly, this is not the case in every province. We have work to do.

We must reckon with how social policies and racism affect lifelong physical, mental, economic and justice outcomes, and how developing resilience and promoting resilient, safe and nurturing environments will make Canada a place where we can all succeed.

My message to children and young people: We need you. Canada needs you, your ideas, your creativity and your innovation. You are 100% of our future. Thank you.

Senator Seidman: There’s a lot of evidence to show that vaping is a gateway to smoking tobacco, burning tobacco and cigarettes. It is a cause for concern. We have some of the highest rates of vaping among youth in this country.

My supplementary is as follows: On Tuesday, Australia introduced reforms that toughen their already strict vaping law. The country has banned all disposable vapes. Prescriptions will be necessary for the vaping products that remain legal.

My home province — and your home province — of Quebec is also acting. In April, it followed Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick and the Northwest Territories in banning flavoured vaping products.

Senator Gold, youth vaping rates doubled between 2017 and 2019. The government has the data, and now it needs to act. When — specifically — will the government finally act to ban flavoured vaping products?

Senator Coyle: There is the National Association of Friendship Centres that services many urban Indigenous people in Canada.

My question is this: Are you saying that if we want this new council to represent those 800,000 voices, the way to do that is to get this group on the national council? Is that the answer?

Senator Ataullahjan: Senator Gold, you talk about the process being faster, and it has been digitized; yet, between last Thursday and this Wednesday, the wait time has gone up to 802 days.

Senator Gold, I want to read to you one of the messages I received:

Why are we suffering the most? We are contributing to the workforce, paying taxes and yet no one is helping us. The Canadian United Arab Emirates visa office is the most painful visa office.

What do I say to this gentleman and others who feel abandoned by this Liberal government?

Senator Coyle: Okay. That’s where my question is. I do not question that the organization is a recognized Indigenous organization. The issue around representation of 800,000 people — and I think you are talking mostly about urban Indigenous people. We heard at the Indigenous Peoples Committee how the other national Indigenous organizations are working hard, in their ways, to represent the interests of their people who do not necessarily live in their territories — who live in other parts of the country — and that there may be some issues, and we know there are, with that.

Senator Coyle: Okay. That’s where my question is. I do not question that the organization is a recognized Indigenous organization. The issue around representation of 800,000 people — and I think you are talking mostly about urban Indigenous people. We heard at the Indigenous Peoples Committee how the other national Indigenous organizations are working hard, in their ways, to represent the interests of their people who do not necessarily live in their territories — who live in other parts of the country — and that there may be some issues, and we know there are, with that.

Senator Richards: I just stated how I feel. I feel it should go to committee and be examined. I feel that a warning label on alcohol is not a bad thing. If anything, it’s a good thing. It’s absolute common sense that it could be done, a committee could study it and my speech explicitly gives the reasons why I think that. That’s about all I can say, senator.

(On motion of Senator Martin, debate adjourned.)

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator McCallum, seconded by the Honourable Senator Boisvenu, for the second reading of Bill C-226, An Act respecting the development of a national strategy to assess, prevent and address environmental racism and to advance environmental justice.

Senator Brazeau: Senator Richards, thank you very much for your speech and for your personal story. I know you mentioned you didn’t want to go into it in detail, but I think there’s enough detail there to give us all a very clear picture of what you and your family went through.

This place is a place of partisanship; whether we like it or not, it is about partisanship. However, Bill S-254 is a non-partisan bill. It’s a bill about the health of Canadians and it’s a bill about the right of Canadian consumers to know what effects and consequences could come with the consumption of alcohol.

We are here in this chamber. It would be my dream for this bill to at least see the light of day in a committee room so that we can have the experts come and testify and answer questions that we all collectively have. We went through this fight with the tobacco companies several years ago, so I’m asking you: What would you have in terms of a suggestion for us to really push for this bill to get into a committee room as soon as possible?

Senator Richards: Yes.

Senator Gold: Thank you for your question. I continue to endeavour to get answers to all questions, and the answers will be forthcoming when this chamber and I are provided with them.

Leave having been given to revert to Senators’ Statements: