Hon. Senators: Agreed.

(Motion agreed to.)

Senator Dalphond: Thank you, senator.

[English]

I have two questions, but I will wait for the second round for the next one.

The first question is about the — if I read the bill properly — carve-out, to use an expression, which I think is rather proper. The carve-out is good for 8 years, but it can be extended by the government afterwards if it believes that it should be extended for another 8 years or 10 years or 20 years.

Don’t you think it would be better if the bill also provided that the government could reduce the eight years, which has been provided here, if next year or two years from now there are technology advancements that make it interesting to use another technology and, instead, use something else based on solar power or wind power, other than natural gas or propane, to dry the grain, for example?

Senator Wells: Thank you, Senator Dalphond. That is an excellent question, and, of course, any government can do anything it wants, as long as it has the will of the chambers.

This is established at eight years in this bill. Of course, the government can extend it, but a government can also repeal it or make an amendment to make it six years or make it any number of years.

I didn’t hear what you said, but any amendment can be made to any existing legislation.

Senator Quinn: Thank you so much for a very informative speech. It underscored the importance of the issue being dealt with. In regard to the people that I have been meeting with from the various associations that I have talked to, the one thing that has stood out to me — in relation to other discussions that have happened here around the agricultural industry — is food security. You alluded to food security in your speech, and it resonated with me. I’m somewhat concerned that the farming industry — as price-takers — is continuing to face challenges such that the next generation has less interest in taking over, or becoming involved in that business, which backs into the question of food security.

I would suggest that we could wait to see what other approaches could be taken, but given where we are in our particular point in history within the agricultural business — with food security and the prices that my honourable colleague just talked about — does it not make sense that this oversight be corrected through the expansion of the exemptions? I agree that this is the right language.

At some point, I will have a great discussion with Senator Woo about carve-outs — maybe over a roast beef or something.

In any case, I want to get your opinion on this question: Should we not be concerned more about food security, as well as the ability of the current generation and the next generation to enter into the business?

Senator Wells: Thank you, Senator Quinn. That is an excellent question. It is a trend that we’re seeing. There are fewer family farms because it’s hard to make a go of it on that small scale — on the family farm scale, or even the small industrial scale. We do see, especially across the Prairies — and we see it within the fishing industry in Atlantic Canada as well — the larger companies that have economies of scale buying up smaller farms, or smaller operations, because they can have a better margin. However, it is still difficult. I cannot think of anything in the food supply chain that is decreasing in price; nothing comes to mind.

It is a really important point. If there are fewer and fewer farm operations, it becomes closer and closer to monopolistic tendencies where the consumer will have no say in the price. They will simply be in a position to take it or leave it, whether it’s the consumer or the value-added consumer companies that put value into grain or cattle.

I agree with you; it is untenable, and any time you increase the price of something that is already on dangerous ground, it doesn’t make it any better.

[Translation]

Senator Batters: I guess I was just reinforcing the point you made that farmers are price-takers, not price-makers. If they have increased costs because of the carbon tax increasing, as well as GST on the carbon tax and all of that, they have to pass that cost along in order to remain a viable operation. The cost, of course, is passed on to the consumer at the grocery store because groceries do not fall out of the sky. Groceries come from farmers, generally, at one point or another.

As a result, given that grocery store prices are continuing to increase — perhaps inflation is flattening a little bit, but it is still a very high rate — could you tell us a bit more regarding how the food that farmers produce, whether that be grain, cattle or chickens, results in higher costs at grocery stores?

Senator Wells: Thank you again, Senator Batters.

In regard to farmers, ranchers and growers being price-takers, their markets are commodity markets. For the price of hogs, wheat and all of these things, they have no say like in the grocery store. The grocery store owner might charge a specific price for a can — whatever it is — because they have the choice to do that. The farmer has no choice. Any price differential wouldn’t happen in that year; that would happen in the next year. But when you look at it, there are so many things globally that account for a price, such as droughts in different areas of the world and flooding in other areas; there are so many things. The farmer gets what the farmer gets. They do not have a great deal of choice.

It is absolutely passed on to the consumer. The consumer is the one who pays for the end product regardless — which gives even more credence to the necessity for farmers to have as much margin as they can in order to invest in things that they know they will need to invest in. It is only becoming more costly; it is not becoming less costly, especially with the price of fuel and the price of equipment — this goes directly to that — for which there are no other alternatives, both in fuel and equipment.

Senator Carignan: Leader, last week, Toronto media showed images of several hundred people lined up outside of a food bank.

Given the answer you just gave me, what do you have to say to the hundreds of people who were waiting in line at the food bank so they could feed themselves?

Senator Miville-Dechêne: The public is still scared, however, and some people are happy to take those fears and exploit them. I don’t think we can try to make them go away.

That was the point of my question. Is the federal government considering strong action to positively counter or correct the fearmongering about immigration? Unfortunately, the immigrants themselves are the ones who suffer from prejudice.

Senator Plett: Well, I find it strange. He is your parliamentary secretary, and you don’t know about claims that he has made.

Senator Plett: Now we see Michael Chong being discredited by the Trudeau government, including by your parliamentary secretary.

Will the Trudeau government stop hiding the truth about foreign interference, stop blaming Michael Chong and apologize to him, or are we going to hear the Prime Minister’s infamous excuse — that people experience things differently — for his own bad behaviour?

Senator Gold: Thank you for the question. As the Prime Minister recently said, and I quote: “Building a world free of racism requires deliberate, continuous efforts to change perceptions.”

In that respect, the government has committed to building a more inclusive country where everyone has an equal opportunity to succeed. With the support of the Federal Anti-Racism Secretariat, the government is continuing to take steps to combat racial discrimination and its impacts on individuals and communities across the country, including in the health care system.

The government has put in place initiatives such as Promoting Health Equity: Mental Health of Black Canadians Fund, which supports community projects designed to promote mental health in Black communities; the Addressing Racism and Discrimination in Canada’s Health Systems Program, which funds projects that fight systemic racism in our health care systems; and the Indigenous Health Equity Fund, which demonstrates Canada’s commitment to implementing Joyce’s Principle to bring in legislation on Indigenous health, address systemic inequities faced by Indigenous people and give them access to high-quality and culturally appropriate health care free from racism and discrimination.

[English]

Senator Gold: Although they become fewer with each passing month, there remain far too many challenges facing Canadians, especially with the cost of groceries and inflation in several sectors.

It is concerning, and that is why the government is moving forward with Bill C-46, which will be debated at third reading tomorrow, despite a translation error. This bill will help 11 million of the most vulnerable and marginalized Canadians, who need the government to give them a hand as part of a responsible budgetary framework.

Senator Gold: Thank you for your question. It is one thing to stand up, as oppositions do, to demand information that is classified, would be against the law and is against the law to publicly disclose. That is the partisan prerogative of this opposition.

The fact remains that the Government of Canada, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Foreign Affairs learned of this a week ago. Proper, prudent steps were taken to determine and evaluate the allegations that were made — again, I repeat — by leaked, not necessarily nuanced documents of a classified nature. The government, as Minister Joly also said, had a responsibility to the Canadians in China and to those here, as well as to the economic interests of those farmers and other producers whose livelihoods depend upon their continued access to markets in China, to at least assess the consequences that the government took, and properly so, in declaring this diplomat persona non grata.

The process took a week. It was done properly, in conformity with the Vienna Convention, in consultation with our allies, on whom we depend, to make sure that what happened to the two Michaels and reprisals against our farmers and producers would not be repeated.

Senator Plett: Well, yes, in fact, he is. It is similar to when the Prime Minister says that he isn’t aware of information — the Prime Minister’s Chief of Staff Katie Telford says that she ensures he receives everything that he needs and that he sees everything.

We have seen this before — as I just mentioned — from the Prime Minister and his government. Nothing is ever their fault — blame the victim, spread misinformation and never apologize unreservedly.

A few days after the SNC-Lavalin scandal was revealed in The Globe and Mail, the Trudeau government engaged in a smear campaign against Jody Wilson-Raybould. The Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs rightly called it blatant sexism.

Minister O’Regan personally attacked veteran Sean Bruyea in a newspaper column. Vice-Admiral Mark Norman never received an apology for what the Trudeau government put him through.

Hon. Iris G. Petten, of St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador, introduced between Hon. Marc Gold, P.C., and Hon. Fabian Manning.

Senator Gold: I will continue to make every effort to answer seriously the questions that raise serious issues, though it does somehow sometimes strain my creativity to do so in the face of some of the implications.

I’m about to answer it, colleagues, but you’ll at least allow me the small indulgence to comment on the rhetoric that surrounds these otherwise important issues that you raise for your purposes.

The Prime Minister was very clear that although his government was not made aware until The Globe and Mail published the leaked documents, he instructed CSIS:

Going forward, we are making it very, very clear to CSIS and all our intelligence officials that when there are concerns that talk specifically about any MP, particularly about their family, those need to be elevated.

He also said:

Even if CSIS doesn’t feel that it’s a sufficient level of concern for them to take more direct action, we still need to know about it at the upper government level.

That is what this government has instructed CSIS. That is the way in which it expects the intelligence services to go forward.

Senator Jaffer: Thank you. Let us also take this opportunity to remember that diversity makes this country stronger. It is the key to our shared prosperity. There is no room in Canada for intolerance or hate. Never again should we pass an act such as the Chinese Exclusion Act. Never again should we treat Chinese Canadians any differently from any other Canadian. They belong to Canada. Thank you.

Senator Gold: Well, that’s quite the tour d’horizon, Senator Plett.

The government has put into place serious measures to address the issue of foreign interference. We are waiting, and it will only be a few short weeks until the report of the Right Honourable David Johnston — at which point Canadians will understand the next steps that the government may be advised to conduct in its continued effort to protect Canadians from foreign interference.

Senator Black: For my clarity, and for the clarity of our colleagues, is agriculture a priority for your government? Yes or no.

Senator Batters: Senator Gold, Prime Minister Trudeau’s Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino plays fast and loose where facts are concerned. He recently claimed that the RCMP had ousted Beijing government police stations operating in Canada, but an article days later proved that wasn’t the case.

During last year’s convoy, Mendicino repeatedly insisted that police asked for the federal government to invoke the Emergencies Act, a claim that was flatly denied by police.

Now, after enduring opposition criticism on this issue, Minister Mendicino finally said last week that he has only known about the threats against MP Michael Chong since last Monday, even though the CSIS assessment was dated July 2021.

Whether the minister willfully failed to be informed, or whether his advisers failed to inform him, either way, it’s a firing offence. The question is who will be fired. If the Minister of Public Safety is so unaware of what’s going on in his portfolio, when will he finally be fired? If CSIS knew two years ago and failed to inform him until last week, who will lose their job there?

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Honourable senators, on behalf of the Government Representative Office, I rise today to welcome Senator Iris Petten to the Senate of Canada.

Senator Petten holds a Bachelor of Arts and a Bachelor of Vocational Education from Memorial University of Newfoundland. Later, her alma mater would honour her with an honorary degree, a Doctor of Laws.

An important part of Senator Petten’s previous career was defined by her time in the business world and her success as an entrepreneur. In 1984, Senator Petten began her career in the fishing industry with Fishery Products International. She would then be a founding shareholder and serve as Vice-President of Grand Atlantic Seafoods. In 2000, she would co-found Ocean Choice International, where she remained until 2008.

It was as early as her childhood that Senator Petten began her apprenticeship in the world of fishing. Her father was a fisherman and a boatbuilder, as were generations before him.

Senator Petten, your deep roots will prove invaluable in advancing matters of importance to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, but I suspect much of your knowledge and skills of the fishing industry are transferable, and they will surely serve as a boon and an asset to the Pacific and Arctic coastal regions and the maritime challenges that we know they face.

[Translation]

In addition to a long and brilliant career in the Atlantic fishing industry, Senator Petten has been an active member of her community, namely by serving three terms as the chair of the Board of Regents of Memorial University of Newfoundland from 2013 to 2022.

[English]

Senator Petten, once again, welcome to the Senate of Canada. We are honoured to count you among our colleagues. I speak for all of us, but I’m especially sure that Senators Manning, Marshall, Wells and Ravalia will ensure that you’re made to feel very much at home here in Ottawa, as will we all.

Welcome, and thank you very much.