Senator Plett: Well, the fact of the matter is — I think if we check Hansard, we’ll see — that Senator Carignan rose on a point of order. You may not have understood that, Your Honour, but Senator Carignan clearly stood on a point of order and raised a point of order.

Senator Plett: Again, Your Honour, I will be raising another point of order in a minute, but right now we are dealing with a point of order that Senator Carignan raised. That is what he did.

Senator Plett: — in his ruling. So today —

Senator Plett: You know, leader, you’re upset when we, somewhat in frustration, ask you questions, and you don’t even attempt to touch the question. There’s no argument about the validity of our passports. I didn’t talk about that; I didn’t mention that. I asked about images, leader, and you didn’t even touch that. And then we’re being schooled on not being personal.

Senator Housakos: Why fix it if it’s not broken?

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): Honourable senators, I also rise to pay tribute to our colleague and friend the Honourable George Furey as we begin saying goodbye to Canada’s forty-fifth Speaker of the Senate.

Your Honour, as I reflected on your tenure in the Senate, I remembered many of your interventions when we both served on the Standing Senate Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration. That’s when our friendship began. We were faced with difficult times then — times that brought on increased transparency. Yet, things back then were simple. You were a good Liberal — if there is such a thing — and I a proud Conservative. But at the end of the day, we both knew that partisanship had a respectful role in this institution. Those were the good old days.

A lot has changed since then, as Prime Minister Trudeau sent the Senate into uncharted waters — waters that you as Speaker have had to navigate. You stepped up to the helm as a storm was brewing on the horizon. There were turbulent times, which called for you to make difficult rulings. Some we agreed with, and others we did not. But my respect and admiration for your efforts to be a fair and impartial Speaker prevailed. They never wavered.

Your Honour, thank you for the role you have played in ensuring this chamber runs smoothly. You have demonstrated incredible patience. I will always cherish your professionalism and allegiance to this institution.

Over the years, you took on the role of a devoted ambassador for Canada in your travels abroad. When meeting with various leaders of other countries, you always allowed and welcomed everyone present to take part in the discussions and meetings. You recognized the role of the opposition and you let everyone express their views.

Your Honour, I wish to close with this genuine thought: It has been a pleasure to know you over the years. I recognize that this sentence is sometimes used lightly, but the meaning is sincere. Both Betty and I hold great memories of our times spent with you and Karen. We have truly enjoyed your friendship.

As of later today, Your Honour, I will once again be calling you George. Happy retirement! I wish you and Karen the very best, and may you catch up on spending time with your loved ones, especially your grandchildren. I will take you up on that game of golf that you have promised me.

Thank you, Your Honour.

[Translation]

The Hon. the Speaker: I cannot begin without thanking Senator Gold, Senator Plett, Senator Saint-Germain, Senator Tannas and Senator Cordy for the very warm, kind and, I must say, humbling remarks. I want to thank you very much for that. It’s very touching and very heartfelt. Thank you.

Honourable senators, for 23 and a half years it has been an honour and a privilege to serve in the Senate of Canada.

As many before me and, no doubt, many after, I will always cherish fond memories of the Senate and of its members, past and present, with whom I have had the distinct privilege to serve.

[Translation]

I feel very humbled to have had the honour and unique opportunity to contribute to the work of the Senate as Speaker for the past seven and a half years.

I want to sincerely thank you, honourable senators, for your generous support, encouragement and advice throughout my tenure as Speaker.

[English]

Honourable senators, let us always remember that our calling to this chamber is an honourable one. Let us always remember in our debates that disagreements must be debated, even vigorously at times, but never — never — personally. Disparaging individuals adds nothing to debate, but indeed denigrates the Senate as a whole.

Colleagues, we live in a world filled with outpourings of misinformation and disinformation. We see the very principles of democracy under attack all around the world.

In 1947, Winston Churchill said:

Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time . . .

Churchill was not trying to be funny; he was reminding us that while the very freedoms of democracy are its strengths, so too are they its vulnerabilities. For with all its strengths and all its fragilities, democracy requires honesty, honour and decency on both sides of the aisle. Your deliberations must always reflect this as well as your commitment to the principles of democracy, accountability and transparency.

We are very fortunate in our parliamentary system of government to have an appointed Senate as a complementary chamber to the House of Commons. And as we have seen, the new method of appointments since 2015 builds on the advantage of an appointed house by diversifying and strengthening the overall membership.

Members of the other place carry the responsibility of being the elected representatives of the people to whom the government of the day is both responsible and accountable. We in the Senate are less constrained than they are in applying our knowledge and experience to the tasks of making good laws and scrutinizing government policy because we do not face that requirement of seeking election.

Instead of being so often preoccupied with the day-to-day that is the necessary duty of the House of Commons, we in the Senate have an opportunity to focus on the long-term perspective. We can offer advice and propose policies that enrich public discourse across the entire spectrum of public policy. The studies we undertake can assist the House of Commons, the government and the general public in appreciating the nature of the challenges we face and the opportunities they present in today’s Canada and, indeed, in today’s world.

In playing this vital role, the Senate can never pretend to have a determinative voice, but as a complementary chamber we can certainly ensure a better-informed, more balanced public debate.

At the outset of my career in the Senate, two outstanding examples of this work were carried out by two special studies in committee: The first concerned cannabis in a special committee chaired by former Conservative senator Pierre Claude Nolin, and the second concerned the federal role in health care, resulting from the work of the Social Affairs, Science and Technology Committee chaired by former Liberal senator Michael Kirby.

These studies make real a characteristic that is unique to the Senate and that exists only because we are an appointed body. These studies show clearly the great value of bipartisan parliamentary work. Senators are in the distinct position of being able to resist public pressure in order to do public good. Never has this been more important than in today’s world.

The membership in the Senate now is as good, as talented and as capable as it has ever been. The challenges that we need to confront remain still before us. Some, like climate change, are existential in importance. Others, like the poisonous impact of dark social media, threaten to undermine confidence in the institutions of government.

The Senate offers so much potential to do so much good. Do not waste this potential through partisan bickering. Do your very best to make the Senate a truly integral and complementary part of our whole parliamentary system.

On this matter, the Senate must always make its views known, but must then show deference to the elected body. There are, of course, rare occasions when the Senate may hold out in the name of grave public interest. Remember, though, that just because some may feel an issue is of grave national interest does not make it so. The people of Canada will tell you when there is an issue of grave national concern.

I wish you well in your deliberations. Argue and debate loud and clear, but please never fall victim to ad hominem or personal attacks, no matter how subtle they are. And never assign motives to the decisions and debates of others. You belittle yourself with such attacks, and the Senate in general.

I want to take a moment to thank the staff of the Senate, whose dedication and hard work have made my job as Speaker, and all our jobs as senators, if not much easier, certainly possible. Their tireless efforts to support the work of the Senate, often behind the scenes, have been instrumental in ensuring that this institution functions smoothly and effectively.

I wish to highlight the work of our senior executive: our Clerk, Gérald Lafrenière; our Chief Corporate Services Officer and Clerk of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration, Pascale Legault; and our Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, Philippe Hallée, who are supported by our directors and their staff.

As well, I want to extend a special thank you to our present and former chiefs of the Chamber Operations and Procedure Office, or COPO, who sit next to me during all of our sittings: Till Heyde, Cathy Piccinin, Heather Lank and all other COPO staff members, without whom we would, no doubt, descend into chaos here in the chamber.

And, of course, thank you to our pages, who always manage to do their work with great zeal and great humour. We owe all who work here a great deal of appreciation for their commitment to public service and to our great institution. They work long hours often and sacrifice personal and family time to serve the Senate.

I also wish to thank my long-standing senior staff and all those who worked with them over the years, in particular, Suzanne Charron, Stuart Barnable, Loren Cicchini and Vince MacNeil. I want to express a special thank you to Frederick Grittner, who has served five Speakers over the years with dedication and professionalism and who will be retiring as well.

I will speak more about this later today but, for the record, I want to recognize and thank my wonderful wife, Karen, who is in the gallery today, and our children — Andrew and his wife, Allison; Meghan and her husband, Ben; Rebecca and her husband, Mike; David and his friend, Kerri — as well as our wonderful grandchildren, Maggie, Sarah, Adam, Luke, Rachael, Mark and Matthew, whose love and support have made my work possible. As well, they are accompanied by other family members and friends.

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

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): Sarah Fischer, Director of Communications for the Conservative Party of Canada, posted on Twitter:

It’s just a passport

It’s just a symbol

They’re only words

Only beliefs held by the few

Only traditions that no longer matter

It’s just history

Milan Kundera wrote:

The first step in liquidating a people . . . is to erase its memory. Destroy its books, its culture, its history. Then have somebody write new books, manufacture a new culture, invent a new history. Before long the nation will begin to forget what it is and what it was.

The struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting.

Leader, the mayor of Terry Fox’s hometown of Port Coquitlam, British Columbia, said yesterday:

Whoever made the decision to remove Terry Fox from Canadian passports needs to give their head a shake. Our country needs more Terry Fox, not less.

I certainly agree with those words. I also agree, leader, with the Royal Canadian Legion statement condemning the removal of an image of the Vimy Memorial from our passports. They said it was, “. . . to put it bluntly, a poor decision,” leader.

This is the result of a government that has a lack of respect for Canadians and Canada’s history, and the heroes and heroines of the past who have made our country great. They have no moral compass.

Leader, why did the Trudeau government make it a priority to erase images of our country from our passports?

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Senator Plett, just a second. Let us clarify this.

Senator Carignan didn’t raise a point of order; he just stood up. Are you now raising a point of order, Senator Plett?

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): I find it strange, Your Honour, that you would make a ruling on something without even allowing anybody else to get up and say anything. The fact of the matter is the Speaker last week made a ruling calling the government leader, the Liberal leader, calling him the Leader of the Government —

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Are you, Senator Plett, raising a point of order?

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): Your Honour, I know that you, others and all of us would like to go next door to an unveiling. However, we did not create the situation here today, others did. We are standing on points of order that we rightfully have, and you, Your Honour, are being put in a very difficult position here, as I’m not sure what your title will be next week. But you are certainly, at this point, in the chair and are going to need to take these matters under advisement.

During Question Period today, two senators made things clear in their questions. One of them was that, “You have given me a sufficient answer, but I have a second question.” The other one made it clear in his preamble, “I have two questions.” I think the Rules of the Senate, again, are that you have a question and a supplementary question. The supplementary question needs to at least refer to the initial question.

Your Honour, I’m hoping that you’re going to agree with me on this point, and in the future you’re going to hopefully police that. When a person asks a second question, it is a supplemental question, not a brand new question, which happened in two cases today where both of the people said at the outset that this is a second question and it should have been caught at that time.