Hon. Mary Jane McCallum: Thank you, Your Honour, and I also offer you my congratulations.

Before I start, I want to thank James Campbell from my office for all the help he has given me over these past few years.

Honourable senators, I rise today to speak to Government Motion No. 1, which conveys the Senate of Canada’s thanks to Her Excellency, the Governor General of Canada, for delivering the Speech from the Throne.

One of the main themes of this Throne Speech delivered in November of 2021 was a renewed pledge and commitment to the importance of reconciliation. This, of course, is not a surprise given Prime Minister Trudeau has boldly stated that there is no more important relationship to him and to Canada than the one with First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples in Canada.

This Throne Speech was perhaps more meaningful on the topic of reconciliation as it was delivered by Her Excellency Mary Simon, an Inuk woman who, as we all know, is the first Indigenous Governor General in Canada’s history. I agreed with our Governor General’s words when Her Excellency stated:

. . . I have seen how Canadians are committed to reconciliation. Indigenous Peoples are reclaiming our history, stories, culture and language through action. Non‑Indigenous Peoples are coming to understand and accept the true impact of the past and the pain suffered by generations of Indigenous Peoples. Together they are walking the path towards reconciliation.

Honourable senators, although Her Excellency was speaking to the acts of reconciliation that are, indeed, occurring across Canada, I see glimmers of this same hope and shared vision for a better and more equitable future within our very own chamber. There is perhaps no greater example of this than the unprecedented action of this chamber in passing a motion of acknowledgement and apology for the role that the Senate of Canada played in the creation of the residential school system.

As you know, colleagues, I have delivered speeches in this chamber that were, for me, very emotional. They examined profoundly difficult aspects of my life, yet they allowed me to grow and to strengthen through the very sharing of these stories. As you may recall, these speeches dealt with issues including residential school, unmarked graves and corporal punishment. They confronted loss of language, loss of culture and loss of self.

Despite these moments of vulnerability and pain, I have always been met with support and compassion from all corners of this chamber. Indigenous and non-Indigenous senators alike have demonstrated a sincere willingness to listen, understand and challenge their own preconceived notions of both the history of this country as well as their understanding of the First Peoples who called this land home.

Colleagues, I acknowledge that many of these conversations are difficult to have. Much of this difficulty rests with the fact that many of these conversations are new. They are unfamiliar, and with that unfamiliarity comes an uncomfortableness that must be embraced. I have seen, by and large, a willingness for this chamber to embrace new ways of knowing, thinking and seeing the world.

As Canadians across this great country and within this great chamber continue to come to grips with the history of the First Peoples and the intergenerational trauma they carry with them to this day, there has been a prevailing sense of guilt. Guilt in the belief that this country should have known better than to create and sustain such horrifically discriminatory policies. Guilt that they, as Canadians, should have known better the history of the land they call home.

Honourable senators, to that, I would like to restate the following words of Her Excellency Mary Simon within the Speech from the Throne:

We must turn the guilt we carry into action.

Action on reconciliation.

Action on our collective health and well-being.

Action on climate change.

It is absolutely critical, colleagues, that we subscribe to the importance of promoting reconciliation and a more just, fair and equitable future for all who call this land home. Unless and until we seize every opportunity to champion this cause, we will continue to see indicators of overall population health, known as the social determinants, lag further and further behind for First Nations in Canada. Governor General Mary Simon affirmed these very sentiments when she read:

Reconciliation requires a whole-of-government approach, breaking down barriers, and rethinking how to accelerate our work.

. . . the Government is committed to closing the gaps that far too many First Nations, Inuit and Métis communities still face today.

To this end, Her Excellency also stated that Canadians:

. . . want bold, concrete solutions to meet the other challenges we face.

Growing an economy that works for everyone.

Fighting climate change.

Moving forward on the path of reconciliation.

Making sure our communities are safe, healthy, and inclusive.

Honourable senators, within the Throne Speech, Her Excellency expounded upon some of these issues we are facing as a nation — in some cases existential issues — and the path forward that we must take to come out the other side. When speaking to issues of the environment, the Governor General stated:

Protecting our land and oceans will address biodiversity loss. In this work, the Government will continue to strengthen its partnership with First Nations, Inuit, and Métis, to protect nature and respect their traditional knowledge.

When speaking to racism and discrimination — massive and insidious issues in our society — the Governor General said:

When someone in our country is targeted because of their gender, or who they love, or where they come from, the way they pray, the language they speak, or the colour of their skin, we are all diminished.

Everyone should be — and feel — safe.

The Government will continue combatting hate and racism, including with a renewed Anti-Racism Strategy.

She continued:

Canadians understand that equity, justice, and diversity are the means and the ends to living together.

Fighting systemic racism, sexism, discrimination, misconduct, and abuse, including in our core institutions, will remain a key priority.

Honourable senators, these are profound words and they are lofty goals. Despite that fact, we must resolve to work towards them, as they are critical outcomes that simply must be achieved, not only for a better today but for a better future for those to come seven generations from now.

To this end, there are many items that exist before us today for consideration and debate in this chamber that would be critical tools in achieving these goals. There are items that affirm gender equity, items that seek to mitigate harms to our environment, items that look at addressing racism in the health care systems and items that aim to address environmental racism across this country. Colleagues, these are items that are not only critical to reconciliation; they are critical in the fundamental sense of the word in that, in many cases, they are matters of life and death.

Issues of reconciliation, issues of discrimination, issues of climate action and issues of environmental stewardship are not bartering chips. They are not frivolous matters that we can afford to have caught up in partisan gamesmanship or political bickering. No. They are issues that are critical to the survival and well-being of the most vulnerable in our society. They are issues that are critical to the very survival and well-being of the land, the animals and the environment in which we all live.

When items of this nature are left to toil without resolution, we must look in the mirror and ask ourselves why that is so. There is so much potential in this chamber to do infinite good, yet far too often we stand in our own way, to the detriment of all who call this land home.

I would like to close, honourable senators, by once again quoting Her Excellency the Right Honourable Mary Simon in the Speech from the Throne:

There is hope in the every day. Reconciliation is not a single act, nor does it have an end date. It is a lifelong journey of healing, respect and understanding.

As such, colleagues, I urge that we collectively embrace our role as agents of change and commit to upholding the principle of reconciliation as a core and guiding value as we each go about fulfilling the vital role bestowed upon us as members of Canada’s upper house.

Kinanâskomitin. Thank you.

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

(On motion of Senator Cotter, bill, as amended, placed on the Orders of the Day for third reading at the next sitting of the Senate.)

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Gold, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator LaBoucane-Benson:

That the following Address be presented to Her Excellency the Governor General of Canada:

To Her Excellency the Right Honourable Mary May Simon, Chancellor and Principal Companion of the Order of Canada, Chancellor and Commander of the Order of Military Merit, Chancellor and Commander of the Order of Merit of the Police Forces, Governor General and Commander-in-Chief of Canada.

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR EXCELLENCY:

We, Her Majesty’s most loyal and dutiful subjects, the Senate of Canada in Parliament assembled, beg leave to offer our humble thanks to Your Excellency for the gracious Speech which Your Excellency has addressed to both Houses of Parliament.

The Hon. the Speaker: Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?

The Hon. the Speaker: Are honourable senators ready for the question?

The Hon. the Speaker: Are honourable senators ready for the question?

Some Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Hon. the Speaker: Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?

Hon. Senators: Question.

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

(On motion of Senator Cotter, bill, as amended, placed on the Orders of the Day for third reading at the next sitting of the Senate.)

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Gold, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator LaBoucane-Benson:

That the following Address be presented to Her Excellency the Governor General of Canada:

To Her Excellency the Right Honourable Mary May Simon, Chancellor and Principal Companion of the Order of Canada, Chancellor and Commander of the Order of Military Merit, Chancellor and Commander of the Order of Merit of the Police Forces, Governor General and Commander-in-Chief of Canada.

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR EXCELLENCY:

We, Her Majesty’s most loyal and dutiful subjects, the Senate of Canada in Parliament assembled, beg leave to offer our humble thanks to Your Excellency for the gracious Speech which Your Excellency has addressed to both Houses of Parliament.

The Hon. the Speaker: Is leave granted?

So ordered.

Hon. David Richards: Your Honour, congratulations to you.

Honourable senators, this item is adjourned in the name of Senator Clement, and I ask for leave of the Senate that following my intervention, the balance of her time to speak to this item be reserved.

The Hon. the Speaker: Is leave granted?

So ordered.

Hon. Marie-Françoise Mégie: Honourable senators, I rise today in support of Bill S-254, introduced by the Honourable Senator Brazeau.

The bill amends Canada’s Food and Drugs Act to ensure that the labelling of alcoholic beverages reflects the most current scientific information. Senators Brazeau, Cordy, Miville-Dechêne and Richards spoke at second reading of this bill. I add my voice to theirs in the hope that we will promptly send this bill to committee for study. Let’s not delay any longer in doing the right thing to improve the lives and the health of Canadians.

Three questions spring to mind upon reading the preamble. What is the link between alcohol and various cancers? Is labelling an effective way to inform the public? How could this bill be improved for the benefit of public health and consumers?

Before establishing the scientifically-proven link between alcohol and cancer, I’d like to share some data on the leading causes of mortality, in order to better understand the relevance of the bill and why urgent action is needed.

You’ll hear the names of many diseases and many types of cancer. I don’t mean to be alarmist, but I’ll be sharing the information that’s being reported in the current medical literature.

In Canada, roughly 300,000 people die each year of all causes. In 2020, malignant tumours were the cause of more than 80,000 of those 300,000 deaths. The numbers compiled by Statistics Canada indicate that cancer is still among the primary causes of death and that alcohol is indirectly responsible for more than one in four deaths — hence the urgency to take action in Canada.

What’s more, we saw notable increases in the rate of deaths associated with alcohol consumption in 2020. Specifically in people under 45, the number of deaths directly caused by alcohol increased by 50%. Many illnesses are caused by the chronic use of alcohol, including alcoholic gastritis, cirrhosis of the liver, pancreatitis, etc.

Note that the illnesses I just cited are responsible for death in the long term. There are other immediate deaths, such as highway accidents, in which alcohol is a determining factor.

What’s more, there’s a proven link between alcohol consumption and acts of aggression and violence.

What concrete action has been taken? The Canadian government tasked the Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction, the CCSA, with conducting studies and submitting reports with science-based recommendations. The CCSA produced a report entitled What We Heard: Refreshing the National Framework for Action to Reduce the Harms Associated with Alcohol and Other Drugs and Substances in Canada. It’s a long title, but that’s what it’s called. It’s a synthesis of consultations involving over 170 stakeholders in the context of a process to refresh the national framework.

Our National Framework for Action to Reduce the Harms Associated with Alcohol and Other Drugs and Substances in Canada is almost 20 years old. Its vision is for all people in Canada to live in a society free of the harms associated with these substances.

One of the principles articulated in the framework is that action should be knowledge-based, evidence-informed and evaluated for results. The January 2023 final report on Canada’s guidance on alcohol and health came as a shock to many. It upends conventional thinking. Whereas the approach used to be prescriptive, now it is becoming restrictive.

Rather than suggest a number of drinks per day or per week, the experts are now telling us that the less alcohol one consumes, the better. Contrary to messaging from Éduc’alcool, moderation is no longer in good taste.

No amount of alcohol is considered good for a person’s health. This report is worth taking a closer look at. The guidance is based on the principle of autonomy in harm reduction and the fundamental idea behind it is that people living in Canada have a right to know. In addition to the chronic diseases that I mentioned earlier, alcohol itself is a carcinogen that can cause at least seven types of cancer. People often do not know that. The most recent data show that the use of alcohol causes nearly 7,000 cancer deaths each year in Canada, with most cases being breast cancer, colorectal cancer, liver cancer and oropharyngeal cancer.

According to the Canadian Cancer Society, drinking less alcohol is one of the top behaviours to reduce cancer risk.

The message of Bill S-254 is reiterated in the CCSA report, which states, and I quote:

As a priority, people living in Canada need consistent, easy‑to-use information at the point of pour to track their alcohol use in terms of standard drinks. They also have a right to clear and accessible information about the health and safety of the products they buy.

One of the direct benefits of this bill and a particularly effective policy change could be the mandatory labelling of all alcoholic beverages. We would expect the label to indicate the number of standard drinks per bottle, Canada’s Guidance on Alcohol and Health and the health warnings.

Another study conducted by the CCSA, in collaboration with the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, reported an association between alcohol use and aggression and violence.

I’m well aware that moving away from our collective addiction to alcohol requires a real paradigm shift. Drinking is deeply rooted in our culture. We call up a friend or colleague to go for a drink. Some even claim it’s their right or duty to drink, as was the case a few years ago with smoking. However, we no longer carry our former convictions about alcohol’s alleged benefits. We must strive to reduce our use of alcohol in all its forms, just as we did with tobacco.

The CCSA produced a separate report entitled Lifetime Risk of Alcohol Attributable Death and Disability. It notes that the lifetime risk of death and disability increases as alcohol consumption increases. This project, titled Canadian Substance Use Costs and Harms, analyzed Canadian data from 2007 to 2020 and lays out the dramatic changes in direct and indirect costs to our society. The CCSA report from March 29, 2023, states that the cost of substance use was estimated to be $49.1 billion in 2020. The cost associated with alcohol is allegedly close to $20 billion, or 40% of that total. The costs associated with the use of alcohol and tobacco have fluctuated over time. The per‑person cost for alcohol has increased by 21%, while the cost for tobacco has decreased by 20%.

These estimates highlight the consequences of substance use, not only on the health care and criminal justice systems, but also on Canadians’ ability to work and contribute to the economy.

To improve health and productivity in Canada, initiatives related to prevention, harm reduction and alcohol treatment must be put in place. Bill S-254 on alcohol labelling is just one of many measures the government should implement to ensure a healthier and safer life experience for all Canadians.

I couldn’t help but wonder whether labelling actually works. A study on the effect of alcohol labelling on consumption, published in 2020 in Journal of Studies of Alcohol and Drugs in an article entitled “The Effects of Alcohol Warning Labels on Population Alcohol Consumption,” compared alcohol consumption in Yukon with its neighbour, Northwest Territories. Approximately 300,000 labels were placed on 98% of alcoholic beverages in Whitehorse. Sales dropped significantly in the capital city for products that carried these warnings, so the labelling made a difference.

My last question is the following: How could we improve this bill to benefit public health and consumers? I believe the only way is to study it in committee. It would give us the opportunity to hear from experts, the industries and other stakeholders on the  future implementation of labelling and information to be disclosed. I think it is essential that consumers be able to obtain the information they need to freely make informed decisions.

Given that some consider alcohol a food item, should other information, such as the ingredients and nutritional information, be included?

Those are some of the ideas that I wanted to share with you, esteemed colleagues. Thank you for your attention.

Hon. Elizabeth Marshall: Congratulations on your appointment, Your Honour. It’s wonderful to see you in the chair.

Honourable senators, I rise today to speak as a critic of Senator Downe’s Bill S-258, An Act to amend the Canada Revenue Agency Act (reporting on unpaid income tax), but I must confess that there is not much to be critical of with this bill.

As most of you will know, Senator Downe has been working on this issue for several years. He tabled his first bill in April 2015; it was Bill S-226. That bill died on the Order Paper when the 2015 election was called, but Senator Downe reintroduced the legislation as Bill S-243 in 2018. That bill was passed by this chamber with some minor amendments at committee, and then made it all the way to second reading in the House of Commons. I am hoping this bill makes it all the way through both houses.

Like its earlier iterations, Bill S-258 amends the Canada Revenue Agency Act to do three things: First, it will require the Canada Revenue Agency to list all convictions for tax evasion in the annual report it submits to the Minister of National Revenue. This would include convictions with respect to international tax evasion.

Second, Bill S-258 requires the agency to provide statistics on the tax gap once every three years.

Third, the bill will require the minister to provide data on the tax gap to the Parliamentary Budget Officer.

The value of these amendments is quite evident, but allow me to briefly explain the importance of what this bill will do — starting with the tax gap.

Quite simply, the tax gap is the difference between what the government should be collecting in taxes and what is actually collected. This is not an exact science because the tax gap exists, in part, due to income, assets and economic activities which are intentionally hidden, or as a result of errors which can be difficult to detect. But it is possible to establish an approximate tax gap range using one of two methodologies.

Since the tax gap is an estimate, it is presented as a range; for example, in 2022, the Canada Revenue Agency estimated a total gross tax gap of between $35 billion to $40 billion, or about 9% of federal revenues. The Canada Revenue Agency projected that, through collection efforts, they would be able to recoup $17 billion of that, leaving a net tax gap of $23 billion.

Colleagues, measuring this number is critical because it gives us a much-needed benchmark. Without it, we have no clear picture of how well our tax system is working, and we have no way to measure the effectiveness of our compliance and enforcement efforts. We are essentially flying blind.

While simply measuring the tax gap solves nothing on its own, it is very much like taking a reading of someone’s vital signs. It reveals if something is wrong, and whether it is getting better or worse. If your tax gap is high, you know you have a problem. If your tax gap is rising, your problem is becoming worse. But if your tax gap is dropping, then you’re doing something right.

This information is a vital tool. It assists the government in improving revenue collection, evaluating tax policies, ensuring fairness in the tax system, allocating resources effectively and developing strategies to promote compliance. Yet until recently, we were not measuring the tax gap.

This began to change in 2016, when the Canada Revenue Agency began publishing reports on various components of the federal tax gaps, including estimates and their underlying methodologies. In 2022, the Canada Revenue Agency published the Overall federal tax gap report: Estimates and key findings for non-compliance, tax years 2014-2018 — its first-ever overall tax gap report — which looked at all sources of federal government taxation. This work is valuable and appreciated, but it remains deficient for a number of reasons.

First, there is no statutory requirement for the Canada Revenue Agency to continue this work. Because of the importance of the information to parliamentarians, it needs to be required by law. It needs to be regular in its occurrence so we can see over time if we are making progress. Bill S-258 addresses these shortcomings by mandating that the tax gap report is provided to parliamentarians every three years.

Second, there is currently no obligation for the Canada Revenue Agency to provide tax gap data to the Parliamentary Budget Officer. Without this information, there is a serious gap in accountability because the Parliamentary Budget Officer is unable to do his own assessment and verification of the Canada Revenue Agency’s tax gap estimate. Bill S-258 addresses this deficiency as well.

Third, although the Canada Revenue Agency publicly releases a list of some convictions for tax evasion, this list is not exhaustive and includes little information on international tax evasion cases. Without this information, the Canada Revenue Agency faces diminished public accountability regarding their efforts to crack down on offshore tax evasion. Bill S-258 would address this by requiring the Government of Canada to disclose all convictions for overseas tax evasion.

At its heart, this bill is one step in the fight against tax evasion, but it is an important step because tax evasion can have a significant impact on the public’s confidence in the fairness of the tax system. When individuals or corporations evade taxes, they are avoiding their obligation to contribute their fair share to the funding of public services and programs that benefit our society as a whole. This creates a sense of unfairness and resentment among those who do pay their taxes and can create the perception that the system is rigged in favour of those who are wealthy and powerful. It erodes public confidence in the government’s ability to enforce the tax laws fairly and to ensure that everyone is treated equally under the law.

Furthermore, tax evasion has practical consequences such as the loss of revenue for the government, which can lead to cuts in public services and programs or an increase in the tax burden on those who do pay their taxes. This can further exacerbate feelings of unfairness and injustice and lead to a breakdown in the social contract between citizens and the government.

Bill S-258 does not solve all of these problems, but it is a necessary step in the right direction. It will close a gap in important information that parliamentarians need to do their jobs properly. It will help to increase public accountability for the Canada Revenue Agency. It will help incentivize better enforcement and better public policy. It will help bolster voluntary compliance through greater public awareness, and it will strengthen public confidence in the fairness of our tax system.

Honourable senators, there is no perfect tax system, but we can make ours better and stronger by passing Bill S-258. I encourage you to support this bill so it can go to committee for further study. Thank you.

(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.

Hon. Julie Miville-Dechêne: Would Senator Mégie take a question?

The Hon. the Speaker: I’d like to remind you that although I know it is awkward not to face the person to whom you’re putting the question, it’s very difficult to hear you when you turn your back on the microphone. It is just a little reminder. Thank you.

[English]

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Downe, seconded by the Honourable Senator Tannas, for the second reading of Bill S-258, An Act to amend the Canada Revenue Agency Act (reporting on unpaid income tax).

The Hon. the Speaker: I’d like to remind you that although I know it is awkward not to face the person to whom you’re putting the question, it’s very difficult to hear you when you turn your back on the microphone. It is just a little reminder. Thank you.

[English]

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Downe, seconded by the Honourable Senator Tannas, for the second reading of Bill S-258, An Act to amend the Canada Revenue Agency Act (reporting on unpaid income tax).

Hon. Wanda Thomas Bernard: Thank you, Your Honour. I also want to congratulate and welcome you as our Speaker.

Honourable senators, I stand today in support of Bill C-226, the national strategy respecting environmental racism and environmental justice act. I want to acknowledge that we are on the unceded, unsurrendered territory of the Algonquin Nation, and I live in Mi’kma’ki, the ancestral and unceded territory of the Mi’kmaq people. These acknowledgements are particularly important to me today given this topic of environmental racism. Thank you to Elizabeth May and Lenore Zann for their work in the other place. Thank you to Senator McCallum for sponsoring this very important bill here in the Senate and for sharing your ways of knowing and being. It truly is a gift.

Honourable senators, when I talk about marginalized communities, I am talking about groups of people who are, at times, physically on the margins of communities. Think about the outskirts of major city centres. You’ll see landfills, industry and undesirable sites. You will also see racialized communities. When I say the name of a community to our south, Flint, Michigan, most Canadians understand the expanse of the devastating drinking water crisis impacting African Americans. Let me tell you that we have many communities like Flint, Michigan right here in Canada, many of which are still living under conditions that are killing them.

One of the most widely known examples of environmental racism of a marginalized community in Canada is the story of Africville. Senator Klyne talked about Africville in his speech on this bill. Let me add a bit more. Africville was a vibrant community of African Nova Scotians. An open-pit dump was placed 350 metres from this seaside community. They did not have clean drinking water. Throughout the 170 years that Africville existed, a railway extension was installed through the community and the Halifax Explosion damaged the community. An infectious disease hospital was built nearby, along with a human waste disposal pit, a prison and slaughterhouses. It was also the location chosen for a fertilizer production plant.

Imagine a location surrounded by hazardous sites, the last place on earth that you would allow your children and grandchildren to grow up nearby. Those were the conditions forced upon Africville. Located in the city of Halifax, they were denied basic services, such as city water and sewer. Instead of providing services, the city chose to relocate the residents of Africville. During the forceful relocation of Africville in 1967, some community members were transported to public housing in the North End by the City of Halifax using garbage trucks. If that doesn’t show you how African Nova Scotians were seen by the government, I don’t know what would. To this day, I hear of anecdotal stories about the staggering number of former Africville residents who have died of various forms of cancer. The community has connected the dots, and perhaps the government should too.

My gratitude goes to the fierce community activists and advocates who have been mobilizing for decades to protect the health and safety of their communities. African-Canadian Professor Dr. Ingrid Waldron published a book called There’s Something in the Water, which reveals one of Nova Scotia’s hardest and most shameful truths: the pervasive nature of environmental racism against Mi’kmaq and African Nova Scotians.

This book was used to create a documentary highlighting the devastation of racialized Nova Scotians. The film brings the viewer through the African-Nova Scotian community of Shelburne with local advocate Louise Delisle, who lists the people who have died or are ill with lung cancer and multiple myelomas. These families have no option to move, and even if they did, they would be leaving their homes and be separated from their communities.

Although the dump has been removed, the buried waste contaminates their water. Louise describes her childhood memories of the black smoke that regularly engulfed the skies of her neighbourhood as piles of hazardous waste from the hospitals, factories and residences were burned. She remembers arriving at school smelling like burnt garbage.

Nearby, in Pictou Landing, Nova Scotia, is a Mi’kmaw community absolutely devastated by the toxic waste from the Northern Pulp mill contaminating the water.

The Grassroots Grandmothers are a group of women water protectors who fight for the human right for their community’s access to clean drinking water. Colleagues, please take one hour to watch the documentary There’s Something in the Water and learn more about Canada’s own environmental racism crisis.

We could name many communities: Whitney Pier, the Sydney tar ponds, Membertou, Lincolnville, Indian Brook — colleagues, there are so many examples. In my own community of East Preston, residents have been advocating against plans to designate a dump nearby for decades. In a 2016 letter of protest, Spencer Colley documented three examples of locating dumps in or near the Preston communities, which are the largest Black communities in Nova Scotia: in 1992 near East Lake in North Preston, in 1997 in North Preston and then, in 2016, the proposal to relocate a facility from Porters Lake to East Preston opposite Highway 107, Exit 17, where I live.

Colleagues, policy-making on environmental issues must not exclude race as the two are intrinsically tied. We can map out Nova Scotia by sites of dumps and hazardous industry alongside Indigenous and African-Nova Scotian communities. The environment, race and land have always been tied and always will be.

Eddie Carvery’s protest against the forceful relocation of the residents of Africville will always remind us of that.

In her book, Ingrid Waldron states that:

State-sanctioned racial and gendered violence is subtle, invisible, and often has no specific person who can (or will) be . . . responsible, in contrast to interpersonal violence where a main perpetrator can be identified.

Since there is no one specific person, it is necessary to obligate all policy-makers to make decisions based on what is good for the communities nearby.

This bill proposes a national strategy to examine the link between race and environmental hazards and the locations of hazardous sites. It seeks to address federal laws, policies and programs pertaining to environmental justice; examine compensation for communities impacted and collect information on health outcomes to give us the data to prove what community residents have known for decades: that environmental racism is detrimental to our health.

Honourable colleagues, these communities are no strangers to advocating for themselves, and it’s time the Senate advocated for them. Environmental racism is a great example of colonization doing its job: wiping out Indigenous and Black people in Canada.

Reconciliation cannot happen without putting a stop to environmental racism. Let’s send this bill to committee quickly. This is not a topic to debate; it’s a topic to act upon quickly. We are ready to make policy solutions that will save the lives of some of the most marginalized people in Canada.

Thank you. Asante.

Hon. Kim Pate: Your Honour, allow me to join our colleagues in congratulating you on your role as Speaker and taking on such a vital and important position, not just for yourself but for all of us. It reflects so well on this place. Thank you so much.

Honourable senators, I rise today to speak in support of Bill C-226. Many examples of environmental racism have already been spoken about at length, most recently by Senators Bernard, McCallum, Klyne and Audette. Their excellent interventions underscore the depth and breadth of this issue across Canada. And as Senator McCallum so clearly articulated last week and as Senator Bernard just did, environmental racism is one facet of the much broader intersectional issue of systemic racism.

Systemic racism both exacerbates and facilitates intersecting forms of racism to flourish and effectively normalizes and too often desensitizes the general population to its very existence and effects. In other words, environmental racism is not experienced in isolation, nor is it unintended. It can go unnoticed, however, as its consequences are rarely felt by those in the most privileged positions or locations.

Too often, we witness deliberate decisions, sometimes characterized as necessary or political compromises, whereby environmental devastation is permitted in what are often referred to as “sacrifice zones,” communities that are largely out of sight and out of mind from the general public. Such decisions are rooted in and fuel geographic racism. On a global scale, environmental racism is the logic by which particular communities, nations and places — often racialized — experience the harshest consequences of the climate crisis.

We see it in terms of the historical and ongoing seizure of land and resources that privileges the convenience and access of the most privileged, from the razing of poor and racialized communities such as Africville and green spaces for the construction of highways, airports and industry. Polluting infrastructure has been purposefully built in, over or adjacent to the backyards of poor, Indigenous and Black communities, with seemingly little regard for the impact of toxic pollutants on the respiratory or heart health of inhabitants, not to mention the racist and class-biased disregard for the corresponding proliferation of cancers and other diseases.

Last week, as I flew over Saskatchewan and into Alberta, the devastating forest fires raging in the West were top of mind. The consequences of those forest fires are immediate and devastating for Indigenous peoples and those in rural communities. The havoc wreaked will affect many people for decades to come. Many have lost their homes with nowhere to go. Many will never financially recover from these losses and will require financial supports. For many, the trauma they have experienced will require a lifetime of mental aid and support.

These forest fires are part of our climate crisis and are predictable, direct byproducts of our colonial privileging of individualistic profiteering and the pursuit of wealth through industries and the use of technology. The climate crisis is directly increasing both the severity and frequency of forest fires, and the resulting environmental, financial and personal devastation is disproportionately negatively impacting the most marginalized, racialized and disadvantaged.

Neither the trauma and hardship experienced nor the remedial resources or relief are equitably distributed. Indigenous communities are clearly signalling this.

The day I arrived in Edmonton, Carol Johnston, a resident of East Prairie Metis Settlement, was in the media describing her concerns that the communities closer to Edmonton and central Alberta were getting more attention than the northern Indigenous communities destroyed by fire. She described how the burning of 4 houses near Drayton Valley was “all over the media,” whereas the loss of 14 homes in the East Prairie settlement did not even initially warrant a mention despite the reality that the community was in dire straits.

Similarly, dozens of homes destroyed in Sturgeon Lake Cree Nation and Fox Lake in Little Red River Cree Nation received virtually no attention. The province has called on the federal government to act, but neither jurisdiction seems to have taken seriously the notice that a dozen Indigenous communities are currently affected or under threat from these wildfires. Neither the province nor the federal government seemingly wants to take responsibility for the crisis they have both played a part in creating.

To her credit, the federal Minister of Indigenous Services recognized that there were at least 150 homes lost, along with community infrastructure, and over 4,000 evacuees. Yet, we are hearing virtually nothing about support efforts. For the few we do know of, we are hearing that Indigenous peoples are having issues accessing the limited funding because they do not have sufficient identification, including identification that states they are Alberta residents.

For those who are displaced, it is often far from their communities, to places they have never been. Mayor of High Level Crystal McAteer recently explained:

Many of our evacuees come from the reserves, that like Fox Lake, for example, are remote . . . so a lot of the people have never left Fox Lake. A lot of the Elders, they speak Cree. Same with the Dene [communities] — they speak Dene. They don’t speak any other language.

With no central evacuation centres or adequate culturally safe and specific resources, families and communities are also often separated. These communities, already devastated by immeasurable loss, effectively lose their support systems, further exacerbating their traumatic experiences.

If this were anomalous, we might be less concerned. But do you remember the wildfires in British Columbia in 2021? Lytton First Nation was all but destroyed, and there was no help provided and no plan to help those most in need. As Chief Matt Pasco so chillingly reminded us then, “They had processes in places for our cattle but none for Nlaka’pamux people.”

Two years later, their community is still grappling with rebuilding while having to take on the burden of again preparing for wildfire season. They are still in severe drought conditions and at risk of another wildfire. It took 19 months for the Lytton First Nation community store to open, a temporary grocery store for the residents of the community. Before that, community members were driving upwards of three hours, travelling as far as Kamloops to buy essential food items. They are still waiting for permanent reconstruction to begin. The Mayor of Lytton, Denise O’Connor, has said:

It’s been extremely frustrating. We’ve been asking specifically for timelines and dates but it’s just not there, we’re just not getting it.

These communities are already struggling with overcrowding, lack of funding, inadequate health care and an overall deficit in social, housing, economic and health supports. Environmental crises create additional hardships and responsibilities for already struggling communities, further disadvantaging them and perpetuating the cycle of systemic inadequacies, distrust and the racism they face.

Last year, the Auditor General of Canada reported on this issue. These are the stark findings.

First:

. . . Indigenous Services Canada did not provide the support First Nations communities needed to manage emergencies such as floods and wildfires, which are happening more often and with greater intensity.

Second, they found that “. . . the department’s actions were more reactive than preventative . . .,” despite the proactive identification by First Nations communities of many infrastructure projects to mitigate the impact of emergencies. In fact, there was a backlog of 112 eligible infrastructure projects waiting to be funded.

Third — and worse yet — the Auditor General found that many issues had not been addressed or improved since they had first identified them in their 2013 audit of emergency management on reserves.

Finally:

The department also did not know whether First Nations received services that were culturally appropriate and comparable to emergency services provided in municipalities of similar size and circumstance because it did not identify or consistently monitor the services or level of services to be provided to First Nations.

Minister Hajdu said it’s clear that First Nations sit on the front lines of this environmental crisis, which has astronomical cost tied to evacuation, emergency accommodation and rebuilding of communities and livelihoods. Yet, we continue to do little or nothing to meaningfully support these communities and fail to take proactive steps to deal with the issue.

In short, the lack of a national strategy and the focus on reactive rather than preventative measures continue the privileging of the communities of the most privileged, which is just one of the many examples and forms of environmental racism that persists in Canada and that we must address. Let’s please get this to committee and continue the work.

Meegwetch. Thank you.