An Hon. Senator: Wow.

The Hon. the Speaker: Those opposed to the motion will please say, “nay.”

The Hon. the Speaker: Those in favour of the motion will please say, “yea.”

The Hon. the Speaker: In my opinion, the “yeas” have it.

And two honourable senators having risen:

The Hon. the Speaker: Those in favour of the motion will please say, “yea.”

The Hon. the Speaker: The bells will therefore ring for 15 minutes. The vote will be at 9:39. Call in the senators.

Motion agreed to and bill read second time on the following division:

The Hon. the Speaker: Is there an agreement on a bell?

Senator Seidman: Yes, there is. Fifteen minutes.

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

The Hon. the Speaker: Is there an agreement on a bell?

Senator Seidman: Yes, there is. Fifteen minutes.

Hon. Senators: Question.

The Hon. the Speaker: The bells will therefore ring for 15 minutes. The vote will be at 9:39. Call in the senators.

Motion agreed to and bill read second time on the following division:

The Hon. the Speaker: Those opposed to the motion will please say, “nay.”

The Hon. the Speaker: In my opinion, the “yeas” have it.

And two honourable senators having risen:

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

The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, I have the honour to inform the Senate that a message has been received from the House of Commons which reads as follows:

Wednesday, June 21, 2023

EXTRACT, —

That a message be sent to the Senate to acquaint Their Honours that, in relation to Bill C-9, An Act to amend the Judges Act, the House:

agrees with amendments 1(b)(i) and 1(c)(i) made by the Senate;

respectfully disagrees with amendments 1(g), 1(i), 1(j) and 1(k) because they undermine the mechanisms in the bill for controlling process costs and delays by introducing a second intermediate appellate level into the proposed new judicial conduct process that would duplicate the work of the first and, as a result, would introduce into the new process costs and delays comparable to those that have undermined public confidence in the current process;

respectfully disagrees with amendment 2 because it undermines the mechanisms in the bill for controlling process costs and delays by maintaining most of the unnecessary costs and delays that the bill was intended to excise from the process for obtaining court review of a Canadian Judicial Council report issued under the current process;

respectfully disagrees with amendments 1(a), 1(b)(ii), 1(f) and 1(h) because they would, taken together, have the effect of redefining the roles of lay persons, expressly defined as persons who have no legal background, in the proposed new judicial conduct process by obliging them to fulfill decision-making functions requiring legal training or that are best fulfilled by those with legal training;

respectfully disagrees with amendments 1(c)(ii) and 1(c)(iii), 1(d) and 1(e) because, taken together, they would redefine the balance struck by the bill between confidentiality and transparency considerations arising during the investigative stages of the process in a way that risks disclosing information of a personal or confidential nature, and that would require substantial new financial resources that are not otherwise necessary for the proper operation of the proposed new judicial conduct process; and

respectfully disagrees with amendments 1(b)(iii) and 1(l) because, taken together, they substantially rework the principal mechanisms contained in the bill for ensuring that the Canadian Judicial Council makes public information about the process, and these amendments do so in a way that risks disclosing information of a personal or confidential nature.

ATTEST

Eric Janse

Acting Clerk of the House of Commons

Hon. Patti LaBoucane-Benson (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate): Honourable senators, with leave of the Senate and notwithstanding rule 5-5(j), I move:

That, when the Senate next adjourns after the adoption of this motion, it do stand adjourned until tomorrow, Thursday, June 22, 2023, at noon.

The Hon. the Speaker: Is leave granted, honourable senators?

The Hon. the Speaker: Is leave granted, honourable senators?

The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, when shall this message be taken into consideration?