Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for the question. The Canada Pension Plan enables all Canadians to have a dignified retirement with a stable and secure pension, and Canadians rightly expect that their retirement savings will be available to them when they need them.

I was assured that the government will always defend the pensions of Canadians and the security of their retirement. As you mentioned, the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance is looking forward to meeting with her provincial and territorial counterparts to discuss this issue.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for the question. Canada’s ties — economic, political and otherwise — to the United States are so deep, close and substantial that it’s to be expected our two sovereign governments would have differences of opinion and even disputes about decisions made by one or the other to protect its interests as it perceives them.

I have confidence, and the Senate and Canadians should have confidence, in the professionalism, expertise and experience of the Canadians who are working with their American counterparts to find amicable solutions and, failing that, will follow the established dispute resolution process.

Hon. Jean-Guy Dagenais: Leader, polls predicting the Prime Minister’s defeat in the next election may have been the wake-up call that prompted him to reverse course on a number of things, including the carbon tax and immigration. Canada has cut ties with Russia, China and even India, and now the United States is threatening harsh reprisals if the government goes ahead with its plan to slap a “discriminatory” tax on foreign streaming services come January 1.

Given that the new Liberal tax will surely be passed on to taxpayers, is the Prime Minister prepared to admit his mistake and reverse course on this as he has on other issues before it’s too late?

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for the question. The next CRTC regional commissioners will definitely be high-calibre, talented individuals who represent their communities. These appointments will occur in a timely manner to ensure that the CRTC continues to be an independent regulator that makes sound decisions. As always, Governor-in-Council appointments, including CRTC appointments, are subject to cabinet confidence.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your question. We all know that Canada’s population is aging, and that immigration is now driving most of our population growth and labour force stability. It is concerning that the worker-to-retiree ratio of 7 to 1 from 50 years ago has dropped to 3 to 1 now. While I cannot speak to the specific consultations, the new immigration levels have taken this reality into consideration and will permit the government to bring in the skills and talent needed to fill labour gaps and to ensure our ongoing prosperity.

[Translation]

Hon. Raymonde Saint-Germain: My question is for Senator Gold.

On October 26, 2022, more than 12 months ago, I asked you a question about Yves Bourque, a Canadian Paralympic athlete and a victim of thalidomide, who has been forced to deal with the extremely cumbersome, even inhumane, administration of the Canadian Thalidomide Survivors Support Program, a program that the government has entrusted to the firm Epiq.

Since then, my team and I have discussed Mr. Bourque’s case with the former minister of health, Jean-Yves Duclos, and his team, and more recently, with the team of his successor, Mark Holland. I was assured that follow-up had been done with Epiq, and the former minister even publicly stated that he had put pressure on Epiq to get things moving more quickly. However, nothing has changed.

Can the government assure us that additional measures will be taken to ensure that this program can be better administered immediately and to ensure accountability to address these unacceptable delays?

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): No, that is not correct, Senator Plett, despite the litany of things that you have cobbled together in your question.

Senators are entitled to view their role as they see fit. This government is focusing on policy, not politics — certainly in this chamber. The government and the Prime Minister are engaged in the important work of governing this country and guiding this country’s policies — both domestic and foreign — through these difficult times, and shall continue to do so.

Hon. Stan Kutcher: Senator Gold, Bill S-5 was a significant step forward in enhancing Canada’s environmental health protections, and this government should be proud of that. But — and, sadly, there is a “but” — as we learned during the study of this bill, Canada does not have the capacity to be able to provide the essential, robust and comprehensive biomonitoring, biobanking, ongoing longitudinal cohort studies and toxicogenomic research needed to support the goals of this legislation. Can you please provide us with the plans that the government has to rapidly develop these needed scientific capabilities?

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your question. I’m disappointed to learn that no progress has been made on this file. Thalidomide had devastatingly tragic results for a whole generation of children. It is only by chance that I escaped it myself.

I need to consult the current minister to better understand the progress that, I hope, is being made. I’ll undertake to do that.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your question, and for underlining the significance and importance of Bill S-5. It’s a complicated and far-reaching bill. I’ve been informed that the funding for the implementation of the changes to the act has already been allocated and is, indeed, available. The work to implement the act is well under way, but it will take some time to get it right before the act can be fully implemented, including the measures that you referenced. That’s why the government is working to ensure that they provide policy statements, guidelines and regulation updates to approve and align with the updated act.

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): Government leader, on October 16, Information Commissioner Caroline Maynard spoke to a committee of the other place about the poor state of access to information after eight years of the Trudeau government. The commissioner said:

. . . some government institutions now routinely violate this law on a daily basis and . . . there is no or little indication that the government intends to act to rectify the situation. . . .

Leader, you told us last year that transparency, accountability and openness are guiding principles of your government. How can that be when the NDP-Liberal government breaks our transparency laws every day?

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): You’re right to underline the importance of openness and transparency. These are goals that are — and should be — the guiding principles of a government in a democratic society. They are essential to our democracy, and they are principles to which this government is committed.

It should be recalled that this government — as I’m advised, and I think I’m correct — was the first in over 30 years to introduce major reforms to the Access to Information Act, and has invested significant additional funds to improve access to information. As I recall from some years ago, in reviewing the legislation at committee — of which I was a member and heard that testimony — improving access to information is a complicated problem that has a lot to do with human resources, retention and the like. This is an explanation, not a justification, and more needs to be done.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for your question. This government’s commitment to moving forward with legislation and to regulate, in an appropriate way, the use of firearms that are used to cause harm and to cause death while protecting the rights of law‑abiding Canadians, Indigenous and non-Indigenous alike — and in cases of Indigenous rights holders, their rights to use firearms — is clear and will continue.

The extension was for the benefit of those Canadians to give them more time in order to comply. It’s out of respect for gun owners in Canada. That is something for which the government will continue to do.

Hon. Patti LaBoucane-Benson (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate), pursuant to notice of November 1, 2023, moved:

That, when the Senate next adjourns after the adoption of this motion, it do stand adjourned until Tuesday, November 7, 2023, at 2 p.m.

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): Senator Gold, a senior official from Natural Resources Canada recently revealed the truth behind the Prime Minister’s 2019 election promise to plant 2 billion trees over 10 years. Appearing before a House committee on October 17, the official confirmed the 2 Billion Trees program will not actually plant 2 billion trees. She said the program is still called 2 Billion Trees, “. . . to rally interest among Canadians.”

Leader, your government often talks about misinformation. Isn’t that what you’ve engaged in here? After eight long years of this Prime Minister, why should Canadians believe anything he has to say about this particular promise?

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

Hon. Pat Duncan: Honourable senators, I rise to speak to the twelfth report of our Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry which amends Bill C-234, an Act to amend the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act.

As we’re all very well aware, federalism must be one of the more difficult if not the most difficult form of government. We are a very large and diverse country — a country that is also, perhaps more than any other, challenged by the global crisis of climate change.

Crafting legislation, especially taxation and rebate policy, with these two challenges alone is incredibly difficult. It’s tough to have the legislation or the taxation mechanisms address the issues, change behaviour and be cognizant of all the differences that we share.

Reviewing the legislation and listening to the debate, a former member of our National Finance Committee, I needed to go back and look at the file on climate taxation. It’s not an easy file for those with PhDs in economics, whom I am not, let alone the average Canadian, whom I consider myself to be.

Having once occupied a seat with ministers of finance, as they are meeting tomorrow, and at what is now called the Council of the Federation, I can only imagine the challenging conversations that they are going to have.

The approach to climate change, taxation and climate change and rebate policy varies across the whole country.

Originally, the relief for farmers on fuel taxation was modelled after the program in British Columbia. That became evident at the committee hearings. A legislative oversight omitted the fuel used in grain drying and used largely by poultry farmers. Those are two very salient points. They prompted Bill C-234. The bill, as drafted and passed by the House of Commons, equitably addresses those two points and provides a time limit for the measure.

Honourable senators, I’d be remiss if I did not also flag that in addition to sober second thought, we represent our regions. Western Canada — where a good many of these farmers are located and where there are very specific differences in climate taxation programs that exist — is missing senators from Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and British Columbia.

Dear colleagues, this does not denigrate any of the individuals sitting in this chamber today. It’s recognition that there are voices that we are not hearing.

Honourable senators, I note that much focus is put on aggregate expenses and aggregate benefits, and we see numbers from analysts that are based on averages, national or provincial. It’s a very urban and centralized way of thinking about this particular issue. It’s exactly to counter such aggregation and to identify weak spots of the current carbon pricing regime that is the purpose of the bill.

It’s quite evident from what I’ve read and heard from the committee study and from speaking with farmers that there’s a gap between the desired reduction in carbon emissions through technological innovation and adjustment and what is readily available. Let’s give the farmers the time they claim they need to fix it, to be an honest and participating partner in finding climate solutions that are realistic.

Honourable senators, this bill corrects an oversight. Some farmers that this bill addresses were left out.

I was deeply moved by the tributes today to a very honourable public servant. I was also reminded of the prayer that you’ve often heard me reference in the Yukon legislature, where we pray to the Creator that we may make only sound, fair and wise decisions on behalf of the people we represent.

It’s the fairness that strikes me about this bill over and over again. It’s fair to include the farmers who were left out and to correct this oversight.

I don’t see it as a purposeful omission, and I would not reference it as a drafting error in the original bill. I recognize that Bill C-234 corrects an oversight. It’s not the first time we’ve been asked to do this. Over and over at National Finance, when we were dealing with the difficult situation of the pandemic and the benefits to reach Canadians, we corrected bills repeatedly because people were left out. First it was the artists and the artistic community.

This is a similar situation. I believe it has been somewhat usurped by events of the past week and discussions of other situations that go on in our country. We must focus our efforts on this bill itself. That’s why I believe we should not accept the recommendations that were put forward in the Agriculture Committee report, but to reject the report and allow for fulsome, thorough third reading debate that enables a fair discussion of all amendments and points of view throughout the chamber so that we can hear from everyone.

I believe we have a chance, with a full discussion of Bill C-234, to fix an oversight. It will not cause an extraordinary burden on federal coffers to enact Bill C-234. Let’s remember that natural gas and propane are the cleanest burning fuels. Will allowing this rebate and passing Bill C-234 make a tremendous difference to Canada reaching the climate change goals? I don’t think so. It will correct an oversight and be fair to all concerned.

I believe that we should adopt the bill as we received it and send a message to inform the House of Commons that it is adopted without amendment.

I will encourage all senators to hear from one another, as I understand we will — perhaps not today — be expressing our views on the Agriculture report. I encourage senators to hear what I have said in terms of fairness, to take a look. Again, by rejecting this report and adopting and having a fulsome, fair, thorough and extensive debate on Bill C-234 as we received it, we can do our best work for Canadians and for the whole country. Thank you, honourable senators.

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): Leader, after eight long years, the NDP-Liberal government has played political games on the backs of licensed and responsible firearms owners. The latest example of this is another two-year extension of the amnesty for owners of firearms that the Trudeau cabinet banned in 2020. The amnesty is now set to expire on October 30, 2025, a few days after the next election is scheduled to take place. What a coincidence, leader.

Canadians can see this for what it is: A failed government willing to try anything to save itself. Are Canadians actually expected to think that your government picked this date randomly?

Hon. Michèle Audette moved third reading of Bill C-29, An Act to provide for the establishment of a national council for reconciliation, as amended.

(On motion of Senator Audette, debate adjourned.)

[English]