Journals of the Senate
49 Elizabeth II, A.D. 2000, Canada
Journals of the Senate
2nd Session, 36th Parliament
Issue 55
Thursday, May 11, 2000
1:30 p.m.
The Honourable Gildas L. Molgat, Speaker
The Members convened were:
The Honourable Senators
Adams, Andreychuk, Atkins, Bacon, Beaudoin, Bolduc, Boudreau, Bryden, Buchanan, Callbeck, Carstairs, Chalifoux, Christensen, Cochrane, Cogger, Cohen, Cools, Corbin, De Bané, Doody, Fairbairn, Finestone, Finnerty, Fitzpatrick, Forrestall, Fraser, Furey, Gauthier, Gill, Grafstein, Graham, Grimard, Hays, Hervieux-Payette, Joyal, Kenny, Keon, Kinsella, Kirby, Kroft, Lawson, Losier-Cool, Lynch-Staunton, Maheu, Mercier, Milne, Molgat, Moore, Murray, Nolin, Pépin, Pitfield, Poulin (Charette), Prud'homme, Rivest, Roberge, Robichaud, (L'Acadie-Acadia), Roche, Rompkey, Rossiter, Ruck, St. Germain, Sibbeston, Simard, Sparrow, Spivak, Stollery, Stratton, Taylor, Watt, Wiebe, Wilson
The Members in attendance to business were:
The Honourable Senators
Adams, Andreychuk, *Angus, Atkins, *Austin, Bacon, Beaudoin, Bolduc, Boudreau, Bryden, Buchanan, Callbeck, Carstairs, Chalifoux, Christensen, Cochrane, Cogger, Cohen, *Comeau, Cools, Corbin, De Bané, Doody, Fairbairn, Finestone, Finnerty, Fitzpatrick, Forrestall, Fraser, Furey, Gauthier, Gill, Grafstein, Graham, Grimard, Hays, Hervieux-Payette, *Johnson, Joyal, Kenny, Keon, Kinsella, Kirby, Kroft, Lawson, Losier-Cool, Lynch-Staunton, Maheu, *Mahovlich, *Meighen, Mercier, Milne, Molgat, Moore, Murray, Nolin, Pépin, *Perry (Poirier), Pitfield, Poulin (Charette), Prud'homme, Rivest, Roberge, Robichaud, (L'Acadie-Acadia), Roche, Rompkey, Rossiter, Ruck, St. Germain, Sibbeston, Simard, Sparrow, Spivak, Stollery, Stratton, Taylor, Watt, Wiebe, Wilson,
PRAYERS
SENATORS' STATEMENTS
Some Honourable Senators made statements.DAILY ROUTINE OF BUSINESS
Introduction and First Reading of Government Bills
The Honourable Senator Hays presented a Bill S-22, A First Act to harmonize federal law with the civil law of the Province of Quebec and to amend certain Acts in order to ensure that each language version takes into account the common law and the civil law.The Bill was read the first time.
The Honourable Senator Hays moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Fairbairn, P.C., that the Bill be placed on the Orders of the Day for a second reading on Monday next, May 15, 2000.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Presentation of Petitions
The Honourable Senator Milne presented petitions:Of Residents of Canada concerning the Statistics Act (census records).
SPEAKER'S RULING
On Friday, April 7, just when the Orders of the Day had been called, the Deputy Leader of the Senate rose on a point of order. Senator Hays asked for a ruling as to whether it is permissible to set limits to any request for leave to extend the time allowed a Senator for debate. This issue was being raised by the Senator as a follow-up to a series of exchanges that had taken place the previous day after Senator Sibbeston had asked for leave to continue his speech on third reading of Bill C-9. According to Senator Hays, it is in the interest of order that a time limit be agreed to when seeking leave to extend the time for debate. In his view, granting leave should not be regarded as open-ended, as an opportunity to continue debate for an unlimited amount of time.By way of response, Senator Kinsella, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, agreed with the underlying position that he believed was at the root of the complaint made by Senator Hays. There was, he said, a need to review the rules of debate with respect to the time permitted to individual Senators and this task should be undertaken by the Rules Committee. Indeed, several other Senators who subsequently participated in the discussion on the point of order also mentioned the possibility of reviewing our rules of debate. Nonetheless, on the point of order raised by Senator Hays, Senator Kinsella argued in effect that the request for leave to suspend the time limits stipulated in the rules cannot logically be qualified by the imposition of another time limit.
As I have already noted, several other Senators then intervened to speak to the point of order to express their views. At the end, the Speaker pro tempore informed the Senate that we had already discussed aspects of this question following the comments of the previous day and that we would look at it again in light of the remarks made on the point of order raised by Senator Hays. Since then, I have read the relevant texts of Hansard, I have also examined our rules in consultation with the Speaker pro tempore and the Table Officers and I am now prepared to give my ruling.
During the course of his intervention, Senator Corbin noted that Rule 37(4) is categorical in its language. It states that "no Senator shall speak for more than fifteen minutes, inclusive of any question or comments which the Senator may permit in the course of his or her remarks." This limitation on debate was incorporated into the Rules of the Senate in 1991 together with numerous other rules that were drawn up to more clearly structure the Senate's sitting day and to better assure the ability of the Government to transact its business. Senator Murray suggested that now, almost ten years later, there might not be the same need to restrict the time allocated to speeches. Whether or not this is true cannot be decided by me. This is a subject that is best studied by the Rules Committee.
There is no doubt that the current rule is restrictive. With growing frequency, requests are being made to extend the time for debate and the question and comment period that can follow a speech. Only rarely are these requests denied. This practice, in turn, may now be giving rise to a sense of frustration. This appears to be evident based on the objections that have occasionally been raised by some Senators who find the process too open-ended. Senator Hays has raised his point of order to suggest a solution to this problem. Until there is a revision of the rules on debate, this solution might be the only effective means to address this situation. The question to be answered first, however, is whether it is procedurally viable.
Senator Kinsella noted that accepting the request for leave means, according to Rule 4(6), approval to do something or to proceed in some particular fashion "without a dissenting voice." Normally, what is requested involves the suspension of a rule in whole or in part. This is done routinely every Tuesday, for example, when the Deputy Leader of the Government seeks leave to move without the required notice, a motion respecting the hour the Senate will sit on Wednesday. Instead of meeting at 2:00 p.m. Wednesday, the Senate usually agrees to meet at 1:30 p.m. and to adjourn by 3:30 p.m. in order to allow committees to sit. Leave is also used sometimes to suspend the rule on a deferred vote in order to hold the recorded division at a time more convenient than 5:30 p.m. as specified in Rule 67(2). In both cases, leave is used not just to suspend the notice requirement, but to offer something else in place of the relevant rules for the purpose of allowing the Senate to conduct its business more conveniently and effectively.
Based on these examples, I do not find it procedurally objectionable to have a request for leave to suspend the rules limiting the time for debate combined with a proposal to fix the time of the extension. Indeed, following the model of the House of Lords that Senator Kinsella mentioned it might be useful and advantageous to the Senator, who is requesting more time, to indicate how much time is needed in order to improve the likelihood of a favourable response. Moreover, such an approach would, I think, be in keeping with the intent of Rule 3 regarding the suspension of any particular rule. According to this rule, the purpose of any proposed suspension should be "distinctly stated." As much as possible, I have usually permitted an explanation so long as it did not involve any prolonged discussion. This I think is a sensible approach that could serve the Senate well until the rules of debate are revised.
Accordingly, it is my ruling that a request to extend time for debate can be qualified with a statement indicating the time of the extension. This statement can be proposed either by the Senator making the request or by any other Senator so long as any discussion related to the request for leave is kept very brief.
It is my hope that such a procedure, in addition to the current practice with requests for leave to extend debate, will provide satisfactory alternatives to the Senate until such time as the Rules Committee comes up with a more comprehensive review of our rules of debate.
ORDERS OF THE DAY
GOVERNMENT BUSINESS
Bills
Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Boudreau, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Hays, for the second reading of Bill C-20, An Act to give effect to the requirement for clarity as set out in the opinion of the Supreme Court of Canada in the Quebec Secession Reference.Debate.
_______________________________________
Ordered, That, pursuant to Rule 38, no later than 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, May 16, 2000, any proceedings before the Senate shall be interrupted and all questions necessary to dispose of the motion of the Honourable Senator Hays, concerning the appointment of a special committee of the Senate for the consideration of Bill C-20, shall be put forthwith without further debate or amendment, and that any votes on any of those questions be not further deferred; andThat if a standing vote is requested, the bells to call in the Senators be sounded for thirty minutes, so that the vote takes place at 6:00 p.m.
With leave of the Senate, The Honourable Senator Hays moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Graham, P.C.:
That, notwithstanding Rule 63(1), the proceedings on Bill C-22, which took place on Tuesday, May 9, 2000, be declared null and void.
After debate, The question being put on the motion, it was adopted. Accordingly, the Order of the Day for the second reading of Bill C-22, An Act to facilitate combatting the laundering of proceeds of crime, to establish the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada and to amend and repeal certain Acts in consequence, was discharged and the Bill withdrawn.
Bills
The Senate resumed debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Boudreau, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Hays, for the second reading of Bill C-20, An Act to give effect to the requirement for clarity as set out in the opinion of the Supreme Court of Canada in the Quebec Secession Reference.After debate, The Honourable Senator Hays for the Honourable Senator Cools moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Carstairs, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted. Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Hays, seconded by the Honourable Senator Moore, for the third reading of Bill C-2, An Act respecting the election of members to the House of Commons, repealing other Acts relating to elections and making consequential amendments to other Acts.
After debate, In amendment, the Honourable Senator Nolin moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Prud'homme, P.C., that Bill C-2 be not now read a third time but that it be amended, in clause 375, on page 154,
(a) by replacing line 27 with the following:
"375. (1) A registered party shall, subject to";
(b) by replacing line 32 with the following:
(c) by adding the following after line 36:"registered party shall appoint a person, to be";
"(3) The registration of an electoral district agent is valid
(a) until the appointment of the electoral district agent is revoked by the political party;
(b) until the political party that appointed the electoral district agent is deregistered; or
(c) until the electoral district of the electoral district agent no longer exists as result of a representation order made under section 25 of the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act.;
(4) Outside an election period, the electoral district agent of a registered party is:
(a) responsible for all financial operations of the electoral district association of the party; and
(b) required to submit to the chief agent of the registered party that appointed the person to act as the electoral district agent an annual financial transactions return, in accordance with subsection (5), on the electoral district association's financial transactions.
(5) The annual financial transactions return referred to in subsection (4) must set out
(a) a statement of contributions received by the following classes of contributor: individuals, businesses, commercial organizations, governments, trade unions, corporations without share capital other than trade unions, and unincorporated organizations or associations other than trade unions;
(b) the number of contributors in each class listed in paragraph (a);
(c) subject to paragraph (c.1), the name and address of each contributor in a class listed in paragraph (a) who made contributions of a total amount of more than $200 to the registered party for its use, either directly or through one of its electoral district associations or a trust fund established for the election of a candidate endorsed by the registered party, and that total amount;
(c.1) in the case of a numbered company that is a contributor referred to in paragraph (c), the name of the chief executive officer or president of that company;
(d) in the absence of information identifying a contributor referred to in paragraph (c) who contributed through an electoral district association, the name and address of every contributor by class referred to in paragraph (a) who made contributions of a total amount of more than $200 to that electoral district association in the fiscal period to which the return relates, as well as, where the contributor is a numbered company, the name of the chief executive officer or president of that company, as if the contributions had been contributions for the use of the registered party;
(e) a statement of contributions received by the registered party from any of its trust funds;
(f) a statement of the electoral district association's assets and liabilities and any surplus or deficit in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, including a statement of
(i) disputed claims under section 421, and
(ii) unpaid claims that are, or may be, the subject of an application referred to in subsection 419(1) or section 420;
(g) a statement of the electoral district association's revenues and expenses in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;
(h) a statement of loans or security received by the electoral district association, including any conditions on them; and
(i) a statement of contributions received by the electoral district association but returned in whole or in part to the contributors or otherwise dealt with in accordance with this Act.
(6) For the purpose of subsection (5), other than paragraph (5)(i), a contribution includes a loan.
(7) The electoral district association shall provide the chief agent of a registered party with the documents referred to in subsection (5) within six months after the end of the fiscal period."; and
(d) by renumbering subsection (3) as subsection (8) and any cross-references thereto accordingly, With leave of the Senate, In amendment, the Honourable Senator Nolin moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Prud'homme, P.C., that Bill C-2 be not now read a third time but that it be amended, in clause 405, on page 166, by replacing lines 36 to 38 with the following:
"(3) No person, other than a chief agent, or a registered agent or an electoral district agent of a registered party, shall accept contributions to a registered party.
(4) No person, other than a chief agent of a registered party, shall provide official receipts to contributors of monetary contributions to a registered party for the purpose of subsection 127(3) of the Income Tax Act.",
With leave of the Senate, In amendment, the Honourable Senator Nolin moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Prud'homme, P.C., that Bill C-2 be not now read a third time but that it be amended, in clause 424, on page 174, by replacing lines 14 to 16 with the following:
With leave of the Senate, In amendment, the Honourable Senator Nolin moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Prud'homme, P.C., that Bill C-2 be not now read a third time but that it be amended, in clause 426,"(a) the financial transactions returns, substantially in the prescribed form, on the financial transactions of both the registered party and of the registered party's electoral district associations;".
(a) on page 176, by replacing lines 36 to 38 with the following:
(b) on page 177,"shall report to its chief agent on both its financial transactions return and trust fund return referred to in section 428, and on the annual financial transactions returns on the electoral district associations' financial transactions referred to in paragraph 375(4)(b), and shall make any"; and
(i) by replacing line 11 with the following:
"electoral district agents, registered agents and officers of the regis-", and
(ii) by replacing line 20 with the following:
"electoral district agents, registered agents and officers of the party to".With leave of the Senate, In amendment, the Honourable Senator Nolin moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Prud'homme, P.C., that Bill C-2 be not now read a third time but that it be amended, in clause 473, on page 202, by replacing lines 37 and 38 with the following:
With leave of the Senate, In amendment, the Honourable Senator Nolin moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Prud'homme, P.C., that Bill C-2 be not now read a third time but that it be amended, in clause 477, on page 203, by replacing lines 30 and 31 with the following:"registered party or to a registered agent of that registered party in the".
"477. A candidate, his or her official agent, and the chief agent of a registered party, as the case may be, shall use the prescribed forms for".
With leave of the Senate, In amendment, the Honourable Senator Nolin moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Prud'homme, P.C., that Bill C-2 be not now read a third time but that it be amended, in clause 560, on page 246,
(a) by replacing line 18 with the following:
(b) by replacing line 25 with the following:"ceipt with the Minister, signed by the chief agent or a registered "; and
After debate, The Honourable Senator Taylor moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Milne, that further debate on the motions in amendment be adjourned until the next sitting."(a) by the chief agent or a registered agent of a registered".
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
MESSAGES FROM THE HOUSE OF COMMONS
A Message was brought from the House of Commons with a reprinted Bill C-22, An Act to facilitate combatting the laundering of proceeds of crime, to establish the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada and to amend and repeal certain Acts in consequence, to which they desire the concurrence of the Senate.The Bill was read the first time.
The Honourable Senator Hays moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Carstairs, that the Bill be placed on the Orders of the Day for a second reading on Monday next, May 15, 2000.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Bills
Order No. 2 was called and postponed until the next sitting.Motions
Order No. 1 was called and postponed until the next sitting.Reports of Committees
Order No. 1 was called and postponed until the next sitting.OTHER BUSINESS
Senate Public Bills
Orders No. 1 to 5 were called and postponed until the next sitting. Order No. 6 (Bill S-4) was called and pursuant to Rule 27(3) was dropped from the Order Paper.Commons Public Bills
Orders No. 1 to 3 were called and postponed until the next sitting.Reports of Committees
Orders No. 1 to 6 were called and postponed until the next sitting.Other
Orders No. 21, 22, 14, 17 (inquiries), 7 (motion), 6, 19, 12, 9 and 18 (inquiries) were called and postponed until the next sitting.MOTIONS
The Honourable Senator Chalifoux for the Honourable Senator Gustafson moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Rompkey, P.C.:That the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry have power to sit at 3:30 p.m. on Tuesday next, May 16, 2000, even though the Senate may then be sitting, and that Rule 95(4) be suspended in relation thereto.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
_______________________________________
With leave, The Senate reverted to Government Notices of Motions.With leave of the Senate, The Honourable Senator Hays moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Rompkey, P.C.:
That when the Senate adjourns today, it do stand adjourned until Tuesday next, May 16, 2000, at 2:00 p.m.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
ADJOURNMENT
The Honourable Senator Hays moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Joyal, P.C.:That the Senate do now adjourn.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
_______________________________________
Changes in Membership of Committees Pursuant to Rule 85(4)
Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and CommerceThe name of the Honourable Senator Finnerty substituted for that of the Honourable Senator Poulin (May 10).
The name of the Honourable Senator Poulin substituted for that of the Honourable Senator Finnerty (May 11).
Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs
The name of the Honourable Senator Banks substituted for that of the Honourable Senator Pépin (May 10).
The names of the Honourable Senators Pépin and Bryden substituted for those of the Honourable Senators Banks and Pearson (May 11).
Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology
The name of the Honourable Senator Banks substituted for that of the Honourable Senator Pépin (May 10).
Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources
The name of the Honourable Senator Banks substituted for that of the Honourable Senator Chalifoux (May 11).