Journals of the Senate
56 Elizabeth II, A.D. 2007, Canada
Journals of the Senate
1st Session, 39th Parliament
Issue 68
Thursday, February 8, 2007
1:30 p.m.
The Honourable Rose-Marie Losier-Cool, Speaker pro tempore
The Members convened were:
The Honourable Senators
Andreychuk, Atkins, Austin, Bacon, Baker, Banks, Biron, Bryden, Callbeck, Carstairs, Chaput, Cochrane, Comeau, Cook, Cools, Corbin, Cowan, Dawson, Day, De Bané, Di Nino, Downe, Dyck, Eggleton, Fairbairn, Fortier, Fox, Fraser, Furey, Gill, Goldstein, Gustafson, Hays, Hervieux-Payette, Joyal, Keon, LeBreton, Losier-Cool, Lovelace Nicholas, Mahovlich, Massicotte, McCoy, Meighen, Merchant, Milne, Mitchell, Moore, Munson, Murray, Nolin, Oliver, Pépin, Peterson, Phalen, Pitfield, Poulin (Charette), Poy, Ringuette, Rivest, Robichaud, Sibbeston, Stollery, Stratton, Tardif, Tkachuk, Trenholme Counsell
The Members in attendance to business were:
The Honourable Senators
Andreychuk, *Angus, Atkins, Austin, Bacon, Baker, Banks, Biron, Bryden, Callbeck, Carstairs, Chaput, Cochrane, Comeau, Cook, Cools, Corbin, Cowan, Dawson, Day, De Bané, Di Nino, Downe, Dyck, Eggleton, Fairbairn, Fortier, Fox, Fraser, Furey, Gill, Goldstein, *Grafstein, Gustafson, Hays, Hervieux-Payette, Joyal, Keon, *Kinsella, LeBreton, Losier-Cool, Lovelace Nicholas, Mahovlich, Massicotte, McCoy, Meighen, Merchant, Milne, Mitchell, Moore, Munson, Murray, *Nancy Ruth, Nolin, Oliver, Pépin, Peterson, Phalen, Pitfield, Poulin (Charette), Poy, *Prud'homme, Ringuette, Rivest, Robichaud, Sibbeston, *Smith, Stollery, Stratton, Tardif, Tkachuk, Trenholme Counsell
PRAYERS
SENATORS' STATEMENTS
Some Honourable Senators made statements.
DAILY ROUTINE OF BUSINESS
Presentation of Reports from Standing or Special Committees
The Honourable Senator Meighen, Deputy Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence, tabled its seventh report (interim) entitled: Canadian Troops in Afghanistan: Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission. —Sessional Paper No. 1/39-655S.
The Honourable Senator Meighen moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Keon, that the report be placed on the Orders of the Day for consideration at the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
ANSWERS TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS
Pursuant to rule 25(2), the Honourable Senator Comeau tabled the following:
Reply to Question No. 19, dated November 23, 2006, appearing on the Order Paper and Notice Paper in the name of the Honourable Senator Downe, respecting Veterans Affairs Canada.—Sessional Paper No. 1/39-656S.
ORDERS OF THE DAY
GOVERNMENT BUSINESS
Bills
Order No. 1 was called and postponed until the next sitting.
Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator LeBreton, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Comeau, for the second reading of Bill S-4, An Act to amend the Constitution Act, 1867 (Senate tenure).
The Honourable Senator Tardif moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Fraser, that the debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted on the following vote:
YEAS
The Honourable Senators
Atkins, Austin, Baker, Banks, Callbeck, Carstairs, Chaput, Cook, Corbin, Dawson, Day, De Bané, Downe, Dyck, Fairbairn, Fox, Fraser, Gill, Goldstein, Hays, Hervieux-Payette, Joyal, Lovelace Nicholas, Mahovlich, McCoy, Merchant, Milne, Mitchell, Moore, Munson, Murray, Pépin, Peterson, Phalen, Pitfield, Poulin, Poy, Ringuette, Stollery, Tardif, Trenholme Counsell—41
NAYS
The Honourable Senators
Andreychuk, Cochrane, Comeau, Di Nino, Gustafson, Keon, LeBreton, Meighen, Nolin, Oliver, Stratton, Tkachuk—12
ABSTENTIONS
The Honourable Senators
Nil
Orders No. 3 and 4 were called and postponed until the next sitting.
Reports of Committees
Resuming debate on the consideration of the first report of the Special Senate Committee on Senate Reform (subject-matter of Bill S-4, An Act to amend the Constitution Act, 1867 (Senate tenure)), tabled in the Senate on October 26, 2006.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Tardif moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Cowan, that further debate on the consideration of the report be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
OTHER BUSINESS
Senate Public Bills
Orders No. 1 to 6 were called and postponed until the next sitting.
Reports of Committees
Consideration of the twelfth report of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration (Elimination of the special fund), presented in the Senate on February 7, 2007.
The Honourable Senator Nolin moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Di Nino, that the report be adopted.
After debate,
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Orders No. 2 to 5 were called and postponed until the next sitting.
Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Day, seconded by the Honourable Senator Banks, for the adoption of the fourth report of the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance (Bill S-201, An Act to amend the Public Service Employment Act (elimination of bureaucratic patronage and geographic criteria in appointment processes), with an amendment), presented in the Senate on October 3, 2006.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
The Honourable Senator Ringuette moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Fraser, that the bill, as amended, be placed on the Orders of the Day for a third reading at the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Consideration of the fourth report (interim), as amended, of the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence, entitled: Managing Turmoil, The Need to Upgrade Canadian Foreign Aid and Military Strength to Deal with Massive Change, tabled in the Senate on November 21, 2006.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Banks moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Day, that further debate on the consideration of the report be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Other
Orders No. 131 (motion), 14, 20, 15 (inquiries) and 140 (motion) were called and postponed until the next sitting.
Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Bacon, seconded by the Honourable Senator Milne:
That the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications be authorized to examine and report on the objectives, operation and governance of the Canadian Television Fund, and
That the Committee submit its final report no later than June 30, 2007.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Orders No. 3, 17, 6, 19, 11 (inquiries) and 5 (motion) were called and postponed until the next sitting.
The Order was called to resume debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Joyal, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C.:
That the Senate congratulates the Honourable Noël Kinsella on his appointment as Speaker and expresses its confidence in him while acknowledging that a Speaker, to be successful and effective in the exercise of the duties of that office, requires the trust and support of a majority of the senators.
SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE'S RULING
Last week, on Tuesday January 30, a point of order was raised by Senator Comeau while the Speaker was in the chair. I have had the opportunity to consult with the Speaker on this matter and am delivering this ruling on his behalf. The point of order occurred after Senator Joyal had completed his speech on his motion to express congratulations and confidence in the Speaker. While Senator Comeau felt certain that all Senators would agree with the intention of the motion, he questioned its acceptability as a confidence motion in the chair. After quoting section 34 of the Constitution Act, 1867, he stated that the Senate does not have the authority to appoint or remove its Speaker, since this power is reserved solely for the Governor General. Further, Senator Comeau suggested that if the Senate wished to take up Senator Joyal's proposal, it would have to seek another more appropriate vehicle to achieve this goal.
Several other senators contributed to the debate on the point of order. Senator Murray stated that the motion could be amended by deleting its second half, thus resolving Senator Comeau's objection. In addition, Senator Murray recalled that a motion of censure had been moved against one of our former Speakers in 1990.
Senator Hays, during his intervention, sought to draw a distinction between the text of the motion and the content of Senator Joyal's speech. He explained that although Senator Joyal's speech, which he felt was more in keeping with the investigative nature of an inquiry, could lead one to believe that the effect of adopting the motion would be to change the way our Speaker is appointed, there was nothing in the text of the motion to support that conclusion. He also noted that a great deal of leeway has always been accorded to senators with respect to debate on motions or inquiries. Senator Fraser, for her part, echoed Senator Hays' comments and reinforced the idea that the wording of the motion is not unconstitutional. Rather, as she noted, it states a reality: the Speaker must enjoy the support of a majority of Senators, otherwise his rulings may be overturned and his service to the chamber rendered ineffective.
Senator Corbin, quoting Beauchesne's, 6th edition, cautioned senators that the Speaker is not authorized to render a decision on a constitutional question or a question of law. He contended that Senator Comeau was attempting to ask for such a ruling in his point of order. Finally, Senator Cools spoke to state her support of Senator Comeau's objection and Senator Murray's comments. She added a few other points to the discussion. First, she stated that the motion is composed of two distinct propositions and could be divided into two questions. She then appealed to Senator Joyal to consider making such a division to his motion. Second, Senator Cools raised the concern that the content of this motion and the nature of the point of order would require the Speaker to be a judge in his own cause. She believed that it would be more appropriate that any debate on the future of the role and functions of the Speaker occur in a separate motion without reference to the incumbent.
Before giving a decision on the matter, let me thank, on behalf of the Speaker, all honourable senators who participated in the discussion on this point of order. In the interval, the Speaker and I have had time to review the Debates, examine the procedural authorities and review relevant precedents.
The question to be decided is whether Senator Joyal's motion is procedurally acceptable for debate and decision by the Senate.
Although Senator Comeau's objection was based on both the motion and the speech of Senator Joyal, the question at hand is the motion's procedural acceptability. As a result, it is sufficient to limit consideration to the motion. In addition, while acknowledging Senator Corbin's caveat that the Speaker is not permitted to rule on constitutional questions, the chair's role is to give a ruling on whether debate may proceed on this motion.
After looking at the authorities, there are many precedents for motions of confidence in a Speaker or, as they are sometimes called, motions of censure. As Senator Murray recalled in his intervention, one censure motion in the Senate was moved against the Speaker in 1990, during the events surrounding the GST debate. This motion was debated and remained on the Order Paper for a considerable period of time. Furthermore, House of Commons Procedure and Practice by Marleau and Montpetit notes, on page 266, that there have been motions of censure brought against the Speaker of the House of Commons and its Deputy Speakers. In addition, at page 294, over fifteen examples of similar motions against Speakers of provincial and territorial legislatures are cited. From these cases, it is clear that motions of censure and confidence motions in a Speaker are in order and can be debated and decided by an assembly. These precedents are in keeping with remarks found in Erskine May's, 23rd edition, on pages 386-387, explaining that any reflection on a Speaker, including confidence issues, may only be debated by way of substantive motion, which allows for a distinct decision of the House.
Thus far the issue that has been assessed relates to the acceptability of a censure motion. The authorities and precedents are clear, a censure motion is acceptable. In this case, however, there is nothing in the language of the motion suggesting censure. All the more reason to find it in order. Whatever the outcome, it would not bring about any changes in the current appointment process, role or functions of the Speaker; it would merely be a reflection of the Senate's opinion. Such motions are not uncommon. Already in this session, several motions have been proposed and adopted commenting on national and international events and issues. As a result, there are no procedural reasons to disallow this motion. The point of order is not well founded, the motion is procedurally acceptable, and debate may continue.
The Honourable Senator Banks moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Day, that the debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Orders No. 18, 23, 9 (inquiries), 92 (motion), 8, 12 (inquiries) and 104 (motion) were called and postponed until the next sitting.
Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Banks, seconded by the Honourable Senator Moore:
That the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration be directed to examine and determine, in light of recent discussions and in light of present Rules, procedures, practices and conventions of the Senate, whether it is appropriate or permissible that persons working in the offices of senators, including senators who are Ministers of the Crown, should obtain or attempt to obtain from hotels used by senators conducting business properly authorized by the Senate, detailed breakdowns including lunches or other costs included in hotel invoices, and including any and all sundry costs associated with the stay; and
That the Committee be directed to report its determination to the Senate no later than Thursday, December 7, 2006;
And on the motion in amendment of the Honourable Senator Comeau, seconded by the Honourable Senator Stratton, that the motion be amended by deleting the word "and'' at the end of the first paragraph and by adding the following paragraph immediately thereafter:
"That the Committee be directed to take into consideration whether it would be appropriate or permissible for persons working in the offices of Senators to obtain from hotels replacement receipts for the Senator in whose office they work should the originals be misplaced or be otherwise unavailable; and''.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Day moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Moore, that further debate on the motion in amendment be adjourned until the next sitting.
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 Comeau moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Stratton:
That when the Senate adjourns today, it do stand adjourned until Tuesday, February 13, 2007, at 2 p.m.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
REPORTS DEPOSITED WITH THE CLERK OF THE SENATE PURSUANT TO RULE 28(2):
Report on the Operation of the Canadian Multiculturalism Act for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2006, pursuant to the Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 24 (4th Supp.), s. 8.—Sessional Paper No. 1/39-654.
ADJOURNMENT
The Honourable Senator Comeau moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Meighen:
That the Senate do now adjourn.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
(Accordingly, at 3:40 p.m. the Senate was continued until Tuesday, February 13, 2007, at 2 p.m.)
Changes in Membership of Committees Pursuant to Rule 85(4)
Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs
The name of the Honourable Senator Hays substituted for that of the Honourable Senator Ringuette (February 8).
Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry
The names of the Honourable Senators Callbeck, Peterson and Mercer substituted for those of the Honourable Senators Trenholme Counsell, Merchant and Hubley (February 7).
Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade
The name of the Honourable Senator Phalen substituted for that of the Honourable Senator Smith (February 7).
Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications
The name of the Honourable Senator Zimmer substituted for that of the Honourable Senator Fairbairn (February 8).