Journals of the Senate
56 Elizabeth II, A.D. 2007, Canada
Journals of the Senate
1st Session, 39th Parliament
Issue 86
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
1:30 p.m.
The Honourable Noël A. Kinsella, Speaker
The Members convened were:
The Honourable Senators
Adams, Andreychuk, Angus, Atkins, Bacon, Baker, Banks, Biron, Bryden, Callbeck, Cochrane, Comeau, Cook, Cools, Corbin, Cordy, Cowan, Dallaire, Dawson, Day, De Bané, Di Nino, Dyck, Eggleton, Fitzpatrick, Fortier, Fox, Furey, Grafstein, Gustafson, Harb, Hays, Jaffer, Johnson, Joyal, Kenny, Keon, Kinsella, Lapointe, LeBreton, Losier-Cool, Mahovlich, Massicotte, Mercer, Mitchell, Moore, Munson, Murray, Nolin, Oliver, Pépin, Phalen, Poulin (Charette), Poy, Ringuette, Robichaud, Rompkey, St. Germain, Segal, Spivak, Stollery, Stratton, Tardif, Tkachuk, Trenholme Counsell, Watt, Zimmer
The Members in attendance to business were:
The Honourable Senators
Adams, Andreychuk, Angus, Atkins, Bacon, Baker, Banks, Biron, Bryden, Callbeck, *Carstairs, Cochrane, Comeau, Cook, Cools, Corbin, Cordy, Cowan, Dallaire, Dawson, Day, De Bané, Di Nino, Dyck, Eggleton, Fitzpatrick, Fortier, Fox, *Fraser, Furey, *Goldstein, Grafstein, Gustafson, Harb, Hays, Jaffer, Johnson, Joyal, Kenny, Keon, Kinsella, Lapointe, LeBreton, Losier-Cool, Mahovlich, Massicotte, Mercer, *Milne, Mitchell, Moore, Munson, Murray, Nolin, Oliver, Pépin, Phalen, Poulin (Charette), Poy, Ringuette, Robichaud, Rompkey, St. Germain, Segal, *Smith, Spivak, Stollery, Stratton, Tardif, Tkachuk, Trenholme Counsell, Watt, Zimmer
PRAYERS
SENATORS' STATEMENTS
Some Honourable Senators made statements.
DAILY ROUTINE OF BUSINESS
Presentation of Reports from Standing or Special Committees
The Honourable Senator Di Nino presented the following:
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
The Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament has the honour to present its
FOURTH REPORT
Pursuant to Rule 86(1)(f)(i), your Committee is pleased to report as follows:
1. In a ruling given on October 26, 2006, dealing with the process for raising questions of privilege, the Speaker noted three aspects of the Senate's procedures which could be clarified. First, he considered the level of detail required in the written and oral notices to raise a question of privilege under Rule 43 and concluded that the notice should clearly identify the issues that will be raised as a question of privilege. Second, the Speaker invited your Committee to examine the apparent inconsistency of Rules 43 and 59(10) insofar as the two provisions deal with the notice required for questions of privilege. Third, the Speaker invited your Committee to examine ways in which the Rules might more clearly delineate the beginning and end of the Routine of Business, as under Rule 23(1), questions of privilege and points of order cannot be raised during the Routine of Business or during Question Period.
2. On March 20, 2007, your Committee heard from Mr. Charles Robert, Principal Clerk, Chamber and Procedure Office, Senate of Canada.
3. After reviewing the Speaker's ruling, and examining the issue, your Committee believes that the following amendments should be made to the Rules of the Senate:
With respect to the written notice to be given by a senator wishing to raise a question of privilege, your Committee agrees that the notice should provide some detail so as to give senators an indication of the subject of the general nature of the issue to be raised. Accordingly, amendments are proposed to sections 3, 4, and 7 of Rule 43.
Rule 59(10) allows a question of privilege to be raised without notice. As the Speaker explained, this Rule is linked to the pre-1991 provisions of the Rules of the Senate and should have been reviewed as a consequence of the amendments that were adopted at that time. The idea behind Rule 59(10) should be maintained to allow matters that occur during a sitting of the Senate to be dealt with. Nevertheless, your Committee believes that it would be helpful to move this provision and link it more directly to the other provisions relating to questions of privilege and to clarify how they relate to one another. Accordingly, a new section to Rule 43 is proposed.
The Speaker noted in his ruling of October 2006 that Rule 23(1) prohibits points of order or questions of privilege during either the Routine of Business or Question Period. A careful reading of Rule 23(6), however, indicates that Senators' Statements are, in fact, not part of Routine of Business, as it provides that the Routine of Business is a distinct category of business called after Senators' Statements. The intent behind this Rule is that the regular business of the Senate at the beginning of each sitting, whose time is limited, should not be interrupted. Your Committee agrees that the prohibition on points of order should apply to Senators' Statements as well, and an appropriate amendment to the Rules is proposed.
4. These proposed amendments lead to a number of consequential changes to the Rules of the Senate.
Your Committee recommends that the Rules of the Senate be amended as follows:
(1) That section (1) of Rule 23 be replaced with the following:
Consideration of questions of privilege and points of order
23. (1) During proceedings of the Senate taking place before Orders of the Day, including Senators' Statements, Routine of Business, Question Period and Delayed Answers, it shall not be in order to raise a point of order. Any point of order in respect to any proceeding shall be raised either at the time the Speaker announces Orders of the Day or, in relation to any notice given during the Routine of Business, when the Order is called for consideration by the Senate.
(2) That sections (3), (4), (7), and (10) of Rule 43 be replaced with the following:
Written notice
(3) Subject to section (3.1) below, a Senator wishing to raise a question of privilege shall, at least three hours before the Senate meets for the transaction of business, give a written notice of such question to the Clerk of the Senate, provided that the written notice shall clearly identify the subject matter that will be raised as a question of privilege.
Exception - Proceedings in Chamber
(3.1) With respect to a question of privilege arising out of proceedings in the Chamber during the course of a sitting, a Senator has the option of either raising it immediately without written notice or giving written notice in accordance with sections (3) and (4).
Notice for Friday
(4) Notwithstanding section (3) above, a Senator wishing to raise a question of privilege on a Friday shall, at not later than 6:00 o'clock p.m. on the immediately preceding Thursday, give a written notice of such question to the Clerk of the Senate clearly identifying the subject matter that will be raised as a question of privilege.
Oral notice
(7) A Senator having given a notice, in accordance with section (3) or (4) above, shall be recognized during the time provided for the consideration of "Senators' Statements'', for the purpose of giving oral notice of the question of privilege. In doing so, the Senator shall clearly identify the subject matter that will be raised as a question of privilege and shall indicate that he or she is prepared to move a motion either calling upon the Senate to take action in relation to the matter complained of or referring the matter to the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament.
Order of consideration
(10) The order in which the notices were received under sections (3), (3.1) or (4), as the case may be, shall determine the order of consideration of questions of privilege.
(3) That section 10 of Rule 59 be deleted and that current sections 11 to 18 be renumbered as 10 to 17.
Respectfully submitted,
CONSIGLIO DI NINO
Chair
The Honourable Senator Di Nino moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Nolin, 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.
Introduction and First Reading of Government Bills
A message was brought from the House of Commons with a Bill C-46, An Act to provide for the resumption and continuation of railway operations, to which it desires the concurrence of the Senate.
The bill was read the first time.
With leave of the Senate,
The Honourable Senator Comeau moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Oliver, that the bill be placed on the Orders of the Day for a second reading later this day.
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. 20, dated January 30, 2007, appearing on the Order Paper and Notice Paper in the name of the Honourable Senator Spivak, respecting Natural Resources Canada.—Sessional Paper No. 1/39-768S.
Reply to Question No. 29, dated February 27, 2007, appearing on the Order Paper and Notice Paper in the name of the Honourable Senator Callbeck, respecting the Task Force on Women Entrepreneurs.—Sessional Paper No. 1/39- 769S.
ORDERS OF THE DAY
GOVERNMENT BUSINESS
Motions
The Honourable Senator Comeau moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Oliver:
That, notwithstanding the Order adopted by the Senate on April 6, 2006, when the Senate sits on Wednesday, April 18, 2007, it continue its proceedings beyond 4 p.m. and follow the normal adjournment procedure according to rule 6(1); and
That committees of the Senate scheduled to meet on Wednesday, April 18, 2007, be authorized to sit even though the Senate may then be sitting, and that rule 95(4) be suspended in relation thereto.
After debate,
In amendment, the Honourable Senator Tardif moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Cowan, that the motion be amended by replacing the second paragraph with the following:
"That the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce and the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications scheduled to meet on Wednesday, April 18, 2007, be authorized to sit 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 in amendment, it was adopted, on division.
The question then being put on the motion, as amended, of the Honourable Senator Comeau, seconded by the Honourable Senator Oliver:
That, notwithstanding the Order adopted by the Senate on April 6, 2006, when the Senate sits on Wednesday, April 18, 2007, it continue its proceedings beyond 4 p.m. and follow the normal adjournment procedure according to rule 6(1); and
That the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce and the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications scheduled to meet on Wednesday, April 18, 2007, be authorized to sit 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, as amended, it was adopted.
Ordered, That the Speaker not see the clock at 6 p.m. and that rule 13(1) be suspended.
Bills
Second reading of Bill C-46, An Act to provide for the resumption and continuation of railway operations.
The Honourable Senator Comeau moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Oliver, that the bill be read the second time.
After debate,
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
The bill was then read the second time.
The Honourable Senator Comeau moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Di Nino, that the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole now.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
The Senate was accordingly adjourned during pleasure and put into a Committee of the Whole on Bill C-46, An Act to provide for the resumption and continuation of railway operations, the Honourable Senator Losier-Cool in the Chair.
—In the Committee—
Pursuant to rule 21, the Honourable Jean-Pierre Blackburn, P.C., M.P., Minister of Labour, together with Mr. Don Clarke, Director, Dispute Resolution Services, Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, and Ms. Ginette C. Brazeau, Director, Legislation, Research and Policy, Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, Human Resources and Skills Development Canada, were escorted to a seat in the Senate Chamber.
Debate.
With leave, Mr. Glen Gower, Chair of Local 483, United Transport Union, was escorted to a seat in the Senate Chamber.
Debate.
The title of the Bill was read and postponed.
Clause 1, the short title of the Bill, was read and postponed.
Clause 2 of the Bill was read.
The question of concurrence being put on Clause 2 of the Bill, it was adopted.
Clause 3 of the Bill was read.
The question of concurrence being put on Clause 3 of the Bill, it was adopted.
Clause 4 of the Bill was read.
The question of concurrence being put on Clause 4 of the Bill, it was adopted.
Clause 5 of the Bill was read.
The question of concurrence being put on Clause 5 of the Bill, it was adopted.
Clause 6 of the Bill was read.
The question of concurrence being put on Clause 6 of the Bill, it was adopted.
Clause 7 of the Bill was read.
The question of concurrence being put on Clause 7 of the Bill, it was adopted.
Clause 8 of the Bill was read.
The question of concurrence being put on Clause 8 of the Bill, it was adopted.
Clause 9 of the Bill was read.
The question of concurrence being put on Clause 9 of the Bill, it was adopted.
Clause 10 of the Bill was read.
The question of concurrence being put on Clause 10 of the Bill, it was adopted.
Clause 11 of the Bill was read.
The question of concurrence being put on Clause 11 of the Bill, it was adopted, on division.
Clause 12 of the Bill was read.
The question of concurrence being put on Clause 12 of the Bill, it was adopted.
Clause 13 of the Bill was read.
The question of concurrence being put on Clause 13 of the Bill, it was adopted.
Clause 14 of the Bill was read.
The question of concurrence being put on Clause 14 of the Bill, it was adopted.
Clause 15 of the Bill was read.
The question of concurrence being put on Clause 15 of the Bill, it was adopted.
Clause 16 of the Bill was read.
The question of concurrence being put on Clause 16 of the Bill, it was adopted.
Clause 17 of the Bill was read.
The question of concurrence being put on Clause 17 of the Bill, it was adopted.
Clause 18 of the Bill was read.
The question of concurrence being put on Clause 18 of the Bill, it was adopted.
Clause 19 of the Bill was read.
The question of concurrence being put on Clause 19 of the Bill, it was adopted.
Clause 20 of the Bill was read.
The question of concurrence being put on Clause 20 of the Bill, it was adopted.
Clause 21 of the Bill was read.
The question of concurrence being put on Clause 21 of the Bill, it was adopted.
Clause 1, the short title of the Bill, was again read.
The question of concurrence being put on Clause 1, the short title of the Bill, it was adopted.
The title of the Bill was again read.
The question of concurrence being put on the title of the Bill, it was adopted.
The question of concurrence being put on the Bill, it was adopted.
The question of concurrence in the motion that the Chair report the Bill to the Senate without amendment being put, it was adopted.
The sitting of the Senate resumed.
The Chair of the Committee stated that the Committee had examined Bill C-46 and had directed her to report the same to the Senate, without amendment.
With leave of the Senate,
The Honourable Senator Comeau moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Di Nino, that the Bill be read the third time now.
After debate,
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
The bill was then read the third time and passed.
Ordered, That a Message be sent to the House of Commons to acquaint that House that the Senate has passed this bill, without amendment.
With leave of the Senate,
The Honourable Senator Tardif moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Pépin:
That the Clerk of the Senate be authorized to pay reasonable travel and living expenses for the witness who appeared before the Committee of the Whole earlier this day, subject to the Senate guidelines for witness expenses.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Ordered, That Order No. 4 under OTHER BUSINESS, Commons Public Bills, be brought forward.
Second reading of Bill C-293, An Act respecting the provision of official development assistance abroad.
The Honourable Senator Dallaire moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Banks, that the bill be read the second time.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Keon, for the Honourable Senator Segal, moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Cochrane, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
WRITTEN DECLARATION OF ROYAL ASSENT
At 6:55 p.m. the Honourable the Speaker pro tempore informed the Senate that the following communication had been received:
RIDEAU HALL
April 18th, 2007
Mr. Speaker:
I have the honour to inform you that the Right Honourable Michaëlle Jean, Governor General of Canada, signified royal assent by written declaration to the bill listed in the Schedule to this letter on the 18th day of April, 2007, at 6:37 p.m.
Yours sincerely,
Curtis Barlow
Deputy Secretary, Policy, Program and Protocol
The Honourable
The Speaker of the Senate
Ottawa
Schedule
Bill Assented To
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
An Act to provide for the resumption and continuation of railway operations (Bill C-46, Chapter 8, 2007)
Ordered, That Motion No. 169 standing in the name of the Honourable Senator Kenny on the Notice Paper be brought forward.
MOTIONS
The Honourable Senator Kenny moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Banks:
That, notwithstanding the Order of the Senate adopted on Thursday, April 27, 2006, the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence which was authorized to examine and report on the national security policy of Canada, be empowered to report no later than March 31, 2008; and
That the Committee retain all powers necessary to publicize its findings until May 31, 2008.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted, on division.
Ordered, That all remaining items on the Order Paper and Notice Paper be postponed until the next sitting.
ADJOURNMENT
The Honourable Senator Comeau moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Keon:
That the Senate do now adjourn.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
(Accordingly, at 6:58 p.m. the Senate was continued until 1:30 p.m. tomorrow.)
Changes in Membership of Committees Pursuant to Rule 85(4)
Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry
The name of the Honourable Senator Zimmer substituted for that of the Honourable Senator Peterson (April 17).
Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications
The name of the Honourable Senator Fox substituted for that of the Honourable Senator Mercer (April 18).
Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs
The names of the Honourable Senators Robichaud and Watt substituted for those of the Honourable Senators Milne and Robichaud (April 18).
Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce
The name of the Honourable Senator Segal substituted for that of the Honourable Senator Meighen (April 18).