Previous Sittings
Previous Sittings

Debates of the Senate (Hansard)

1st Session, 42nd Parliament,
Volume 150, Issue 81

Friday, December 2, 2016
The Honourable George J. Furey, Speaker


Friday, December 2, 2016

The Senate met at 9 a.m., the Speaker in the chair.



Appropriation Bill No. 4, 2016-17

First Reading

The Hon. the Speaker informed the Senate that a message had been received from the House of Commons with Bill C-35, An Act for granting to Her Majesty certain sums of money for the federal public administration for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2017.

(Bill read first time.)

The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, when shall this bill be read the second time?

(On motion of Senator Harder, bill placed on the Orders of the Day for second reading two days hence.)


Social Affairs, Science and Technology

Notice of Motion to Authorize Committee to Meet During Sitting of the Senate

Hon. Diane Bellemare (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate): Honourable senators, on behalf of Senator Ogilvie, I give notice that, at the next sitting of the Senate, he will move:

That, if Bill C-26, An Act to amend the Canada Pension Plan, the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board Act and the Income Tax Act, is read a second time and referred to the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology, that committee have the power to meet for the purposes of its study of the bill even though the Senate may then be sitting, with the provisions of rule 12-18(1) being suspended in relation thereto.



Prime Minister's Office

Visit of the Vice President of the United States—Softwood Lumber

Hon. Yonah Martin (Acting Leader of the Opposition): My question is for the Leader of the Government in the Senate. It concerns an issue raised many times in recent months, including in the inquiry of Senator Maltais about softwood lumber. This industry is in need of stability and predictability when it comes to access to the American market, which the Liberal government has so far failed to provide.

On November 25, the U.S. Lumber Coalition filed a petition with the United States government to impose duties on Canadian softwood lumber imports. This trade action does not come as a surprise. In fact, we have been expecting just such a move for weeks now.

United States Vice President Joe Biden will be in Ottawa a week from today. Will the Prime Minister and the Vice President discuss softwood lumber when they meet next week?

Hon. Peter Harder (Government Representative in the Senate): I thank the honourable senator for her question. The issue of softwood lumber is one that we have discussed in this chamber over the last number of weeks, quite rightly, because the softwood lumber industry is so important to Canada and our bilateral trade with the United States.

The Minister of International Trade and other senior officials have used every opportunity to advance Canada's interests in these discussions. The issues are extraordinarily difficult. I am not privy to all of the items that will be raised between the Vice President and the Prime Minister and other senior ministers. However, I would strongly expect that issues such as softwood lumber would be very much part of the overall Canadian agenda with the Obama administration, for the weeks that remain of that administration.

Senator Martin: As a supplementary question, I listened carefully, and I know that you, leader, would strongly expect such conversation to take place. What I'm looking for, and what we would like to ask on behalf of all those directly impacted by these challenging times, is

that the Prime Minister will raise this issue with Vice President Joe Biden. If you cannot give those assurances, would you please raise that with the Prime Minister's Office?

Senator Harder: I would be happy to do that. I will take the question, on behalf of all honourable senators who have expressed an interest in this subject, and urge that this be part of the overall discussions with the Vice President.

Senator Martin: Thank you.

Privy Council Office

Policy on Hiring Medically Released Veterans

Hon. Percy E. Downe: I would like to thank Senator Harder for the speed with which he is trying to answer written questions. I hope my follow-up question doesn't annoy him enough that he starts slowing down again. This is in the interests of Canadians who have asked me about these issues.

I am particularly interested in the answer that I received on medically released members of the Canadian Forces and their priority for employment in the public service. Since 2005, medically released, qualified veterans have had priority in the public service. Unfortunately, only a few departments are participating in this program. The bulk of employees are being hired by DND and a few other departments. I note, for example, Veterans Affairs, between 2005 and 2015, has hired a total of 34 medically released veterans. That is a strikingly low figure when you compare it to, for example, Corrections Canada where 66 were hired and Employment and Social Development Canada hired 56. Is there any initiative on the part of government to explain the importance of this program to deputy ministers and departments that are not participating fully?

Hon. Peter Harder (Government Representative in the Senate): I thank the honourable senator for his follow-up question to the written response, and I want to assure him and all senators that I view prompt responses as part of my obligation to you, so I take no offence in the question at all.

An Hon. Senator: Hear, hear.

Senator Harder: With respect to the follow-up question, I will inquire.


I'm unaware of any specific program or process of encouragement, but I would encourage senators when estimates of committees are before the Senate to ask the question in the estimates process. I know from personal experience that nothing focuses the mind as much as a Senate question on estimates, where each department could well be asked by the appropriate Senate committee: "What are you doing in this regard?"

Senator Downe: That's actually an excellent suggestion, particularly since delegation of hiring has been moved to deputy ministers. It would bring it to their attention.

I notice, for example, according to the information I asked for and that you provided, that between January 1, 2005, and September 30, 2015, just to give colleagues a sense of the numbers, there were 534,000 hires in the public administration; 188,000 casuals were hired in the same period; 134,000 term employees; and 117,000 indeterminate. At the same time, we have over 585 qualified medically released veterans whose priority fell off the list because they were not able to obtain employment in the time period allowed.

So those 585 served our country, were injured in the performance of their duty, wanted to work for the public service but were not given the opportunity because their priority expired. I think it's important for the government, particularly for deputy ministers and ministers, to put an emphasis on trying to pick up as many of these people as we can.

Senator Harder: I will share the comment of the honourable senator and will do what I can to bring this to the attention of deputy ministers and, indeed, ministers.

Senator Downe: I'm sure everybody read the answer when it was tabled, but just to highlight it, in case you haven't, in 2014, for example, 2,123 members of the forces were medically released, and last year, the figure was 1,841. We have a large number of people being released who are in their prime working years. These are not people taking retirement. These are people who can't continue in the forces because of injuries incurred, and if they want to work for the federal public service, the priority is there, hiring is available for them and we should try to emphasize that. I know Senator Harder is nodding, so he obviously agrees as well. Thank you.


Marijuana Companies—Information Leak

Hon. Yonah Martin (Acting Leader of the Opposition): I had a quick question for Senator Harder regarding any updates on the marijuana task force.

Hon. Peter Harder (Government Representative in the Senate): I thank the honourable senator for her question because it gives me the opportunity at the earliest possible moment to respond to the question that Senator Carignan raised yesterday, where I said I would seek the information.

Given the seriousness with which I take the question and in which I know it was intended, I want to report to all honourable senators with respect to the marijuana task force that the Minister of Justice has indicated to me that she has not seen the report. This was confirmed by the task force chair, Anne McClellan, who, as we all know is the former Minister of Justice, as well as Deputy Prime Minister. No minister has seen the report. They will see it at the same time as every member of both chambers when it is made public in mid-December.

As all senators well know, capital markets are strictly regulated. They are independent bodies that could look into the matter if they choose to. The TSX, I am informed, is monitoring this issue with the Ontario Securities Commission, of which our new honourable colleague will know more than any of us, and they will exercise whatever responsibilities they feel necessary in looking into market irregularities.


Canada Pension Plan
Canada Pension Plan Investment Board Act
Income Tax Act

Bill to Amend—Second Reading—Debate Adjourned

Hon. Tony Dean moved second reading of Bill C-26, An Act to amend the Canada Pension Plan, the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board Act and the Income Tax Act.

He said: Honourable senators, I rise to speak on Bill C-26, an Act to amend the Canada Pension Plan, the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board Act and the Income Tax Act.

Before I do that, I ask for your indulgence in taking a few minutes to reflect on my arrival in the Senate.

It has been a long road from my first serious job as an apprenticed machine tool fitter or millwright at the Dunlop Tire Company in Birmingham in the former industrial West Midlands of the United Kingdom.

Like many other newcomers to Canada, it was, as Bob Dylan would say, "a simple twist of fate" in 1978 that brought me to Hamilton, Ontario, to earn a master's degree in sociology at McMaster University. I came for 12 months, met my spouse, Marie Boutilier, and 38 years later I find myself among you in this venerable place.

Honourable senators, none of us makes these journeys alone, and that is certainly true of me. I am nothing but a beneficiary of the tremendous opportunities provided to me in my time in this wonderful country. From the moment I arrived as a graduate student and later as a union researcher, a labour relations professional, a new public servant in Ontario's Ministry of Labour, and later as a Deputy Minister of Labour, I was encouraged, nudged, thrown into the deep end of many ponds, and stretched personally and professionally in ways that I never would have imagined. Come to think about it, I'm in another one of those deep pools standing here right now.

I've benefited from a wonderful public service career, culminating as the head of Ontario's 63,000-strong public service and, beyond that, the opportunity to teach top-rated public policy graduate students at the University of Toronto's School of Public Policy & Governance.

I make two short points about public service. First, as a professional, non-partisan public servant, I have supported Conservative, Liberal and New Democratic premiers and governments in Ontario, and I have seen first-hand the hard work that they all do, politicians of every stripe on behalf of citizens. No one works harder and none are larger magnets for accountability when things go wrong than our elected politicians.

Second, I've also seen the hard-working commitment every day of Canada's public servants at every level of government. These are second to none, and they work hard every day to make a difference in the lives of Canadians. There is always room for improvement in our public services and with our public servants, but there is also much to be admired, and I ask that we don't forget that.

I often say that public servants hold an important public trust in their hands, and they take this very seriously, as do senators and the wonderful officials and staff who support us in this place. I've learned that very, very quickly.


Millions of Canadians sleep well every night because they don't worry too much about the availability of public services, and they don't worry about our system of governance. It occurs to me that they sleep well because they believe that someone else is worrying about these things and is working hard at these things. That most definitely involves our public servants, elected politicians and us in this chamber.

Honourable senators, I've been drawn here — and I arrive here drawn like you — to the virtues of working collaboratively to achieve the best possible outcomes for Canadians. I'm deeply committed to working with you in this important enterprise. I'm happy to be here. Thank you, and now back to business.

Hon. Senators: Hear, hear!

Senator Dean: Honourable senators, on June 20, Canada's federal and provincial governments came to an agreement that will enhance the Canada Pension Plan to give Canadians a more generous public pension and help them to retire with greater security and predictability. Because their efforts are reflected in the text of Bill C-26, we have the opportunity to support Canadian federalism at its best, and the power of what we can accomplish when governments work openly and constructively together to advance the highest priorities of the people that they represent.

A financially secure and dignified retirement is an important and fair objective for Canadians after a lifetime of hard work.


The facts tell an entirely different story, however. One in four families is nearing retirement age and an estimated 1.1 million families might not have saved enough for retirement. Several factors come into play.


We've seen the ongoing decline in private workplace pension coverage. There was a time, honourable senators, when private retirement pensions were a robust part of Canada's post-retirement income. But we've already seen the share of private sector employees covered by pension plans drop from over 35 per cent in 1977 to less than 25 per cent in 2012.

Today those families without workplace pensions are at particular risk of under saving for retirement. It's estimated that 33 per cent of such families may be at risk of undersaving. What's more, even those with access to private retirement plans are facing challenges.

This is in part because the reliability of those private pension plans offered by employers today has diminished as a result of the ongoing shift away from solid and predictable defined benefit pension plans in favour of defined contribution models. In 1975, 33 per cent of private sector workers were covered by defined benefit pension plans. By 2012, this coverage had dramatically reduced to 11 per cent.

Defined contribution plans expose individuals to investment risk, so if the investments they hold diminish in value, they get less in retirement. This can result in unexpected shortfalls in their pension savings just prior to their planned retirement, forcing them to work longer than desired or planned.

Younger Canadians are particularly exposed to market risks, such as interest and asset price movements, as they have both higher debts and higher assets than previous generations had at the same age, and they rely more on individual savings for retirement.

What's more, younger generations of Canadians can expect to live longer and healthier lives. While this is obviously a positive trend, their longer life expectancies also mean that the level of savings they will require at retirement must be higher in order to maintain comparable living standards over a longer retirement.

Fortunately, there is an existing retirement savings program in place that has the capacity to address all of these challenges, both effectively and economically. Stronger retirement savings are possible through a stronger Canada Pension Plan. The Canada Pension Plan, or CPP, has provided a solid foundation for supporting stronger retirement savings and alleviating poverty among seniors over the 50 years since its inception.

Statistics Canada data shows a dramatic decrease in the poverty rate among Canadian seniors over the past four decades, from 30 per cent in 1976 to about 5 per cent in 2014. According to a study by the Conference Board of Canada, this decrease is largely attributable to the establishment of the CPP and in Quebec the Quebec Pension Plan.

The most recent available statistics indicate that 5.2 million people in Canada receive $37.3 billion in benefits from the CPP, and the fundamental strengths which have supported its performance also make it ideal for addressing the challenges of the future.

The CPP provides a secure, predictable benefit, which means that Canadians can worry less about outliving their savings, having their retirement's investments impacted by large negative market shocks or the security of their savings through their workplace pension plan.

CPP benefits are also fully indexed to prices, which reduces the risk that inflation will erode the purchasing power of retirement savings.

The CPP is also a good fit for Canada's dramatically changing job market. It helps to fill the gap left by declining workplace pension coverage, and it is portable across jobs and provinces, which promotes labour mobility.

The CPP is also an efficient way to save. It's a large program with millions of contributors, which allows the CPP investment board to take advantage of economies of scale in order to deliver strong net returns. And with the automatic collection of contributions for all workers, the CPP is a simple and efficient way to save.

The CPP is an appropriate tool to improve the retirement income of younger workers. It will take roughly 40 years of contributions for a worker to fully accumulate an enhanced CPP benefit. This means younger Canadians will be the greatest beneficiaries of a CPP enhancement.

Honourable senators, I think this gives us pause to reflect on what Canada's federal and provincial governments have been able to accomplish here. In a world of 30-second sound bites, where the next election cycle qualifies as long-term thinking, they have accomplished something commendable and increasingly rare: they have planned ahead for the future. This is intergenerational policy-making. In doing so, they have displayed the same wisdom and foresight our predecessors did in creating the critical programs that sustain and define us as a nation.

Over 75 per cent of Canadians support a stronger CPP. They understand that an enhanced CPP is a way that we can take action today to support stronger retirement incomes.

Honourable senators, the legislation we're considering will do several things to provide future generations of Canadians with a more generous public pension in their retirement years. It is a comprehensive package that will increase CPP retirement, disability and survivor benefits while striking an appropriate balance between short-term economic considerations and longer-term gains.

First, it will increase the share of annual earnings received during retirement from one quarter to one third. This means that an individual making $50,000 a year in today's dollars over their working life will receive about $16,000 per year in retirement instead of roughly $12,000 available today.

Second, it will increase by 14 per cent the maximum income range covered by the CPP so that those who earn more will receive more in retirement. Once fully in place, the CPP enhancement will increase the maximum CPP retirement benefit by about 50 per cent. The current maximum benefit is $13,110. In today's dollar terms, the enhanced CPP represents an increase of nearly $7,000 to a maximum benefit of nearly $20,000.

These increased CPP retirement benefits will increase demand and increase savings overall. This will boost economic output and make more money available for investment. The Department of Finance estimates that, as a result, gross domestic product would see a slight increase between 0.05 and 0.09 per cent as a result of the CPP enhancement contained in Bill C-26. Employment levels are also projected to be permanently higher.

By providing more money from the CPP to Canadians when they retire, it will meaningfully reduce the share of families at risk of not saving enough for retirement. The Department of Finance has estimated that by ensuring the Royal Assent of Bill C-26 as it currently stands, we have the opportunity to reduce by about one quarter the share of families at risk of not having adequate retirement savings.

A stronger CPP is also an important tool to improve the retirement income security of younger workers. It's an opportunity for today's working Canadians to give their children, their grandchildren and future generations a more secure retirement.


The legislation also includes enrichments to CPP, disability and survivor benefits. For most Canadians, all of these increased CPP benefits will come from only a 1 per cent increase in contribution rates.

In considering this modest rate increase, it is important to note that the legislation governing the CPP requires any enhancement to CPP benefits to be fully funded. In essence, this means that individuals will receive higher benefits, paid for by increased contributions. This requirement was put in place during the reform of the CPP in the 1990s to ensure that the CPP remains financially sustainable.

This will ensure that the enhancement follows the principle of intergenerational equity, meaning that each generation pays for its own benefits. Each year of contributing to the enhanced CPP will allow workers to accrue partial additional benefits. Full enhanced CPP benefits will be available after about 40 years of making contributions, but partial benefits will be available sooner and will be based on years of contributions.

This legislation and the agreement it enacts will give individuals and their employers ample time to adjust to this modest increase by implementing it gradually starting in 2019. For example, an individual with earnings of $54,900 will contribute about $6 more a month in 2019. By the end of the seven-year phase-in period, contributions for that individual would be about $43 more per month. Because new employee CPP contributions will be tax deductible as opposed to being eligible for a tax credit, Canadians will not experience an increase in tax if registered retirement savings plans, RRSPs or employee pension plan contributions, which are deductible, are reduced in response to the increase in CPP contributions.

The proposed legislation, as agreed upon with the provinces, will also ensure that low-income Canadians are not financially burdened as a result of these additional contributions. It will do that by enhancing the Working Income Tax Benefit to roughly offset incremental CPP contributions, leaving eligible low-income Canadians with little to no change in disposable income, while still securing higher retirement income.

Taken together, these tax measures will provide Canadians with about $970 million in federal fiscal support in 2021 to 2022 alone.

Honourable senators, all of these positive outcomes reflect the careful approach that informed finance ministers' work towards an agreement on CPP enhancement, and it's also apparent in the way Bill C-26 supports all CPP contributors equally.

The benefits from both the base CPP and the CPP enhancement contained in Bill C-26 will always be higher for all contributing Canadians, regardless of where they live and what they do. Bill C-26 does not affect the existing provisions in the base CPP that are particularly important in supporting women and disabled Canadians. The child rearing provision — the CRP — and the disability exclusion in the base CPP will continue to exclude or to drop out qualifying periods of low earnings from the calculations used to determine base CPP benefits in retirement, effectively increasing the retirement pension of the recipient and protecting their eligibility for CPP.

For example, women will still be able to split pension credits with their former spouse or partner in the case of divorce or separation. CPP survivor benefits will also continue to support women. In 2015, 85 per cent of CPP survivors were women, and the plan will continue to provide this support and further increase the benefits that women receive.

The general dropout will continue to ensure that 17 per cent of the lowest earnings in an individual CPP contributory period can be dropped out of the calculation used to determine CPP benefits in retirement. These measures will continue to effectively boost individual CPP benefits in retirement.

The enhanced CPP contained in Bill C-26 simply builds on these existing CPP core benefits, and it does so in a prudent way that reflects the extensive research that Canada's finance ministers brought to the table in crafting this enhancement to maximize benefits for Canadians. The challenge that government faced in crafting an enhanced CPP was that the existing CPP was not accumulating benefits fast enough to meet the future needs of Canadians in a world of challenges, declining workplace pension coverage, low interest rates and market volatility. Their solution is effective because it focuses available resources on addressing these challenges as efficiently as possible.

In order to effectively balance the need for increased benefits against the need for affordability, the CPP enhancement is structured differently from the core CPP that it builds on. Its design reflects a policy focus on increasing income replacement, especially in retirement. In short, it is designed to translate the largest possible portion of new CPP savings into the largest possible new retirement benefits. So, in this regard, the enhanced CPP model contained in C-26 closely resembles the structure of the workplace-based registered pension plans that are currently in decline.

In conclusion, years of discussion between the provincial and federal governments and all of their myriad of stakeholders are reflected in Bill C-26. Through briefings from the Department of Finance, I am assured that the views of workers, employers, financial planners, academics, actuaries, economists and other governments were all judiciously considered and distilled down through these 11 governments to the document that we have before us today.

As joint stewards of the CPP, only those governments have the authority to change the agreement contained in the bill. Now that all nine CPP-participating provinces have fully confirmed their support for implementing the Vancouver agreement, we have the opportunity to join them in making history by supporting the passage of this legislation through the Senate to reflect the consensus that has been achieved.


Hon. Diane Bellemare (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate): May I ask the honourable senator a question?


Senator Dean: Yes, of course.


Senator Bellemare: Before I ask my question, I want to make sure I understood your speech. The maximum earnings covered by the Canada Pension Plan will increase by half the average industrial earnings, or 14 per cent. That means eligible income will increase by 14 per cent, and the plan will insure not 25 per cent of average earnings but 33 per cent of average earnings, with an increase of 14 per cent.

My question is on the Quebec Pension Plan, which you did not mention: How does it compare with these new parameters?


Senator Dean: Thank you for the question, senator. My understanding is that the Province of Quebec is not participating, at this point, in the CPP enhancements and is considering its own enhancements to the plan and whether or not it will join with the federal government and other provinces in some way or another. At this point, it is considering its own approach.

(On motion of Senator Martin, for Senator Stewart Olsen, debate adjourned.)


Motion in Modification Adopted

Hon. Diane Bellemare (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate), pursuant to notice of December 1, 2016, moved:

That when the Senate next adjourns after the adoption of this motion, it do stand adjourned until Monday, December 5, 2016 at 5 p.m.;

That committees of the Senate scheduled to meet on Monday, December 5, 2016 be authorized to sit even though the Senate may then be sitting and that rule 12-18(1) be suspended in relation thereto; and

That rule 3-3(1) be suspended on that day.

She said: Honourable senators, pursuant to rule 5-10(1), I ask leave to modify the motion by replacing the words "5 p.m." with the words "6 p.m."

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

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

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

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

(Motion agreed to, as modified.)



The Senate

Statutes Repeal Act—Motion to Resolve that the Act and the Provisions of Other Acts not be Repealed—Debate Adjourned

Hon. Diane Bellemare (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate), pursuant to notice of December 1, 2016, moved:

That, pursuant to section 3 of the Statutes Repeal Act, S.C. 2008,c. 20, the Senate resolve that the Act and the provisions of the other Acts listed below, which have not come into force in the period since their adoption, not be repealed:

1.Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act, R.S.,c. 33 (2nd Supp):

-Parts II and III;

2.Contraventions Act, S.C. 1992, c. 47:

-paragraph 8(1)(d), sections 9, 10 and 12 to 16, subsections 17(1) to (3), sections 18 and 19, subsection 21(1) and sections 22, 23, 25, 26, 28 to 38, 40, 41, 44 to 47, 50 to 53, 56, 57, 60 to 62, 84 (in respect of the following provisions of the schedule: sections 1, 2.1, 2.2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 7.1, 9 to 12, 14 and 16) and 85;

3. Agreement on Internal Trade Implementation Act, S.C. 1996, c. 17:

-sections 17 and 18;

4. Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty Implementation Act, S.C. 1998, c. 32;

5. Preclearance Act, S.C. 1999, c. 20:

-section 37;

6. Public Sector Pension Investment Board Act, S.C. 1999, c. 34:

-sections 155, 157, 158 and 160, subsections 161(1) and (4) and section 168;

7. Modernization of Benefits and Obligations Act, S.C. 2000, c. 12:

-sections 89 and 90, subsections 107(1) and (3) and section 109;

8. Marine Liability Act, S.C. 2001, c. 6:

-section 45;

9. Yukon Act, S.C. 2002, c. 7:

-sections 70 to 75 and 77, subsection 117(2) and sections 167, 168, 210, 211, 221, 227, 233 and 283;

10. An Act to amend the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, S.C. 2003, c. 26:

-sections 4 and 5, subsection 13(3), section 21, subsections 26(1) to (3) and sections 30, 32, 34, 36 (with respect to section 81 of the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act), 42 and 43;

11. Assisted Human Reproduction Act, S.C. 2004, c. 2:

-sections 12 and 45 to 58;

12. Public Safety Act, 2002, S.C. 2004,c. 15:

-section 78;

13. Amendments and Corrections Act, 2003, S.C. 2004, c. 16:

-sections 10 to 17 and 25 to 27;

14. Budget Implementation Act, 2005, S.C. 2005, c. 30:

-Part 18 other than sections 124 and 125; and

15. An Act to amend certain Acts in relation to financial institutions, S.C. 2005, c. 54:

-subsections 1(1) and 27(2), sections 29 and 102, subsections 140(1) and 166(2), sections 168 and 213, subsections 214(1) and 239(2), section 241, subsection 322(2), section 324, subsections 368(1) and 392(2) and section 394.

She said: Honourable senators, I am not quite done preparing my notes on this. I therefore move the adjournment of the debate until Monday, when I will pursue the matter.

(On motion of Senator Bellemare, debate adjourned.)


Linguistic Plurality Bill

Second Reading—Debate Continued

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Jaffer, seconded by the Honourable Senator Hubley, for the second reading of Bill S-222, An Act for the promotion and advancement of Canada's linguistic plurality.

Hon. Mobina S. B. Jaffer: Honourable senators, today my bill stands at the fourteenth day. My speech is ready but it's a long speech. I appreciate what day it is today. I would ask for an adjournment to the next sitting.

The Hon. the Speaker: As Senator Jaffer has already adjourned this matter, she will need leave from the chamber. Is leave granted, honourable senators?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

(On motion of Senator Jaffer, debate adjourned.)

(The Senate adjourned until Monday, December 5, 2016, at 6 p.m.)

Back to top