Order Paper and Notice Paper
The Order Paper and Notice Paper is a document that guides the deliberations of the Senate and lists items of business currently before it. These items are listed in several different categories and in a priority according to an arrangement adopted by the Senate as stipulated in the rules. The majority of these items constitute the Orders of the Day which are called following Routine Proceedings. These items are themselves divided into two principal categories - government business and other business. Within each of these two categories are items for bills, motions, inquiries and reports of committees.
The Notice Paper contains the text of motions and inquiries not yet called for debate.
The Order Paper and Notice Paper is prepared every day in advance of the actual sitting.
Order of Business
(The following is an outline of a typical sitting day in the Senate. Variations are possible subject to the Rules and to the decisions of the Senate.)
Senators' Statements (15 minutes)
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS (30 minutes)
1. Tabling of Documents
2. Presenting or Tabling Reports from Committees
3. Government Notices of Motions
4. Government Notices of Inquiries
5. Introduction and First Reading of Government Bills
6. Introduction and First Reading of Senate Public Bills
7. First Reading of Commons Public Bills
8. Reading of Petitions for Private Bills
9. Introduction and First Reading of Private Bills
10. Tabling of Reports from Interparliamentary Delegations
11. Notices of Motions
12. Notices of Inquiries
13. Tabling of Petitions
Question Period (30 minutes)
Delayed Answers
ORDERS OF THE DAY
Government Business
• Bills — Messages from the House of Commons
• Bills — Third Reading
• Bills — Reports of Committees
• Bills — Second Reading
• Reports of Committees — Other
• Motions
• Inquiries
• Other
Other Business
• Bills — Messages from the House of Commons
• Senate Public Bills — Third Reading
• Commons Public Bills — Third Reading
• Private Bills — Third Reading
• Senate Public Bills — Reports of Committees
• Commons Public Bills — Reports of Committees
• Private Bills — Reports of Committees
• Senate Public Bills — Second Reading
• Commons Public Bills — Second Reading
• Private Bills — Second Reading
• Reports of Committees — Other
• Motions
• Inquiries
• Other
NOTICE PAPER
• Notices of Motions
• Notices of Inquiries
Orders Of The Day
Other Business
Rule 4-15(2) states:
Except as otherwise ordered by the Senate, any item of Other Business on the Order Paper and any motion or inquiry on the Notice Paper that have not been proceeded with during 15 sitting days shall be dropped from the Order Paper and Notice Paper.
Consequently, the number appearing in parentheses indicates the number of sittings since the item was last proceeded with.
Reports of Committees – Other
No. 11.
June 23, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Patterson, seconded by the Honourable Senator Seidman for the adoption of the third report of the Standing Committee on Ethics and Conflict of Interest for Senators, entitled Developments and actions in relation to the committee’s fifth report regarding Senator Beyak, presented in the Senate on June 22, 2020.
Government Business
Bills – Messages from the House of Commons
Nil
Bills – Third Reading
Nil
Bills – Reports of Committees
Nil
Bills – Second Reading
Nil
Reports of Committees – Other
Nil
Motions
No. 1.
February 4, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Gold, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator LaBoucane-Benson:
That the following Address be presented to Her Excellency the Governor General of Canada:
To Her Excellency the Right Honourable Julie Payette, Chancellor and Principal Companion of the Order of Canada, Chancellor and Commander of the Order of Military Merit, Chancellor and Commander of the Order of Merit of the Police Forces, Governor General and Commander-in-Chief of Canada.
MAY IT PLEASE YOUR EXCELLENCY:
We, Her Majesty’s most loyal and dutiful subjects, the Senate of Canada in Parliament assembled, beg leave to offer our humble thanks to Your Excellency for the gracious Speech which Your Excellency has addressed to both Houses of Parliament.
No. 7.
February 6, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Gagné, seconded by the Honourable Senator Gold, P.C.:
That, notwithstanding usual practice, the Senate invite any Minister of the Crown who is not a member of the Senate to enter the chamber during any future Question Period and take part in proceedings by responding to questions relating to his or her ministerial responsibilities, subject to the Rules and practices of the Senate.
And on the motion in amendment of the Honourable Senator Housakos, seconded by the Honourable Senator Mockler:
That the motion be not now adopted, but that it be amended:
1.by replacing the words “the Senate invite any Minister of the Crown who is not a member of the Senate to enter the chamber during any future Question Period and” by the following:
“for the remainder of the current session, the Senate authorize the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate to make a short statement during any Question Period in order to designate Ministers of the Crown who are not members of the Senate to participate in Question Period;
That these ministers then be deemed invited to enter the chamber during Question Period at a future sitting to”;
2.by replacing the words “his or her” by the word “their”; and
3.by adding the following before the period:
“; and
That the Leader or Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate advise the Senate of the date that any minister designated by the Leader of the Opposition will be in attendance by making a brief statement during Question Period no later than the fourth day the Senate sits before that date”.
And on the subamendment of the Honourable Senator Gold, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Gagné:
That the motion in amendment be not now adopted, but that it be amended:
1. by replacing the words “Opposition in the Senate to make a short statement during any Question Period” by the words “Government in the Senate, after consultation with the leaders and facilitators of all the recognized parties and recognized parliamentary groups, to make a short statement at the start of the Orders of the Day during any sitting”; and
2. by replacing the words “by the Leader of the Opposition will be in attendance by making a brief statement during Question Period” by the words “pursuant to this order will be in attendance by making a brief statement at the start of the Orders of the Day”.
Inquiries
Nil
Other
Nil
Other Business
Rule 4-15(2) states:
Except as otherwise ordered by the Senate, any item of Other Business on the Order Paper and any motion or inquiry on the Notice Paper that have not been proceeded with during 15 sitting days shall be dropped from the Order Paper and Notice Paper.
Consequently, the number appearing in parentheses indicates the number of sittings since the item was last proceeded with.
Bills – Messages from the House of Commons
Nil
Senate Public Bills – Third Reading
Nil
Commons Public Bills – Third Reading
Nil
Private Bills – Third Reading
Nil
Senate Public Bills – Reports of Committees
Nil
Commons Public Bills – Reports of Committees
Nil
Private Bills – Reports of Committees
Nil
Senate Public Bills – Second Reading
No. 1. (one)
December 12, 2019—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Joyal, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Cordy, for the second reading of Bill S-202, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (conversion therapy).—(Honourable Senator Cormier)
No. 2. (two)
December 12, 2019—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Joyal, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Cordy, for the second reading of Bill S-203, An Act to amend the National Capital Act (buildings or works of national significance).—(Honourable Senator Munson)
No. 3. (two)
December 10, 2019—Second reading of Bill S-204, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (trafficking in human organs).—(Honourable Senator Ataullahjan)
No. 4. (one)
December 11, 2019—Second reading of Bill S-205, An Act to amend the Constitution Act, 1867 and the Parliament of Canada Act (Speaker of the Senate).—(Honourable Senator Mercer)
No. 5. (thirteen)
February 18, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Griffin, seconded by the Honourable Senator Verner, P.C., for the second reading of Bill S-206, An Act to amend the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act (use of wood).—(Honourable Senator Duncan)
No. 6. (ten)
February 6, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Boisvenu, seconded by the Honourable Senator Marshall, for the second reading of Bill S-207, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (disclosure of information by jurors).—(Honourable Senator Duncan)
No. 7.
February 6, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Pate, seconded by the Honourable Senator Petitclerc, for the second reading of Bill S-208, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (independence of the judiciary).—(Honourable Senator Duncan)
No. 8. (one)
February 18, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator McCallum, seconded by the Honourable Senator Francis, for the second reading of Bill S-209, An Act to Amend the Department for Women and Gender Equality Act.—(Honourable Senator Mégie)
No. 9. (fourteen)
February 6, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Bovey, seconded by the Honourable Senator LaBoucane-Benson, for the second reading of Bill S-210, An Act to amend the Parliament of Canada Act (Parliamentary Visual Artist Laureate).—(Honourable Senator Martin)
No. 10. (six)
February 18, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Miville-Dechêne, seconded by the Honourable Senator Klyne, for the second reading of Bill S-211, An Act to enact the Modern Slavery Act and to amend the Customs Tariff.—(Honourable Senator Duncan)
No. 11. (fourteen)
February 5, 2020—Second reading of Bill S-212, An Act to establish International Mother Language Day.—(Honourable Senator Jaffer)
No. 12. (eight)
March 10, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Dalphond, seconded by the Honourable Senator Boyer, for the second reading of Bill S-213, An Act to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle.—(Honourable Senator Martin)
No. 13.
February 20, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Pate, seconded by the Honourable Senator Petitclerc, for the second reading of Bill S-214, An Act to amend the Criminal Records Act, to make consequential amendments to other Acts and to repeal a regulation.—(Honourable Senator Duncan)
No. 14. (six)
March 10, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Griffin, seconded by the Honourable Senator Verner, P.C., for the second reading of Bill S-215, An Act to amend the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act (farming exemptions).—(Honourable Senator Wallin)
No. 15. (six)
March 12, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Moncion, seconded by the Honourable Senator Dasko, for the second reading of Bill S-216, An Act to amend the Assisted Human Reproduction Act.—(Honourable Senator Martin)
No. 16. (two)
June 22, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Moodie, seconded by the Honourable Senator Patterson, for the second reading of Bill S-217, An Act to establish the Office of the Commissioner for Children and Youth in Canada.—(Honourable Senator Munson)
No. 17. (three)
June 18, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Patterson, seconded by the Honourable Senator Seidman, for the second reading of Bill S-218, An Act to amend the Constitution Act, 1867 (property qualifications of Senators).—(Honourable Senator Omidvar)
No. 18. (two)
June 22, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator McPhedran, seconded by the Honourable Senator Forest-Niesing, for the second reading of Bill S-219, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act and the Regulation Adapting the Canada Elections Act for the Purposes of a Referendum (voting age).—(Honourable Senator Omidvar)
Commons Public Bills – Second Reading
Nil
Private Bills – Second Reading
No. 1. (seven)
March 11, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Jaffer, seconded by the Honourable Senator Lankin, P.C., for the second reading of Bill S-1001, An Act respecting Girl Guides of Canada.—(Honourable Senator Duncan)
Reports of Committees – Other
No. 1. (nine)
February 27, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Marwah, seconded by the Honourable Senator Wetston for the adoption of the first report of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration, entitled Senate Budget for 2020-21, presented in the Senate on December 12, 2019.—(Honourable Senator Plett)
No. 3. (eight)
February 18, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Saint-Germain, seconded by the Honourable Senator Woo for the adoption of the third report (interim) of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration, entitled Policy on Prevention and Resolution of Harassment in the Senate Workplace, presented in the Senate on February 6, 2020.
And on the motion in amendment of the Honourable Senator McPhedran, seconded by the Honourable Senator Hartling:
That the report be not now adopted, but that it be amended:
1.by replacing paragraph 1 with the following:
“1. (a) That the revised Policy on the Prevention and Resolution of Harassment in the Senate Workplace, appended to this report, be adopted;
(b) That the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights be authorized to study and recommend amendments to the Policy adopted pursuant to paragraph 1(a), when and if the committee is formed;
(c) That the papers and evidence received and taken, and work accomplished, by the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights in relation to Bill C-65, An Act to amend the Canada Labour Code (harassment and violence), the Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act and the Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 1, during the first session of the Forty-second Parliament, be referred to the committee for the purposes of its study of the Policy pursuant to paragraph 1(b);
(d) That the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights submit its final report on its study pursuant to paragraph 1(b) to the Senate no later than 30 days after the adoption of this report or the formation of the committee, whichever comes later; and
(e) That the content of any report from the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights presented to the Senate in relation to its study pursuant to paragraph 1(b), if the report is adopted by the Senate, be deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament, and the Standing Committee on Ethics and Conflict of Interest for Senators for the purpose of their respective studies pursuant to paragraphs 2 and 3;”;
2.in paragraph 2, by:
(a)adding the words “,when and if the committee is formed,” after the word “Parliament”; and
(b)by replacing the date “April 30, 2020” by the words “60 days after the adoption of this report or 60 days after the formation of the committee, whichever comes later”;
3.in paragraph 3, by replacing the date “April 30, 2020” by the words “60 days after the adoption of this report or 60 days after the formation of the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament, whichever comes later”; and
4.by adding the following new paragraph 6:
“6. That the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights, the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament, and the Standing Committee on Ethics and Conflict of Interest for Senators be permitted, notwithstanding usual practices, to deposit with the Clerk of the Senate, any reports authorized by this report, if the Senate is not then sitting, and that the reports be deemed to have been presented in the Chamber.”.—(Honourable Senator Martin)
No. 4. (eleven)
February 6, 2020—Consideration of the first report of the Special Senate Committee on the Charitable Sector, entitled Catalyst for Change: A Roadmap to a Stronger Charitable Sector, deposited with the Clerk of the Senate on June 20, 2019, during the first session of the Forty-second Parliament.—(Honourable Senator Mercer)
No. 8. (six)
May 1, 2020—Consideration of the first report of the Committee of Selection, entitled Nomination of a Speaker pro tempore, presented in the Senate on May 1, 2020.—(Honourable Senator Woo)
No. 9. (six)
May 1, 2020—Consideration of the second report of the Committee of Selection, entitled Nomination of senators to serve on committees, presented in the Senate on May 1, 2020.—(Honourable Senator Woo)
No. 10.
June 22, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Patterson, seconded by the Honourable Senator Seidman for the adoption of the second report of the Standing Committee on Ethics and Conflict of Interest for Senators, entitled Consideration of an inquiry report of the Senate Ethics Officer, presented in the Senate on June 18, 2020.
No. 12.
June 23, 2020—Consideration of the fourth report of the Special Committee on the Arctic, entitled Northern Lights: A Wake-Up Call for the Future of Canada, tabled in the Senate on June 11, 2019, during the First session of the Forty-second Parliament.—(Honourable Senator Patterson)
No. 13.
July 27, 2020—Consideration of the fourth report (interim) of the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance, entitled COVID-19: Relief in Times of Crisis, deposited with the Clerk of the Senate on July 14, 2020.—(Honourable Senator Harder, P.C.)
No. 14.
July 27, 2020—Consideration of the first report (interim) of the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology, entitled The Federal Response to COVID 19: Interim Observations, deposited with the Clerk of the Senate on July 9, 2020.—(Honourable Senator Petitclerc)
Motions
No. 5. (one)
December 11, 2019—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Joyal, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Day:
That, in order to preserve the authority, dignity and reputation of the Senate of Canada, and in light of the following reports from the First Session of the Forty-second Parliament:
1.the Senate Ethics Officer’s Inquiry Report under the Ethics and Conflict of Interest Code for Senators concerning [then] Senator Don Meredith, dated March 9, 2017;
2.the Second Report of the Standing Committee on Ethics and Conflict of Interest for Senators presented on May 7, 2017;
3.the Senate Ethics Officer’s Inquiry Report under the Ethics and Conflict of Interest Code for Senators concerning former Senator Don Meredith, dated June 28, 2019; and
4.the Sixth Report of the Standing Committee on Ethics and Conflict of Interest for Senators tabled on July 29, 2019;
the Standing Committee on Ethics and Conflict of Interest for Senators be authorized to examine and report on the advisability of adopting the following motion:
That the Senate call on the Prime Minister to recommend to Her Excellency the Governor General that former senator Don Meredith be excluded from the application of section 6 of the Table of Titles to be used in Canada, and no longer entitled to the style of “Honourable”, and that former senator Meredith no longer receive any precedence or status that would normally be accorded a former senator.;
That in conducting its examination of this question, the committee afford former Senator Meredith the opportunity to be heard by the committee;
That notwithstanding the provisions of rule 12-28(1), the committee be empowered to meet in public for the purposes of this study if it accepts a request from former Senator Meredith to that effect; and
That the committee present its final report no later than January 31, 2020.—(Honourable Senator Coyle)
No. 6. (seven)
February 18, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Verner, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Saint-Germain:
That, in light of the reports of the Senate Ethics Officer dated March 9, 2017, and June 28, 2019, concerning the breaches by former Senator Don Meredith of the Ethics and Conflict of Interest Code for Senators, the Senate call upon the Prime Minister to advise Her Excellency the Governor General to take the necessary steps to revoke the honorific style and title of “Honourable” from former senator Meredith.—(Honourable Senator Martin)
No. 7. (one)
December 11, 2019—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Gold, seconded by the Honourable Senator Woo:
That the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence be authorized to examine and report on the body of issues known as “intelligence to evidence”, when and if the committee is formed; and
That the committee submit its final report no later than December 31, 2020.—(Honourable Senator Plett)
No. 8. (one)
December 12, 2019—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Housakos, seconded by the Honourable Senator Ngo:
That the Senate call upon the Government of Canada to impose sanctions against Chinese and/or Hong Kong officials, pursuant to the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law), in light of the violation of human rights, of the principles of fundamental justice and of the rule of law in relation to the ongoing protests in Hong Kong and to the systematic persecution of minority Muslims in China.—(Honourable Senator Coyle)
No. 9. (eight)
February 18, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Housakos, seconded by the Honourable Senator Mockler:
That the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence be authorized to examine and report on the prospect of allowing Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. to be part of Canada’s 5G network, when and if the committee is formed; and
That the committee submit its final report no later than April 30, 2020.—(Honourable Senator Duncan)
No. 10. (three)
December 11, 2019—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Lankin, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Gagné:
That the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology, when and if it is formed, be authorized to examine and report on the future of workers in order to evaluate:
(a)how data and information on the gig economy in Canada is being collected and potential gaps in knowledge;
(b)the effectiveness of current labour protections for people who work through digital platforms and temporary foreign workers programs;
(c)the negative impacts of precarious work and the gig economy on benefits, pensions and other government services relating to employment; and
(d)the accessibility of retraining and skills development programs for workers;
That in conducting this evaluation the committee pay particular attention to the negative effects of precarious employment being disproportionately felt by workers of colour, new immigrant and indigenous workers; and
That the committee submit its final report on this study to the Senate no later than April 7, 2022.—(Honourable Senator Martin)
No. 12. (one)
February 18, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Woo, seconded by the Honourable Senator Saint-Germain:
That the Rules of the Senate be amended:
1.by replacing rule 3-6(2) by the following:
“Adjournment extended
3-6. (2) Whenever the Senate stands adjourned, if the Speaker is satisfied that the public interest does not require the Senate to meet at the date and time stipulated in the adjournment order, the Speaker shall, after consulting all the leaders and facilitators, or their designates, determine an appropriate later date or time for the next sitting.”;
2.by replacing rule 4-2(8)(a) by the following:
“Extending time for Senators’ Statement
4-2. (8)(a) At the request of a whip or the designated representative of a recognized party or recognized parliamentary group, the Speaker shall, at an appropriate time during Senators’ Statements, seek leave of the Senate to extend Statements. If leave is granted, Senators’ Statements shall be extended by no more than 30 minutes.”;
3.by replacing rule 4-3(1) by the following:
“Tributes
4-3. (1) At the request of any leader or facilitator, the period for Senators’ Statements shall be extended by no more than 15 minutes for the purpose of paying tribute to a current or former Senator.”;
4.by replacing rules 6-3(1)(a), (b) and (c) by the following:
“Leaders and facilitators
(a) any leader or facilitator shall be permitted up to 45 minutes for debate;
Sponsor of a bill
(b) the sponsor of a bill shall be allowed up to 45 minutes for debate at second and third reading;
Spokesperson on a bill
(c) the spokesperson on a bill from each recognized party and recognized parliamentary group, except for the party or group to which the sponsor belongs, shall be allowed up to 45 minutes for debate at second and third reading; and”;
5.by replacing rule 6-5(1)(b) by the following:
“(b) the time remaining, not to exceed 15 minutes, if the Senator who yielded is a leader or facilitator.”;
6.by replacing the portion of rule 7-1(1) before paragraph (a) by the following:
“Agreement to allocate time
7-1. (1) At any time during a sitting, the Leader or the Deputy Leader of the Government may state that the representatives of the recognized parties and recognized parliamentary groups have agreed to allocate a specified number of days or hours either:”;
7.by replacing the portion of rule 7-2(1) before paragraph (a) by the following:
“No agreement to allocate time
7-2. (1) At any time during a sitting, the Leader or the Deputy Leader of the Government may state that the representatives of the recognized parties and recognized parliamentary groups have failed to agree to allocate time to conclude an adjourned debate on either:”;
8.by replacing rule 7-3(1)(f) by the following:
“(f) Senators may speak for a maximum of 10 minutes each, provided that a leader or facilitator may speak for up to 30 minutes;”;
9.by replacing rules 9-5(1), (2) et (3) by the following:
“(1) The Speaker shall ask the whips and the designated representatives of the recognized parties and recognized parliamentary groups if there is an agreement on the length of time the bells shall ring.
(2) The time agreed to shall not be more than 60 minutes.
(3) With leave of the Senate, the agreement on the length of the bells shall constitute an order to sound the bells for that length of time.”;
10.by replacing rule 9-10(1) by the following:
“Deferral of standing vote
9-10. (1) Except as provided in subsection (5) and elsewhere in these Rules, when a standing vote has been requested on a question that is debatable, a whip or the designated representative of a recognized party or recognized parliamentary group may defer the vote.
EXCEPTIONS
Rule 7-3(1)(h): Procedure for debate on motion to allocate time
Rule 7-4(5): Question put on time-allocated order
Rule 12-30(7): Deferred vote on report
Rule 12-32(3)(e): Procedure in Committee of the Whole
Rule 13-6(8): Vote on case of privilege automatically deferred in certain circumstances”;
11.by replacing rule 9-10(4) by the following:
“Vote deferred to Friday
9-10. (4) Except as otherwise provided, if a vote has been deferred to a Friday, a whip or the designated representative of a recognized party or recognized parliamentary group may, at any time during a sitting, further defer the vote to 5:30 p.m. on the next sitting day, provided that if the Senate only meets after 5 p.m. on that day, the vote shall take place immediately before the Orders of the Day.
EXCEPTIONS
Rule 12-30(7): Deferred vote on report
Rule 13-6(8): Vote on case of privilege automatically deferred in certain circumstances”;
12.by replacing rule 12-3(3) by the following:
“Ex officio members
12-3.(3) In addition to the membership provided for in subsections (1) and (2), the Leader of the Government, or the Deputy Leader if the Leader is absent, and the leader or facilitator of each recognized party and recognized parliamentary group, or a designate if a leader or facilitator is absent, are ex officio members of all committees except the Standing Committee on Ethics and Conflict of Interest for Senators and the joint committees. The ex officio members of committees have all the rights and obligations of a member of a committee, but shall not vote.”;
13.by adding the word “and” at the end of rule 12-5(a) in the English version, and by replacing rules 12-5(b) and (c) by the following:
“(b) the leader or facilitator of a recognized party or recognized parliamentary group, or a designate, for a change of members of that party or group.”;
14.by replacing rule 12-8(2) by the following:
“Service fee proposals
12-8. (2) When the Leader or Deputy Leader of the Government tables a service fee proposal, it is deemed referred to the standing or special committee designated by the Leader or Deputy Leader of the Government following consultations with the leaders and facilitators of the recognized parties and recognized parliamentary groups, or their designates.
REFERENCE
Service Fees Act, subsection 15(1)”;
15.by replacing rule 12-18(2)(b)(ii) by the following:
“(ii) with the signed consent of the majority of the leaders and facilitators, or their designates, in response to a written request from the chair and deputy chair.”;
16.by replacing rule 12-27(1) by the following:
“Appointment of committee
12-27. (1) As soon as practicable at the beginning of each session, the Leader of the Government shall move a motion, seconded by the other leaders and the facilitators, on the membership of the Standing Committee on Ethics and Conflict of Interest for Senators. This motion shall be deemed adopted without debate or vote, and a similar motion shall be moved for any substitutions in the membership of the committee.
REFERENCE
Ethics and Conflict of Interest Code for Senators, subsection 35(4)”;
17.in Appendix I:
(a)by deleting the definition “Critic of a bill”;
(b)by deleting the definition “Ordinary procedure for determining duration of bells”; and
(c)by adding the following new definitions in alphabetical order:
“Designated representative of a recognized party or a recognized parliamentary group
The Senator designated from time to time by the leader or facilitator of a recognized party or a recognized parliamentary group without a whip as that group or party’s representative for a purpose or purposes set out in these Rules. (Représentant désigné d’un parti reconnu ou d’un groupe parlementaire reconnu)”;
“Leaders and facilitators
The Government Leader and the leaders and facilitators of the recognized parties and recognized parliamentary groups (see definitions of “Leader of the Government”, “Leader of the Opposition” and “Leader or facilitator of a recognized party or recognized parliamentary group”). (Leaders et facilitateurs)”; and
“Spokesperson on a bill
The lead Senator speaking on a bill from each recognized party and recognized parliamentary group, as designated by the leader or facilitator of the party or group in question. (Porte-parole d’un projet de loi)”; and
18.by updating all cross references in the Rules, including the lists of exceptions, accordingly; and
That the Ethics and Conflict of Interest Code for Senators be amended by deleting subsection 35(5), and renumbering other subsections and cross-references accordingly.
And on the motion in amendment of the Honourable Senator Tannas, seconded by the Honourable Senator Campbell:
That the motion be not now adopted, but that it be amended:
1.by replacing point number 4 by the following:
“4. by replacing rules 6-3(1)(a), (b), (c) and (d) by the following:
“Leaders and facilitators
(a) any leader or facilitator shall be permitted up to 45 minutes for debate;
Sponsor of a bill
(b) the sponsor of a bill shall be allowed up to 45 minutes for debate at second and third reading;
Critic of a bill
(c) the critic of a bill shall be allowed up to 45 minutes for debate at second and third reading;
Spokesperson on a bill
(d) the spokesperson on a bill from each recognized party and recognized parliamentary group, except those of the sponsor and critic, shall be allowed up to 45 minutes for debate at second and third reading; and
Others
(e) other Senators shall speak for no more than 15 minutes in debate.”;”;
2.in point number 12, by deleting the words “, but shall not vote”;
3.by deleting current point number 13 and renumbering current points number 14 to 18 as points number 13 to 17; and
4.in current point number 17, by replacing sub-point (a) by the following:
“(a) by replacing the words “(Porte-parole d’un projet de loi)” at the end of the definition of “Critic of a bill” by the words “(Critique d’un projet de loi)”;”.—(Honourable Senator Woo)
No. 15. (five)
February 4, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Brazeau, seconded by the Honourable Senator Cormier:
That the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology be authorized to examine and report on suicide prevention and mental health needs among Canadians, including a particular emphasis on boys and men, and the overrepresentation of Indigenous peoples in suicide statistics, when and if the committee is formed; and
That the committee submit its final report no later than December 31, 2020.—(Honourable Senator Verner, P.C.)
No. 16. (ten)
February 20, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Dean, seconded by the Honourable Senator Pate:
That the Rules of the Senate be amended:
1.by:
(a)deleting the word “and” at the end of rule 12-3(2)(e) in the English version; and
(b) replacing the period at the end of rule 12-3(2)(f) by the following:
“; and
(g) the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight, three Senators and two qualified external members.”;
2.by replacing rule 12-3(3) with the following:
“Ex officio members
12-3. (3) In addition to the membership provided for in subsections (1) and (2), the Leader of the Government, or the Deputy Leader if the Leader is absent, and the leader or facilitator of each recognized party and recognized parliamentary group, or a designate if a leader or facilitator is absent, are ex officio members of all committees except the Standing Committee on Ethics and Conflict of Interest for Senators, the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight and the joint committees. The ex officio members of committees have all the rights and obligations of a member of a committee, but shall not vote.
Restriction on membership
12-3. (4) No Senator shall be a member of both the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration and the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight.”;
3.by replacing the portion of rule 12-5 before paragraph (a) by the following:
“12-5. Changes in the membership of a committee, except for the ex officio members and members of the Standing Committee on Ethics and Conflict of Interest for Senators and the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight, may be made by notice filed with the Clerk, who shall have the notice recorded in the Journals of the Senate. The notice shall be signed by:”;
4.by replacing rule 12-6 with the following:
“Quorum of standing committees
12-6. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2) and elsewhere in these Rules, the quorum of a standing committee shall be four of its members.
EXCEPTION
Rule 12-27(2): Quorum of committee
Audit and Oversight
12-6. (2) The quorum of the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight shall be two Senators and one external member, except in the case of the organization meeting, for which the quorum shall be three Senators.”;
5.by:
(a)deleting the word “and” at the end of rule 12-7(15) in the English version; and
(b)replacing the period at the end of rule 12-7(16) by the following:
“; and
Audit and Oversight
12-7. (17) the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight, which, for the purposes of integrity, independence, transparency and accountability, shall be authorized, on its own initiative, to:
(a) retain the services of and oversee the external auditors and internal auditors;
(b) supervise the Senate’s internal and external audits;
(c) make recommendations to the Senate concerning the internal and external audit plans;
(d) report to the Senate regarding the internal and external audits, including audit reports and other matters;
(e) review the Senate Administration’s action plans to ensure:
(i) that they adequately address the recommendations and findings arising from internal and external audits, and
(ii) that they are effectively implemented;
(f) review the Senate’s Quarterly Financial Reports and the audited Financial Statements, and report them to the Senate; and
(g) report at least annually with observations and recommendations to the Senate.”;
6.by adding the following new rule 12-9(3):
“Audit and Oversight — access to information
12-9. (3) The Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight may review the in camera proceedings of other Senate committees, including any transcripts of meetings, as they relate to the mandate of the Audit and Oversight Committee.”;
7.by replacing rule 12-13 with the following:
“Organization meeting
12-13. (1) Once the Senate has agreed to the membership of a committee, the Clerk of the Senate shall, as soon as practicable, call an organization meeting of the committee at which it shall elect a chair.
Chair of Audit and Oversight
12-13. (2) The chair of the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight shall be a Senator who is not a member of the recognized party or recognized parliamentary group to which the chair of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration belongs.
Audit and Oversight — nomination of external members
12-13. (3) After electing its chair and deputy chair, the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight shall adopt a report to the Senate nominating two qualified external members for the committee. This report must be agreed to by all three Senators who are members of the committee. The report shall include recommendations on remuneration and permissible expenses for the external members, which shall be paid from Senate funds once the report is adopted by the Senate.”;
8.by replacing rule 12-14 with the following:
“Participation of non-members
12-14. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2) and elsewhere in these Rules, a Senator who is not a member of a committee may attend and participate in its deliberations, but shall not vote.
EXCEPTIONS
Rule 12-28(2): Participation of non-members
Rule 15-7(2): Restrictions if declaration of interest
Rule 16-3(6): Speaking at conferences
Audit and Oversight
12-14. (2) Senators who are not members of the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight shall not participate in its meetings, unless they are appearing as witnesses.”;
9.by replacing the portion of rule 12-16(1) before paragraph (a) by the following:
“12-16. (1) Except as provided in subsections (2) and (3) and elsewhere in these Rules, a committee may meet in camera only for the purpose of discussing:”;
10.by renumbering current rule 12-16(2) as 12-16(3), and by adding the following new rule 12-16(2):
“Audit and Oversight — in camera
12-16. (2) The Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight shall meet in camera whenever it deals with the in-camera proceedings of another committee.”;
11.by replacing the portion of rule 12-18(2) before paragraph (a) by the following:
“12-18. (2) Except as provided in subsection (3) and elsewhere in these Rules, a Senate committee may meet when the Senate is adjourned:”;
12.by adding the following new rule 12-18(3):
“Audit and Oversight
12-18. (3) The Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight may meet during any adjournment of the Senate.”;
13.by replacing rule 12-22(1) by the following:
“Majority conclusions
12-22. (1) Except as provided in subsection (7), a report of a Senate committee shall contain the conclusions agreed to by majority.”;
14.by replacing rule 12-22(2) by the following:
“Presentation or tabling
12-22. (2) Except as provided in subsection (8) and elsewhere in these Rules, a committee report shall be presented or tabled in the Senate by the chair or by a Senator designated by the chair.
EXCEPTION
Rule 12-31: Report deposited with the Clerk”;
15.by adding the following new rules 12-3(7) and (8):
“Reports of Audit and Oversight Committee — Content
12-3. (7) The Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight shall include the opinions of the external members in its reports.
Audit and Oversight — report deposited with the Clerk
12-22. (8) A report of the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight may be deposited with the Clerk at any time the Senate stands adjourned, and the report shall be deemed to have been presented or tabled in the Senate.”;
16.by replacing the opening paragraph of the definition of “Committee” in Appendix I, starting with the words “A body of Senators, Members of the House of Commons or both,”, by the following:
“A body of Senators, Members of the House of Commons, members of both houses, or others, appointed by one or both of the two houses to consider such matters as may be referred to it or that it may be empowered to examine, including bills. A Senate committee is, except in the case of the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight, one composed solely of Senators (as opposed to a joint committee — see below). (Comité)”; and
17.by updating all cross references in the Rules, including the lists of exceptions, accordingly.
And on the motion in amendment of the Honourable Senator Massicotte, seconded by the Honourable Senator Dean:
That the motion be not now adopted, but that it be amended:
1.in the French version of point number 3, by replacing the proposed new text by the following:
“12-5. Sauf dans le cas des membres d’office, des membres du Comité permanent sur l’éthique et les conflits d’intérêts des sénateurs et des membres du Comité permanent de l’audit et de la surveillance, le remplacement d’un membre d’un comité peut s’effectuer au moyen d’un avis remis au greffier du Sénat, qui le fait consigner aux Journaux du Sénat. Cet avis est signé :”;
2.in paragraph (b) of point number 5, by deleting paragraph (c) in the proposed new text and renumbering the remaining paragraphs in consequence;
3.in the French version of point number 14, in the proposed new text, by replacing the rule number “12-22. (1)” by “12-22. (2)”;
4.in the English version of point number 15, in the introductory wording, by replacing the words “new rules 12-3(7) and (8)” by “new rules 12-22(7) and (8)”; and
5.in point number 15, in the proposed new text, by replacing the rule number “12-3. (7)” by “12-22. (7)”.—(Honourable Senator Martin)
No. 18. (thirteen)
February 6, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Boisvenu, seconded by the Honourable Senator Seidman:
That the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence be authorized to examine and report on the manner in which the correctional system and the Parole Board of Canada managed the case of an inmate accused of the murder of a young woman while he was on day parole in January of this year, including a review of the training of commissioners, the report of the Auditor General (Report 6 — Community Supervision — Correctional Service Canada) and existing rehabilitation programs at Correctional Service Canada, with a view to recommending measures to be taken to ensure another tragedy such as this never happens again, when and if the committee is formed; and
That the committee submit its final report no later than April 30, 2020.
No. 19. (ten)
February 20, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator McCallum, seconded by the Honourable Senator Cormier:
That the Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources be authorized to examine and report on the cumulative impacts of resource extraction and development, and their effects on environmental, economic and social considerations, when and if the committee is formed; and
That the committee submit its final report no later than December 31, 2020.—(Honourable Senator Galvez)
No. 20. (seven)
March 10, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Bellemare, seconded by the Honourable Senator Ringuette:
That, the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce, when and if it is formed, be authorized to examine and report on the need to review the Bank of Canada Act in order to:
(a)specify that the Bank of Canada’s mandate covers not only price stability, but also the pursuit of maximum employment or full and productive employment, as is the case in the United States, Australia and, recently, New Zealand;
(b)provide for the signature of an agreement between the Bank of Canada and the Minister of Finance, as has been done since 1991;
(c)provide for transparency measures regarding the procedure and choice of indicators for the setting of the key policy interest rate, as well as analyses of how the conduct of monetary policy affects the inflation rate, employment and income distribution, and report to Parliament; and
That the committee submit its final report to the Senate no later than June 20, 2020.—(Honourable Senator Ringuette)
No. 22. (ten)
February 20, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Miville-Dechêne, seconded by the Honourable Senator Klyne:
That, given the unanimous declaration of the House of Commons on February 22, 2007, to condemn all forms of human trafficking and slavery, the Senate:
(a)encourage Canadians to raise awareness of the magnitude of modern day slavery in Canada and abroad and to take steps to combat human trafficking; and
(b)recognize the 22nd day of February as National Human Trafficking Awareness Day.—(Honourable Senator Duncan)
No. 26. (seven)
February 27, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Housakos, seconded by the Honourable Senator Mockler:
That, for the remainder of the current session, the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate be authorized to designate, by making a short statement during any Question Period, a Minister of the Crown to be invited to appear as a witness before the next Committee of the Whole held pursuant to this order;
That, at the start of Orders of the Day on every third Tuesday that the Senate sits after the adoption of this order, the Senate resolve itself into a committee of the whole in order to receive the designated minister in relation to his or her ministerial responsibilities;
That the committee report to the Senate no later than two hours after it starts sitting; and
That if the designated minister is unable to attend on a particular Tuesday:
1.the Leader or Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate advise the Senate of this fact as soon as possible by making a brief statement to that effect during any Question Period; and
2.the designated minister’s appearance be then postponed to the next Tuesday that the Senate sits, subject to the same conditions.
No. 30. (eight)
February 27, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Ngo, seconded by the Honourable Senator Patterson:
That the Senate urge the Government of Canada to actively support the genuine autonomy of Tibet and, consequently, to also call for the People’s Republic of China to:
(a)renew the Sino-Tibetan dialogue in good faith and based on the Middle Way Approach;
(b)respect the religious rights of the Tibetan people and stop interference in the process of recognizing a successor or reincarnation of the 14th Dalai Lama;
(c)respect the linguistic rights, freedom of movement, thought and conscience of the people in Tibet;
(d)free all Tibetan political prisoners, including the youngest political prisoner Gendhun Choekyi Nyima (Panchen Lama), and cease all arbitrary detention of dissidents;
(e)grant Canada reciprocal diplomatic access to Tibet without limitations; and
(f)protect the Tibetan Plateau that serves as Asia’s water tower, feeding over a billion lives in Asia; and
That the Senate urge the Government of Canada to raise Tibetan issues at every opportunity with China with a view to taking the additional steps necessary to deescalate tensions and restore peace and stability in Tibet.—(Honourable Senator Housakos)
No. 31. (seven)
March 10, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Lankin, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Klyne:
That, in order to promote national unity, to improve collaboration with provincial and territorial initiatives, and to support the competitive needs of domestic business, the Senate now:
(a)call on the government to:
(i)address the issue of inter-provincial trade and assert in law, for judicial clarity, that Section 121 of the Constitution Act, 1867 is the law of the land;
(ii)clarify key principles of inter-provincial trade, such as accelerating mutual recognition, formal harmonization and introduction of federal standards when applicable;
(iii)develop institutional architecture to facilitate inter-provincial trade which would include creating an internal trade commissioner or expanding the Canada Free Trade Agreement Secretariat powers; and
(iv)create a binding investor-state dispute-resolution process where complaints, negotiations, decisions and appeals might occur;
(b)urge the government to move toward enacting a revised Canada Free Trade Agreement as law, cutting back on specific exemptions within the CFTA; and
(c)recommend that the government clarify longer-term integration objectives, such as how to more consistently relate them to urban projects and innovation super-clusters.—(Honourable Senator Mockler)
No. 47. (five)
June 16, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Tannas, seconded by the Honourable Senator Verner, P.C.:
That, in light of the impact that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on Senate proceedings, and that future emergencies may have similar effects, the Clerk of the Senate, under the direction of the Speaker of the Senate, be instructed to prepare a report identifying the procedural and technological options best suited to ensure the continuity of the Senate’s operations in such situations;
That without limiting the generality of the foregoing, this review include:
1.an evaluation of the efficacy of technologies, temporary rules and practices, and safety measures to protect the health and wellness of Senators and staff that have been adopted by the Senate to support its proceedings during the COVID-19 pandemic;
2.the technological best practices implemented in other jurisdictions, including provinces, territories and foreign countries, to support legislative proceedings during emergency situations, in particular those in Commonwealth countries operating under the Westminster parliamentary system; and
3.the development of recommendations for the implementation of a contingency plan that will allow the Senate to rapidly adapt its rules, usual practices and technologies during future emergencies;
That, the Speaker be authorized to distribute the report of the Clerk of the Senate to all senators upon receipt, and that he tables the report in the Senate no later than 45 calendar days after the adoption of this order, or at the next sitting thereafter if the Senate is not then sitting;
That, upon tabling, the report be deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament, if and when it is formed, with that committee being authorized to examine and report on the findings of the Clerk of the Senate, and to recommend to the Senate the best practices it should adopt in a contingency plan to ensure the continuity of its legislative functions in the case of an emergency, including any necessary changes to the Rules and usual practices of the Senate;
That the committee submit its report no later than 60 calendar days following its receipt of the report from the Clerk of the Senate, provided that if the Senate is not sitting at the end of this period, the committee be authorized to deposit its report with the Clerk of the Senate, with the report being deemed for all purposes to have been tabled or presented in the Senate;
That after any report from the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament arising from this order has been tabled or presented in the Senate, the subject matter of that report be referred to the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration to examine and report on any necessary administrative changes, including information technologies and capital purchases, required to implement the procedural changes recommended by the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament to be part of a contingency plan; and
That the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration report thereon no later than 60 calendar days after having received the report of the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament, provided that:
1.if the report of the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament was deposited with the Clerk of the Senate, the period for the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration to conduct its study only begin on the next day thereafter that the Senate sits; and
2.if the Senate is not sitting at the end of the period for the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration to conduct its study, the committee be authorized to deposit its report with the Clerk of the Senate, with the report being deemed for all purposes to have been tabled or presented in the Senate.—(Honourable Senator Omidvar)
No. 51. (two)
June 22, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Dalphond, seconded by the Honourable Senator Munson:
That, notwithstanding any provision of the Rules, previous order or usual practice, upon the adoption of this order, and for the remainder of the current session, no Senate committee be considered a standing or special committee for the purposes of paragraphs 62.1(1)(g) and (h) of the Parliament of Canada Act.—(Honourable Senator Martin)
No. 52. (one)
June 23, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Dalphond, seconded by the Honourable Senator Galvez:
That, notwithstanding any provision of the Rules, previous order or usual practice, upon the adoption of this motion, the provisions of the motion adopted by the Senate on March 11, 2020, relating to committees, as moved by the Honourable Senator Woo and seconded by the Honourable Senator Plett, cease to have effect.—(Honourable Senator Martin)
No. 53. (three)
June 17, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Dalphond, seconded by the Honourable Senator Boniface:
That, notwithstanding any provision of the Rules or usual practice:
1.for the remainder of the session, any vacancy in the position of Speaker pro tempore be filled by means of a secret ballot, using a process to be established by the Speaker after consulting with the Leader of the Government, the Leader of the Opposition, and the leader or facilitator of any other recognized party or recognized parliamentary group; and
2.the first report of the Committee of Selection, if not disposed of before the adoption of this order, be discharged from the Order Paper.
And on the motion in amendment of the Honourable Senator Saint-Germain, seconded by the Honourable Senator Moncion:
That the motion be not now adopted, but that it be amended:
1.by adding the following before the last paragraph:
“2. the senator elected to serve as Speaker pro tempore shall be required to possess the full and practical knowledge of the official language which is not that of the Speaker for the time being;”; and
2.by renumbering the final paragraph as number 3.—(Honourable Senator Miville-Dechêne)
No. 54.
June 22, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Lankin, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Pate:
That a Special Senate Committee on Systemic Racism be appointed to conduct a review of systemic racism in Canada;
That, without limiting its mandate, the committee be authorized:
1.to review the extent and scope of anti-Indigenous racism, anti-Black racism, and systemic racism in federal institutions and agencies;
2.to review the federal government’s role in eliminating anti-Indigenous racism, anti-Black racism, and systemic racism both within federal institutions and agencies and in Canadian society generally; and
3.to identify priorities and recommendations for government action to combat anti-Indigenous, anti-Black, and systemic racism;
That the committee be composed of 12 members, to be nominated by the Committee of Selection, and that 5 members constitute a quorum;
That the committee have the power to send for persons, papers and records; to hear witnesses; and to publish such papers and evidence from day to day as may be ordered by the committee;
That, notwithstanding any provision of the Rules or usual practices, and taking into account the exceptional circumstances of the current pandemic of COVID-19, the committee have the power to meet by videoconference or teleconference, if technically feasible for any purposes of:
1.the study authorized by this order;
2.an organization meeting pursuant to rule 12-13; or
3.electing a chair or deputy chair if there is a vacancy in either of those positions;
That both senators and witnesses be allowed to participate in meetings of this committee by videoconference or teleconference, with such meetings being considered for all purposes to be meetings of the committee in question, and senators taking part in such meetings being considered for all purposes to be present at the meeting;
That, for greater certainty, and without limiting the general authority granted by this order, when the committee meets by videoconference or teleconference:
1.members of the committee participating count towards quorum;
2.priority be given to ensuring that members of the committee are able to participate;
3.such meetings be considered to be occurring in the parliamentary precinct, irrespective of where participants may be; and
4.the committee be directed to approach in camera meetings with all necessary precaution, taking account of the risks to confidentiality inherent in such technologies;
That, when the committee meets by videoconference or teleconference, the provisions of rule 14-7(2) be applied so as to allow recording or broadcasting through any facilities arranged by the Clerk of the Senate, and, if a meeting being broadcast or recorded cannot be broadcast live, the committee be considered to have fulfilled the requirement that a meeting be public by making any available recording publicly available as soon as possible thereafter;
That there be a minimum of 72 hours’ notice for a meeting of the committee by videoconference or teleconference, subject to technical feasibility;
That, the committee be authorized to report from time to time, submit a comprehensive interim report no later than six months after its organization meeting, and submit its final report no later than six months after the tabling or presenting of the comprehensive interim report;
That the committee be permitted to deposit its reports with the Clerk of the Senate if the Senate is not then sitting, with the reports then being deemed to have been tabled or presented in the Senate; and
That the committee retain the powers necessary to publicize its findings for 60 days after submitting its final report.—(Honourable Senator Martin)
No. 56. (three)
June 17, 2020—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Mégie, seconded by the Honourable Senator Anderson:
That, notwithstanding any provision of the Rules or usual practice, at the start of the Orders of the Day on the sitting day following the adoption of this order, the Senate resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole in order to receive a minister or ministers of the Crown to discuss the role of the Government of Canada in combatting anti-Black racism and anti-Indigenous racism, and ending systemic racism;
That the committee report to the Senate no later than 120 minutes after it begins;
That the provisions of rule 3-3(1) be suspended while the committee is meeting;
That the application of any provision of the Rules or previous order concerning the time of adjournment be suspended until the committee has completed its work; and
That the ringing of the bells for any deferred vote that would conflict with the committee be deferred until the committee has completed its work.
And on the motion in amendment of the Honourable Senator Black (Ontario), seconded by the Honourable Senator Verner, P.C.:
That the motion be not now adopted, but that it be amended:
1.by replacing the words “following the adoption of” with “provided for in”; and
2.by adding, after the words “systemic racism;”, the following new paragraph:
“That the sitting day provided for in this order be the earlier of the following:
(a)the first sitting day that follows the adjournment of the third successive sitting of the Senate with a daily attendance of at least 60 senators that follows the adoption of this order; or
(b)the first sitting day on which senators are permitted to participate in the proceedings of the Senate by video or teleconference;”.
And on the subamendment of the Honourable Senator Plett, seconded by the Honourable Senator Martin:
That the motion in amendment be not now adopted, but that it be amended by deleting:
1. the words “the earlier of the following:
(a)”; and
2. the words “; or
(b)the first sitting day on which senators are permitted to participate in the proceedings of the Senate by video or teleconference”.—(Honourable Senator Martin)
Inquiries
No. 1. (six)
February 4, 2020—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Omidvar, calling the attention of the Senate to the link between Canada’s past, present and future prosperity and its deep connection to immigration.—(Honourable Senator Moodie)
No. 3. (nine)
February 20, 2020—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Klyne, calling the attention of the Senate to the unrecognized histories and meaningful contributions of First Nations, Métis and Inuit.—(Honourable Senator Duncan)
No. 4. (five)
March 11, 2020—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Munson, calling the attention of the Senate to the abuse of human rights and democratic freedoms in Hong Kong.—(Honourable Senator Martin)
No. 6. (six)
February 6, 2020—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Dyck, calling the attention of the Senate to the deficiencies or gaps in the policies of the Senate of Canada compared to other parliamentary bodies on behaviours of individual senators that constitute bullying, harassment, or sexual misconduct that occur during parliamentary proceedings.—(Honourable Senator Lovelace Nicholas)
No. 7. (eleven)
February 18, 2020—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Verner, P.C., calling the attention of the Senate to the Senate Ethics Officer’s Inquiry report under the Ethics and Conflict of Interest Code for Senators concerning former Senator Don Meredith, dated June 28, 2019.—(Honourable Senator Bernard)
No. 8. (fourteen)
February 4, 2020—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Wallin, calling the attention of the Senate to:
(a)a September 2019 Quebec Superior Court ruling, which declared parts of federal and provincial law relating to medical assistance in dying (MAiD) to be too restrictive;
(b)the recent Quebec Ministry of Health and Social Services report, which recommends provisions allowing for advance requests in MAiD, out of a “moral duty to respond to it”;
(c)the ongoing and tireless work of Dying with Dignity Canada, a non-for-profit organization that advocates for vulnerable Canadians regarding their right to die;
(d)the recommendations of the federally mandated, December 2018 Canadian Association of Academies report relating to advance requests in medical assistance in dying; and
(e)the urgent need for the Senate to study and propose new rules pertaining to advance requests for medical assistance in dying.—(Honourable Senator Griffin)
No. 9. (six)
February 6, 2020—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Coyle, calling the attention of the Senate to the importance of finding the right pathways and actions for Canada and Canadians to meet our net-zero carbon emissions targets in order to slow, arrest and reverse human-caused climate change to ensure a healthy planet, society, economy and democracy.—(Honourable Senator Duncan)
No. 10. (six)
February 6, 2020—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Sinclair, calling the attention of the Senate to the need for this House of Parliament to reevaluate its rules, practices and procedures as they relate to non-government business.—(Honourable Senator Plett)
No. 11. (nine)
February 20, 2020—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Richards, calling the attention of the Senate to the decimation of Atlantic salmon spawning grounds on the Miramichi, Restigouche and their tributaries.—(Honourable Senator Griffin)
No. 12. (two)
February 6, 2020—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Bovey, calling the attention of the Senate to the need to renew and further its interest in Arctic issues.—(Honourable Senator Martin)
No. 14.
February 25, 2020—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Pate, calling the attention of the Senate to the need to examine and evaluate concrete measures available to the Senate to support the implementation of guaranteed livable income initiatives and to promote substantive equality for all Canadians.—(Honourable Senator Duncan)
No. 15. (six)
March 10, 2020—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Busson, calling the attention of the Senate to the way the Bank of Canada honours Canadians through banknotes.—(Honourable Senator Duncan)
No. 17.
June 25, 2020—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Plett, calling the attention of the Senate to the presence of racism and discrimination within Canadian institutions.—(Honourable Senator Patterson)
Other
Nil
Notice Paper
Motions
No. 23. (ten)
By the Honourable Senator Housakos:
February 18, 2020—That the Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade be authorized to examine and report on the situation in Hong Kong, in light of last year’s pro-democracy demonstrations, when and if the committee is formed; and
That the committee submit its final report no later than May 31, 2020.
No. 57. (three)
By the Honourable Senator Saint-Germain:
June 16, 2020—That the Rules of the Senate be amended:
1. by:
(a)deleting the word “and” at the end of rule 12-3(2)(e) in the English version; and
(b)replacing the period at the end of rule 12-3(2)(f) by the following:
“; and
(g) the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight, three Senators and two external members.”;
2.by replacing rule 12-3(3) with the following:
“Ex officio members
12-3. (3) In addition to the membership provided for in subsections (1) and (2), the Leader of the Government, or the Deputy Leader if the Leader is absent, and the leader or facilitator of each recognized party and recognized parliamentary group, or a designate if a leader or facilitator is absent, are ex officio members of all committees except the Standing Committee on Ethics and Conflict of Interest for Senators, the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight and the joint committees. The ex officio members of committees have all the rights and obligations of a member of a committee, but shall not vote.
Restriction on membership
12-3. (4) No Senator shall be a member of both the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration and the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight.”;
3.by replacing the portion of rule 12-5 before paragraph (a) by the following:
“12-5. Changes in the membership of a committee, except for the ex officio members and members of the Standing Committee on Ethics and Conflict of Interest for Senators and the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight, may be made by notice filed with the Clerk, who shall have the notice recorded in the Journals of the Senate. The notice shall be signed by:”;
4.by replacing rule 12-6 with the following:
“Quorum of standing committees
12-6. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2) and elsewhere in these Rules, the quorum of a standing committee shall be four of its members.
EXCEPTION
Rule 12-27(2): Quorum of committee
Audit and Oversight
12-6. (2) The quorum of the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight shall be two Senators and one external member, except in the case of the organization meeting, for which the quorum shall be three Senators.”;
5.by:
(a)deleting the word “and” at the end of rule 12-7(15) in the English version; and
(b)replacing the period at the end of rule 12-7(16) by the following:
“; and
Audit and Oversight
12-7. (17) the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight, which, for the purposes of integrity, independence, transparency and accountability, shall be authorized, on its own initiative, to:
(a) retain the services of and oversee the external auditors and internal auditors;
(b) supervise the Senate’s internal and external audits;
(c) report to the Senate regarding the internal and external audits, including audit reports and other matters;
(d) review the Senate Administration’s action plans to ensure:
(i) that they adequately address the recommendations and findings arising from internal and external audits, and
(ii) that they are effectively implemented;
(e) review the Senate’s Quarterly Financial Reports and the audited Financial Statements, and report them to the Senate; and
(f) report at least annually with observations and recommendations to the Senate.”;
6.by adding the following new rule 12-9(3):
“Audit and Oversight — access to information
12-9. (3) The Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight may review the in camera proceedings of other Senate committees, including any transcripts of meetings, as they relate to the mandate of the Audit and Oversight Committee.”;
7.by replacing rule 12-13 with the following:
“Organization meeting
12-13. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), once the Senate has agreed to the membership of a committee, the Clerk of the Senate shall, as soon as practicable, call an organization meeting of the committee at which it shall elect a chair.
Audit and Oversight — Organization meeting
12-13. (2) In the case of the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight, the Clerk of the Senate shall, as soon as practicable after the Senate has agreed to the Senators to serve on the committee, call an organization meeting of the committee at which it shall elect a chair, without the external members having been nominated.
Chair of Audit and Oversight
12-13. (3) The chair of the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight shall be a Senator who is not a member of the recognized party or recognized parliamentary group to which the chair of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration belongs.
Audit and Oversight — nomination of external members
12-13. (4) After electing its chair and deputy chair, the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight shall adopt a report to the Senate nominating two external members for the committee. A former Senator or former member of the House of Commons is not eligible for nomination as an external member. This report must be agreed to by all three Senators who are members of the committee. The report shall include recommendations on remuneration and permissible expenses for the external members, which shall be paid from Senate funds once the report is adopted by the Senate. A similar process shall be followed if a vacancy arises in the position of external member over the course of the session.”;
8.by replacing rule 12-14 with the following:
“Participation of non-members
12-14. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2) and elsewhere in these Rules, a Senator who is not a member of a committee may attend and participate in its deliberations, but shall not vote.
EXCEPTIONS
Rule 12-28(2): Participation of non-members
Rule 15-7(2): Restrictions if declaration of interest
Rule 16-3(6): Speaking at conferences
Audit and Oversight
12-14. (2) Senators who are not members of the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight shall not attend or participate in its meetings, unless they are appearing as witnesses.”;
9.by replacing the portion of rule 12-16(1) before paragraph (a) by the following:
“12-16. (1) Except as provided in subsections (2) and (3) and elsewhere in these Rules, a committee may meet in camera only for the purpose of discussing:”;
10.by renumbering current rule 12-16(2) as 12-16(3), and by adding the following new rule 12-16(2):
“Audit and Oversight — in camera
12-16. (2) The Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight shall meet in camera whenever it deals with the in-camera proceedings of another committee.”;
11.by replacing the portion of rule 12-18(2) before paragraph (a) by the following:
“12-18. (2) Except as provided in subsection (3) and elsewhere in these Rules, a Senate committee may meet when the Senate is adjourned:”;
12.by adding the following new rule 12-18(3):
“Audit and Oversight
12-18. (3) The Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight may meet during any adjournment of the Senate.”;
13.by renumbering current rule 12-20(2) to (4) as 12-20(3) to (5), and by adding the following new rule 12-20(2):
“Vote in Audit and Oversight Committee
12-20. (2) The external members of the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight may participate in all proceedings of the committee, but shall not vote on any motion put to the committee.”;
14.by replacing rule 12-22(1) by the following:
“Majority conclusions
12-22. (1) Except as provided in subsection (7), a report of a Senate committee shall contain the conclusions agreed to by majority.”;
15.by replacing rule 12-22(2) by the following:
“Presentation or tabling
12-22. (2) Except as provided in subsection (8) and elsewhere in these Rules, a committee report shall be presented or tabled in the Senate by the chair or by a Senator designated by the chair.
EXCEPTION
Rule 12-31: Report deposited with the Clerk”;
16.by adding the following new rules 12-22(7) and (8):
“Reports of Audit and Oversight Committee — Content
12-22. (7) Any member of the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight, including an external member, shall have the right to include individual observations and dissenting opinions in any report of the committee if the member so wishes.
Audit and Oversight — report deposited with the Clerk
12-22. (8) A report of the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight may be deposited with the Clerk at any time the Senate stands adjourned, and the report shall be deemed to have been presented or tabled in the Senate.”;
17.by replacing the opening paragraph of the definition of “Committee” in Appendix I, starting with the words “A body of Senators, Members of the House of Commons or both,”, by the following:
“A body of Senators, Members of the House of Commons, members of both houses, or others, appointed by one or both of the two houses to consider such matters as may be referred to it or that it may be empowered to examine, including bills. A Senate committee is, except in the case of the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight, one composed solely of Senators (as opposed to a joint committee — see below). (Comité)”; and
18.by updating all cross references in the Rules, including the lists of exceptions, accordingly.
Inquiries
No. 2. (fourteen)
By the Honourable Senator Manning:
December 10, 2019—That he will call the attention of the Senate to the life of Larry Dohey.
No. 16. (six)
By the Honourable Senator Dalphond:
February 27, 2020—That he will call the attention of the Senate to the use of parliamentary privilege in the context of employee relations and inquiries of the Senate Ethics Officer.
Written Questions
No. 5.
By the Honourable Senator Boisvenu:
December 10, 2019—Regarding the list of individuals who are automatically required to hold a security clearance according to section 50 of the Cannabis Regulations, how many applicants failed the security clearance requirements for each of the following categories:
1.directors;
2.officers;
3.partners;
4.heads of security;
5.licence holders (where holder is an individual); and
6.master growers.
No. 9.
By the Honourable Senator Downe:
December 10, 2019—Regarding possible overseas tax evasion and the LGT Bank in Liechtenstein where information was disclosed in 2008, indicating 106 Canadian accounts, as of December 1, 2019:
1. How many Canadians (individuals, trusts, foundations and companies) have been determined to have had accounts in LGT Bank?
2. How much money has been identified as owing to the Government of Canada?
3. How many Canadians (individuals, trusts, foundations and companies) have been determined to owe money to the Government of Canada?
4. What are the names of the individuals, companies, trusts and foundations determined to owe money to the Government of Canada?
5. How many Canadians (individuals, trusts, foundations and companies) have been charged with overseas tax evasion?
6. What are the names of the individuals, companies, trusts and foundations charged?
7. In which court and in which cities were these charges laid?
8. How many were convicted?
9. Of those convictions:
(a) What was the largest fine, and what was the smallest?
(b) What was the longest term of imprisonment, and what was the shortest?
10. How much money identified as owing has been collected by the Canada Revenue Agency?
No. 10.
By the Honourable Senator Downe:
December 10, 2019—Regarding possible overseas tax evasion and the “Paradise Papers”, a 2017 leak of information from the law firm Appleby and the corporate registries of 19 tax jurisdictions, as of December 1, 2019:
1. How many Canadians (individuals, trusts, foundations and companies) have been identified by the Canada Revenue Agency as a result of this leak?
2. How much money has been identified as owing to the Government of Canada?
3. How many Canadians (individuals, trusts, foundations and companies) have been determined to owe money to the Government of Canada?
4. What are the names of the individuals, companies, trusts and foundations determined to owe money to the Government of Canada?
5. How many Canadians (individuals, trusts, foundations and companies) have been charged with overseas tax evasion?
6. What are the names of the individuals, companies, trusts and foundations charged?
7. In which court and in which cities were these charges laid?
8. How many were convicted?
9. Of those convictions:
(a) What was the largest fine, and what was the smallest?
(b) What was the longest term of imprisonment, and what was the shortest?
10. How much money identified as owing has been collected by the Canada Revenue Agency?
No. 13.
By the Honourable Senator Downe:
December 10, 2019—With respect to a report in the Toronto Star on May 30th 2019, about tax evasion in the real estate markets of Ontario and British Columbia, and claims that “Canada Revenue Agency audits have added more than $1 billion to government coffers”, would the Government of Canada provide the following information:
1. How many Canadians (individuals or companies/corporations) have been identified as having evaded taxes through real estate transactions?
2. How many non-Canadians (individuals or companies/corporations) have been identified as having evaded taxes through real estate transactions?
3. Of those Canadians (individuals or companies/corporations) identified, how many of them are being, or have been reviewed by the Canada Revenue Agency?
4. Of those non-Canadians (individuals or companies/corporations) identified, how many of them are being, or have been reviewed by the Canada Revenue Agency?
5. How many audits have been undertaken against these Canadians by the Canada Revenue Agency?
(a) How many reassessments or related compliance actions have been undertaken?
6. How many audits have been closed?
7. How many audits are still ongoing?
8. How many audits have been undertaken against these non-Canadians by the Canada Revenue Agency?
(a) How many reassessments or related compliance actions have been undertaken?
9. How many audits have been closed?
10. How many audits are still ongoing?
11. How many identified Canadians have availed themselves of the Voluntary Disclosure Program with the Canada Revenue Agency?
12. How many identified non-Canadians have availed themselves of the Voluntary Disclosure Program with the Canada Revenue Agency?
13. How many identified Canadians have settled with the Canada Revenue Agency?
14. How many identified non-Canadians have settled with the Canada Revenue Agency?
15. How much money, including unpaid taxes, fines, etc., has the Canada Revenue Agency assessed as a result of investigating these cases?
16. Regarding Question 15, what is the breakdown of the money assessed from these cases, specifically:
(a) in unpaid taxes;
(b) in interest;
(c) in fines; and
(d) in penalties?
17. How much of the money has been collected?
18. How many of these cases are under appeal?
19. How many cases remain open?
20. How many of the cases have been closed, i.e. the full amount of taxes, interest, fines and penalties have been collected?
21. How many tax evasion charges have been laid?
22. How many convictions have been recorded?
No. 14.
By the Honourable Senator Downe:
February 4, 2020—With respect to overseas tax evasion:
On April 3rd, 2016 the Panama Papers were disclosed, including the names of more than 600 Canadians. On May 9th of that same year the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) gained access to the external Panama Papers database. Subsequently, the CRA committed to “combatting the abusive use of offshore jurisdictions and protecting the integrity of the Canadian tax system” and would “pursue audits related to offshore tax evasion including some Canadian clients” named in the Panama Papers.
However, more than three years later, the CRA seems not to have shared in the success that other national revenue agencies have achieved. According to the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists — the organization that broke the Panama Papers story — in the three and a half years since the release of the Papers, many countries have worked swiftly and forcefully to act on the information discovered.
Other countries have recovered:
•Germany: $183 million
•Spain: $164 million
•Ecuador: $84 million
•Australia: $93 million
•Mexico: $22 million
•Malta: $11 million
•Lithuania: $358,830
•Iceland: $25 million
•Numerous individuals charged and convicted worldwide.
And over $1.2 billion collected. Not “identified”, collected.
During this same time, Canada, according to the same source, has recovered no money whatsoever.
Also, unlike in other countries, not a single Canadian had been convicted, or even charged with tax evasion as a result of the Panama Papers.
After more than 3 years, can the Canada Revenue Agency join other countries in pointing to any real progress resulting from the release of the Panama Papers?
Any at all?
With that in mind, would the Government of Canada provide the following:
1.How many Canadians (individuals, trusts, foundations and companies) have been identified in the Panama Papers?
2.Of those Canadians (individuals, trusts, foundations and companies) identified, how many of their accounts are being, or have been reviewed by the Canada Revenue Agency since the release of the Panama Papers?
3.How many audits have been undertaken against these Canadians by the Canada Revenue Agency?
(a)How many reassessments or related compliance actions have been undertaken?
4.How many audits have been closed?
5.How many audits are still ongoing?
6.How many identified Canadians have requested that their cases be dealt with under the auspices of the Voluntary Disclosure Program with the Canada Revenue Agency?
7.How many of those requests have been granted
8.How many identified Canadians have settled with the Canada Revenue Agency?
9.How much money, including unpaid taxes, fines, etc., has the Canada Revenue Agency assessed as a result of investigating these cases?
10.How much money identified as owing has been collected by the Canada Revenue Agency?
11.How many cases remain open?
12.How many of the audits have been completed, including the full amount of taxes, interest, fines and penalties having been collected?
13.How many tax evasion charges have been laid?
No. 15.
By the Honourable Senator Downe:
February 4, 2020—With respect to the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA):
Regarding the commitment in the 2016 Federal Budget to spend $444.4 million (over five years) to combat tax evasion, and the commitment in the 2017 Federal Budget to spend $523.9 million (over five years) for the same purpose, for a combined total $968.3 million, of as well as the claim by the CRA that “The CRA remains on track to spend the budget investments over the 5-year period for which they have been outlined”:
1.As of the end of Fiscal Year 2016-2017, how much of the $41.8 million (from the $968.3 million total) budgeted for “Cracking down on Tax Evasion and Combatting Tax Avoidance” for that Fiscal Year in Budget 2016 had actually been spent;
•How much of the money spent from the $41.8 million budgeted was used to fund employee benefit plans?
2.As of the end of Fiscal Year 2017-2018 how much of the $62.8 million (from the $968.3 million total) budgeted for “Cracking down on Tax Evasion and Combatting Tax Avoidance” for that Fiscal Year in Budget 2016 had actually been spent;
•How much of the money spent from the $62.8 million budgeted was used to fund employee benefit plans?
3.As of the end of Fiscal Year 2017-2018 how much of the $54.9 million (from the $968.3 million total) budgeted for “Cracking down on Tax Evasion and Combatting Tax Avoidance” for that Fiscal Year in Budget 2017 had actually been spent;
•How much of the money spent from the $54.9 million budgeted was used to fund employee benefit plans?
4.As of the end of Fiscal Year 2018-2019 how much of the $85.7 million (from the $968.3 million total) budgeted for “Cracking down on Tax Evasion and Combatting Tax Avoidance” for that Fiscal Year in Budget 2016 had actually been spent;
•How much of the money spent from the $85.7 budgeted was used to fund employee benefit plans?
5.As of the end of Fiscal Year 2018-2019 how much of the $78.1 million (from the $968.3 million total) budgeted for “Cracking down on Tax Evasion and Combatting Tax Avoidance” for that Fiscal Year in Budget 2017 had actually been spent;
•How much of the money spent from the $78.1 million budget was used to fund employee benefit plans?
No. 16.
By the Honourable Senator Downe:
February 4, 2020—Regarding the Canada Child Benefit for the benefit years 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19:
1.How much money was provided via the Canada Child Benefit per federal electoral district in Prince Edward Island?
2.How many families in Prince Edward Island received the Canada Child Benefit?
3.How many children in Prince Edward Island were covered by the Canada Child Benefit?
4.What was the largest monthly payment for a Prince Edward Island family receiving the Canada Child Benefit?
5.What was the smallest monthly payment for a Prince Edward Island family receiving the Canada Child Benefit?
6.What percentage of recipients of the Canada Child Benefit in Prince Edward Island had adjusted net family annual income:
(a)Under $30,000
(b)Between $30,000 and $49,999
(c)Between $50,000 and $79,999
(d)Over $80,000
7.What was the average adjusted net family income for those Prince Edward Islanders receiving the Canada Child Benefit?
No. 17.
By the Honourable Senator Downe:
February 4, 2020—Since 2005, qualified medically released Canadian Forces veterans have been eligible for priority employment appointments in the federal public service.
For the period from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2019:
1.How many people were hired by the federal public service?
2.How many casual employees were hired by the federal public service?
3.How many term employees were hired by the federal public service?
4.How many indeterminate employees were hired by the federal public service?
5.How many members of the Canadian Forces, by rank upon release, have been medically released?
6.How many of these qualified medically released members, by rank upon release, have applied for a priority employment appointment in the federal public service?
(a)How many of these were hired as casual employees?
(b)How many of these were hired as term employees?
(c)How many of these were hired as indeterminate employees?
7.How many, by rank upon release, were still on the priority employment appointment list when their eligibility period expired?
8.How many qualified medically released Canadian Forces veterans, by rank upon release, were hired by each federal Government department?
(a)How many of these were hired as casual employees by each federal Government department?
(b)How many of these were hired as term employees by each federal Government department?
(c)How many of these were hired as indeterminate employees by each federal Government department?
No. 18.
By the Honourable Senator Downe:
February 4, 2020—With respect to the employees of Global Affairs Canada (GAC) who have been posted outside Canada for ten or more consecutive years for the period 2000-2019, would the government provide for each of these employees the,
1.name;
2.title;
3.location or locations; and
4.length of time outside Canada.
5.GAC has stated that “employees assigned abroad are part of the career rotational foreign service and are expected to spend more than half of their entire careers outside Canada.” What percentage of the careers of each of these employees has been spent outside Canada?
6.Which employee has had the longest continuous posting outside Canada, and where has this employee been posted?
7.Which employee has had the most consecutive postings outside Canada, and where has this employee been posted?
No. 19.
By the Honourable Senator Downe:
February 25, 2020—According to the Public Accounts of Canada, 19 instances of fraudulent use of Contribution Funds has cost what is now Global Affairs Canada over five and a half million dollars over the last 11 years.
With that in mind, could the government provide the following information:
1.In what countries did these instances occur?
2.What are the names of the individuals or groups responsible for these fraudulent claims?
3.How much of the money lost to fraudulent claims has been recovered?
4.What is the total loss to Global Affairs Canada?
No. 20.
By the Honourable Senator Downe:
February 25, 2020—As stated in the Public Accounts of Canada 2018-2019:
Ministerial approval represents authority given to Ministers under the Financial Administration Act (FAA) or other Acts of Parliament as follows:
•Section 25(1) of the FAA gives Ministers, through Treasury Board regulations, general authority to approve the write-off of any debt, obligation or claim other than accountable advances or overpayments of salaries, wages, or employment-related allowances that would not result in a charge to an appropriation.
•Section 155.1(4) of the FAA gives Ministers, through Treasury Board regulations, authority to waive interest on overdue amounts owing to Her Majesty and to waive administrative charges for dishonoured instruments (e.g. NSF cheques) imposed under section 155.1 of the FAA.
•Other Acts of Parliament (e.g. Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act) give Ministers general authority to approve the write-off or forgiveness of specific debts, obligations or claims.
Under this authority, the Minister of National Revenue wrote off, forgave or waived interest or administrative charges in 1,534,315 cases of “debts, obligations and claims” to the Government of Canada in Fiscal Year 2018-2019, for a total of $4,166,405,553.
These include:
•1,190,147 cases under the Financial Administration Act, totaling $3,237,650,407;
•25,303 cases under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, totaling $352,032,596;
•7,637 cases under the Excise Tax Act, totaling $98,070,653; and
•311,228 cases under the Income Tax Act, totaling $478,651,897.
With this in mind, regarding the Financial Administration Act and the Income Tax Act, would the Government of Canada provide the following information for the Fiscal Year 2018-2019:
1.How many Canadians (individuals, trusts, foundations and companies) have had their debts written off?
2.What was the largest amount written off?
3.What was the smallest amount written off?
4.What was the largest amount forgiven?
5.What was the smallest amount forgiven?
6.How many Canadians (individuals, trusts, foundations and companies) have had interest and/or administrative charges waived?
7.What was the largest amount of interest or administrative charges waived?
8.What was the smallest amount of interest or administrative charges waived?
9.What was the Minister of National Revenue’s justification for writing off or forgiving those debts, and waiving interest and administrative charges?
10.Is the Canada Revenue Agency still actively trying to recover the debts owed but written off?
11.If so, what steps are being taken?
12.If not, why not?
13.How much of this debt has been recovered?
No. 21.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
March 10, 2020—With respect to Veterans Affairs Canada:
For several months, the Virtual Memorial Website of the Department of Veterans Affairs has stated: “We are experiencing technical difficulties with our Digital Collections and we are working to resolve the issue. We apologize for any and all inconveniences and appreciate your patience in this matter. If you notice any missing images on our website, please contact us at vac.cvwm-mvgc.acc@canada.ca”. Given the important nature of the information provided on this site to the families of Canada’s fallen, can the Department please explain:
1.The nature of the problem with the website,
2.Why it has taken so long to resolve the problem, and
3.When the problem will be resolved?
No. 22.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
March 10, 2020—With respect to the War of 1812 Book of Remembrance:
In 2019, the War of 1812 Book of Remembrance was placed in the Memorial Chamber. The Book incorporates the names of some 1,600 Canadian and Allied First Nations fallen. The Book had been complete for nearly four years but was not placed in the Memorial Chamber until February 2019, during the brief time that the Honourable Jody Wilson-Raybould was Minister of Veterans Affairs. Since that time, the search engine on the Department of Veterans Affairs’ website has stated: “Our database is currently being updated to include the War of 1812 Books of Remembrance”. On what date will the names of Canadian and First Nations’ fallen from this conflict finally be accessible on the website?
No. 23.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
March 10, 2020—Regarding the Defence Capabilities Blueprint:
The mandate letter of the Minister of National Defence instructs the Minister to: “Ensure the Canadian Armed Forces have the capabilities and equipment required to uphold their responsibilities through continued implementation of Strong, Secure, Engaged, including new procurements and planned funding increases”. Under Strong, Secure, Engaged, the Defence Capabilities Blueprint (DCB) contains general project timelines for approximately 240 major capital information technology and infrastructure projects, and significant in-service support contracts.
1.Can the Minister explain how these projects are prioritized?
2.Can the Minister identify the government’s twenty most important capability projects within the DCB, and the current timelines for completing priority projects?
3.How many of the 240 major projects are currently funded?
No. 24.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
March 10, 2020—Regarding Defence Procurement Canada:
The mandate letter for the Minister of National Defence instructs the Minister to: “Support the Minister of Public Services and Procurement to bring forward analyses and options for the creation of Defence Procurement Canada, to ensure that Canada’s biggest and most complex National Defence and Canadian Coast Guard procurement projects are delivered on time and with greater transparency to Parliament. This priority is to be developed concurrently with ongoing procurement projects and existing timelines”.
1.Can the Minister provide the currently envisaged timeline and key milestones for bringing forward “analyses and options for the creation of Defence Procurement Canada”?
2.Since December 2019, how many meetings has the Minister held with the Minister of Public Services and Procurement specifically concerning this matter?
No. 25.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
March 10, 2020—Regarding fighter aircrafts:
The mandate letter of the Minister of National Defence instructs the Minister to: “Work with the Minister of Public Services and Procurement to manage the competitive process to select a supplier and enter into a contract to construct Canada’s fighter aircraft fleet”.
1.Can the Minister please explain how this process is being managed on a day-to-day basis?
2.Since December 2019, how many meetings has the Minister held with the Minister of Public Services and Procurement specifically concerning this project?
3.Can the Minister confirm that the plan is to sign a contract for a new fighter aircraft in 2022? Can the Minister outline the key milestones over the next two years in order to meet that objective?
4.Can the Minister confirm that all aircraft manufacturers, including Boeing, Saab and Lockheed Martin, are participating in this competitive process?
No. 26.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
March 10, 2020—Regarding defence capabilities in Canada’s North:
The mandate letter for the Minister of National Defence instructs the Minister to: “Work with the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Minister of Northern Affairs and partners through the Arctic and Northern Policy Framework to develop better surveillance (including by renewing the North Warning System), defence and rapid-response capabilities in the North and in the maritime and air approaches to Canada, to strengthen continental defence, protect Canada’s rights and sovereignty and demonstrate international leadership with respect to the navigation of Arctic waters”.
1.Since December 2019, how many meetings has the Minister of National Defence held with the Ministers concerned on this matter?
2.What is the Government’s current timeline for renewing the North Warning System?
3.Have discussions been initiated with the United States on this matter?
4.What does the Government assess as the most important military capabilities that will require renewal in the years ahead to ensure “better surveillance, defence and rapid-response capabilities in the North and in the maritime and air approaches to Canada”?
No. 27.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
March 10, 2020—Regarding shipbuilding:
The mandate letter of the Minister of National Defence instructs the Minister to: “Work with the Minister of Public Services and Procurement on the renewal of the Royal Canadian Navy Fleet, continuing the revitalization of the shipbuilding industry, creating middle class jobs and ensuring Canada’s Navy has the modern ships that it needs”.
1.Can the Minister please explain how this process is being managed on a day-to-day basis?
2.Since December 2019, how many meetings has the Minister held with the Minister of Public Services and Procurement specifically concerning the National Shipbuilding Strategy?
3.Can the Minister please confirm:
(a)the planned in-service dates for the two Joint Support ships under construction,
(b)the planned in-service dates for each of the six Arctic Offshore Patrol Ships, and
(c)the planned date (year and month) for the start of construction of the future Canadian Surface Combatant?
No. 28.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
March 10, 2020—Regarding Global Affairs Canada:
The mandate letter of the Minister of Foreign Affairs calls on the Minister to “Expand Canadian diplomacy on global issues and in international institutions. We must maximize the Canadian advantage of being a member of the world’s most vital multilateral institutions, continuing to be a strong voice for the rules-based order” and to “lead Canada’s United Nations Security Council campaign”.
Please outline:
•Funding and full-time equivalents (FTEs) allocated within Global Affairs Canada to support this initiative since March 2016;
•Total value of funding provided to date to “Security Council Report” to address thematic and country priorities of interest to Canada in its preparation for a seat on the council;
•A list of all contracts entered into by the Government of Canada or the Department with any organization related to the preparation of Canada’s bid for a Security Council seat;
•The individual value of each such contract;
•Number of meetings held by the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs with foreign ambassadors/high commissioners or other senior foreign officials since March 2016 where this initiative was a principal issue on the proposed agenda;
•Number of meetings held by the Deputy Minister of International Trade with foreign ambassadors/high commissioners or other senior foreign officials since March 2016 where this initiative was a principal issue on the proposed agenda;
•Number of meetings held by the Deputy Minister of International Development with foreign ambassadors/high commissioners or other senior foreign officials since March 2016 where this initiative was a principal issue on the proposed agenda;
•Number of meetings held by the Associate Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs with foreign ambassadors/high commissioners or other senior foreign officials since March 2016 where this initiative was a principal issue on the proposed agenda;
•Number of meetings held by the Minister of Foreign Affairs with other Foreign Ministers, foreign ambassadors/high commissioners or other senior foreign officials since March 2016 where this initiative was a principal issue on the proposed agenda;
•Number of meetings held by the Minister of International Development with other Foreign or Development Ministers, foreign ambassadors/high commissioners or other senior foreign officials since March 2016 where this initiative was a principal issue on the proposed agenda;
•Number of meetings held by the Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade with other Foreign or Development Ministers, foreign ambassadors/high commissioners or other senior foreign officials since March 2016 where this initiative was a principal issue on the proposed agenda;
•Number of international visits undertaken by any Minister, Deputy Minister or Associate Deputy Minister from the Department of Global Affairs since March 2016 where this initiative was a principal issue on the proposed agendas.
•A list of countries visited by any Minister, Deputy Minister or Associate Deputy Minister from the Department of Global Affairs since March 2016 where this initiative was a principal issue on the proposed agendas.
•List, nature and value of individual funding commitments made by the Government of Canada to development, or other initiatives, in Barbados or any other member state in the Caribbean Community since March 2016;
•List, nature and value of individual funding commitments made by the Government of Canada to development, or other initiatives, in Nigeria, Ethiopia, Somalia, Mauritius, Madagascar, Senegal or any other member state in the African Union since March 2016;
•List, nature and value of individual funding commitments made by the Government of Canada to development, or other initiatives, in any member state in the Organization of American States since March 2016.
No. 30.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
March 12, 2020—With respect to the Department of National Defence:
The mandate letter for the Minister of National Defence instructs the Minister to: “Continue to improve support for the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces and to ensure a workplace characterized by professionalism, inclusion and valuing diversity: Work with senior leaders of the Canadian Armed Forces to establish and maintain a workplace free from harassment and discrimination; Create a new $2,500 tax-free benefit every time a military family relocates, to help with retraining, recertification and other costs of finding new work; and Achieve the goal of 25 per cent of Canadian Armed Forces members being women by 2026”.
1.Can the Minister please outline the status of each of the components of this initiative?
2.What is the current percentage of women in the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) at present?
3.Within the 25% overall target, have sub-targets been set for the employment of women in the various elements of the CAF, including the combat arms? What are those targets?
4.What measures are being taken to ensure that targets are being met on an annual basis?
5.Have training standards or practices in any element of the CAF been adjusted in any way to facilitate meeting the set targets? If so, please explain the specific nature of the adjustments that have been made?
6.Could the Minister please outline each of the recruitment objectives for every designated group? What is the current level of designated group membership in the CAF at the present time?
7.How are the various designated group recruitment objectives balanced against urgent operational recruiting needs in the CAF that may arise?
8.When an urgent operational recruiting requirement related to a particular trade arises (for instance with respect to pilots in the RCAF), does such a requirement take temporary precedence over designated group objectives?
9.What are the current manning requirements for RCN frigates, submarines and other vessels? To what extent are these requirements being met?
10.How many RCN frigates, submarines or other warships are currently manned up to the full requirement?
No. 31.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
March 12, 2020—Regarding icebreakers:
The entire Coast Guard icebreaker fleet is to reach the limit of its anticipated life expectancy in the current decade. With respect to the Louis S. St-Laurent, that estimated life expectancy has already passed.
1. What is the current estimate for how long the Louis S. St-Laurent can be maintained in service? What is the estimated cost for maintaining the Louis S. St-Laurent through the 2020s? Does the Louis S. St-Laurent have a planned retirement date?
2. The Government has asked for an RFI from Canadian shipyards on their ability to build the Diefenbaker icebreaker as a replacement for the Louis S. St-Laurent. Why did the Government first remove the Diefenbaker from the Seaspan yard in June 2019 only to issue an RFI, including Seaspan, eight months later? Why did it take the Government eight months to issue this RFI when the project is clearly extremely urgent? Why has the Government taken no action on this matter since taking office in November 2015? What explains the four year delay given the age of the Louis S. St-Laurent?
3. Will the Government provide the current cost estimate for building the Diefenbaker icebreaker? Will the Government commit to building an icebreaker at the Polar 2 class level or, if not, what level of icebreaking capability is envisaged for the Diefenbaker? What is the planned in-service date for this vessel?
4. Will the Government please provide the envisaged schedule for building six medium icebreakers for the Canadian Coast Guard to replace the vessels currently reaching their estimated maximum life expectancy? When is the first medium icebreaker anticipated to enter service and when will the sixth vessel enter service?
5. Does the Government remain on track to negotiate an umbrella agreement with Davie Shipbuilding this year? When will construction of the first medium icebreaker begin?
6. Can the Government confirm that the interim icebreakers currently entering service will be sufficient to provide icebreaking capability in the St. Lawrence river and in all Canadian waters through the 2020s and until the new medium icebreakers are in service? If not, how will these essential icebreaking requirements be met?
7. How many times has the Minister responsible for the Canadian Coast Guard met with the Minister of Public Services and Procurement since 2015 to discuss either the Polar icebreaker or medium icebreaker projects?
No. 33.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
March 12, 2020—Regarding the Parliamentary Precinct:
The mandate letter for the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations instructs the Minister to “work with First Nations, Inuit and Métis Nation leadership, with the support of the Minister of Public Services and Procurement, to conclude the Government’s contribution to the space for Indigenous Peoples in the Parliamentary Precinct.”
In relation to this mandate item, please provide:
1. (a)Total spending (in dollar amount) by the federal government on this project since 2015, and a breakdown of all principal expenditures to date.
(b)Percentage of funding to date — capital and operating — provided by the federal government for the creation of this space.
(c) Percentage of funding to date — capital and operating — provided by First Nations, Inuit and Métis Nation organizations for the creation of this space.
(d)Funds currently estimated to be required over the next five years to support this project. As well, please provide breakdown of projected capital and operating costs over the next five years.
2. Is there a current plan for making this space self-sustaining, with no contribution by federal taxpayers required? If so, please explain that plan.
No. 34.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
March 12, 2020—Regarding the Indian Act:
The mandate letter for the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations instructs the Minister to “continue to support Indigenous-led processes for rebuilding and reconstituting their historic nations, advancing self-determination and, for First Nations, transitioning away from the Indian Act.”
1.With which Indigenous Nations does the Government of Canada envisage engaging over the next two years on this mandate item? What resources — monetary and full-time equivalents (FTEs) — are allocated to supporting this initiative in the current fiscal year?
2.In relation to this mandate item, please indicate:
(a)From the perspective of the Government of Canada, what will full reconciliation and self-determination look like once it has been achieved?
(b)What does an end state of “transitioning away from the Indian Act” look like from the perspective of the federal government?
(c)Are there any limitations or boundaries for the Government of Canada with respect to the objective of “advancing self-determination”?
(d)Does the federal government have a definition of “self-determination” in the context of this mandate item?
(e)Does the Government of Canada have a timeline for achieving full reconciliation and self-determination?
No. 36.
By the Honourable Senator Pate:
March 25, 2020—Lack of access to health care in federal prisons has been well documented. There is also an overrepresentation in federal prisons of those at risk of the Coronavirus. As a result of factors such as advanced age and/or chronic underlying health conditions, some individuals are unlikely to be seen as public safety risks.
•How many federal prisoners have been (1) tested for and (2) placed in lockdown, quarantine or otherwise isolated as a result of Coronavirus, with data disaggregated by region, sex, race, and age of the individuals?
•Have any federal prisoners been transferred to hospitals or other community-based health care pursuant to section 29 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act in anticipation of the threat of Coronavirus? If not, what is the rationale for not making use of this provision to better manage the inevitable exposure of prisoners and staff to Coronavirus?
•Have any individuals been transferred to Indigenous communities pursuant to sections 81 or 84 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act in anticipation of the Coronavirus? If not, what is the rationale for not making use of this provision to better manage the inevitable exposure of prisoners and staff to Coronavirus?
•Have any individuals been granted parole by exception pursuant to section 121 in anticipation of the Coronavirus? If not, what is the rationale for not making use of this provision to better manage the inevitable exposure of prisoners and staff to Coronavirus?
No. 37.
By the Honourable Senator Pate:
March 25, 2020—Indigenous communities are often at increased risk of the Coronavirus as a result of Canada’s longstanding failures to invest in necessary infrastructure including potable water, housing and health care. What concrete measures are being taken to close these gaps in infrastructure investment? What is the timeline for action?
No. 38.
By the Honourable Senator Pate:
March 25, 2020—In question period on March 12, 2020, the Government Representative referred to plans for income support for those in gig work and other forms of precarious labour who are affected by the Coronavirus.
•Is this income support a guaranteed livable income? If not, what steps were taken to evaluate the effectiveness of guaranteed livable income and what was the rationale for not implementing a guaranteed livable income?
•What criteria will be applied to determine eligibility for income support?
•How much support will be granted and for how long?
•What measures are being taken to offer income support and ensure adequate health care for others lacking income security, including those on social assistance or performing unpaid work?
No. 39.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
May 1, 2020—Regarding infrastructure:
In its 2016 budget, the Government of Canada signaled its intention to: “Where it is in the public interest, engage public pension plans and other innovative sources of funding — such as demand management initiatives and asset recycling — to increase the long-term affordability and sustainability of infrastructure in Canada”.
1. Could the government please list the asset recycling projects that have been realized since Budget 2016?
2. Since Budget 2016, have any government departments or agencies studied asset recycling within their portfolios? If so, which ones and when?
3. Is the government still pursuing asset recycling? If so, what is currently being done on that front? If not, when and why was this idea abandoned?
No. 40.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
May 1, 2020—Regarding government consultations:
1. Which business groups and organizations did the Department of Finance or any other department consult with respect to each of the government’s new emergency programs in response to COVID-19? What form did these consultations take, and what process was followed?
2. What specific advice was accepted by the government, and why? What advice was rejected, and why?
3. Did the Department of Finance or any other government department consult with the Canadian Federation of Independent Business prior to the government’s two announcements on the wage subsidy program for small business, on March 18 and March 27, 2020, respectively? If yes, what form did that consultation take? If not, why not?
No. 41.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
May 1, 2020—Regarding judicial appointments:
1. Guidelines for Judicial Advisory Committee (JAC) members state: “The Committees are asked to assess all candidates on the basis of three (3) categories — “recommended”, “highly recommended” or “unable to recommend” for appointment.” Since January 14, 2019, how many candidates were appointed as judges who were assessed by JACs as:
(a) “highly recommended”
(b) “recommended”
(c) “unable to recommend”?
2. How has the work of the JACs been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic? Are candidates still being evaluated?
No. 42.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
May 1, 2020—Regarding international trade:
The first round of formal negotiations on a free trade agreement between Canada and Mercosur (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay) was held in March 2018.
1. What is the current status of negotiations of a free trade agreement with Mercosur?
2. Has a second round of negotiations been scheduled? If not, why not?
3. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s 2020-21 Departmental Plan states the department “will continue advancing agricultural interests in trade negotiations in 2020–21, such as those currently taking place with Mercosur countries”. What does the department believe would be the impact on our agricultural sector of a free trade agreement with Mercosur?
No. 43.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
May 1, 2020—Regarding Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls:
1.Since the release of the Final Report of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls in June 2019, has the RCMP reopened any related cases? If, so how many? Have these reopened cases resulted in arrests or charges laid?
2.Has the RCMP reviewed any related investigations since the release of the final report?
3.Is the Government of Canada aware of any other related cases reopened by other police forces in Canada in the time since the release of the final report?
No. 44.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
May 1, 2020—Regarding the Agreement on Land, Rail, Marine, and Air Transport Preclearance between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America:
1.The United States currently conducts preclearance in eight Canadian airports. Are there any plans to expand the number of Canadian airports where the U.S. operates border preclearance?
(a)If so, which airports are under consideration?
(b)If so, what is the timeline involved? Have these plans been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic?
(c)If not, why not?
2. Are there plans to have Canadian border preclearance conducted in American airports?
(a)If so, which airports are under consideration?
(b)If so, what is the timeline involved? Have these plans been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic?
(c)If not, why not?
No. 45.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
May 1, 2020—Regarding the Canada–United States Safe Third Country Agreement:
On April 22, 2020, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) revealed that refugee claimants eligible for exemptions under the Canada–United States Safe Third Country Agreement can enter Canada through designated land ports of entry.
1.How many claimants have applied for asylum in Canada since this directive was announced?
2.Have all claimants who have entered Canada since April 22 been tested for COVID-19? If so, how many have tested positive?
3.Why did the Government of Canada issue this directive, given that the Canadian border is closed and claimants at irregular border crossings are being returned to the United States?
4.Why did CBSA communicate information regarding this change from its French twitter account only?
No. 46.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
May 1, 2020—Regarding the Independent Advisory Board for Senate Appointments:
On March 9, 2020, Order in Council 2020-0120 re-appointed “Vianne Timmons, O.C., of Regina, Saskatchewan, as a special adviser to the Prime Minister, to serve as an ad hoc provincial member of the Independent Advisory Board for Senate Appointments, to hold office during pleasure for a term ending on April 30, 2020.”
1.Why did the government re-appoint Dr. Timmons as a Saskatchewan member of the Independent Advisory Board for Senate Appointments when the Board of Regents of Memorial University of Newfoundland announced in December 2019 that Dr. Timmons would become its president and vice-chancellor, effective April 1, 2020?
2.Are provincial members of the Independent Advisory Board for Senate Appointments required to be residents of the province they represent? If not, why not? How many other provincial members of the Advisory Board are not residents of the province they represent?
3.According to the government’s Senate appointments website, applications are only supposed to be retained for two years. Have there been instances where a list older than two years has been used to fill a Senate seat for any province? If so, how many? When was the last list for the province of Saskatchewan submitted?
No. 47.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
May 1, 2020—Regarding shipbuilding:
For each of the shipyards listed below, what impact has the COVID-19 pandemic had on shipbuilding project timelines? If timelines for the delivery of ships have changed as a result of the pandemic, have new timelines been established? If so, what are they?
1.Irving Shipbuilding
2.Seaspan Shipyards
3.Davie Shipbuilding
No. 48.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
May 1, 2020—Regarding Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project:
On June 3, 2018, the Minister of Finance told CTV’s Question Period: “We have investors who are already expressing interest.”
1.How many investors had expressed interest in purchasing Trans Mountain at the time the Minister made this statement in June 2018? How many have since expressed interest to date?
2.What exactly did the Minister mean by “expressing interest”? What form did this engagement take?
3.What is the current status of the federal government’s engagement with Indigenous-led groups regarding ownership of Trans Mountain either in whole or in part?
4.When does the federal government anticipate it will begin accepting formal offers from investors to purchase Trans Mountain?
No. 49.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
May 1, 2020—Regarding the tourism and accommodation industry:
1.Has the Government of Canada evaluated the losses for the industry as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic? If so, what are they?
2.Are the objectives set by the government for 2025 in Creating Middle Class Jobs: A Federal Tourism Growth Strategy being reevaluated?
(a)Is it still the government’s objective to increase tourism revenues 25% by 2025, using 2018 as a baseline?
(b)What are the new objectives, if any?
3.How many tourism operators have applied for funding from Canada’s Regional Development Agencies (RDAs) since March 13, 2020?
(a)How many have received funding from RDAs since March 13?
(b)What is the total amount of that funding?
(c)What is the breakdown of this funding amongst the six RDAs across Canada?
4.On March 27, 2020, Parks Canada announced it will work with tourism operators in national parks, historic sites, and marine conservation areas to defer payments on commercial leases and licenses of occupation without interest until September 1, 2020. How many tourism operators (listed by province) have had their payments deferred since March 27?
No. 50.
By the Honourable Senator Pate:
May 1, 2020—This pandemic has made two things clear. First, in ways that exacerbate and entrench existing inequalities particularly when it comes to income, class, sex, race, and ability, Canada’s health, employment, housing and social supports leave too many people behind in times of need. Second, that we cannot return to this status quo.
What measures is the government taking to ensure ongoing oversight of its pandemic response by independent human rights and substantive equality experts, and how will such input be incorporated in order to ensure that the “lessons learned” and post-pandemic processes include examinations of and steps to remedy the inequalities that have been exposed by both the pandemic and gaps in government responses?
No. 51.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
May 15, 2020—Regarding Canada’s ports:
On March 12, 2018, the Minister of Transport announced a review of Canada Port Authorities. A public consultation period ended on December 3, 2018.
1.What is the current status of this review? What are the next steps in this process?
2.Has the Minister received a final report? If so, when did this occur? If not, why has this not happened to date?
3.The December 2019 mandate letter from the Prime Minister to the Minister of Transport instructs the Minister to “(c)omplete the Ports Modernization Review with an aim to update governance structures that promote investment in Canadian ports.” How has the Minister worked to date to fulfill this part of his mandate letter? When is the Ports Modernization Review expected to be completed?
4.Have port usage fees increased since 2015? If so, please provide the percentage increase for every year since 2015.
No. 52.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
May 15, 2020—Regarding export control activities conducted by the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA):
1.What progress has been made by CBSA on each of the recommendations made by the Auditor General of Canada in Chapter 2 of the Fall 2015 report?
2.Chapter 2 of the report states: “We found that the Agency did not continue its usual level of export control activities during temporary staff reductions, such as vacation, sick leave, or reassignment to higher-priority import control duties. We found that at one port of exit, no export control examinations were conducted when the assigned border services officer was on vacation. As another example, due to staffing fluctuations, the centralized unit that reviews rail shipments had once gone longer than a month without any targeting.” Are there still gaps in export control examinations due to vacations, sick leave or reassignment? If so, how long are those gaps?
3.For the previous and current fiscal years, what percentage of CBSA’s full-time equivalents work on export control activities?
4.How has the COVID-19 pandemic impacted export control activities conducted by CBSA? Have the export control staffing levels been impacted by the pandemic? Have CBSA’s priorities for export control examinations changed in any way due to the pandemic?
No. 53.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
May 15, 2020—Regarding the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority (CATSA):
1.A Special Examination report by the Auditor General of Canada released in February 2016 recommended that the Corporation should “conduct information technology (IT) Threat and Risk Assessments on all critical systems and maintain action plans for each assessment.” How has CATSA made progress on this specific recommendation? How often are IT Threat and Risk Assessments conducted on critical systems? Please outline the specific actions taken by CATSA in response to the findings of IT Risk and Threat Assessments.
2.The Budget Implementation Act, 2019, No. 1 transfers the responsibility for aviation security screening to a new not-for-profit organization. The original transfer date of March 31, 2020 was delayed. Has a new transfer date been set by the federal government? If so, what is that date?
3.CATSA’s 2019 Annual Report states: “As CATSA is playing a supporting role in this transition, there is a risk that the organization may not have direct access to the pertinent information required to enable a seamless transition to the new entity by the targeted deadline.” Is this risk related to the organization’s IT infrastructure? If so, how?
No. 54.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
May 15, 2020—Regarding the potential privatization of Canadian airports:
In fall/winter 2016, the Government of Canada engaged Credit Suisse to provide financial advice regarding the privatization of Canadian airports.
1.How much did Credit Suisse receive under this contract, which ended on January 31, 2017?
2.In May 2017, the government revealed that the Credit Suisse report was titled “Project Eagle—Scoping Study”. Why has this Credit Suisse report never been publicly released? Who made this decision?
3.Did Credit Suisse give its report to the Minister of Transportation, the Minister of Finance, or any other cabinet minister? If so, which Minister(s) received the report, and when did they receive it?
4.Does the Government of Canada have any current plans to privatize Canadian airports? If yes, what is the timeline associated with these plans? If no, why not?
No. 55.
By the Honourable Senator Pate:
May 15, 2020—Regarding the Correctional Service of Canada’s response to COVID-19:
•What is the federal government’s pandemic prison depopulation strategy? What criteria are being used to identify prisoners who will be released in order to depopulate prisons and permit physical distancing?
•How many individuals have been released as a result of this strategy?
•Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, how many individuals have been released from federal penitentiaries: (i) in total; (ii) on day parole; (iii) on full parole; (iv) on statutory release? What is the comparable number of prisoners released, for each of these numbers, over the same period last year?
•The Parole Board of Canada has rendered 755 decisions granting/directing day parole for individuals and 363 decisions granting/directing full parole between March 1 and May 3, 2020. How many of these individuals have been released from penitentiaries by CSC?
•What measures has the government put in place to ensure independent, public-health led inspection and judicial oversight of CSC’s response to COVID-19 in light of established health standards?
No. 56.
By the Honourable Senator Pate:
May 15, 2020—Regarding the Canada Emergency Response Benefit and other emergency economic support measures for individuals including students and seniors:
•How is the government monitoring gaps in its current economic support measures?
•Which groups has it identified as currently falling through these cracks?
•With CERB payments set to expire after 16 weeks, what steps are being taken to explore a crisis guaranteed livable income as part of the next phase of economic support?
•Have provinces and territories been consulted regarding such a measure?
No. 57.
By the Honourable Senator Downe:
June 16, 2020—Regarding the Canada Revenue Agency:
In a Monday, May 11th 2020 appearance before the House of Commons Committee on Government Operations and Estimates, Ted Gallivan, Assistant Commissioner of International, Large Business and Investigations for the Canada Revenue Agency made a number of statements regarding the Agency’s work to combat overseas tax evasion.
With that in mind, could the government provide the following information:
1.Mr. Gallivan stated that $4.4 billion is the “gross amount” of money identified as being owed to the Government of Canada. Of that amount:
(a)how much has actually been recovered,
(b)how much of that is related to overseas tax evasion,
(c)how many Canadians (individuals, trusts, foundations and companies) comprise that $4.4 billion,
(d)how many Canadians have been charged with tax evasion, and
(e)how many Canadians have been convicted of tax evasion?
2.Mr. Gallivan also stated that this amount is “many years ahead of schedule”. What, then, is the Canada Revenue Agency’s “schedule” for recovering this money?
3.Mr. Gallivan also referred to “over 3,000 cases” currently before the courts. Of that amount:
(a)how many Canadians (individuals, trusts, foundations and companies) are represented in that number,
(b)how many of those cases relate to overseas tax evasion,
(c)what is the largest amount of taxes alleged to have been evaded,
(d)what is the smallest amount,
(e)what is the average amount, and
(f)how many years do these cases go back?
No. 58.
By the Honourable Senator Downe:
June 16, 2020—With regard to government expenditures related to Bruyea v. Canada (Veteran Affairs), what is the total of all expenditures incurred to date in relation to the case?
No. 59.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
June 16, 2020—Regarding 24 Sussex Drive:
In May 2016, Mélanie Joly, then Minister of Canadian Heritage, said a plan to renovate 24 Sussex was forthcoming. Four years later, could the Government answer the following questions:
1.What is the timeline for delivering a plan?
2.Which departments and agencies are working on the plan?
3.Are all options, including tearing down the building, being considered?
No. 60.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
June 16, 2020—Regarding the processing of disability benefits at Veterans Affairs Canada:
1.What is the current backlog in processing applications for disability benefits from Veterans? How many applications in the backlog are completed applications, and how many are incomplete applications?
2.Since March 15, 2020, have any applications for disability benefits been flagged for suspected fraud or abuse? If so, how many, and were those applications subject to further investigation?
3.How does Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) explain why Canada Emergency Response Benefit payments are automatically approved even when fraud is suspected, while applications for disability benefits for our Veterans remain backlogged by the tens of thousands?
4.How many claims have been placed on hold as a result of the inability of Veterans to access supporting documentation due to the COVID-19 pandemic?
5.Due to the closure to the public of in-person Service Canada offices, has the VAC call centre seen an increase in call volume? If so, by how much?
(a)A 2019 report from the Office of the Auditor General found that the VAC call centre allowed all callers to speak with an agent — is that still the case?
(b)Is the average wait time for a caller still five minutes, as was reported by the Auditor General? If not, what is it? What percentage of calls are answered within the department’s timeliness target of two minutes?
6.In a September 2018 report, the Veterans Ombudsman found that francophone applicants waited longer for decisions than anglophone applicants, and women waited longer than men. What are the current wait times for each of these groups?
No. 61.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
June 16, 2020—Regarding superclusters:
1.Could the government please provide the names of the businesses or organizations which have received funding under each of the following superclusters, including the amount awarded and the date?
(a)Ocean supercluster
(b)Scale AI supercluster
(c)Next Generation Manufacturing supercluster
(d)Protein Industries supercluster
(e)Digital Technology supercluster
2.In February 2018, the Government of Canada claimed the superclusters investment of $950 million “is expected to create more than 50,000 middle-class jobs and grow Canada’s economy by $50 billion over the next 10 years.” Does the government still stand by these claims? How many middle-class jobs have been created through the investments to date? How much economic growth have been generated to date, and how has that been determined?
3.Are businesses or organizations which receive funding under the supercluster initiative required by their funding agreements to demonstrate the number of jobs created and/or amount of economic activity generated? If not, why not?
4.Which companies or organizations have received funding dedicated in response to COVID-19 from the Digital Technology and Next Generation Manufacturing superclusters? What were the amounts awarded, and the dates?
No. 62.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
June 16, 2020—Regarding the automotive sector:
In an interview with CBC Windsor on March 23, 2016, Minister Chrystia Freeland said with respect to a national auto strategy: “We’re going to take our time to build our strategy right and to do it carefully… I want Windsor to really understand we’re committed and we’re working on it. It will be a fully fleshed out and elaborate plan.”
1.What is the current status of the federal government’s national auto strategy? When is the strategy expected to be released?
2.Why hasn’t the national auto strategy been brought forward by the federal government to date?
3.How has the federal government worked to implement each of the recommendations of the January 2018 report “Drive to Win” from Mr. Ray Tanguay, the former Automotive Advisor to the federal Minister of Innovation, Science, and Economic Development and the Ontario Minister of Economic Development and Growth?
(a)Were any recommendations rejected by the federal government, and if so, why?
4.Who is the current Automotive Advisor to the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry?
No. 63.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
June 16, 2020—Regarding Global Affairs Canada:
1.Please indicate total imports from the People’s Republic of China during each of the past four years of the following health-related materials:
•Anthraquinone
•Steroidal hormones
•Azelaic acid
•Vitamin D
•Vitamin B6
•Vitamin B12
•Naphthols
•First-aid boxes
•Hydantoin
•Resorcinol
•Acetylsalicylic acid
•Lysine
•Choline
•Vitamin B1
•Coenzyme Q10
2.Please indicate total Canadian imports from the People’s Republic of China during each of the past four years of the following metals and industrial products:
•Manganese
•Scandium and yttrium
•Magnesium
•Alkali metals
•Tungsten
•Steel and iron grinding balls
•Shipping containers
•Piezoelectric quartz
•Iron and steel nails
•Carbon electrons
•Sodium metasilicates
•Magnets
•Hydraulic jacks
•Laptops
•Mobile phones
•Video recorders
•sound recorders
3.Please provide the total imports of each of the same materials during each of the past four years from other countries, and please provide total sourcing of the same materials from Canadian suppliers in each of the past four years.
4.Does Global Affairs or any other department or agency of the Government of Canada identify categories of goods deemed necessary for the support of critical national infrastructure in Canada? If so, please outline how those categories are determined and how critical national infrastructure — or the equivalent term used in government — is defined.
5.What measures or policies does the Government of Canada have in place to ensure that Canada’s critical national infrastructure has secure chains of supply?
No. 64.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
June 16, 2020—Regarding the Privy Council Office (PCO):
In January 2016, Mr. Matthew Mendelsohn was appointed Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet (Results and Delivery) in the Privy Council Office. On March 4, 2020, the Prime Minister announced Mr. Mendelsohn had stepped down from his position.
1.What was Mr. Mendelsohn’s salary or salary range?
2.Did Mr. Mendelsohn receive severance pay or any amount after leaving his position?
3.Who replaced Mr. Mendelsohn as Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet (Results and Delivery)?
4.How many PCO employees were assigned to Results and Delivery between January 2016 and March 2020?
5.What results were delivered by the Results and Delivery section of the Privy Council Office between January 2016 and March 2020?
No. 65.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
June 16, 2020—Regarding the Correctional Service of Canada:
In response to recent media inquiries, the Office of the Minister of Public Safety has been quoted as stating: “Since the beginning of March 2020, there have been fewer admissions to federal institutions and continued releases into the community, resulting in the overall federal custody population to decline by over 400 inmates or more than the average size of a minimum-security facility.”
In relation to this statement please provide:
•the number of offenders admitted to federal institutions since the beginning of March 2020 to date when compared to: a) the same period of time in 2019; and, b) the same period of time (11 weeks) prior to the end of February 2020;
•the number of offenders released into the community since the beginning of March 2020 to date;
•the number of offenders released into the community from medium-security facilities since the beginning of March 2020 to date;
•the number of offenders released into the community from medium-security facilities during the period from the beginning of March 2019 to date;
•the number of offenders released into the community from medium-security facilities during the 11-week period prior to the end of February 2020;
•the number of offenders released into the community on: a) full parole and b) day parole since the beginning of March 2020 to date who are serving life sentences;
•the number of offenders released into the community on: a) full parole and b) day parole during the period from the beginning of March 2019 to date who are serving life sentences;
•the number of offenders released into the community on: a) full parole and b) day parole during the 11-week prior to the end of February 2020 who are serving life sentences.
No. 66.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
June 16, 2020—Regarding Canada’s missions abroad:
1.How has Global Affairs Canada responded to each of the recommendations in the November 2018 report of the Auditor General of Canada regarding security in Canada’s missions abroad?
(a)Have threat assessments been completed for all missions? If not, is there a plan in place to do so? By what date?
(b)How many threat assessments were scheduled to be updated in fiscal year 2019-2020, and how many were completed?
(c)Have vulnerability assessments been updated for all missions? If not, is there a plan in place to do so? By what date?
2.Has Global Affairs Canada provided personal protective equipment (PPE) for diplomatic staff working at Canada’s embassies, High Commissions, consulates, missions and trade offices abroad in response to the COVID-19 pandemic? If so, how much PPE has been provided?
No. 67.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
June 16, 2020—Regarding federal heritage properties:
In November 2018, the Auditor General reported that Parks Canada and Fisheries and Oceans Canada did not possess a complete inventory of the buildings and other structures they own.
1.What steps have been taken to correct the situation? Do these two departments now have a complete and detailed list of the heritage buildings they own, along with the current condition of these buildings?
2.Have these departments made a list of the repairs necessary to maintain these buildings and other structures? If so, what is the estimated budget? And is there a timeline to complete the repairs?
3.Parks Canada committed to complete a review by fall 2020, in consultation with other departments, on the implementation of changes to conserve federal heritage properties. Is the review on track to be completed by this date?
No. 68.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
June 16, 2020—Regarding Global Affairs Canada:
Could the government please list all Canadian diplomats who currently receive a remuneration higher than the official pay scale, and provide the position and salary range of these individuals?
No. 69.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
June 16, 2020—Regarding classified or protected documents:
1.Across the Government of Canada, from January 1, 2020 to date, how many documents have been stored in a manner which did not meet the requirements of the document’s security level?
2.Have any security clearances been revoked in 2020 in relation to the treatment of these documents? If so, how many?
3.What guidance regarding the treatment of documents has been given to public servants working from home due to the COVID-19 pandemic? How do government agencies and departments conduct security checks to monitor the proper handling of documents remotely?
4.Have any “Protected C”, “Confidential”, “Secret”, and “Top Secret” documents been worked on from home during the COVID-19 pandemic? If so, how many, and from which departments or agencies?
No. 70.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
June 16, 2020—Regarding the residences situated at Harrington Lake:
1.When was the “Caretaker’s House”, originally built in 1850, moved and renamed the “Farmhouse”?
2.Was the Prime Minister, the Prime Minister’s Office and/or the Privy Council Office involved in the decision to move the Caretaker’s House?
3.What are the detailed costs of moving the Caretaker’s House and renovating the Farmhouse?
4.What is the budget for renovating the main cottage?
5.What is the timeline to complete the renovations?
No. 71.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
June 16, 2020—Regarding Export Development Canada (EDC):
1.How has EDC worked to implement each of the recommendations contained in a 2018 report from the Office of the Auditor General of Canada?
(a)The Auditor General found significant deficiencies concerning Board appointments. With respect to the two Board of Directors vacancies set for 2020, does EDC have a plan to ensure the timely appointment or reappointment of Directors? Has the COVID-19 pandemic impacted this appointments process?
2.How does EDC’s new Transparency and Disclosure Policy released in March 2020 address all the deficiencies identified in a 2019 review from Global Affairs Canada and International Financial Consulting Ltd.?
No. 72.
By the Honourable Senator Pate:
June 22, 2020—This week, the Parliamentary Black Caucus issued a statement on the need to eradicate systemic racism, including a call to “eliminate mandatory minimum sentencing measures.” This statement was signed by 26 out of 36 members of Cabinet — that is more than two thirds of Cabinet — including the Minister of Justice.
This appears to signal a renewed interest in tackling the injustices and constitutional issues associated with mandatory minimum penalties, something to which the government first committed in 2015 when it campaigned on a platform to implement the Calls to Action of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. This commitment to implement the TRC as well as the Calls for Justice of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women, which similarly address mandatory minimums, was reiterated last fall in the mandate letter of the Minister of Justice.
Can we count on the government to follow up this renewed commitment with action, such as support for the immediate passage of Bill S-208, which would give judges the discretion to depart from mandatory minimum penalties in appropriate situations?
No. 73.
By the Honourable Senator Mégie:
July 27, 2020—Regarding the use of facial recognition in Canada since 2011:
(a)Which agencies/departments have used facial recognition software (FRS) in Canada?
(b)Which FRS has been used?
(c)What laws and regulations govern their use?
(d)Was gender based analysis plus (GBA+) done when using FRS?
(e)How does Canada store the information collected?
(f)With which countries has Canada shared this information?
No. 74.
By the Honourable Senator Mégie:
July 27, 2020—In his testimony before the committee of the whole on systemic racism in Canada on June 25, 2020, the Honourable Bill Blair said that there has been an evolution in the reasonable use of force by police officers in Canada:
(a)What is the current regulatory framework for reasonable use of force?
(b)What mechanism has the Government of Canada put in place to develop new standards and definitions of reasonable use of force?
(c)How does the government study the use of force by police in Canada?
(d)How does the government recognize systemic bias in Canadians’ experiences of use of force, whether reasonable or not?
No. 75.
By the Honourable Senator Mégie:
July 27, 2020—Regarding the review of the implementation of Bill C-46, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (offences relating to conveyances) and to make consequential amendments to other Acts (42nd Parliament, 1st Session), which includes an evaluation of whether it has resulted in differential treatment of any particular group based on a prohibited ground of discrimination:
(a)How does the government compile data to prepare this report?
(b)When does the government plan to table the report?
No. 76.
By the Honourable Senator Mégie:
July 27, 2020—In his testimony before the committee of the whole on systemic racism in Canada on June 25, 2020, the Honourable Bill Blair committed to acting on all the measures proposed by Chief Ghislain Picard:
(a)First Nations representatives wanted a written response. Can a copy of this letter be provided?
(b)What is the government’s timeline for implementing the proposed measures?
(c)Who is responsible for following up on the proposed measures with the government?
No. 77.
By the Honourable Senator Mégie:
July 27, 2020—In his testimony before the committee of the whole on systemic racism in Canada on June 25, 2020, the Honourable Bill Blair said that he sent Frank Iacobucci’s report with 74 recommendations to the RCMP, as well as to all other police forces across the country:
(a)When did the minister send this report?
(b)To whom was this report sent?
(c)What is the plan for implementing the 74 recommendations of the Iacobucci report?
No. 78.
By the Honourable Senator Mégie:
July 27, 2020—Hate speech: Has the government implemented the nine recommendations of the report Taking Action to End Online Hate of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights presented in the House of Commons on June 17, 2019? If not, when does the government plan to do so?
No. 79.
By the Honourable Senator Mégie:
July 27, 2020—Since the adoption of Canada’s Digital Charter in 2019, what concrete progress has been made, and what talks are underway with web giants like Facebook and Twitter to address hate speech in Canada on all social network platforms?
No. 80.
By the Honourable Senator Pate:
July 27, 2020—This question is submitted with and on behalf of Senators Coyle, Deacon (Nova Scotia), Keating, Kutcher and others. In April of this year, Canada experienced the worst mass murder in recorded history. Nova Scotia tragically lost 22 citizens — mothers, fathers, children, friends... and, the RCMP lost one of its own.
In the months that have followed, unwavering voices from all sectors of society have called upon the government for a joint federal-provincial inquiry to answer the questions as to how and why so many died and what measures could be taken to prevent such devastation in the future. Senators and others have stated that an open, comprehensive, fully transparent inquiry employing a feminist lens is the best instrument to get to the truth, to learn from it and to then make the necessary reforms.
On June 25, in this chamber, Minister Blair was asked if he would commit to ensuring that an appropriately constituted, public, joint federal-provincial inquiry into the Nova Scotia massacre will be established with a mandate broad enough to address the complex social and structural issues and policing practices raised by the incident. The Minister responded by saying “the simple answer is yes... we understand the essential importance of ensuring that all Nova Scotians, all Canadians, but in particular the families of the victims get the answers they need”.
Nova Scotia Justice Minister Mark Furey is quoted in the June 3 Globe and Mail as saying the probe must have certain features, including judicial leadership, the power to compel witnesses to testify and the ability to make binding recommendations and hold agencies accountable.
Recently, and a few days after 37 of us, senators from all provinces and territories and all groups and caucuses, publicly underscored their support for an inquiry, Minister Blair and Nova Scotia Minister Furey announced they were convening a review.
With all due respect to those appointed to the review panel, the federal and provincial governments could appoint them to conduct a public inquiry including under the Nova Scotia Public Inquiries Act. The public inquiry process has been used in the past by provinces to examine matters of administration of justice and look into the conduct of the RCMP. The BC government had no hesitation in doing so when it came to the Braidwood Inquiry, for example.
A review panel has no power either to compel witnesses to testify under oath or the authority to have their conclusions enforced. As it stands, those who do not ‘wish’ to testify cannot be required to do so. The result? There is no guarantee of openness and transparency; something the victims’ families and the public have the right and are entitled to expect. It is a question of getting this right not how quickly it can be done.
In light of all this, the questions we are asking today are: Why hasn’t the government chosen the only option guaranteed to provide the answers so desperately sought by survivors of the victims and the public? And, will the government revert its position and convene a public inquiry?
No. 81.
By the Honourable Senator Pate:
July 27, 2020—Regarding Bill C-20:
1.Have any plans been made to ensure that the payment to those with disabilities is not just a one-time payment given the strong message, from those with disabilities and those working with and on their behalf, that needs of people with disabilities cannot be met with a one-time payment?
2.Are discussions going on between the federal government and provinces/territories to supplement Bill C-20 by distributing money to a larger number of people with disabilities?
3.In light of COVID-19, are discussions going on between the federal government and provinces/territories about getting people with disabilities who are living in institutional settings back into more community-based settings where they will be at less risk?
No. 82.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
July 27, 2020—Concerning Global Affairs Canada’s Private Sector Investment Champions Speaker’s Program:
In 2019, Mr. Kyle Kemper, the son of the mother of the current Prime Minister, was awarded a $12,430 grant from the Government of Canada. The grant was to attend a conference in Switzerland on Blockchain technology. Mr. Kemper was quoted in the Globe and Mail as saying it was his extensive work in the field that led to his invitation to speak at the conference: “That’s my expertise and I’d love to talk to you all about how blockchain can radically transform Canada and bring about a golden age.” However, Mr. Kemper’s presentation, which was entitled “Think Canada” seemed decidedly out of place at a conference where the rest of the presentations were of the character of the one entitled: “The Importance of Multi-Signature, Time-Locked Bitcoin Transactions in Custody Solutions.”
Mr. Kemper was selected as part of Global Affairs Canada’s Private Sector Investment Champions Speaker’s Program (PSICSP). That program is run by the Trade Commissioner and involves identifying and recruiting senior executives from the private sector to be champion speakers at events organized by Embassies, High Commissions and Consulates in priority markets to promote Canada as an investment destination of choice.
1.Was the Canadian Embassy in Switzerland the organizer of the Crypto Valley Blockchain Technology Conference in Zug, Switzerland that Mr. Kemper spoke at on June 24, 2019? If not, why did he qualify for a PSICSP grant of $12,430 to participate in what was clearly a technical/scientific conference?
2.The Private Sector Investment Champions Initiative (PSICI), which the Champion Speaker’s Program is a part of, was created to attract foreign investment in key sectors in Canada, such as the satellite and telecommunications industry. When was blockchain identified as a key sector for foreign direct investment in Canada? Can you please provide the documentation that can substantiate this?
3.One of the management tools for the PSICI is a champions database. Could the government please provide the 2019 database that included champions for the blockchain sector in Canada?
4.The Champions Initiative includes regular training consisting of an orientation and coaching program for Champions to familiarize themselves with government policies and investment trends. On what dates did Mr. Kemper participate in orientation and coaching programs prior to his participation in the June 2019 conference?
5.How many Champions Speaking events took place in 2019, who were the champions speakers at each of them? What events/venues did they speak at, and what were the individual costs for each of those champion speakers that were covered by the PSICSP?
6.Where did the idea to have Mr. Kemper speak at the Crypto Valley Conference come from? Did it originate with the organizers of the conference? Did it originate with Global Affairs Canada? Or did it originate from Mr. Kemper? Was there PMO involvement? How did this all come about?
7.Besides Mr. Kemper, how many Champions has Global Affairs Canada engaged in the blockchain sector?
8.In the Crypto Valley Conference program, Mr. Kemper is identified as representing the Canadian Blockchain Association, however he was no longer the Executive Director of that Association. Why wasn’t Ms. Tanya Woods, the Executive Director of the Association, selected as the Champion Speaker for the Crypto Valley Conference? Were other experts considered, and if so, who were they?
9.Champions are paid nominal honoraria. What was the amount of honoraria that Mr. Kemper was paid?
10.Champions are expected to generate investment prospects. What investment prospects did Mr. Kemper generate as a result of his participation in the Crypto Valley Conference, and what is the value to Canada of those investments he generated?
11.Did Mr. Kemper participate in any other sector specific events either prior to or after the Crypto Valley conference, and if not why not?
12.In a recent video available on YouTube, Mr. Kemper is asked about the last protest he attended. His response is: “My life seems to be a constant protest against central banking.” In another video interview he argues that modern communication and the internet have made representative democracy as we know it obsolete. Given these statements, why was Mr. Kemper chosen by the government to represent Canada at an international conference to drum up foreign direct investment in this country?
No. 83.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
July 27, 2020—Regarding immigration removals:
1.Report 1 of the Spring 2020 Auditor General’s report states: “In April 2019, we determined that there were about 50,000 individuals with enforceable removal orders. Two thirds of these — 34,700 cases in the wanted inventory — involved individuals whose whereabouts were unknown.” What is being done to determine the whereabouts of these 34,700 missing individuals?
2.As of September 2020, how many individuals were there with enforceable removal orders? How many of these are individuals whose whereabouts are unknown? How many of these involve individuals with criminality? How many have criminal convictions in Canada? How many have served sentences in provincial prisons? How many have served federal sentences? How many were released from correctional institutions with deportation orders whose whereabouts are now unknown?
3.The Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) stopped carrying out immigration removals in March 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. When does CBSA intend to resume removals? Does it anticipate doing so in the current calendar year?
4.What is the Government of Canada doing to improve the data quality issues across the immigration removals system, as identified in the Auditor General’s report? How has the COVID-19 pandemic impacted CBSA’s plans during the current fiscal year to improve the input of information to support removals, through systems upgrades and additional training measures?
5.What is CBSA’s target for removals for the 2020-21 fiscal year? Has the target been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic?
No. 84.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
July 27, 2020—Regarding interprovincial trade:
1.What is the current annual cost to the Canadian economy of interprovincial trade barriers, in both dollar figures and as a percentage of GDP?
2.What are the concrete measures taken by the Government of Canada since 2016 to improve internal trade within the country?
3.Can the government identify specific barriers to trade between provinces that have been taken down within the last year?
4.Has the Government of Canada implemented any recommendations from the 2016 report Tear Down These Walls: Dismantling Canada’s Internal Trade Barriers from the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce? If so, which recommendations? If not, why not?
5.Which provinces allow interprovincial alcohol shipments under amendments to the Importation of Intoxicating Liquor Act in 2012 and 2014?
6.The Canadian Free Trade Agreement’s Regulatory and Reconciliation Cooperation Table had planned to complete work in 11 areas by the end of 2020. What is the current status of each of the identified areas below? If the work has been delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic, has a new timetable been set for each area?
Occupational Health and Safety
(a)Workplace First Aid Training
(b)Fall Protection
(c)Occupational Exposure Limits
Transportation
(d)Size and Weight Restrictions (Except Spring Weight Restrictions)
(e)Electronic Logging Devices
(f)Truck Driver Certification — Mandatory Entry-Level Training (MELT) for Commercial Drivers
(g)Autonomous Vehicles Testing
Agriculture / Agri-Food / Aquaculture
(h)Food Inspection
(i)Meat Inspection
Registration Requirements
(j)Workers’ Compensation Board
Technical Safety
(k)Gasfitter/Gas Technician Licensing/Certification
No. 85.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
July 27, 2020—Regarding human rights:
1.Did the Prime Minister raise China’s crackdown on human rights in Hong Kong during any of his telephone calls with over 40 world leaders in the run up to the United Nations Security Council seat vote? If so, which world leaders did the Prime Minister speak with about this issue?
2.Did the Prime Minister raise China’s treatment of the Uyghurs during any of his telephone calls with over 40 world leaders in the run up to the United Nations Security Council seat vote? If so, which world leaders did the Prime Minister speak with about this issue?
3.Did the Prime Minister raise LGBTQ2 rights during any of his telephone calls with over 40 world leaders in the run up to the United Nations Security Council seat vote? If so, which world leaders did the Prime Minister speak with about this issue?
4.Did the Prime Minister raise gender equality during any of his telephone calls with over 40 world leaders in the run up to the United Nations Security Council seat vote? If so, which world leaders did the Prime Minister speak with about this issue?
5.The Prime Minister has said: “The tragic violence that Indigenous women and girls have experienced (in Canada) amounts to genocide”. Was this issue raised during any of the Prime Minister’s telephone calls with over 40 world leaders in the run up to the United Nations Security Council seat vote? If so, which world leaders did the Prime Minister speak with about this issue?
6.The Prime Minister has said: “Systemic racism is an issue right across the country, in all our institutions, including in all our police forces, including in the RCMP”. Was this issue raised during any of the Prime Minister’s telephone calls with over 40 world leaders in the run up to the United Nations Security Council seat vote? If so, which world leaders did the Prime Minister speak with about this issue?
No. 86.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
July 27, 2020—Regarding the delivery of government programs:
1.Since 2016, how many programs worth $900 million or more have been delivered by departments or agencies of the Government of Canada?
2.Since 2016, how many Government of Canada programs have been run by outside administrators? Of these, how many of Government of Canada programs worth $900 million or more have been run by outside administrators?
3.Since 2016, how many Government of Canada programs were administered under a sole-source contract and did not go to tender? Of these, how many of Government of Canada programs worth $900 million or more were administered under a sole-source contract and did not go to tender?
No. 87.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
July 27, 2020—Regarding the Canada Student Loans Program:
1.Report 2 of the Auditor General’s Spring 2020 Reports found that the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada repeatedly reached out to Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) to post its financial literacy tools for students on the web portal of the National Student Loans Service Centre. Why did ESDC fail to do this?
2.The Auditor General reported: “As of 31 March 2019, the value of outstanding student loans in default amounted to $2.4 billion.” What is the value of outstanding student loans in default as of September 2020?
No. 88.
By the Honourable Senator Plett:
July 27, 2020—With respect to Veterans Affairs Canada:
After years of delay, Veterans Affairs Canada has finally added the names of Canadian and First Nations fallen from the War of 1812 to its website. However, although these names are included in the War of 1812 Book of Remembrance located in Parliament’s Memorial Chamber, the names of the 1812 fallen appear to have been excluded from the department’s “Virtual Memorial” which honors all of Canada’s fallen on line.
Can Veterans Affairs Canada explain why the names of Canadian and First Nations fallen from the War of 1812 have been purposely segregated from the rest of Canada’s fallen online, even though they are all honoured together in the Books of Remembrance in the Memorial Chamber? Did the Department consult with First Nations representatives or other experts before taking this decision?