THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Thursday, June 23, 2022
The Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry met with videoconference this day at 9:01 a.m. [ET]; and, in camera, to consider Bill S-236, An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act and the Employment Insurance Regulations (Prince Edward Island); and to consider a draft agenda (future business)
Senator Robert Black (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Honourable senators, thank you for allowing me to chair this meeting from my home office.
Senators, before we begin, I would like to remind you and witnesses to please keep their microphones muted at all times unless recognized by name by the chair.
Should any technical challenges arise, particularly in relation to interpretation, please signal this to the chair or the clerk, and we will work to resolve the issue. If you experience other technical challenges, please contact ISD at the technical assistance number provided.
As I have said before, the use of online platforms does not guarantee speech privacy or that eavesdropping won’t be conducted. As such, while conducting committee meetings, all participants should be aware of such limitations and restrict the possible disclosure of sensitive, private or privileged Senate information.
Senators should participate in a private area and be mindful of their surroundings so that they do not inadvertently share any personal information or information that could be used to identify their location.
With that, good morning, everyone. I would like to begin by welcoming members of the committee. We have no witnesses, but we also welcome those who are watching on the web.
My name is Rob Black, senator from Ontario, and I’m the chair of this committee. Now, I would like to introduce members of the Agriculture and Forestry Committee who are participating in this meeting, starting with the deputy chair, Senator Simons, from Alberta; Senator Cotter, from Saskatchewan; Senator Deacon, from Nova Scotia; Senator Jaffer, from British Columbia; Senator Klyne, from Saskatchewan; Senator Marwah, from Ontario; Senator Oh, from Ontario; and Senator Petitclerc, from Quebec.
Having heard from witnesses on Bill S-236, An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act and the Employment Insurance Regulations (Prince Edward Island), at our last meeting, today we will be proceeding with clause-by-clause consideration of this bill.
With that, senators, is it agreed that the committee proceed to clause-by-clause consideration of Bill S-236, An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act and the Employment Insurance Regulations (Prince Edward Island)?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you. I declare that motion carried.
Shall the title stand postponed? Agreed or not?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: I’ll declare that carried. Shall clause 1 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried. Shall clause 2 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: That’s carried. Shall clause 3 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried.
Senator C. Deacon: Thank you, chair. I would like to add an amendment to clause 4. I’ll state my reason. After the meeting last week, I was thinking of all the various issues that could cause the government to perhaps not agree to implementing this bill because of challenges around its implementation. One was simply just giving them time to make the changes in their IT systems to manage this change. It is really just recommending a coming into force.
You asked a question, chair, at the end of the meeting of one of our witnesses on the final panel as to what was required for a period of coming into force, and the witness didn’t provide any feedback in that regard. So we have just selected 30 days as being a reasonable period of time for the small technical changes to be made.
So I move that:
That Bill S-236 be amended on page 1 by adding the following after line 17:
“Coming into Force
4. This Act comes into force on the first Sunday that is at least 30 days after the day on which it receives royal assent.”.
That’s the amendment I’m proposing, just to try to prevent any issues around the implementation of this very important change. Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you very much, Senator Deacon.
Debate? Any questions, concerns, issues?
Senator Cotter: I was just noting, I hadn’t really appreciated this before, but there is no coming-into-force provision with respect to the bill, so Senator Deacon’s proposal is a good one. As much as anything, I guess I have a question which — unfortunately, my memory of the presentations by the witnesses is not as clear as it might be on the point about the process that would be required and how long it might take them to do that and whether, if they start on day 1, they can do it by day 30. I’m inviting Senator Deacon or others to recollect that evidence, to ensure that there is both a coming into force and that it can actually work at the department’s end to recreate the regions of Prince Edward Island. I’m supportive of the amendment. I’m just curious about the time frame that we might choose.
Senator C. Deacon: Thank you, Senator Cotter. The trouble is we were not given any guidance. This was something that I thought was a reasonable amount of time because it is a small programming change. This is an issue that clearly hasn’t been prioritized, and probably this coming into force would require it to be prioritized. I think that’s reasonable. Given the sorts of inequities that we heard described a week ago, the fact that the Charlottetown metropolitan area, in terms of the census map, is not how the area is mapped. The two don’t map up in any way, shape or form.
There isn’t a reason as to why this change wasn’t made in the first place other than perhaps a political reason. From my standpoint, I think we need to have some coming-into-force period, and that seems reasonable. I don’t have anything more because we were not offered more information when the question was directly asked.
The Chair: Thank you.
Senator Cotter: Just as a supplementary observation, if I may, Mr. Chair, I’m fine with this. Somebody might get back to us and say the time frame is unmanageable, but that would be a bit of a challenge. I think the equities of this were compelling. Senator Deacon’s observation about the map reminded me of the map of South Carolina and North Carolina for electoral purposes, which itself is a little troubling. So I’m supportive of this.
The Chair: Thank you.
Senator Jaffer: Chair, I’m also supportive of this. If there is an issue in the timing, this is an S-bill, so in the House, it would be amended. I suggest that we put this in. I agree with the amendment. And if there are any changes needed, I’m sure, in the House, it can be changed.
The Chair: Thank you, Senator Jaffer. Any further comments, questions or debate? I’m not seeing anything on the screen or in the room.
Shall the motion in amendment carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried.
Shall the title carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried.
Shall the bill as amended carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you. That was carried.
Is it agreed that the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel be authorized to make necessary technical, grammatical, or other required non-substantive changes as a result of the amendments adopted by the committee, including updating cross-references and renumbering of provisions?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried.
Are there any observations, colleagues, that need to be added to this report?
Senator Simons: I have an observation if we didn’t already prepare it in writing. I don’t want to hold things up.
I just want to say this here and on the record. I am and remain uncomfortable with the idea of the Senate micromanaging EI zones in Prince Edward Island, and I wanted someone to explain to me why the zones were set up this way and what the justification was. But when we heard from the witnesses, it became apparent that unless there was political action, this was not going to change any time soon. When we were told they haven’t been conducting the reviews that are mandated and they haven’t been acting on them — what happens to this bill once it reaches the other place? As Senator Jaffer said, there could be changes. But I think we have sent a strong signal that the way they are conducting these reviews is not proper. I don’t know if we need to add that observation or if that is something I can stew on in my own head.
I’m sorry; I forget the name of the gentleman who was the commissioner. I asked him, “Should we be doing this?” He said no. I said, “Well, is it going to happen if we don’t do it?” And he said no.
I don’t know if we want to make an observation about the things the commissioner told us in general about the failure of the system to be conducting reviews as mandated. Perhaps that’s not necessary.
The Chair: Colleagues, if we do want to add observations, we will proceed in camera, and we can do that now. I did hear Senator Simons say that she just wanted to get it on the record. Would you like to proceed in camera, colleagues, to discuss possible observations? If so, please let me know.
Some Hon. Senators: Yes.
The Chair: With that, then, we’ll proceed in camera. We will return after the in camera portion to finish up this clause by clause.
(The committee continued in camera.)