THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Tuesday, March 10, 2026
The Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry met this day at 7:08 p.m. [ET] to consider Bill S-230, An Act respecting the development of a national strategy for soil health protection, conservation and enhancement; and, in camera, to examine and report on the role of the agriculture and agri-food sector with regard to food security in Canada.
Senator Mary Robinson (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Honourable senators, I call to order this meeting of the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry. My name is Mary Robinson. I am the chair of this committee. Welcome to members of the committee, our witnesses and those watching this meeting online.
I would like to start by acknowledging that the land on which we gather is on the unceded traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabe Nation. I would like to ask all senators to consult the cards on the table for guidelines to prevent audio feedback incidents. I would also like to remind all those participating to refrain from switching languages mid-sentence and to not speak too quickly. Clear audio supports accurate interpretation, transcription and captioning.
Today, the committee is continuing its clause-by-clause consideration of Bill S-230, An Act respecting the development of a national strategy for soil health protection, conservation and enhancement. I would like to welcome officials from Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, who are with us in the room today and available to answer technical questions if needed: Sophie Beecher, Director General of the Sustainable Development Policy Directorate, and Kevin Norris, Director of the Resilient Agriculture Policy Division.
Before we begin, I would like to remind senators of a number of points:
First, if, at any point, a senator is not clear where we are in the process, please ask for clarification. I want to ensure that, at all times, we all have the same understanding of where we are in the process.
Second, in terms of the mechanics of this process, when more than one amendment is proposed to be moved in a clause, amendments should be proposed in the order of the lines of a clause.
Third, if a senator is opposed to an entire clause, the proper process is not to move a motion to delete the entire clause but, rather, to vote against the clause as standing as part of the bill.
Fourth, some amendments that are moved may have consequential effects on other parts of the bill. It is, therefore, useful to this process if a senator moving an amendment identifies to the committee other clauses in the bill where this amendment could have an effect; otherwise, it would be very difficult for members of the committee to remain consistent in their decision making.
Fifth, because no notice is required to move amendments, there can, of course, have been no preliminary analysis of the amendments to establish which one — or ones — may be of consequence to others and which may be contradictory.
Sixth, if committee members ever have questions about the process or the propriety of anything occurring, they can certainly raise a point of order. As chair, I will listen to the argument, decide when there has been sufficient discussion of a matter on a point of order and make a ruling.
Seventh, the committee is the ultimate master of its business within the bounds established by the Senate, and a ruling can be appealed to the full committee by asking whether the ruling shall be sustained.
Eighth, I wish to remind honourable senators that if there is ever any uncertainty as to the results of a voice vote or a show of hands, the most effective route is to request a roll call vote, which, obviously, provides unambiguous results.
Ninth and finally, senators are aware that any tied vote negates the motion in question.
Are there any questions on any of these points?
If not, we can now proceed.
Before we go further in the agenda, I ask my colleagues to introduce themselves.
Senator Burey: Sharon Burey, Ontario. Welcome.
Senator McNair: John McNair, New Brunswick. Welcome.
Senator Sorensen: Karen Sorensen, Alberta, Treaty 7 territory.
Senator Black: Rob Black, Ontario. Welcome.
Senator Muggli: Tracy Muggli, Treaty 6 territory, Saskatchewan.
The Chair: Colleagues, we are returning to clause 3.
Senator McNair’s amendment to clause 3 was adopted at the previous meeting. Are there any other amendments at clause 3?
Senator McNair: I have an amendment to propose on behalf of the Honourable Senator McBean:
That Bill S-230 be amended in clause 3, on page 3, by replacing lines 16 to 18 with the following:
“(a) stakeholders;
(b) Indigenous and non-Indigenous representatives of agricultural industry and organizations; and
(c) any interested persons.”.
The Chair: Is there any discussion or debate on Senator McNair’s motion?
Senator Burey: I would like to support this amendment, Senator McNair, as well as Senator McBean. We talked about being inclusive, and I think this captures it.
The Chair: Thank you.
Anyone else?
It is moved by the Honourable Senator McNair on behalf of Senator McBean:
That Bill S-230 be amended in clause 3, on page 3, by replacing lines 16 to 18 with the following —
Senator Black: Dispense.
The Chair: Excellent. Thank you.
Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion in amendment?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Agreed. I declare the motion in amendment carried.
Shall clause 3 carry as amended?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Excellent. Carried.
Shall clause 4 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried.
Shall clause 5 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried.
Shall clause 6 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried.
Shall clause 1, which contains the short title, carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried.
Shall the preamble 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: Carried.
Is it agreed that the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel be authorized to make necessary technical, grammatical or other required, non-substantive changes resulting from the amendments adopted by the committee in both official languages, including updating cross-references and renumbering of provisions?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Agreed.
Does the committee wish to consider appending observations to the report?
The rule allows us to go in camera.
Senator Black: I do not have an observation, but I wonder if, in the presentation of the report, we should note that we listened.
The Chair: Okay. Super.
Is it agreed that I report this bill as amended — with a note that we listened — to the Senate in both official languages?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Agreed.
Thank you, senators. We will continue our meeting in camera to discuss the draft agenda.
(The committee continued in camera.)