THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL AFFAIRS, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Thursday, May 28, 2026
The Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology met this day at 10:30 a.m. [ET] to study Bill S-221, An Act to provide for the recognition of the Canada jay as the national bird of Canada; and for clause-by-clause consideration of Bill S-221, An Act to provide for the recognition of the Canada jay as the national bird of Canada, and Bill S-215, An Act respecting National Immigration Month; and, in camera, for consideration of a draft agenda (future business).
Senator Rosemary Moodie (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Welcome to this meeting of the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology. My name is Rosemary Moodie. I’m a senator from Ontario and the chair of this committee. I’d like to start with a round table and have senators introduce themselves.
Senator Burey: Good morning. Sharon Burey, senator for Ontario.
Senator Senior: Good morning. Paulette Senior, senator from Ontario.
[Translation]
Senator Boudreau: Victor Boudreau from New Brunswick.
Senator Arnold: Dawn Arnold from New Brunswick.
Senator Petitclerc: Chantal Petitclerc from Quebec.
[English]
Senator Greenwood: Good morning and welcome. Margo Greenwood from beautiful British Columbia, the home of lots of birds.
Senator Cuzner: Rodger Cuzner from beautiful Nova Scotia.
Senator Muggli: Good morning. Tracy Muggli, Saskatchewan, Treaty 6 territory.
The Chair: Thank you, senators. During the first portion of today’s meeting, the committee will examine Bill S-221, An Act to provide for the recognition of the Canada jay as the national bird of Canada. In the second half of this meeting, we will dedicate our time to clause-by-clause consideration of Bill S-221 and Bill S-215, An Act respecting National Immigration Month.
Joining us today for the first panel, we welcome the Honourable Senator Salma Ataullahjan, sponsor of the bill; and Dr. David M. Bird, Emeritus Professor of Wildlife Biology at McGill University. Thank you for joining us today. For your opening statements, you will each have five minutes, followed by questions from committee members.
Hon. Salma Ataullahjan, sponsor of the bill, as an individual: Good morning, Madam Chair and honourable members of the committee. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to appear before you today to speak about Bill S-221.
Every country that seeks to define itself chooses symbols to reflect its values, beliefs and aspirations. That’s why symbols matter. They are the stories that we tell ourselves about who we are. They are anchors of our national identity. In a nation as vast and diverse as Canada, national symbols provide common ground. It’s not just branding; it’s nation building.
Take the maple leaf, for example: Even before it appeared on our national flag in 1965, generations of Canadians had already used it as a symbol of the Canadian identity. The maple tree, after all, is an important feature of the landscape of eastern parts of Canada, where Indigenous Peoples value it for its sap and other by-products. Now when we see the Maple Leaf flag displayed prominently on backpacks overseas or raised at an Olympic medal ceremony, it evokes feelings of pride, of belonging and of home. I can’t tell you how many times my children would see a maple leaf when we were travelling and they would jump for joy and say, “Canada! Canada!” They were really small, but they knew the maple leaf represents Canada.
Yet here we stand 158 years after Confederation. We have a flag. We have a national anthem. We even have a national tree and a national horse. But we do not have a national bird.
“But why a bird?” you may ask. Birds are some of the most commonly used symbols to shape a narrative. Out of the 195 countries in the world, 106 have an official national bird, while 21 have unofficial ones. In Canada, all provinces and territories have an official bird.
Birds are universal. They are found in every part of the world and often across national borders. They are visually striking, frequently vocal and observable in daily life. People take delight in watching birds, thus making birding — or birdwatching — a popular hobby, especially in North America.
According to a CBC News article in 2024, a growing community of young people in northern Ontario are choosing birding as their hobby of choice.
Recent studies show that having birds in your environment is good for your mental health. I’m sorry. I scribbled that in and I’m having difficulty reading my own writing.
Birds play an important role in our daily lives. For example, they help with pollination and pest control. They provide us with eggs and meat for sustenance.
Their feathers are used in our clothing, pillows and blankets to provide warmth and in decorative items and some artistic works.
Yet birds are more than just beautiful or useful creatures. They are metaphors. They represent freedom, aspirations and vision. Their songs mark our seasons. Their feathers drift through our poetry. Their flight lifts our imagination.
Canada is home to over 450 bird species. Given this rich avian biodiversity, it’s a shame that we still haven’t officially recognized a national bird.
In choosing one, we are choosing a symbol to carry our story into the future and to emphasize our natural heritage. During this time, when climate change threatens our ecosystems, when our identity continues to evolve and when our citizens seek unity, it is critical that we choose a bird that doesn’t just represent our geography but our spirit.
I will leave it to Dr. Bird to talk about the Canada jay and why it is the best choice to be Canada’s national bird.
But I would like to conclude by emphasizing the importance of symbols. They may not define us, but they do reflect us. And in moments of uncertainty, we turn to our symbols to remind us of who we are. At a time when our country is facing many challenges that strike at the heart of our nation, it is crucial that we remember what matters most: our history, our peoples, our values, our land.
We are a country redefining itself, reconciling with its past, looking boldly to the future. Let us choose a bird that mirrors that journey. Let us not wait another 158 years. Let us act now.
Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you, senator. Dr. Bird, the floor is yours.
David M. Bird, Emeritus Professor of Wildlife Biology, McGill University, as an individual: Madam Chair, esteemed committee members and guests, thank you so much for this opportunity to argue our case for the Canada jay. This beautiful songbird is found breeding in every province and territory in Canada. Its distribution map practically mirrors the borders of our country, with some minor incursions into the U.S. It was not always known as the Canada jay. For 200 years, it was indeed known by that name, but in 1957, the official checklist committee erroneously renamed it as the gray jay, with the American spelling. Thanks to Dan Strickland, Canada’s foremost expert on the species, the committee restored the name Canada jay in 2015. Could you imagine a better name for the national bird of our country? Its French name is mésangeai du Canada, and its Latin name is Perisoreus canadensis.
Perhaps many Canadians best know this bird by the name whisky jack. It apparently originated from the Cree word wîskicahk. The Canada jay is unique among Canadian birds by having a widely used English vernacular name of Aboriginal origin. This bird has deep cultural roots in the lore and traditions of Indigenous people. Indeed, First Nations folks highly revere the whisky jack as an omen of good fortune and a warning of danger in the forest. One could argue that the Canada jay could stand as an important symbol for the collective task of reconciliation with Indigenous people. Fortunately, the Canada jay has not already been claimed as an official bird by any other geographical entity; it’s all ours. It’s a safe choice too, neither hunted nor killed as a nuisance species and also not an endangered species. In terms of character, you simply could not find a more Canadian bird. First, as a member of the corvid family — crows, ravens, magpies and jays — it’s arguably one of the smartest birds on the planet. With a brain-to-body ratio nearly rivalling that of the human, this intelligent bird demonstrates an impressive amount of economic skill by hiding and relocating as many as 100,000 food items in a single season. It’s a numerical ability that might even impress a certain Prime Minister.
Second, as an extremely tough and hardy species, this bird actually elects not to leave our country during our harsh Canadian winters but instead remains year-round to breed at temperatures well below freezing, sometimes incubating its eggs at minus 30 degrees centigrade. Third, Canada jays are extremely friendly, curious and trusting, readily coming down to perch on open hands even without food or any training whatsoever. No other Canadian bird does that. When it was announced in 2016 that the Canada jay is the best choice for our national bird, a few grumpy Canadians were scratching their heads wondering, “Why don’t we pick a bird I see in my backyard or one that’s found commonly in cities and towns?” I disagree with this qualifier. Many world-renowned national animals, such as the kiwi and the bald eagle, are rarely seen by most citizens but remain powerful national icons. Closer to home, 10 of our 13 provincial and territorial birds are rarely, if ever, seen by Canadians, and none of them are backyard birds or city birds.
The Canada jay is a denizen of our boreal forest, Canada’s largest contiguous wild habitat stretching from coast to coast and spanning 1.3 billion acres. In short, to meet this bird, Canadians will have to get off their duffs and venture outdoors to our parks and ski mountains in the boreal forest. I guarantee you that this amazing little bird will come down to greet you, just like it’s done for millennia, cheerfully welcoming around their campfires — in the dead of winter — the people who built our nation: the explorers, settlers, trappers and First Nations people.
Obviously, no choice will ever receive universal acceptance, at least at the beginning, just as our now uncontroversial and much-loved flag also met considerable resistance when it was first introduced in 1965. While a few Canadians might argue that Canada should not even have a national bird, such a negative attitude is not likely shared by many Canadians, especially at this time of renewed pride in our country and our common desire to reaffirm our unique character and independence. In fact, I hold in my hands a list of no less than 43 bird/nature organizations, including 8 national ones, with 33 representing every province and a territory, as well as the two largest international ornithological societies in the world, all of which lent their wholehearted support for Bill S-221. These organizations collectively comprise almost 2 million Canadians. In summary, the Canada jay is a unifying, ecologically meaningful and distinctly Canadian choice, and it deserves very serious consideration as our national bird. We hope that you’ll agree.
The Chair: Thank you, Dr. Bird.
We’ll now proceed to questions from committee members. For this panel, senators will have four minutes for the question, which includes the answer. Please indicate if your question is directed to a particular witness or witnesses.
Senator Burey: Thank you so much to all the witnesses for being here, and thank you for your passion.
I became a backyard birder during the pandemic; let me confess that right away. I’m very interested in this bill, but I really wanted to know why you think Canada has not yet adopted a national bird, in your estimation, from both of you.
Mr. Bird: That is a very good question because I’ve been working on this for 11 years now. In fact, in 2010, in my Montreal Gazette bird column, I mused about what would make a good national bird for Canada, and I went through the Birds of Canada book, which I had just joined as the editor, and I quickly came up with the grey jay. It was named that at that time. And I said, at the end of the column, it was a no-brainer.
I remember going to, I believe, an MP in those years who was kind of interested in doing this, but it never got any traction, and then there was a half-hearted attempt at a bird centre in Ontario to get something going, but it just sort of fell through. In 2015, the Royal Canadian Geographical Society stepped in and did their contest, and in the end, they proclaimed the Canada jay — then called the grey jay — as the winner.
So why haven’t we done this a long time ago? Perhaps there wasn’t somebody like me who just wanted to put in the hours and so on to make this happen. I’m not doing this alone. There are other members of Team Canada Jay — the seven other authors of the book we put together — so it’s taken an awful lot of work, and I’m not surprised someone hasn’t made that effort. I hope I’ve answered your question.
Senator Burey: Yes, you have. Senator Ataullahjan?
Senator Ataullahjan: Thank you for that question. Most issues need a champion. I was very surprised when I heard that we didn’t have a national bird, and it was a chance conversation with former MP Brenda Shanahan. We were on a trip together to the U.S., and I started talking about my love for birds, and she said, “You know, Dr. Bird has been pushing this issue.”
I decided to look into it. Brenda told me that he had sent the books to every member of Parliament — like the MPs — and she was the only one who had picked it up and looked at it and decided that this was worth pursuing, and she reached out to Dr. Bird.
When I spoke to Dr. Bird first, I said, “You know what you should have done? You should have reached out to the senators. We’re the go-getters. We’re the ones who get the work done.” It’s not easy; we’ve been working on this, both Dr. Bird and me. I spoke in the Senate almost a year ago. I was thinking about it. I think there was nobody to champion it, and now here we are. We have a champion. We have people behind us, over 2 million, and I think the time is now for us to have a national bird.
Senator Senior: Dr. Bird, you’re going to have to forgive me, but I was born in Jamaica, and what do you think the name of the national bird there is?
Mr. Bird: I know exactly what it is. It’s the doctor bird, one of my favourite national birds in the world. I actually said that in the book.
Senator Senior: Sorry, I had to do that.
Mr. Bird: Good for you.
Senator Senior: The reason I mention that is because, as a child in school, we learned that. Whether through nursery rhymes or what have you, that was something that we grew up learning, so every Jamaican child in the school system would certainly know what the national bird is. I’m wondering what you have in mind in terms of an educational or awareness-building program once this bill goes through. It’s not often that we get a bill that sort of brings a smile to our faces and we get to laugh and be cheerful about it, so I welcome that. Assuming that this bill will go through in this place and the other place, what do you imagine some sort of rollout would look like?
Mr. Bird: I think that’s a great question, and I’m fairly certain about it based on the media response we got to the announcement by the Royal Canadian Geographical Society that they had chosen the third-place bird, overlooking the common loon, which won the most votes, arguably because it’s Ontario’s bird — the most populous province — with the snowy owl in second place. The media response to that was amazing, partly because of the controversy it created.
I think there’s going to be a pretty strong media response to this, should it be passed by the Senate and then, hopefully, the House of Commons, because a good news story is kind of needed out there by Canadians. We hear so many negative things in the news these days, and that’s not the reason to do this, mind you. I agree with Senator Ataullahjan that national symbols are very important, and I’ve already seen a lot of interest from people. We talk about the Canada jay, and I’ve given a lot of public talks, and I write about it whenever I can. I’m very confident that there’s going to be a strong response to this in a positive way, and once the media gets ahold of it and once Canadians all realize — a lot of Canadians already think this is our national bird. It’s just that it’s never been officially declared. I don’t want it to be just thought of as our national bird. I want to see it officially written in stone that it’s our national bird, and the time has never been more right to do this than right now.
Senator Ataullahjan: Thank you for that question. And you showed the importance of having a national symbol as a child. You learned about it in school. Think of Canadian children who will be learning about this bird.
We’ve gotten a lot of press, and when I’ve spoken to people and asked for support, they said, “Oh, we already thought it was our national bird.” I had somebody from one of the newspapers in my office on Monday, and they were really interested in this story. And like you said, it’s a story that has brought smiles to all of us. I think from where we sit — you know, I sit where you’re sitting today — there are very few occasions in committee where we’re sort of smiling and laughing as we’re also dealing with so much stuff. This is how I think of this story: It is one that will bring smiles to Canadians.
Senator Senior: Thank you.
Senator Boudreau: Thank you to both of you for being here today. I have to confess, as well, to be being a backyard birder. It’s my de-stresser. I thought I was doing a really good job because I’ve identified 26 birds in my backyard so far, but when Senator Ataullahjan said we have 450 in the country, I still have a lot of work left to do. I must admit: Maybe it’s the circles we travel in, I guess, but I would have bet money the Canada goose is our national bird. I thought for sure it was until I saw Bill S-221, and I think it speaks to the importance of symbols and making sure we’re clear on them and that Canadians understand them.
That does bring me to — and Dr. Bird you touched on it a bit in your opening remarks — when we talk about the importance of symbols, I think of the blue jay. And I know the blue jay is taken; I think it’s Prince Edward Island, so we can’t use the blue jay —
Mr. Bird: Also, it’s a baseball team.
Senator Boudreau: The blue jay is a blue jay is a blue jay. But depending on whom you talk to, the Canada jay could be a grey jay, a camp robber, a moose bird, a gorby or a whisky jack. That’s going to bring some confusion, I feel. Again, I support the bill. I’m not speaking against the bill. I support the bill, but I think it goes to Senator Senior’s comments about education and awareness. Whatever we do in terms of education and awareness, we need to be clear so that people understand which bird we’re talking about. I would be curious to hear —
Mr. Bird: It’s interesting you mentioned that because Dan Strickland — who is the world’s foremost expert on this species and has been studying them all his life — instead of pushing through the Canada jay, he tried to get me calling it the “Canada jay whisky jack,” putting both names together, because a lot of people will look a little puzzled at me when I say “Canada jay.” I can see their puzzlement and I get a smile on my face. And I say, “You probably know it by the whisky jack,” and a big smile comes on their face. Then they say, “Oh yeah, I know that bird.”
I was watching a hockey game last night at my friend’s sister’s place, and his brother-in-law was there, and when he heard I was in town for this purpose, he immediately brought out his phone and showed me a whole bunch of videos of him feeding whisky jacks at his moose hunting camp. He wasn’t even a birdwatcher; he is a hunter, but he was just enthralled with these birds and devising ways to tease them about how they could take the food away from his little feeder he had set up.
With the name Canada jay, gee whiz, it will only take an announcement by the national media to say Canada has got — hopefully — a new national bird called the Canada jay, and I think it will spread like wildfire. You can’t beat a name like that. It’s amazing. Whisky jack is kind of cool, but I worry about the name whisky jack because a lot of people think, “Oh, Scotch. What does that have to do with Scotch?” That is not a good thing to think about because the name has nothing to do with that. It has everything to do with our Aboriginal Peoples and Indigenous Peoples, and I think the connection to that is extremely important.
Senator Boudreau: Thank you.
Senator Muggli: Thank you, senator, for introducing this bill.
Dr. Bird, you were talking about the meaning of grey jays for maybe some First Nations, as it relates to an omen of good fortune and a warning of danger in the forest. Has there been dialogue with First Nations, Inuit or Métis people around the selection of this bird?
Mr. Bird: That is another excellent question, and I contemplated that long and hard when I first got my team together and started going after this. We have a fellow on our team and one of the co-authors of the book, Mark Nadjiwan, and he’s First Nations. He and I discussed this at length as well. There are several hundred — maybe more than that — different tribes, if you’d like to call them that, across Canada and I’m pretty certain you’d never get them to agree on one bird. They have many birds in their lore and traditions. If you look at a totem pole, there’s a bald eagle, a golden eagle or a Canada goose, and a raven is another one. I was a bit concerned we could get bogged down in all that, so I was pleased to see that when I approached the University of Manitoba’s Indigenous Birding Club, they signed on to this as well. They think it’s a great choice, and I think what’s particularly nice about the whisky jack or Canada jay is that it actually has a name that originated from Indigenous Peoples, so there’s a strong connection there, and I think that they’ll be quite pleased with this choice. I really do.
Senator Muggli: Did you say it was a Cree name?
Mr. Bird: Yes, that’s where it originated.
If you read about it on Wikipedia, it will say it came from another name that I can’t pronounce well, and it means trickster or mischievous bird, but that’s erroneous. If you talk to Dan Strickland, he did a lot of research into this for the book, and it has nothing to do with that whatsoever. It is a mischievous bird. This camp robber will go onto your picnic ground when you’re not looking and grab a bit of your sandwich.
People ask, “Aren’t they a bit of a pest?” My feeling is and I look at it as — I don’t know — there’s a cheekiness about them that I rather like. This whole idea of them coming to the hand for food is actually part of their ecology. In fact, Dan Strickland and others did a study that shows when birds are good at getting food from the hands of people on ski mountains and so on, those birds produce more young. So it is all part of their ecology.
If you don’t want them on picnic grounds annoying people, just put up a sign saying, “Do not feed the birds.” It is that simple.
Senator Muggli: Senator Ataullahjan, have you had any feedback from provincial governments?
Senator Ataullahjan: No, I haven’t.
Senator Petitclerc: Thank you, Mr. Bird and Senator Ataullahjan. Mr. Bird, your passion is very contagious, as you can see. I have a bit of an out-there question, but would you think it is even possible that if the Canada jay is the national bird of Canada, it would have some sort of side effect of encouraging people — maybe even tourists — to find out where they are and go see them? You mentioned kiwis, and I remember feeling like we’ve got to see them, right?
Mr. Bird: I was the same way. When I went to New Zealand, I wanted to do that. I only saw one in captivity and never got to see one. I think the Canada jay will serve as a tourism draw because it happens to be in places where people like to go. People come to Canada to go skiing or hiking, and that’s where you find this bird: at elevations. I think it will be a great bird for that.
Look at it this way. A child, for example, goes to one of those places and is standing there — it could be a five-year-old or six‑year-old or whatever — and this bird comes down on that child’s hand. You can imagine the impact it will have on that child. I think it will make them an instant bird lover and birdwatcher as well. It is an interesting trait for a bird to have. They are such gentle birds. I think they are gorgeous, personally. They are not brightly coloured. And that’s why I think they are the best bird. I hope I have answered your question.
Senator Petitclerc: You have. Thank you.
Senator Osler: My apologies for being late. I am Senator Flordeliz (Gigi) Osler and I represent Manitoba. I grew up knowing this bird as a whisky jack.
Thank you both for being here. I have a two-part question. The first part picks up on comments by Senator Senior and Senator Boudreau. If this bill receives Royal Assent, could there be backlash from the Canada goose fans and factions?
The second question is regarding the international perspective. I think this is best for you, Dr. Bird. Can you give us some examples of other countries’ national birds and how they were chosen?
Mr. Bird: Okay. Let me start with your first one. You mentioned the Canada goose earlier, and I’ve been dying to say this comment. I actually had it in my speech, but I took it out because I only had five minutes.
I would have the Canada goose as our national bird over my dead body, and I will tell you why. I love Canada geese. I grew up watching them flying over, and I loved watching them honk and everything else. They are iconic Canadian birds, as you can imagine. The trouble is they have become controversial because they are basically pooping machines. All they do is go on lawns and beaches and they eat and poop. Some people want to get rid of them in some places. In the United States, they are killing them because they are such a nuisance.
Would you really want a national bird that the Americans are killing for whatever good reasons they might have? I don’t think it would be a good idea. That’s why I quickly dismissed the Canada goose. It came fourth in that survey. But it has the name “Canada” in it, you see. If grey jay had the name Canada jay, I wonder whether it would have displaced the snowy owl and maybe even taken first place in the poll with a name like that.
To your second question, there are many national birds out there, but let me pick one close to home, which is the bald eagle. About a year ago, at Christmas, President Biden signed that bird as the official bird of the United States. I was shocked because I thought it was already the official bird of the United States, but a senator from Minnesota — there is a bald eagle education centre there, and they went through the records and noticed this has never been ratified as the national bird of the United States. So the senator went to President Biden on Christmas Eve, and he signed that bill making it the national bird.
People tell me, “Canada jays are pesky camp robbers and so on. Do you want a bird like that?” But every bird has some negatives. I gave you one on the Canada goose. What about the common loon? Many people would like it to be the common loon because it is so well known and has that iconic calling. I grew up near Algonquin Provincial Park and I love the bird. It is already honoured as Ontario’s bird and it’s on our coins. But common loons are known to use their beaks to stab and kill not only other birds that come into the lakes where they live, but they will also kill the young of other loons that come into their territory. So there is a negative thing about common loons. They are not harmless creatures.
Bald eagles are known thieves. They wait for ospreys to do the hard work of catching fish, and then they steal the fish from ospreys. And I have seen bald eagles at the Vancouver landfill site — there are 1,500 of them hanging around the site with the gulls, bringing up garbage bags full of human food remains to their nests.
Bald eagles are regal creatures; they are powerful and everything else. I look at the good. That’s what I’m trying to say. Every bird species has some negative aspects to it.
Senator Cuzner: Thank you very much. This has been a great committee so far. We all consider ourselves defenders of national symbols. I think I hold a pretty special place there because 17 years ago, I, as a member of Parliament, and my colleague Mark Eyking rescued a disoriented beaver from Sparks Street here in Ottawa. Check out YouTube. We marched it down across Wellington Street and into the Ottawa River. I phoned 911. No help from the police or fire or anything like that. It was two MPs in the national capital rescuing an iconic animal.
But to stay with the bird theme here, I will be the guy who throws the cat in with the pigeons.
If you asked 10 Canadians what our national sport is, they would all say hockey. We know it is lacrosse. Are we creating something here as a national bird that isn’t natural? Is it a bill that is being put forward sort of as an inside-baseball bill? Those who study birds like you, Dr. Bird, are advancing this because you know more than other Canadians.
The most popular radio show in Cape Breton is “The Bird Hour Phone-In” with Dave Harris and Dave McCorquodale every first Monday of the month. Everybody tunes in. It gets more calls than anybody else; it’s a great show, but you never hear the Canada jay being talked about there.
I live out on the Mira River — 36 miles of the river — and in the summer nights, when you are sitting down with that last glass of whatever and you hear the call of the loon, it is haunting. It holds a special place among First Nations communities because it symbolizes tranquility. It is on our dollar, as you mentioned. I remember “Hinterland Who’s Who,” and the very first one in 1963 was the loon.
Are we pushing back on something natural? I’m with you 100% on the Canada goose. But break my heart here, if you could. Make the case for why it shouldn’t be the Canada loon. Because I would think most Canadians would pick the loon — 95% of loons breed here in Canada. It is really tight. Break my heart here.
Mr. Bird: Which province did you say you are from?
Senator Cuzner: Nova Scotia. More specifically Cape Breton.
Mr. Bird: The Nova Scotia Bird Society is on this list of 43 organizations supporting the Canada jay. Interestingly, Nova Scotia is one of the few provinces where the Canada jay shows up at feeders in backyards. It makes that exception.
Senator Cuzner: Is that right?
Mr. Bird: Coming to the common loon, I remember when we did the national debate on this. Just before the announcement was made by the Royal Canadian Geographical Society, they hosted this debate. Catherine McKenna was in the audience and gave a speech, and she stayed for the whole thing, which surprised a lot of people. They asked her why she stayed and she said, “I think we will be debating this in the House of Commons.”
I took the debate very seriously. The five birds that came at the top of that poll were the common loon, the snowy owl, the grey jay and the Canada goose, which surprised me, and the black-capped chickadee. It’s a great bird. At the end of my closing remarks, I said that when we chose the flag of our country in 1965, we didn’t elevate this flag to our national status — I showed a Quebec fleur-de-lys. And I said we didn’t elevate this flag to our national flag status, which was the flag of Ontario. We chose something fresh and new. And that’s what I think we should do here with the national bird of Canada and choose something fresh and new. And the Canada jay is definitely that bird. And you will never get the common loon to sit on your hand and take food away from you. Never. I wouldn’t recommend it.
Senator Cuzner: But it is in your pocket.
Mr. Bird: It is and it’s recognized as such and recognized by Ontario, our most populous province. I think it has got its recognition, just like the black-capped chickadee. I think the Canada jay is something fresh and new that we should go for.
Senator Arnold: Thank you, Dr. Bird, for being here and for your enduring passion and commitment to this topic. I have a sheepish confession. I am terrified of birds. So being around all of these bird lovers and thinking about them eating off my hand, I have to say it is quite terrifying. However, I am able to put this fear away. In fact, I feel like this is a full circle moment for me because 35 years ago, I worked for a Canadian publisher in Toronto. We were co-publishing a book called The Bird Book & The Bird Feeder for children. My very first job was to go to the Royal Ontario Museum and take a huge tray of deceased birds to an illustrator. And it was really a very terrifying moment.
I am full circle here with you now. I’m not a fan of the Canada goose either, being a former mayor with a Goosinator in our city — yeah, they were bad.
You mentioned that they only have minor incursions into the U.S. From a marketing perspective, I am curious if you have thought about — given the geopolitical world that we are living in today — the fact that they don’t go south? Could that not be a great image for a truly Canadian bird?
Mr. Bird: Well, it is a known fact that a lot of Canadians are choosing not to go south of the border.
Senator Arnold: Exactly.
Mr. Bird: I’m afraid I am one of them for now. Yes, it is certainly a great marketing thing for the Canada jay, but I don’t want to get into geopolitical reasons as to why we should choose this bird because I’m hoping that this will not last. I’m hoping that after, say, three years, Canadians will start going back into the United States again. I probably wouldn’t use that as a marketing ploy for the bird, although Anne Murray, the famous singer, is on this list. She supports this bird. And she has that famous song “Snowbird,” and the Canada jay is a snowbird, but not in the way we know it. They don’t leave this country. They stay here. They are a tough bird. They are a snowbird because they will sit on their eggs, even covered in snow. They rely on cold Canadian winters to keep their food from rotting in their larders.
If I could make a comment on your affliction called ornithophobia, I wish you and I had the time, Senator Arnold — hear me out — and we could go into the elevation in the Gatineau area or Mount Washington, B.C., and I could convince you to have a Canada jay land on your hand. I bet you that you would get over that ornithophobia, for sure. I know it would be tough, but I know we could do it.
The Chair: That is a good segue to completing today’s session.
Senators, this really does bring us to the end of this panel. I would like to thank the witnesses — both of you — for your testimony today. We will prepare for clause-by-clause consideration of Bill S-215 and Bill S-221.
Mr. Bird: May I have a last comment? I was absolutely delighted walking through the streets to get to this building and seeing all those flags of the provincial birds and territorial birds. We need to add one more.
The Chair: We will take that under advisement. Thank you.
I know that I announced that we would be doing clause-by-clause consideration of Bill S-215 first, followed by Bill S-221. With your agreement, I would like to proceed with Bill S-221 first to complete the Canada jay bill and then go into Bill S-215. I’m seeing nodding heads, so we will proceed then with Bill S-221.
Before we begin, I would like to remind senators of a number of points. As chair, I will call each clause successively — all two — in the order in which they appear in the bill.
If, at any point, a senator is not clear where we are in the process, please ask for clarification. I wish to ensure that, at all times, we all have the same understanding of where we are in the process.
In terms of the mechanics of the 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. 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.
Some amendments that are moved may have consequential effect on other parts of the bill. It is therefore useful to this process if a senator moving an amendment identified to the committee other clauses in this bill where this amendment could have an effect. Otherwise, it would be very difficult for members of the committee to follow.
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.
If committee members ever have any questions about the process or about the propriety of anything occurring, they can certainly raise a point of order. As chair, I will listen to arguments, decide when there has been sufficient discussion of a matter or order and make a ruling.
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.
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.
Finally, senators are aware that any tied vote negates the motion in question. I will assure you that this is the one time that I will read this.
Are there any questions on any of the above? If not, we can proceed.
Senators, is it agreed that the committee proceed to clause-by-clause consideration of Bill S-221, An Act to provide for the recognition of the Canada jay as the national bird of Canada?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall the title stand postponed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall the preamble stand postponed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clause 1, which contains the short title, stand postponed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clause 2 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clause 1, which contains the short title, carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall the preamble carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall the title carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall the bill carry?
Some Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Senator Cuzner: May I abstain from supporting the bill?
The Chair: Absolutely.
Senator Cuzner: I do.
The Chair: We will note it.
Senator Cuzner: Yes.
The Chair: Thank you. We will pass it on division.
Senator Cuzner, would you like this passed on division?
Senator Cuzner: Okay, yes.
Ferda Simpson, Clerk of the Committee: Your name won’t be reflected in the minutes. It will just say “passed, on division.” If you want it reflected, we will do a roll call vote.
Senator Cuzner: Let’s go with “on division.”
The Chair: Does the committee wish to consider appending observations to the report? I see there is no interest.
Thank you, senators.
I omitted one last statement at the end of this bill. Is it agreed that I report this bill to the Senate in both official languages?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: My apologies for that.
Colleagues, we’ll now proceed to clause-by-clause consideration of Bill S-215, An Act respecting National Immigration Month.
I will call each clause successively in the order they appear in the bill. If, at any point, a senator is not clear where we are, please ask for clarification.
Senators, is it agreed that the committee proceed at this time to clause-by-clause consideration of Bill S-215, An Act respecting National Immigration Month?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall the title stand postponed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall the preamble stand postponed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clause 1, which contains the short title, stand postponed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clause 2 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clause 1, which contains the short title, carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall the preamble carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall the title carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall the bill carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Does the committee wish to consider appending observations to the report? I see no indications. Thank you.
Is it agreed that I report this bill to the Senate in both official languages?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Senator Cuzner: There you go: two bills.
The Chair: Thank you, colleagues. We have now completed clause-by-clause consideration of Bill S-215. We will now go in camera for further discussion.
(The committee continued in camera.)