Honourable senators, I rise today to speak about Bill S-15, a bill that aims to protect elephants and great apes from captivity that is not in the best interests of their welfare or is not for the purpose of a scientific research or conservation program.

I would like to begin by acknowledging the work of the government in putting this bill forward. This bill is a step toward fulfilling one of their campaign promises to protect animals in captivity, which also appears in the mandate letter of the Minister of Environment. I would also like to thank former Senator Sinclair and Senator Klyne for their leadership in bringing this same issue forward through the Jane Goodall act.

My speech will touch on principles of Bill S-15 that aim to protect elephants and great apes from the harms of captivity and seek to end the import and export of living elephants and great apes into and out of Canada, except by permit issued by the minister.

This legislation would, for example, prevent the future occurrence of a situation similar to the heartbreaking unnatural life lived by Lucy, a 47-year-old Asian elephant that has been held in captivity at the Edmonton Valley Zoo from the age of 2. Lucy, who has lived most of her life in captivity, is ailing and has been deemed medically unfit for travel and therefore cannot be relocated to an elephant sanctuary in the United States. Lucy will remain in Edmonton, where she is forced to endure harsh winter weather and sub-zero temperatures.

More and more Canadians are of the view that wild animals should have the right to a wild life and should not be held in captivity unless there is a direct benefit to them or to the conservation of their species. Bill S-15 will contribute to ensuring elephants and great apes are free to live a wild life.

However, we should also provide protection to other animals, including big cats, bears, wolves, seals and reptiles. In fact, we should consider increased protection for the 800 wild species for which there is abundant scientific evidence that they suffer greatly in captivity because their natural movements and behaviour are severely restricted. Keeping these animals in captivity is cruel and inhuman and is often exploitative and dangerous. There should be only exceptional circumstances for keeping any wild animal in captivity — when it serves the animal’s best interests or for research that has conservation benefits. We have a duty and an opportunity to raise the bar to protect the dignity of wild animals and to set an example for our peers in other countries.

Wildlife protection policy should recognize that global wildlife trade contributes to biodiversity loss and mass extinction and poses a risk to our health, as it contributes to the risk of zoonotic diseases. It should also address Canadian biodiversity crisis through transformative changes given that, for example, the exotic pet trade regrettably remains a significant and growing incentive for animal imports in Canada and that the nature of this practice requires close human contact with wild animals, posing a potential risk from a disease perspective. I hope during committee study these and other issues will be brought up by expert witnesses.

Last year, the United Nations Biodiversity Conference held in Montreal, COP15, culminated with a historic agreement intended to “. . . guide global action on nature through to 2030 . . . .” and call on us to ensure that “. . . 30 per cent of the planet and 30 per cent of degraded ecosystems . . . .” were placed under protection by 2030. The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, GBF, provides tangible actions to stop and reverse nature loss in order to “. . . address biodiversity loss, restore ecosystems and protect Indigenous rights.”

The four overarching global goals of the framework include:

. . . halting human-induced extinction of threatened species and reducing the rate of extinction of all species tenfold by 2050; sustainable use and management of biodiversity to ensure that nature’s contributions to people are valued, maintained and enhanced; fair sharing of the benefits from the utilization of genetic resources, and digital sequence information on genetic resources; and that adequate means of implementing the GBF be accessible to all Parties, particularly Least Developed Countries and Small Island Developing States.

Human activity is responsible for a dangerous decline in nature and there are one million plant and animal species threatened with extinction, many within the next decades.

Perspectives of our relations with nature and wildlife are changing for good. Since time immemorial, Indigenous peoples have known this, but now science is giving them reason. We must recognize that all living creatures are interconnected — each organism, species and ecosystem is an integral part of a network whose strength is only as strong as the weakest link. Humans depend on nature, not the other way around. A new approach based on ecocentrism is taking force. This approach “. . . places intrinsic value on all living organisms and their natural environment, regardless of their perceived usefulness or importance to human beings.”

Last week in Dubai at COP28, there was a long-overdue recognition of the important role Indigenous peoples have in the development of effective, nature-based solutions and in implementing climate solutions. Indigenous peoples and their traditional knowledge are invaluable in preserving biodiversity and ecosystem health. Like Indigenous peoples, we must take a holistic approach instead of considering species in isolation.

In addition, at the end of COP28, the parties adopted a decision that echoed the content of item 13 in the preamble to the Paris Agreement, which emphasizes the importance of ensuring the integrity of all ecosystems, including oceans, and of safeguarding biodiversity, known by some cultures as Mother Earth. The preamble also notes the importance sometimes placed on the concept of climate justice in climate change actions. According to the International Observatory on Nature’s Rights, this is a step forward: For the first time, provisions on the non-market approaches promoted by the Paris Agreement mention Mother Earth.

This progress is the result of the leadership shown by the Bolivian delegation and of a proposed statement recognizing the importance of strengthening Mother Earth rights and Mother Earth approaches when developing and implementing non‑market approaches.

During the 2021 federal election campaign, the government made a commitment to Canadians to “Work with partners to curb illegal wildlife trade and end elephant and rhinoceros tusk trade in Canada.” I applaud the Minister of Environment and Climate Change’s recent announcement of:

. . . a stricter approach to trade for Canada that will further limit the ability to transport all elephant ivory and rhinoceros horn across Canadian borders.

This includes a prohibition on the import and export of raw elephant ivory and raw rhinoceros horns, with few exceptions, and a prohibition on the importation of elephant ivory and rhinoceros horn hunting trophies. However, curbing the illegal wildlife trade of other species, including big cats, is equally important.

Another important issue that should be studied in committee is how to raise the standards of zoos and evaluate if society still finds them acceptable in their current forms of operation. Among other things, the establishment of transparent legal and science‑based standards for zoos that would ensure animals, such as tigers, lions and many species of monkeys that remain in captivity, are no longer housed in undersized, flimsy cages and would ensure that big cats and other exotic wild animals are not held without a permit by people who lack the expertise, training and facilities necessary to provide a safe and healthy life to the wild animals under their care.

Maybe you heard the news that on November 30, a kangaroo escaped from its handlers east of Toronto during transportation to Quebec. The kangaroo, who was found and caught by police, roamed freely for more than three days. Fortunately, the kangaroo was seemingly unharmed, and there were no reported injuries to people.

Colleagues, there are gaps in captive wildlife law and regulation, and it is therefore no surprise that wild animals escape roadside zoos. This is why advocacy groups, such as World Animal Protection Canada, are calling for stricter regulations to protect both captive wildlife — by ensuring zoos meet the highest standard of animal welfare — and public health and safety.

The committee could consider the need to take animal welfare and public health and safety even further. As an under-regulated and unsustainable sector, there continues to be a need for more rules to fight against the trade of wild animals. Undoubtedly, the legal trade of wildlife only fuels illegal trade, and we need efficient regulations to improve the data collection and monitoring system that exists in Canada, which prioritizes zoonotic detection and monitoring in wild animals used for food. We must do more to reduce animal suffering and to reduce the risks of illness and the loss of biodiversity.

Colleagues, the new Senate is fulfilling its duty of sober second thought and proposing integrated, holistic, rigorous and coherent legislation with vision. Our legislative bills aim to solve important problems in Canadian society. In this new Senate, we pride ourselves on well-thought-out, comprehensive, high-quality bills. In some cases, some ideas put forward in Senate public bills are picked up by the government in part. However, the ideas need to be picked up in full.

The Jane Goodall Act, which also aims to protect animals, appears superior to Bill S-15 because it is more comprehensive. Let’s send Bill S-15 to the Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources for a rigorous study so it can become an impactful bill that protects more wild animals and moves us much closer to the 30x30 goal by protecting biodiversity while also protecting human health. Thank you. Meegwetch.