Journals of the Senate
51 Elizabeth II, A.D. 2002, Canada
Journals of the Senate
2nd Session, 37th Parliament
Issue 12
Tuesday, October 29, 2002
2:00 p.m.
The Honourable Daniel Hays, Speaker
The Members convened were:
The Honourable Senators
Adams, Andreychuk, Angus, Atkins, Bacon, Baker, Beaudoin, Biron, Bolduc, Buchanan, Callbeck, Carney, Carstairs, Chalifoux, Christensen, Cochrane, Comeau, Cook, Cools, Corbin, Cordy, Day, De Bané, Di Nino, Doody, Eyton, Fairbairn, Ferretti Barth, Finnerty, Fitzpatrick, Forrestall, Fraser, Furey, Gauthier, Graham, Gustafson, Hays, Hervieux-Payette, Hubley, Johnson, Joyal, Kelleher, Kenny, Kinsella, Kirby, Kolber, Kroft, LaPierre, Lapointe, LeBreton, Léger, Losier-Cool, Lynch-Staunton, Maheu, Mahovlich, Meighen, Milne, Morin, Murray, Oliver, Phalen, Prud'homme, Rivest, Robichaud, Rompkey, Rossiter, Setlakwe, Sibbeston, Smith, Sparrow, Spivak, Stratton, Taylor, Tkachuk, Watt, Wiebe
The Members in attendance to business were:
The Honourable Senators
Adams, Andreychuk, Angus, Atkins, Bacon, Baker, Beaudoin, Biron, Bolduc, Buchanan, Callbeck, Carney, Carstairs, Chalifoux, Christensen, Cochrane, Comeau, Cook, Cools, Corbin, Cordy, Day, De Bané, Di Nino, Doody, Eyton, Fairbairn, Ferretti Barth, Finnerty, Fitzpatrick, Forrestall, Fraser, Furey, Gauthier, Graham, Gustafson, Hays, Hervieux-Payette, Hubley, Johnson, Joyal, Kelleher, Kenny, Kinsella, Kirby, Kolber, Kroft, LaPierre, Lapointe, LeBreton, Léger, Losier-Cool, Lynch-Staunton, Maheu, Mahovlich, Meighen, Milne, Morin, Murray, Oliver, *Pearson, Phalen, Prud'homme, Rivest, Robichaud, Rompkey, Rossiter, Setlakwe, Sibbeston, Smith, Sparrow, Spivak, Stratton, Taylor, Tkachuk, Watt, Wiebe
PRAYERS
TRIBUTES
Tribute was paid to the memory of the Honourable Hartland de Montarville Molson, former Senator, whose death occurred September 28, 2002.
SENATORS' STATEMENTS
Some Honourable Senators made statements.
DAILY ROUTINE OF BUSINESS
Tabling of Documents
The Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C., tabled the following:
Document entitled Proposed Regulations Amending the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (In Relation to the Safethird Country Agreement) and Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement.—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-159.
Presentation of Reports from Standing or Special Committees
The Honourable Senator Fraser tabled the following (Sessional Paper No. 2/37-160S):
TUESDAY, October 29, 2002
The Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications has the honour to table its
FIRST REPORT
Your Committee, which was authorized by the Senate to incur expenses for the purpose of its examination and consideration of such legislation and other matters as were referred to it, reports, pursuant to Rule 104, that the expenses incurred by the Committee during the First Session of the Thirty-seventh Parliament are as follows:
1. With respect to its examination of legislation:
Professional and Other Services $ 24,473 Transport and Communication — Other Expenditures — Witness Expenses $ 4,537 Total $ 29,010
2. With respect to its study of issues facing the intercity busing industry:
Professional and Other Services $ 41,366 Transport and Communication $ 123,092 Other Expenditures $ 1,676 Witness Expenses $ 6,157 Total $ 172,291
Your Committee received 14 orders of reference from the Senate during the session in question. It held 53 meetings during this period, receiving evidence from 182 witnesses over a more than 84 hours. It submitted 12 reports to the Senate and recommended three amendments to legislation.
Respectfully submitted,
JOAN FRASER
Chair
The Honourable Senator Maheu tabled the following (Sessional Paper No. 2/37-161S):
TUESDAY, October 29, 2002
The Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights has the honour to table its
FIRST REPORT
Your Committee, which was authorized by the Senate to incur expenses for the purpose of its examination and consideration of such legislation and other matters as were referred to it, reports, pursuant to Rule 104 of the Rules, that the expenses incurred by the Committee during the First Session of the Thirty-seventh Parliament are as follows:
1.With respect to its study of issues relating to human rights and, inter alia, the machinery of government dealing with Canada's international and national human rights obligations:
Professional and Other Services $ 3,370 Transport and Communication $ 734 Other Expenditures $ 234 Witness Expenses $ 17,635 Total $ 21,973
2.With respect to its study of the status of Canada's adherence to international human rights instruments and the process whereby Canada enters into, implements, and reports on such agreements:
Professional and Other Services $ 12,133 Transport and Communication $ 32,057 Other Expenditures — Witness Expenses $ 8,632 Total $ 52,822
During the session under consideration, Your Committee considered two orders of reference, held 19 meetings, and received evidence from 57 witnesses over some 44 hours. In addition, a delegation of Committee members participated in a fact-finding mission and met with over 60 other individuals. Your Committee submitted three reports relating to its work.
Respectfully submitted,
SHIRLEY MAHEU
Chair
The Honourable Senator Murray, P.C., tabled the following (Sessional Paper No. 2/37-162S):
TUESDAY, October 29, 2002
The Standing Senate Committee on National Finance has the honour to table its
FIRST REPORT
Your Committee, which was authorized by the Senate to incur expenses for the purpose of its examination and consideration of the estimates and legislation referred to it, reports pursuant to Rule 104 of the Rules of the Senate, that the expenses incurred by the Committee during the First Session of the Thirty-Seventh Parliament are as follows:
1. With respect to its consideration of estimates and legislation:
Professional Services $ 2,093 Witness Expenses $ 2,742 Total $ 4,835
2. With respect to its special study on Equalization
Witness Expenses $ 4,851 Total $ 4,851
3. With respect to its special study on the Goose Bay Labrador Airfield
Professional Services $ 9,133 Witness Expenses $ 2,962 Total $ 12,095
Your Committee held 59 meetings, during which it heard 148 witnesses and presented 20 reports during the session. It reviewed the Main Estimates for 2001-2002 and began examination of the Main Estimates for 2002-2003. It reviewed three sets of Supplementary Estimates covering the years 2000-2001 and 2001-2002. The Committee examined five bills including Bill S-23, An Act to amend the Customs Act and to make related amendments to other Acts, which was introduced in the Senate. The Committee carried out three special studies, namely, the effectiveness of the present equalization policy, the role of the government in the financing of deferred maintenance costs in Canada's post- secondary institutions and the administrative contract at the Goose Bay, Labrador Airfield.
Respectfully submitted,
LOWELL MURRAY
Chairman
The Honourable Senator Kenny tabled the following (Sessional Paper No. 2/37-163S):
TUESDAY, October 29, 2002
The Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence has the honour to table its
FIRST REPORT
Your Committee, which was authorized by the Senate to incur expenses for the purpose of its examination and consideration of such legislation and other matters as were referred to it, reports, pursuant to Rule 104 of the Rules, that the expenses incurred by the Committee during the First Session of the Thirty-seventh Parliament are as follows:
1. With respect to its special study to conduct an introductory survey of the major security and defence issues facing Canada with a view to preparing a detailed work plan for future comprehensive studies (Authorized by the Senate on Thursday, May 31, 2001):
(a) During this study, your Committee spent 173.5 hours meeting 204 persons in hearings and fact-finding visits. In addition to hearings in Ottawa, the Committee made three fact-finding visits in Canada and one to Washington, D.C. The Committee visited ports and airports in Montreal, Vancouver and Halifax. It also heard from military personnel in Regular and Reserve units of the Canadian Forces in Montreal, Esquimalt, Winnipeg, Halifax and Gagetown. In Washington the Committee met with congressional and administration leaders responsible for defence, security and homeland defence matters.
(b) Your Committee submitted 3 reports including its substantive report entitled "Canadian Security and Military Preparedness''.
2. With respect to its special study to examine and report on the need for a national security policy for Canada (Authorized by the Senate on Tuesday, April 16, 2002):
(a) During this study, your Committee spent 102 hours meeting 191 persons in hearings and fact-finding visits. In addition to hearings in Ottawa, the Committee held hearings in Toronto on airport security. It also made two fact-finding visits in Canada. The Committee visited military installations in Ottawa and a land border crossings in Lansdowne (Ontario). It also heard from military personnel in Kingston, Borden, Trenton and Petawawa.
(b) Your Committee submitted 3 reports including its substantive report entitled "Defence of North America: A Canadian Responsibility''.
Professional and Other Services $ 167,473 Transportation and Communication $ 253,933 All other Expenditures $ 16,366 Witness Expenses $ 5,971 Total $ 443,743
3. With respect to its special study to examine and report on the health care provided to veterans of war and of peacekeeping missions; the implementation of the recommendations made in its previous reports on such matters; and the terms of service, post-discharge benefits and health care of members of the regular and reserve forces as well as members of the RCMP and of civilians who have served in close support of uniformed peacekeepers (Authorized by the Senate on October 4, 2001):
(a) This Order of Reference was delegated to a Subcommittee on October 15, 2001, which heard 38 witnesses and held 9 meetings (15.3 hours) and submitted 1 report in relation to its work.
(b) In addition to hearing from representatives of all major veterans' organizations, the Sub-committee travelled to Charlottetown for public hearings with departmental officials and an opportunity to visit departmental facilities.
Professional and Other Services $ 6,736 Transportation and Communication $ 15,372 All other Expenditures $ 19 Witness Expenses $ 4,875 Total $ 27,002
Respectfully submitted,
COLIN KENNY
Chair
The Honourable Senator Milne tabled the following (Sessional Paper No. 2/37-164S):
TUESDAY, October 29, 2002
The Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament has the honour to table its
FIRST REPORT
Pursuant to Rule 104, your Committee reports that the expenses incurred by the Committee during the First Session of the Thirty-Seventh Parliament were as follows:
Professional and Other Service $ 13,211 Transportation and Communication — All other Expenditures $ 22 Witness Expenses $ 1,905 Total $ 15,138
During the First Session of the Thirty-Seventh Parliament, your Committee met 50 times, totalling 81.9 hours, tabled or presented a total of 15 reports, and heard 10 witnesses.
In its First Report, which was tabled in the Senate on February 22, 2001, your Committee reported on its expenses and activities in the Second Session of the Thirty-Sixth Parliament, pursuant to Rule 104.
On March 1, 2001, your Committee tabled an updated version of the Rules of the Senate dated February 2001, as its Second Report.
Your Committee's Third Report, which was presented on May 17, 2001, requested authorization to adjourn from place to place within and outside Canada, and pursuant to section 2:07 of the Procedural Guidelines for the Financial Operations of Senate Committees, appended a copy of the report of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration with respect to its Budget. The report was approved by the Senate on June 5, 2001.
Your Committee's Fourth Report, which was presented on September 19, 2001, and approved by the Senate on October 31, 2001, recommended that the "Senate Committee on Defence and Security'' be re-named the "Senate Committee on National Security and Defence.''
In its Fifth Report, which was presented on September 19, 2001, your Committee recommended that the "Committee on Privileges, Standing Rules and Orders'' be re-named the "Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament.'' The report was approved by the Senate on September 25, 2001.
Your Committee's Sixth Report, presented on October 4, 2001, and approved on October 18, 2001, requested an extension of the deadline for reporting on its order of reference of March 15, 2001 to examine the structure of Senate committees from October 31, 2001 to February 15, 2002.
On November 6, 2001, your Committee presented its Seventh Report regarding its order of reference from the Senate of March 22, 2001 on the official recognition of third parties. The Committee recommended that the Senate accord official recognition to parties that are registered as parties under the Canada Elections Act at the time that recognition is sought in the Senate and have at least five members in the Senate; that the Government be asked to propose consequential amendments to the Parliament of Canada Act; and that the Rules of the Senate be reviewed and amendments proposed to implement the report. The Report was approved by the Senate on February 5, 2002.
In your Committee's Eighth Report, which was presented on December 5, 2001, it dealt with the issue of senators indicted and subject to judicial proceedings, and recommended amendments to rules 137 and 138 of the Rules of the Senate, and regulations pursuant to the Parliament of Canada dealing with suspension and deductions for non attendance. The Senate approved the Report on December 14, 2001.
On February 20, 2002, your Committee tabled an updated version of the Rules of the Senate dated February 2002, as its Ninth Report.
Your Committee's Tenth Report, which was presented on March 5, 2002, reported Bill S-34, with amendments. The bill, An Act respecting royal assent to bills passed by the Houses of Parliament, had been referred to your Committee on October 4, 2001. Appended to the report were observations and a letter to the chair of your Committee from the Leader of the Government in the Senate and the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons. The Report was adopted by the Senate on March 6, 2002.
Your Committee's Eleventh Report, which was presented on March 20, 2002, was entitled Modernizing the Senate from Within: Updating the Senate Committee Structure, and dealt with operational issues. The Report contained eight recommendations focused on bringing about improvements to the operational effectiveness of Senate committees.
The report was not approved by the Senate prior to the prorogation of the First Session of the Thirty-seventh Parliament on September 16, 2002.
In its Twelfth Report, which was presented on March 26, 2002, your Committee recommended amendments to the Rules of the Senate with respect to the matter of officially recognizing a third party, pursuant to the adoption of your Committee's Seventh Report. This report had not been approved by the Senate prior to prorogation on September 16, 2002.
Your Committee's Thirteenth Report dealt with the issue of time allocated to tributes in the Senate, and recommended amendments to the Rules of the Senate. The report was presented in the Senate on May 2, 2002, but the report had not been approved by the Senate prior to prorogation on September 16, 2002.
Your Committee's Fourteenth Report was presented in the Senate on June 11, 2002. It was a continuation of your Committee's study of Modernizing the Senate from Within: Updating the Senate Committee, which had started with your Committee's Eleventh Report.
The Fourteenth Report dealt with issues raised by individual Senators relating to the operational effectiveness of Senate committees and the effectiveness of the Senate committee system. This report had not been approved by the Senate prior to prorogation.
In your Committee's Fifteenth Report, which was presented on June 13, 2002, your Committee recommended amendments to the Rules of the Senate dealing with the names and mandates of certain standing committees. It had not been approved by the Senate prior to prorogation on September 16, 2002.
Respectfully submitted,
LORNA MILNE
Chair
Tabling of Reports from Inter-Parliamentary Delegations
The Honourable Senator Mahovlich tabled the following:
Report of the Canadian Delegation of the Canada-Europe Parliamentary Association respecting its participation at the Fifth Conference of Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region, held in Tromso, Norway, from August 11 to 13, 2002.—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-165.
ORDERS OF THE DAY
GOVERNMENT BUSINESS
Bills
Third reading of Bill S-2, An Act to implement an agreement, conventions and protocols concluded between Canada and Kuwait, Mongolia, the United Arab Emirates, Moldova, Norway, Belgium and Italy for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion and to amend the enacted text of three tax treaties.
The Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C., moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Rompkey, P.C., that the Bill be read the third time.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Lynch-Staunton moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Stratton, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Jaffer, seconded by the Honourable Senator Maheu, for the second reading of Bill C-10, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (cruelty to animals and firearms) and the Firearms Act.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Tkachuk moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Stratton, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Order No. 3 was called and postponed until the next sitting.
Motions
Order No. 1 was called and postponed until the next sitting.
Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Morin, seconded by the Honourable Senator Hubley:
That the following Address be presented to Her Excellency the Governor General of Canada:
To Her Excellency the Right Honourable Adrienne Clarkson, Chancellor and Principal Companion of the Order of Canada, Chancellor and Commander of the Order of Military Merit, 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.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Stratton moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator LeBreton, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Order No. 3 was called and postponed until the next sitting.
OTHER BUSINESS
Senate Public Bills
Second reading of Bill S-9, An Act to honour Louis Riel and the Metis People.
The Honourable Senator Chalifoux moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Taylor, that the Bill be read the second time.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Stratton moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Forrestall, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Order No. 2 was called and postponed until the next sitting.
Second reading of Bill S-7, An Act to protect heritage lighthouses.
The Honourable Senator Forrestall moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator LeBreton, that the Bill be read the second time.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator LaPierre moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Lapointe, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Orders No. 4 and 5 were called and postponed until the next sitting.
Reports of Committees
Consideration of the Second Report of the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology (budget—special study on health care system) presented in the Senate on October 24, 2002.
The Honourable Senator LeBreton moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Beaudoin, that the Report be adopted.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Consideration of the Third Report of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration (salary increase for Senior Executive Group) presented in the Senate on October 24, 2002.
The Honourable Senator Bacon moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Losier-Cool, that the Report be adopted.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Order No. 3 was called and postponed until the next sitting.
Other
Orders No. 8 (motion), 4 (inquiry), 4 (motion), 3 (inquiry), 3, 5 (motions), 2 (inquiry) and 7 (motion) were called and postponed until the next sitting.
MOTIONS
The Honourable Senator Morin moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Lapointe:
That the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology be authorized to examine and report on the document entitled Santé en français — Pour un meilleur accès à des services de santé en français;
That the papers and evidence received and taken by the Committee in the First Session of the Thirty-seventh Parliament be referred to the Committee;
That the Committee submit its final report no later than December 31, 2002; and
That the Committee be permitted, notwithstanding usual practices, to deposit any report with the Clerk of the Senate, if the Senate is not then sitting; and that the report be deemed to have been tabled in the Chamber.
After debate,
In amendment, the Honourable Senator Kinsella moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Stratton, that the motion be amended by striking out the last paragraph.
After debate,
The question being put on the motion in amendment, it was adopted.
The question then being put on the main motion, as amended, it was adopted.
The Honourable Senator Kolber moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Bacon:
That in accordance with the provisions contained in section 216 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act and in section 22 of the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act, the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce be authorized to examine and report on the administration and operation of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act and the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act; and
That the Committee submit its final report no later than June 19, 2003.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
The Honourable Senator Kolber moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Losier-Cool:
That the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce have power to engage the services of such counsel and technical, clerical and other personnel as may be necessary for the purpose of its examination and consideration of such bills, subject-matters of bills and estimates as are referred to it.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
The Honourable Senator Kolber moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Mahovlich:
That the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce be empowered to permit coverage by electronic media of its public proceedings with the least possible disruption of its hearings.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
The Honourable Senator Chalifoux moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Milne:
That the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples, pursuant to the input it has received from urban Aboriginal people and organizations, be authorized to examine and report upon issues affecting urban Aboriginal youth in Canada. In particular, the Committee shall be authorized to examine access, provision and delivery of services; policy and jurisdictional issues; employment and education; access to economic opportunities; youth participation and empowerment; and other related matters;
That the papers and evidence received and taken on the subject and the work accomplished by the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples during the First Session of the Thirty-seventh Parliament be referred to the Committee; and
That the Committee report to the Senate no later than June 27, 2003.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
SPEAKER'S RULING
On Wednesday, October 2, Senator Murray rose on a point of order to comment about two issues relating to the opening of the second session of the 37th Parliament and the Speech from the Throne that was read by Her Excellency, the Governor General in this Chamber on September 30. The first had to do with the sound system and the fact that the volume of the translation was so high as to be disruptive, not only to the Senators, but also to the Governor General herself. While it was unclear what might have been the cause of this problem, the Senator urged that steps be taken to prevent it from happening again. The second matter of the point of order related to the behaviour of several Senators and visitors in the Galleries as well, who applauded portions of the Speech from the Throne, contrary to established practice. As the Senator mentioned, the Governor General, as the Queen's representative, must be kept from any political involvement. Accordingly, her Speech is always to be heard in silence. The applause was inappropriate and ought not to be condoned. This intervention by Senator Murray led to a series of other observations about various aspects surrounding the opening of the session.
Senator Carstairs, the Leader of the Government, then spoke in support of the observations made by Senator Murray and added one of her own. One of the MPs who came to the bar of the Senate to hear the Speech from the Throne actually took a Senator's seat and only gave it up after the Government Whip requested that he join his Commons colleagues behind the bar. To avoid any similar occurrence in the future, Senator Carstairs suggested that notes be prepared advising everyone about the traditional decorum that is expected during the Speech from the Throne.
When Senator Kinsella, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, rose to speak on the point of order, it was to agree with the remarks of both Senator Murray and Senator Carstairs. At the same time, he raised three other issues about the opening events that troubled him. The first was another problem touching decorum. In the Senator's view, it was improper for the Senators and others to rise when the justices of the Supreme Court entered the Chamber to take their seats in front of the Thrones where the Table is normally located. The second matter had to do with the sitting of the Senate at 11:30 a.m. when Senator Smith was formally introduced. Since the time for the Speech from the Throne had been set in the Proclamation for 2:00 p.m., the Senator wondered by what authority the Senate held the earlier meeting. Finally, Senator Kinsella cast doubt about the Senate proceedings that followed the Governor General's departure after the Speech from the Throne because the mace was not in its proper place on the Table.
Other Senators also participated in the discussion on the point of order. Senator Austin spoke about the broadcast cameras using "cheap shots'', as he described it, of Senators to project a certain image of this place. For his part, Senator LaPierre wondered what all the fuss was about and defended the practice of applauding elements of the Speech from the Throne. Senator Prud'homme suggested that strict rules should be in place regarding cameras and what is to be portrayed. Senator Grafstein spoke to defend the importance of parliamentary tradition and to explain his actions with respect to the entrance of the justices of the Supreme Court. Senator Cools also agreed with Senator Murray's point of order and lamented the declining knowledge about parliamentary government in a constitutional monarchy. Then Senator Comeau used the opportunity of the point of order to raise a question about attendance. Finally, Senator LaPierre spoke again to suggest that the photographers should be removed from the Chamber.
I wish to thank all honourable Senators for their contribution to the discussion. It is clear that some elements of the Opening did not go as well as they should have and that some practices seem to be misunderstood. I will try to deal with each of the different matters in turn. First of all, however, it is useful to point out that the role of the Speaker during the Speech from the Throne is not the same as during a Senate sitting. With Parliament assembled in this Chamber, with the Crown representative on the Throne, the Senators in their places, and the Commons at the bar, I do not think that it can be said that the Speaker is presiding over the proceedings. Nonetheless, I do think it is important that all of the concerns raised in the point of order be addressed even though they may not be legitimate points of order.
With respect to the problem that we had with the sound system, this point of order and the concerns of Senate officials prompted an investigation that determined that there were some difficulties associated with a sudden breakdown in the sound system just prior to the Opening and that there had been insufficient time to perform an final sound check before the ceremonies began. As well, there were other sound level problems with the equipment of the broadcaster. In any case, I have been assured that steps will be taken to avoid these problems in the future.
As to the matter of the applause made to certain parts of the Speech from the Throne, I am in agreement with the view that it is not proper and it should be avoided. This is for the reasons that were cited by several Senators. The Government prepares the Speech from the Throne that is a declaration of its agenda for the session. The merits or objections of this agenda should be expressed, not in the presence of the Governor General, but during the time the Senate allocates for the Address-in-Reply. At the same time, I must acknowledge that should applause occur, or should any disapproval be expressed, I as Speaker am not in a position to stop it. To rise and then cut off any audible reaction to a passage of the Speech from the Throne when it happens would be to compound the offence. It would put the Governor General in an embarrassing position and would seriously detract from the dignity of the event.
This is also true with respect to what happened when the justices of the Supreme Court entered the Senate to take their seats. By practice, Senators should not rise, but would it have been acceptable for me to intervene to stop it? I do not think so. It is for this reason that I agree with the suggestion that was made by several Senators that notes should be prepared to accompany any material issued explaining the schedule of the proceedings relating to the Opening. In other words, the best approach is to do more in order to ensure that those in attendance are aware of the proper procedures.
In the matter of the MP who took a seat within the bar, this was clearly a violation of tradition and also the Rules of the Senate. Members of the other place when they come to the Senate to witness Royal Assent or to hear a Speech from the Throne as they did on September 30 should always remain behind the bar. Rule 126 reserves several places "without the bar'' for former Senators or Members of the House of Commons who wish to follow the proceedings of the Senate during a sitting. At no time ought members to take a seat inside the bar. Senator Prud'homme indicated that a Senator invited the member to take a seat. Other senators, however, objected and the Government Whip was successful in persuading the member to leave. This incident should not have happened, yet it provides one more reason to prepare and distribute some documentation explaining the traditions and practices that are to be observed at the opening of a parliamentary session.
Senator Kinsella raised questions about the authority for the morning sitting and about the propriety of the sitting following the Speech from the Throne given that the mace was not on the Table. Research has been done to determine the history of our practices. The results are interesting and it may provide Senator Kinsella with part of the answer to his first question. As Speaker, however, I have no authority to give a decision on a constitutional question or a point of law and there is clearly an aspect to his question which is constitutional in nature. Prior to 1930, the Proclamation announcing the date of the opening of Parliament, whether for a new Parliament or a new session, did not indicate the time of the Governor General's arrival on Parliament Hill. Even before the change in 1930, the Senate always met earlier. This happened for several reasons: to receive the message from Rideau Hall indicating the time for the opening; to acknowledge a new Senate Speaker appointed by the Government; and frequently to introduce new Senators. The Journals suggest that all of these sittings were brief. It is less clear, before 1930, whether these meetings took place a short time before the Governor General's arrival or some hours before, though some of them clearly took place a few hours earlier. This is more clearly the case in many of the openings since 1930, but not all. While every opening of a new Parliament has involved an earlier sitting of the Senate, a small number of the openings of a new session have been timed to coincide with the Governor General's appearance in the Senate for the reading of the Speech from the Throne. What occurred, therefore, on September 30 is well within the practices that the Senate has followed since 1867.
The issue of the mace is also interesting. Again without taking a position one way or the other, Senator Kinsella suggested that I as Speaker consider the matter of the proper place for the mace following the departure of the Governor General when the Senate conducted some business. As Honourable Senators will recall, certain proceedings did take place on September 30 following established practice. In accordance with the Rules of the Senate, the pro forma bill is introduced and read a first time and I met my obligation to report the Speech from the Throne. In addition, the Deputy Leader of the Government moved the motion for the creation of the Committee of Selection. During these proceedings, the mace was present in the Chamber, but not on the Table which had been removed temporarily. So far as I can determine, the Table has been removed at every opening since 1920 when the Senate first occupied this Chamber. Indeed, whenever there is a "large'' opening, Senators' desks are also taken away and replaced by rows of benches. The Speaker's Chair is also removed for part of the day so as not to obstruct the Governor General's access to the Throne. These modifications to the Chamber including as well the installation of platforms for cameramen are now an established part of the preparations related to the opening ceremonies of Parliament. None of these modifications, including the absence of the Table, undermine the legitimacy of the Senate's brief sitting following the Speech from the Throne. The mace is present even if not on the Table. This is the minimum requirement and it is sufficient. As Marleau and Montpetit at page 238 explains with respect to the mace in the House of Commons: "The Mace is integral to the functioning of the House; since the late seventeenth century it has been accepted that the Mace must be present for the House to be properly constituted.''
Another question was raised about the practice of treating the morning sitting as one distinct from the afternoon event. The history on this is mixed. It appears to date back to 1930 and has been followed intermittently since. How it figures in the tabulation of Senators attendance is an administrative matter, not a procedural one, and I will not offer any comment on it.
Finally, several Senators deplored the use of "cheap shots'' by television cameramen. A suggestion was made that the Senate should insist on rules or guidelines comparable to those applied in the House of Commons during sittings. Presumably, such guidelines would be formulated by the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament. Among other things, these House of Commons guidelines require the camera to focus with a head-shot on the member speaking. In the alternative, it was proposed that cameras be banned from the Opening. Frankly, I do not think either option is feasible. The opening is not a regular sitting of either the Senate or the House of Commons. Moreover, there are a variety of different camera crews and still photographers present and it would be difficult to impose on them the rules that are applied by the House of Commons to its proceedings on its own camera crew. They are too restrictive for an event like the Opening.
This resolves the issues that were raised during the discussion that was initiated by Senator Murray's point of order. As I indicated earlier, there is little that I as Speaker am able to do to regulate the proceedings related to the Speech from the Throne. Where possible, however, steps will be taken to minimize and hopefully avoid the technical distractions that occurred on September 30. As well, I will undertake to have prepared a document explaining the traditions and practices of the Opening of Parliament and make it available for circulation before this event next occurs.
REPORTS DEPOSITED WITH THE CLERK OF THE SENATE PURSUANT TO RULE 28(2):
Report of the Security Intelligence Review Committee for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-23, s. 53. —Sessional Paper No. 2/37-131.
Reports of the Ministry of the Solicitor General for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Access to Information Act and to the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1 and P-21, sbs. 72(2).—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-132.
Reports of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Access to Information Act and to the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1 and P-21, sbs. 72(2).—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-133.
Report of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, together with the Auditor General's Report, for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. S-12, sbs. 20(2).—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-134.
Report of the National Research Council of Canada for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the National Research Council Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. N-15, s. 17.—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-135.
Report on the Lobbyists' Code of Conduct for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Lobbyists Registration Act, S.C. 1995, c. 12, s. 10.6.—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-136.
Report on the administration of the Lobbyists Registration Act for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 44 (4th Supp.), sbs. 11(2).—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-137.
Reports of the Business Development Bank of Canada for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Access to Information Act and to the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1 and P-21, sbs. 72(2).—Sessional Paper No. 2/37- 138.
Reports of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Access to Information Act and to the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1 and P-21, sbs. 72(2).—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-139.
Reports of the National Film Board for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Access to Information Act and to the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1 and P-21, sbs. 72(2). —Sessional Paper No. 2/37-140.
Reports of the Canadian Museum of Nature for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Access to Information Act and to the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1 and P-21, sbs. 72(2). —Sessional Paper No. 2/37-141.
Reports of the National Gallery of Canada for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Access to Information Act and to the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1 and P-21, sbs. 72(2). —Sessional Paper No. 2/37-142.
Reports of the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Access to Information Act and to the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1 and P-21, sbs. 72(2).—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-143.
Reports of the National Battlefields Commission for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Access to Information Act and to the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1 and P-21, sbs. 72(2).—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-144.
Reports of the Canada Science and Technology Museum Corporation for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Access to Information Act and to the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1 and P-21, sbs. 72(2).—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-145.
Reports of the Canadian Museum of Civilization Corporation for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Access to Information Act and to the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1 and P-21, sbs. 72(2).—Sessional Paper No. 2/ 37-146.
Reports of the Public Service Commission of Canada for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Access to Information Act and to the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1 and P-21, sbs. 72(2).—Sessional Paper No. 2/37- 147.
Reports of the Canadian Cultural Property Export Review Board for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Access to Information Act and to the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1 and P-21, sbs. 72(2).—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-148.
Reports of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Access to Information Act and to the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1 and P-21, sbs. 72(2). —Sessional Paper No. 2/37-149.
Reports of the National Archives of Canada for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Access to Information Act and to the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1 and P-21, sbs. 72(2). —Sessional Paper No. 2/37-150.
Reports of Telefilm Canada for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Access to Information Act and to the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1 and P-21, sbs. 72(2).—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-151.
Report of the National Arts Centre for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-21, sbs. 72(2).—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-152.
Reports of the National Capital Commission for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Access to Information Act and to the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1 and P-21, sbs. 72(2). —Sessional Paper No. 2/37-153.
Reports of the Canada Council for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Access to Information Act and to the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1 and P-21, sbs. 72(2).—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-154.
Reports of the National Library of Canada for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Access to Information Act and to the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1 and P-21, sbs. 72(2). —Sessional Paper No. 2/37-155.
Reports of the Canadian Space Agency for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Access to Information Act and to the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1 and P-21, sbs. 72(2). —Sessional Paper No. 2/37-156.
Report of the Canadian Dairy Commission, together with the Auditor General's Report, for the year ended July 31, 2002, pursuant to the Financial Administration Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-11, sbs. 150(1).—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-157.
Summaries of the Corporate Plan for the period 2002-03 to 2006-07 and of the Operating and Capital Budgets of the Canadian Dairy Commission, pursuant to the Financial Administration Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-11, sbs. 125(4).—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-158.
ADJOURNMENT
The Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C., moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Rompkey, P.C.:
That the Senate do now adjourn.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
(Accordingly, at 5:26 p.m. the Senate was continued until 1:30 p.m. tomorrow.)
_________________________________________________
Changes in Membership of Committees Pursuant to Rule 85(4)
Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples
The name of the Honourable Senator Robertson substituted for that of the Honourable Senator Johnson (October 25).
Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry
The name of the Honourable Senator Lapointe removed from the membership (October 25).
Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce
The names of the Honourable Senators Hervieux-Payette, Poulin and Kroft substituted for those of the Honourable Senators Sparrow, Stollery and Fraser (October 25).
Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs
The names of the Honourable Senators Corbin, Grafstein and Losier-Cool substituted for those of the Honourable Senators Mahovlich, Phalen and Smith (October 25).
Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications
The name of the Honourable Senator Day removed from the membership (October 28).