Journals of the Senate
51 Elizabeth II, A.D. 2002, Canada
Journals of the Senate
2nd Session, 37th Parliament
Issue 27
Monday, December 9, 2002
2:00 p.m.
The Honourable Daniel Hays, Speaker
The Members convened were:
The Honourable Senators
Adams, Andreychuk, Angus, Atkins, Austin, Bacon, Baker, Banks, Beaudoin, Biron, Bolduc, Carstairs, Chalifoux, Christensen, Comeau, Cook, Cools, Corbin, Day, De Bané, Di Nino, Doody, Ferretti Barth, Finnerty, Fitzpatrick, Forrestall, Fraser, Furey, Gauthier, Gill, Graham, Gustafson, Hays, Jaffer, Joyal, Kelleher, Kenny, Keon, Kinsella, Kolber, LaPierre, LeBreton, Léger, Losier-Cool, Lynch-Staunton, Maheu, Mahovlich, Meighen, Milne, Morin, Murray, Oliver, Pépin, Phalen, Poulin (Charette), Poy, Prud'homme, Robichaud, Rompkey, St. Germain, Setlakwe, Sibbeston, Smith, Sparrow, Spivak, Stollery, Stratton, Tkachuk
The Members in attendance to business were:
The Honourable Senators
Adams, Andreychuk, Angus, Atkins, Austin, Bacon, Baker, Banks, Beaudoin, Biron, Bolduc, Carstairs, Chalifoux, Christensen, Comeau, Cook, Cools, Corbin, Day, De Bané, Di Nino, Doody, Ferretti Barth, Finnerty, Fitzpatrick, Forrestall, Fraser, Furey, Gauthier, Gill, Graham, Gustafson, Hays, Jaffer, Joyal, Kelleher, Kenny, Keon, Kinsella, *Kirby, Kolber, LaPierre, LeBreton, Léger, Losier-Cool, Lynch-Staunton, Maheu, Mahovlich, Meighen, Milne, Morin, Murray, Oliver, Pépin, Phalen, Poulin (Charette), Poy, Prud'homme, Robichaud, Rompkey, St. Germain, Setlakwe, Sibbeston, Smith, Sparrow, Spivak, Stollery, Stratton, Tkachuk
PRAYERS
The Honourable the Speaker informed the Senate that he had received a certified copy of Order in Council P.C. 2002-2058, dated December 3, 2002, appointing Terrance J. Christopher Usher of the Black Rod, effective December 9, 2002.
SENATORS' STATEMENTS
Some Honourable Senators made statements.
DAILY ROUTINE OF BUSINESS
Presentation of Reports from Standing or Special Committees
The Honourable Senator Kolber, Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce, presented its Third Report (budget—study on the domestic and International Financial System).
(The Report is printed as Appendix "A'' at pages 373-378 (available in print format PDF))
The Honourable Senator Kolber moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Losier-Cool, that the Report be placed on the Orders of the Day for consideration at the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
The Honourable Senator Kolber, Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce presented its Fourth Report (budget—study on the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act).
(The Report is printed as Appendix "B'' at pages 379-384 (available in print format PDF))
The Honourable Senator Kolber moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Bacon, that the Report be placed on the Orders of the Day for consideration at the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
The Honourable Senator Kolber, Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce, presented its Fifth Report (budget—study on the public interest implications for large bank mergers).
(The Report is printed as Appendix "C'' at pages 385-390 (available in print format PDF))
The Honourable Senator Kolber moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Ferretti Barth, that the Report be placed on the Orders of the Day for consideration at the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Notices of Motions
With leave of the Senate,
The Honourable Senator Losier-Cool moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Maheu:
That the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages have power to sit at 4:00 p.m. today even though the Senate may then be sitting, and that Rule 95(4) be suspended in relation thereto.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
___________________________________________________________
With leave of the Senate,
The Honourable Senator Lynch-Staunton tabled the following:
Letter from the Honourable John F. Hamm, Premier of Nova Scotia, respecting the Kyoto Protocol, dated November 29, 2002 (English text).—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-221S.
Letter from the Honourable Halvar C. Jonson, Minister of International and Intergovernmental Relations, Government of Alberta, respecting the Kyoto Protocol, dated December 5, 2002 (English text).—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-222S.
SPEAKER'S RULING
Last Thursday, December 5, Senator Lynch-Staunton rose on a point of order regarding the whereabouts of Bill C- 10. He wanted to know whether the bill is still before the Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs or whether it was returned to the House of Commons with a message.
Several Senators made some comments on this point of order before I closed the proceeding with a commitment to return to the Senate with a ruling. I am prepared to rule now.
Honourable Senators, there seems to be little doubt that the proceedings on Bill C-10 have been somewhat difficult to follow. This is largely because dividing a bill has not been a frequent feature of our practice, though it is within our power to do it. Be that as it may, there have been few instances or attempts recorded in the Journals of the other place and, as all Senators now know, the only previous attempt to divide a bill in the Senate occurred in 1988.
In describing the nature of the process, I will explain what in fact happened to Bill C-10 and why the Committee remains in possession of Bill C-10B.
The Senate received Bill C-10 on October 10, 2002 and gave it second reading on November 20 when the bill was also referred to the Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs. At the same time, the Senate instructed the Committee to divide the bill into two bills. This instruction allowed the Committee to report its study of Bill C-10 as two separate bills. The Committee reported on November 28 and, following the instruction of the Senate, it divided Bill C-10 and reported one portion as Bill C-10A without amendment. The balance of the original Bill C-10, dealing with cruelty to animals, now designated Bill C-10B, was retained by the Committee for more study.
That same day, November 28, the Senate adopted the report of the Committee. As of that date, therefore, for all intents and purposes within the Senate, and I must stress this point, from within the Senate, Bill C-10 existed as two bills, Bill C-10A and Bill C-10B. The Senate proceeded to debate Bill C-10A while leaving Bill C-10B in the Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs. The Committee has yet to report the results of its work on this second bill, but as we know from the comments that were made on this point of order, the Committee is continuing its hearings. Consistent with our practice, the scheduling of hearings is a matter for the Committee to decide. Once a committee has an order of reference from the Senate, it is master of its own agenda and procedure.
Bill C-10A was read a third time and passed on December 3. Following this decision, I read out to the Senate, as is our custom, the message to be sent to the House of Commons informing them of what we had done. The message indicated that the Senate was returning to the Commons their Bill C-10, as divided by the Senate, together with the information that the Senate has passed Bill C-10A without amendment and was continuing with the study of Bill C- 10B.
Of particular importance, the message requested the concurrence of the House of Commons in the division of Bill C- 10. This is highly significant. From the point of view of the House of Commons, only Bill C-10 exists. We, in the Senate, have elected to divide the bill, creating Bills C-10A and C-10B, but as it is a Commons bill, the concurrence of the House of Commons is necessary to fully implement the actions taken by us in the Senate. In reality, this is no different than when we as the Senate amend a Commons bill. The agreement of the Commons is required in order to properly perfect the amendment.
In due course, the Senate will be advised of the Commons decision by a return message. If the House of Commons agrees to the division and accepts Bill C-10A without amendment, Bill C-10 will cease to exist and Bill C-10A will proceed to Royal Assent. If the Senate completes its review of Bill C-10B without amendment, a message will be sent to the Commons informing them that we have passed Bill C-10B and it too will be placed on the list for Royal Assent. If the Senate amends this bill, it will have to be returned to the House of Commons, but as Bill C-10B this time, for the concurrence to any amendment.
If the House of Commons does not agree to the division of Bill C-10, the Senate will have to decide whether it will insist on the division or whether it will accept the position of the Commons to keep Bill C-10 whole. If the Senate accepts the position of the House of Commons, Bill C-10A will be rejoined to Bill C-10B. One obvious way to do this would be to return Bill C-10A to Committee with an instruction to combine it to Bill C-10B thus restoring Bill C-10.
Of course, there may be different permutations and combinations, but this, I believe, is the general outline or sequence of events that can take place as we proceed to the final steps in our deliberations on what was received from the Commons as Bill C-10, out of which we made Bill C-10A and Bill C-10B.
Finally, with respect to the notice of the Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs, this is an administrative matter and is of no important procedural significance. It may be that the notice reflected the original order of reference relating to Bill C-10. It might have been preferable if the notice had read Bill C-10B which would have taken into account the consequences flowing from the decision of the Senate adopting the second report of the Committee dividing Bill C-10, reporting Bill C-10A without amendment and retaining Bill C-10B for further study. As I indicated, this is an administrative matter that does not impact the work of the Committee.
If Senator Lynch-Staunton's point of order is that Bill C-10 is still before the Committee, I am obliged to inform him that, based on my understanding of the proceedings that have taken place thus far, there is no point of order. Bill C-10B is still in Committee, not Bill C-10.
ORDERS OF THE DAY
GOVERNMENT BUSINESS
Reports of Committees
Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Murray, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Kinsella, for the adoption of the Second Report of the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance (supplementary Estimates (A) 2002-03) presented in the Senate on December 4, 2002.
After debate,
A Point of Order was raised as to the acceptability of the Second Report of the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance.
Debate.
SPEAKER'S RULING
As honourable senators have heard me observe before, the presiding officer must make a decision as to when he or she has heard enough on a point of order to be able to deal with it. With respect to this point of order, I thank honourable senators for their assistance. Of course, we are not unfamiliar with such a matter being raised by Senator Cools and so I will deal with it now.
The honourable senator's point is: Is the current proceeding in the house in respect of the second report of the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance in order or out of order? Senator Cools has expressed her concerns about the way in which proceedings occurred in the other place. With respect to that, we have no control over what happens in the other place. The Senate communicates with the House of Commons by message. As it happens, with respect to this matter, we have a message from the Commons on Bill C-21, which is now on our Order Paper. I do not find that to be a matter that we can even inquire about because the orderliness in the other place is a matter for the other place.
The issue has arisen as to whether the adoption of the report equates with the adoption of the Estimates. If it were to equate, then this would be improper because the Estimates that were studied by the committee do not contain all of the changes that Senator Cools has described, which, according to her, were made in the other place. Other senators commented on that fact.
My view is that the study of the Estimates is simply that. What is available to the committee in its study and in the preparation of its report is within the power of the committee to determine. The committee has, as Senator Murray commented, discussed the Estimates, made recommendations and reported on them. That is all. The Supplementary Estimates are not the report of the Senate committee studying them; rather, the Estimates concurred in by the House of Commons are contained in Bill C-21. In that regard, I do not consider anything to be out of order with respect to what has happened in the other place and what is happening here.
Senator Day expressed the view that the report is an opinion of the committee; and that, with respect to changes as time has passed since the Supplementary Estimates were tabled, referred to committee and studied. The study does not render the work of the committee invalid. I find that there is no point of order in this instance, honourable senators.
I make no comment on Bill C-21. That will be dealt with at a later time.
The question being put on the motion of the Honourable Senator Murray, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Kinsella, for the adoption of the Second Report of the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance (Supplementary Estimates (A) 2002-03), it was adopted on division.
Bills
Second reading of Bill C-21, An Act for granting to Her Majesty certain sums of money for the public service of Canada for the financial year ending March 31, 2003.
The Honourable Senator Day moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Phalen, that the Bill be read the second time.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Murray, P.C. moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Di Nino, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Third reading of Bill C-11, An Act to amend the Copyright Act.
The Honourable Senator Day moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Biron, that the Bill be read the third time.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
The Bill was then read the third time and passed.
Ordered, That a Message be sent to the House of Commons to acquaint that House that the Senate have passed this Bill, without amendment.
Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Banks, seconded by the Honourable Senator Corbin, for the third reading of Bill C-5, An Act respecting the protection of wildlife species at risk in Canada.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Kinsella moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Lynch-Staunton, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
___________________________________________________________
Ordered, That all remaining Orders be postponed until the next sitting.
REPORTS DEPOSITED WITH THE CLERK OF THE SENATE PURSUANT TO RULE 28(2):
Reports of the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade 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. 2/37-220.
ADJOURNMENT
The Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C., moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Bacon:
That the Senate do now adjourn.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
(Accordingly, at 5:06 p.m. the Senate was continued until 2:00 p.m. tomorrow.)
___________________________________________________________
Changes in Membership of Committees Pursuant to Rule 85(4)
Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology
The names of the Honourable Senators Cordy and Fairbairn substituted for those of the Honourable Senators Day and Losier-Cool (December 6).