Journals of the Senate
51 Elizabeth II, A.D. 2002, Canada
Journals of the Senate
2nd Session, 37th Parliament
Issue 29
Wednesday, December 11, 2002
1:30 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, Buchanan, Callbeck, Carstairs, Christensen, Cochrane, Comeau, Cook, Cools, Corbin, Cordy, Day, De Bané, Di Nino, Doody, Eyton, Ferretti Barth, Finnerty, Fitzpatrick, Forrestall, Fraser, Furey, Gauthier, Gill, Grafstein, Graham, Gustafson, Hays, Hubley, Jaffer, Joyal, Kelleher, Kenny, Keon, Kinsella, Kirby, Kolber, Kroft, LaPierre, Lapointe, LeBreton, Losier-Cool, Lynch-Staunton, Maheu, Mahovlich, Meighen, Milne, Morin, Murray, Nolin, Oliver, Pearson, Pépin, Phalen, Poulin (Charette), Poy, Prud'homme, Robichaud, Roche, Rompkey, Rossiter, St. Germain, Setlakwe, Sibbeston, Sparrow, Spivak, Stollery, Stratton, Tkachuk, Watt
The Members in attendance to business were:
The Honourable Senators
Adams, Andreychuk, Angus, Atkins, Austin, Bacon, Baker, Banks, Beaudoin, Biron, Bolduc, Buchanan, Callbeck, Carstairs, Christensen, Cochrane, Comeau, Cook, Cools, Corbin, Cordy, Day, De Bané, Di Nino, Doody, Eyton, Ferretti Barth, Finnerty, Fitzpatrick, Forrestall, Fraser, Furey, Gauthier, Gill, Grafstein, Graham, Gustafson, Hays, Hubley, Jaffer, Joyal, Kelleher, Kenny, Keon, Kinsella, Kirby, Kolber, Kroft, LaPierre, Lapointe, LeBreton, Losier-Cool, Lynch-Staunton, Maheu, Mahovlich, Meighen, Milne, Morin, Murray, Nolin, Oliver, Pearson, Pépin, Phalen, Poulin (Charette), Poy, Prud'homme, Robichaud, Roche, Rompkey, Rossiter, St. Germain, Setlakwe, Sibbeston, Sparrow, Spivak, Stollery, Stratton, Tkachuk, Watt
PRAYERS
SENATORS' STATEMENTS
Some Honourable Senators made statements.
DAILY ROUTINE OF BUSINESS
Presentation of Reports from Standing or Special Committees
The Honourable Senator Fraser, Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications, tabled its Third Report entitled: Intercity Bus Service in Canada. —Sessional Paper No. 2/37-224S.
Introduction and First Reading of Senate Public Bills
The Honourable Senator Banks presented a Bill S-12, An Act to repeal legislation that has not been brought into force within ten years of receiving royal assent.
The Bill was read the first time.
The Honourable Senator Banks moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Bacon, that the Bill be placed on the Orders of the Day for a second reading two days hence.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Notices of Motions
With leave of the Senate,
The Honourable Senator Furey moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Callbeck:
That the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs have power to sit at 3:30 p.m. today even though the Senate may then be sitting, and that Rule 95(4) be suspended in relation thereto.
After debate,
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
With leave of the Senate,
The Honourable Senator Kirby moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Callbeck:
That, notwithstanding the Order of the Senate adopted on Tuesday, October 8, 2002, the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology, which was authorized to examine and report upon the state of the health care system in Canada, be empowered to retain the powers necessary to publicize its findings for distribution of the study contained in its final report for 120 days after the tabling of that report.
After debate,
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
SPEAKER'S RULING
Yesterday, as the Senate was about to proceed to the resumed debate on the third reading of Bill C-5, respecting the protection of wildlife species at risk in Canada, Senator Kinsella rose on a point of order. In substance, the Senator challenged the report of the committee that had been presented December 4 because, in his view, it contained remarks that were inconsistent with its recommendation reporting the bill without amendment. To support his claim, he cited references from the British parliamentary authority, Erskine May, the 21st edition at page 644, and in the 22nd edition at page 666.
By way of rebuttal, Senator Robichaud claimed that it was inappropriate to raise the point of order now since the report had been adopted immediately after it was presented since it had recommended no amendment to the bill and the debate on third reading was already well underway. In his assessment, the time had passed for any point of order on the committee report.
Several other Senators then intervened to explain their understanding of the report's observations and the procedural acceptability of our practices with respect to observations generally. Other Senators also commented on the deliberations of the committee as it studied Bill C-5.
I want to thank all honourable Senators for their contributions. They were useful in helping me to better understand the issue in dispute with respect to the point of order. I have had time to consider the arguments that were made and I am now ready to rule.
Let me deal first with the position taken by Senator Robichaud. There is merit to the claim that the point of order ought to have been raised earlier. The report of the committee was presented last Wednesday, December 4, and the motion for third reading of Bill C-5 was moved on Thursday, December 5. Citation 321 of Beauchesne's Parliamentary Rules and Forms, 6th edition, at page 97, states that "A point of order against procedure must be raised promptly and before the question has passed to a stage at which the objection would be out of place.''
Under rule 97(4) of the Rules of the Senate, when a committee reports a bill without amendment, it stands adopted immediately and the Senator in charge of the bill is obliged to indicate when third reading will be moved. The automatic adoption of the committee report would have made it difficult to raise the point of order last Wednesday, but it should have been raised on Thursday, when third reading of Bill C-5 was moved. The objection of Senator Robichaud, therefore, is valid. Nonetheless, I am willing to waive this matter with respect to the point of order because I feel it would be useful to the Senate to review certain aspects of our practices as they pertain to observations in committee reports.
For about twenty years now, committee reports on bills have sometimes contained observations. These observations are not a procedurally significant part of the reports. Their value, in the view of some Senators, is as an advisory to the government to pay attention to certain elements of the law when considering future amendments to legislation. Some Senators, like Senator Stollery and also Senator Murray, have tended to object to the use of observations, but they have, nevertheless, found a place in our practice. They are now fairly routine as was pointed out by Senator Milne.
In the case of Bill C-5, Senator Banks informed the Senate that the observations were adopted unanimously. Thus, in this instance, the observations cannot be said to represent the views of a minority of the committee. For other bills, however, the observations have represented the views of a dissident minority. Of course, none of these differences matter because, as Senator Andreychuk correctly explained yesterday, the observations are not, and have never been, a substantive part of a committee's report. That is why, when the Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources reported Bill C-5 last Wednesday without amendment, the report was adopted immediately as required under rule 97(4) of the Rules of the Senate.
This brings me now to the core of the argument that was made by Senator Kinsella and also Senator Stratton. Both objected to the committee report on Bill C-5 because, as they put it, the observations, these statements, invalidate it procedurally. As Senator Kinsella described it, the report presents difficulties in substance and process. To substantiate their position, Senator Kinsella and Senator Stratton cited Erskine May where it is made clear that a committee report must not "be accompanied by any counterstatement, memorandum of dissent, or protest from any dissenting or non- assenting member or members; nor ought the committee to include in its report any observations which are not subscribed to by the majority.'' It is relevant to point out that the citation in the British authority pertains to minority reports. In the United Kingdom, it is established practice that the report of a committee must reflect only the views of the majority. There can be no minority report. On the same pages already cited, Erskine May states: "It is the opinion of the committee, as a committee, not that of the individual members, which is required by the House, and, failing unanimity, the conclusions agreed to by the majority are the conclusions of the committee.'' This position is not much different from our own rule 96(2) which provides that "A report of any select committee shall contain the conclusions agreed to by the majority.''
Honourable Senators, as I have already mentioned, Senate practice has permitted appending observations to reports for almost twenty years, but they have never been accepted as minority reports. Indeed, the observations have no substantive value in terms of our procedure. They can serve, as Senator Andreychuk explained, as a notice to the government of the views of committee members; they can even provide material for debate, but they have no substantive significance or procedural weight. In this context, therefore, the citation to Erskine May is not relevant, because the observations attached to a committee report of the Senate do not constitute a minority report. Thus, I can find nothing in substance or process that substantiates the point of order. Debate on the third reading of Bill C-5 can proceed.
ORDERS OF THE DAY
GOVERNMENT BUSINESS
Bills
Third 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 third time.
After debate,
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.
Third reading of Bill C-8, An Act to protect human health and safety and the environment by regulating products used for the control of pests.
The Honourable Senator Morin moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Hubley, that the Bill be read the third time.
After debate,
In amendment, the Honourable Senator Keon moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Buchanan, P.C., that the Bill be not now read a third time but that it be amended:
(a) in clause 2, on page 4, by replacing lines 36 and 37 with the following:
"meets the requirements of subsection 43(4).'';
(b) in clause 43, on page 35,
(i) by replacing lines 22 to 39 with the following:
"(5) Information that contains the identity or concentration of an active ingredient, formulant or contaminant in a pest control product is not confidential business information for the purposes of this Act.'', and
(ii) by replacing line 41 with the following:
"designated under subsection (4) does not''; and
(c) in clause 67,
(i) on page 53, by deleting lines 37 to 39, and
(ii) on pages 53 to 55, by relettering paragraphs (o) to (z.5) as paragraphs (n) to (z.4) and any cross-references thereto accordingly.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator LeBreton moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Nolin, that further debate on the motion in amendment 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 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,
In amendment, the Honourable Senator Kinsella moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Rossiter, that the Bill be not now read a third time but that the Bill be referred back to the Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources for consideration of amendments to the Bill that would accurately reflect the concerns raised in the Committee's Third Report on Bill C-5, An Act respecting the protection of wildlife species at risk in Canada, presented in the Senate on December 4, 2002.
After debate,
The question being put on the motion in amendment, it was negatived on division.
The Senate resumed 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 Stratton moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Comeau, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Order No. 4 was called and postponed until the next sitting.
Motions
Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Carstairs, P.C.:
That the documents entitled: "Proposals to amend the Parliament of Canada Act (Ethics Commissioner) and other Acts as a consequence'' and "Proposals to amend the Rules of the Senate and the Standing Orders of the House of Commons to implement the 1997 Milliken-Oliver Report'', tabled in the Senate on October 23, 2002, be referred to the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament,
And on the motion in amendment of the Honourable Senator Joyal, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Losier-Cool, that the motion be amended by adding the following:
"That the Committee, in conjunction with this review, also take into consideration at the same time the code of conduct in use in the United Kingdom Parliament at Westminster, and consider rules that might embody standards appropriate for appointed members of a House of Parliament who can only be removed for cause; and
That the Committee make recommendations, if required, for the adoption and implementation of a code of conduct for Senators, and concerning such resources as may be needed to administer it, including consequential changes to statute law that may be appropriate.''.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Comeau moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Spivak, that further debate on the motion in amendment 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 Carstairs, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Banks:
That the Senate call on the government to ratify the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change,
And on the motion in amendment of the Honourable Senator Lynch-Staunton, seconded by the Honourable Senator Murray, P.C., that the motion be amended by substituting for the period after the word "Change'' the following:
", but only if, after the Senate has heard in Committee of the Whole from all federal, provincial and territorial government representatives who wish to appear, the Senate determines that there is a substantial measure of federal-provincial agreement on an implementation plan.''
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Buchanan, P.C., moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Cochrane, that further debate on the motion in amendment be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
OTHER BUSINESS
Senate Public Bills
Orders No. 1 to 5 were called and postponed until the next sitting.
Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Poy, seconded by the Honourable Senator Banks, for the second reading of Bill S-3, An Act to amend the National Anthem Act to include all Canadians.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Stratton moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Atkins, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Commons Public Bills
Order No. 1 was called and postponed until the next sitting.
Reports of Committees
Order No. 1 was called and postponed until the next sitting.
Consideration of the Sixth Report of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration (Senate Estimates 2003-04) presented in the Senate on December 10, 2002.
The Honourable Senator Bacon moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Maheu, that the Report be adopted.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator LaPierre moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Hubley, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted on division.
Ordered, That Orders No. 6, 7 and 8 be brought forward.
Consideration of the Third Report of the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce (budget—study on the domestic and International Financial System) presented in the Senate on December 9, 2002.
The Honourable Senator Kolber moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Maheu, that the Report be adopted.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Consideration of the Fourth Report of the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce (budget—study on the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act) presented in the Senate on December 9, 2002.
The Honourable Senator Kolber moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Banks, that the Report be adopted.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Consideration of the Fifth Report of the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce (budget—study on the public interest implications for large bank mergers) presented in the Senate on December 9, 2002.
The Honourable Senator Kolber moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Losier-Cool, that the Report be adopted.
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):
Debt Management Report for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2002, pursuant to the Financial Administration Act, S.C. 1999, c. 26, s. 23.—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-223.
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 6:15 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 Banking, Trade and Commerce
The name of the Honourable Senator Mahovlich substituted for that of the Honourable Senator Setlakwe (December 11).
Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry
The name of the Honourable Senator Fraser substituted for that of the Honourable Senator Wiebe (December 11).
Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament
The name of the Honourable Senator Losier-Cool substituted for that of the Honourable Senator Wiebe (December 11).