52 Elizabeth II, A.D. 2003, Canada

Journals of the Senate

2nd Session, 37th Parliament

---

Issue 80

Wednesday, October 1, 2003
1:30 p.m.

The Honourable Daniel Hays, Speaker

---

The Members convened were:

The Honourable Senators

Andreychuk, Angus, Atkins, Austin, Bacon, Baker, Banks, Beaudoin, Biron, Buchanan, Callbeck, Carney, Carstairs, Chalifoux, Chaput, Cools, Corbin, Cordy, Day, De Bané, Doody, Downe, Eyton, Finnerty, Furey, Gauthier, Gill, Grafstein, Graham, Gustafson, Harb, Hays, Jaffer, Joyal, Kelleher, Kenny, Keon, Kinsella, Kolber, Kroft, Lapointe, Lavigne, Lawson, LeBreton, Léger, Losier-Cool, Lynch-Staunton, Mahovlich, Massicotte, Meighen, Milne, Moore, Morin, Murray, Nolin, Plamondon, Poulin (Charette), Prud'homme, Ringuette, Rivest, Robichaud, Roche, Rompkey, Smith, Sparrow, St. Germain, Stollery, Stratton, Tkachuk, Trenholme Counsell, Watt, Wiebe

The Members in attendance to business were:

The Honourable Senators

*Adams, Andreychuk, Angus, Atkins, Austin, Bacon, Baker, Banks, Beaudoin, Biron, Buchanan, Callbeck, Carney, Carstairs, Chalifoux, Chaput, *Comeau, *Cook, Cools, Corbin, Cordy, Day, De Bané, *Di Nino, Doody, Downe, Eyton, Finnerty, *Fraser, Furey, Gauthier, Gill, Grafstein, Graham, Gustafson, Harb, Hays, *Hubley, Jaffer, Joyal, Kelleher, Kenny, Keon, Kinsella, *Kirby, Kolber, Kroft, Lapointe, Lavigne, Lawson, LeBreton, Léger, Losier-Cool, Lynch-Staunton, Mahovlich, Massicotte, Meighen, Milne, Moore, Morin, Murray, Nolin, *Oliver, *Pearson, *Pépin, *Phalen, Plamondon, Poulin (Charette), Prud'homme, Ringuette, Rivest, Robichaud, Roche, Rompkey, Smith, Sparrow, *Spivak, St. Germain, Stollery, Stratton, Tkachuk, Trenholme Counsell, Watt, Wiebe

PRAYERS

SENATORS' STATEMENTS

Some Honourable Senators made statements.

__________________________________________________________

With leave of the Senate,

The Honourable Senator Watt tabled the following:

Article entitled: Man Survives Polar Bear Attack, published in the NewsNorth on September 8, 2003 (English text).—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-680S.

DAILY ROUTINE OF BUSINESS

Tabling of Documents

With leave of the Senate,

The Honourable Senator Hays tabled the following:

Report of the Parliamentary Delegation, led by the Speaker of the Senate, which travelled to India from November 17 to 23, 2002.—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-681S.

Presentation of Reports from Standing or Special Committees

The Honourable Senator Losier-Cool, Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages, tabled its Fourth Report (Interim) entitled: Official Languages: 2002-2003 Perspective.—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-682S.

The Honourable Senator Losier-Cool, 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.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

GOVERNMENT BUSINESS

Bills

Consideration of the Message from the House of Commons concerning Bill C-10B, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (cruelty to animals).

The Honourable Senator Carstairs, P.C., moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C.:

That, with respect to the House of Commons Message to the Senate dated September 29, 2003 regarding Bill C-10B:

(i) the Senate do not insist on its amendment numbered 2;

(ii) the Senate do not insist on its modified version of amendment numbered 3 to which the House of Commons disagreed;

(iii) the Senate do not insist on its modified version of amendment numbered 4, but it do concur in the amendment made by the House of Commons to amendment numbered 4; and

That a Message be sent to the House of Commons to acquaint that House accordingly.

A Point of Order was raised as to the acceptability of the motion.

Debate.

SPEAKER'S RULING

We normally put matters before the chamber by way of motion. The fact that the motion urges a conclusion on the Senate does not mean that the Senate will reach that conclusion. Accordingly, I see no problem procedurally in beginning the debate on the message by way of motion. I do not believe I require time to consider this point of order.

I draw to the attention of honourable senators our Hansard of June 10 of this year, at page 915, where we received a message on this same bill. We proceeded to debate that message by way of motion. Accordingly, I rule that it is appropriate to consider again our response to the message from the House of Commons by way of motion.

The Senate proceeded to the debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Carstairs, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C.

After debate,

A Point of Order was raised as to the acceptability of the motion.

Debate.

SPEAKER'S RULING

In effect, Senator Cools is making the point that the only way to deal with this matter would be to follow the procedures that she described from Beauchesne's, fifth edition, which relate to conferences. This is not a new matter to us in this place. We have established practices; I am not sure of the date of the fifth edition, but we are using the sixth edition of Beauchesne's at the present time, and I would like to use that as the authority. I think it is important, given the matter raised by the Honourable Senator Cools, to read the relevant provisions in Beauchesne's sixth edition. I am quoting at page 216, paragraph 743:

When the House of Commons does not agree to the Senate amendments, it adopts a motion which states reasons for its disagreement. This is communicated to the Senate by a written Message. If the Senators persist in their amendments, they send a Message informing the House of this fact. The House may adopt the amendments, or return them to the Senate with a further Message.

I emphasize these next words.

This may occur a number of times.

I will end there and let honourable senators read it for themselves.

I will quote as well from another text that we use — Marleau and Montpetit — quoting from the only edition that has been published to my knowledge, at page 675, under the heading, "Passage of Senate amendments (if any) by the House of Commons.'' In the last paragraph, before the heading "Conference Between the Houses,'' it states:

It —

— the Senate —

— may decide to accept the decision of the House, to reject that decision and insist that its amendments be maintained, or to amend what the House has proposed. Regardless of what the Senate decides, it sends another message to the House to inform it of the decision. Communication between the two Houses goes on in this way until they ultimately agree on a text.

There are provisions for conferencing that are available to the two Houses. However, there is also the procedure available to the two Houses that we are following: that is, sending messages back and forth until such time as we agree.

Accordingly, I find nothing out of order with the way in which we are proceeding, particularly nothing in the sense that the only alternative to us now would be to use our conferencing procedures.

As to the question of notice, Senator Kinsella's reading of the rule is correct. This matter could have proceeded yesterday; there is no notice required. We are proceeding today. I rule that the debate can continue.

The Senate resumed debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Carstairs, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C.:

That, with respect to the House of Commons Message to the Senate dated September 29, 2003 regarding Bill C-10B:

(i) the Senate do not insist on its amendment numbered 2;

(ii) the Senate do not insist on its modified version of amendment numbered 3 to which the House of Commons disagreed;

(iii) the Senate do not insist on its modified version of amendment numbered 4, but it do concur in the amendment made by the House of Commons to amendment numbered 4; and

That a Message be sent to the House of Commons to acquaint that House accordingly.

After debate,

The Honourable Senator Beaudoin moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Nolin, 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 Day, seconded by the Honourable Senator Harb, for the third reading of Bill C-25, An Act to modernize employment and labour relations in the public service and to amend the Financial Administration Act and the Canadian Centre for Management Development Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts,

And on the motion in amendment of the Honourable Senator Beaudoin, seconded by the Honourable Senator Comeau, that the Bill be not now read a third time but that it be amended in clause 12, on page 126, by replacing lines 8 to 12 with the following:

"30. (1) Appointments by the Commission to or from within the public service shall be free from political influence and shall be made on the basis of merit by competition or by such other process of personnel selection designed to establish the relative merit of candidates as the Commission considers is in the best interests of the public service.

(1.1) Despite subsection (1), an appointment may be made on the basis of individual merit in the circumstances prescribed by the regulations of the Commission.

(2) An appointment is made on the basis of individual''.

After debate,

The Honourable Senator Kinsella moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Keon, that further debate on the motion in amendment 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.

Reports of Committees

Order No. 1 was called and postponed until the next sitting.

__________________________________________________________

Ordered, That all remaining Orders be postponed until the next sitting.

REPORTS DEPOSITED WITH THE CLERK OF THE SENATE PURSUANT TO RULE 28(2):

Report of the Minister of Justice entitled "Applications for Ministerial Review — Miscarriages of Justice'' for the year 2003, pursuant to the Criminal Code, S.C. 2002, c. 13, s. 71.—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-668.

Reports of the Law Commission of Commission for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2003, 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. 2/37-669.

Report of the National Capital Commission for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2003, pursuant to the Alternative Fuels Act, S.C. 1995, c. 20, s. 8.—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-670.

Report of the Canadian Museum of Civilization for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2003, pursuant to the Alternative Fuels Act, S.C. 1995, c. 20, s. 8.—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-671.

Report of the Canadian Museum of Nature for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2003, pursuant to the Alternative Fuels Act, S.C. 1995, c. 20, s. 8.—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-672.

Report of the National Gallery of Canada for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2003, pursuant to the Alternative Fuels Act, S.C. 1995, c. 20, s. 8.—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-673.

Report of the Canada Science and Technology Museum for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2003, pursuant to the Alternative Fuels Act, S.C. 1995, c. 20, s. 8.—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-674.

Report of the National DNA Data Bank of Canada for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2003, pursuant to the DNA Identification Act, S.C. 2000, c. 10, s. 12.—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-675.

Report of the Canada Lands Company Limited for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2003, pursuant to the Alternative Fuels Act, S.C. 1995, c. 20, s. 8.—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-676.

Report of the Queens Quay West Land Corporation for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2003, pursuant to the Alternative Fuels Act, S.C. 1995, c. 20, s. 8.—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-677.

Report of the President of the Treasury Board for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2003, pursuant to the Alternative Fuels Act, S.C. 1995, c. 20, s. 8.—Sessional Paper No. 2/37-678.

Report of the Canadian International Development Agency for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2003, 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/ 37-679.

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 3:32 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 National Finance

The name of the Honourable Senator Ferretti Barth substituted for that of the Honourable Senator Banks (October 1).

Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament

The name of the Honourable Senator Cordy substituted for that of the Honourable Senator Cook (October 1).

---