Journals of the Senate
58 Elizabeth II, A.D. 2009, Canada
Journals of the Senate
2nd Session, 40th Parliament
Issue 23
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
2:00 p.m.
The Honourable Noël A. Kinsella, Speaker
The Members convened were:
The Honourable Senators
Adams, Andreychuk, Angus, Atkins, Bacon, Banks, Brazeau, Brown, Callbeck, Campbell, Carstairs, Champagne, Chaput, Comeau, Cook, Corbin, Cordy, Cowan, Dawson, Day, De Bané, Di Nino, Dickson, Duffy, Dyck, Eaton, Eggleton, Fairbairn, Fortin-Duplessis, Fox, Fraser, Gerstein, Goldstein, Grafstein, Greene, Harb, Hervieux-Payette, Housakos, Hubley, Jaffer, Johnson, Joyal, Kenny, Kinsella, Lang, Lapointe, LeBreton, Lovelace Nicholas, MacDonald, Mahovlich, Manning, Massicotte, McCoy, Meighen, Mercer, Milne, Mitchell, Mockler, Moore, Munson, Murray, Nancy Ruth, Neufeld, Nolin, Pépin, Peterson, Poy, Prud'homme, Raine, Ringuette, Rivard, Rivest, Robichaud, Rompkey, Segal, Sibbeston, Smith, St. Germain, Stollery, Stratton, Tardif, Tkachuk, Wallace, Wallin, Watt, Zimmer
The Members in attendance to business were:
The Honourable Senators
Adams, Andreychuk, Angus, Atkins, Bacon, Banks, Brazeau, Brown, Callbeck, Campbell, Carstairs, Champagne, Chaput, Comeau, Cook, Corbin, Cordy, Cowan, Dawson, Day, De Bané, Di Nino, Dickson, Duffy, Dyck, Eaton, Eggleton, Fairbairn, Fortin-Duplessis, Fox, Fraser, Gerstein, Goldstein, Grafstein, Greene, Harb, Hervieux-Payette, Housakos, Hubley, Jaffer, Johnson, Joyal, Kenny, Kinsella, Lang, Lapointe, LeBreton, *Losier-Cool, Lovelace Nicholas, MacDonald, Mahovlich, Manning, Massicotte, McCoy, Meighen, Mercer, Milne, Mitchell, Mockler, Moore, Munson, Murray, Nancy Ruth, Neufeld, Nolin, Pépin, Peterson, Poy, Prud'homme, Raine, Ringuette, Rivard, Rivest, Robichaud, Rompkey, Segal, Sibbeston, Smith, St. Germain, Stollery, Stratton, Tardif, Tkachuk, Wallace, Wallin, Watt, Zimmer
The first list records senators present in the Senate Chamber during the course of the sitting.
An asterisk in the second list indicates a senator who, while not present during the sitting, was in attendance to business, as defined in subsections 8(2) and (3) of the Senators Attendance Policy.
PRAYERS
SENATORS' STATEMENTS
Some Honourable Senators made statements.
DAILY ROUTINE OF BUSINESS
Tabling of Documents
The Honourable Senator Comeau tabled the following:
Report on the administration of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Pension Plan, together with the Auditor General's Report, for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2008, pursuant to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Superannuation Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. R-11, s. 31.—Sessional Paper No. 2/40-268.
° ° °
The Honourable the Speaker tabled the following:
Report of the Canadian Human Rights Commission for the year 2008, pursuant to the Canadian Human Rights Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. H-6, sbs. 61(4), and the Employment Equity Act, S.C. 1995, c. 44, s. 32.—Sessional Paper No. 2/40-269.
Report of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal for the year 2008, pursuant to the Canadian Human Rights Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. H-6, sbs. 61(4).—Sessional Paper No. 2/40-270.
The March 2009 Report of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons, pursuant to the Auditor General Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-17, s. 7(5), and the Report of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development to the House of Commons (2009), pursuant to the Auditor General Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-17, sbs. 23(5).—Sessional Paper No. 2/40-271.
Presentation of Reports from Standing or Special Committees
The Honourable Senator Kenny presented the following:
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
The Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence has the honour to
present its
SECOND REPORT
Your committee, to which was referred Bill S-2, An Act to amend the Customs Act, has, in obedience to the order of reference of Tuesday, March 3, 2009, examined the said Bill and now reports the same with the following amendment:
Page 7, clause 17: Renumber subsection 164.1 (1) as section 164.1 and delete lines 27 to 29.
Respectfully submitted,
COLIN KENNY
Chair
The Honourable Senator Kenny moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Moore, 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.
Introduction and First Reading of Government Bills
A message was brought from the House of Commons with a Bill C-2, An Act to implement the Free Trade Agreement between Canada and the States of the European Free Trade Association (Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, Switzerland), the Agreement on Agriculture between Canada and the Republic of Iceland, the Agreement on Agriculture between Canada and the Kingdom of Norway and the Agreement on Agriculture between Canada and the Swiss Confederation, to which it desires the concurrence of the Senate.
The bill was read the first time.
The Honourable Senator Comeau moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Greene, 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.
° ° °
The Honourable Senator Comeau presented a Bill S-4, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (identity theft and related misconduct).
The bill was read the first time.
The Honourable Senator Comeau moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator MacDonald, 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.
Introduction and First Reading of Senate Public Bills
The Honourable Senator Goldstein presented a Bill S-231, An Act to amend the Investment Canada Act (human rights violations).
The bill was read the first time.
The Honourable Senator Goldstein moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Cordy, 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.
The Honourable Senator Goldstein presented a Bill S-232, An Act to amend the Patent Act (drugs for international humanitarian purposes) and to make a consequential amendment to another Act.
The bill was read the first time.
The Honourable Senator Goldstein moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Dawson, 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.
Tabling of Reports from Inter-Parliamentary Delegations
The Honourable Senator Di Nino tabled the following:
Report of the Canadian Delegation of the Canada-Europe Parliamentary Association respecting its participation at the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe Parliamentary Assembly's Fifth Economic Conference, held in Andorra la Vella, Andorra, from May 24 to 26, 2007.—Sessional Paper No. 2/40-272.
Report of the Canadian Delegation of the Canada-Europe Parliamentary Association respecting its participation at the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe Parliamentary Assembly's Annual Fall Meeting, held in Portoroz, Slovenia, from September 29 to October 1, 2007. —Sessional Paper No. 2/40-273.
Report of the Canadian Delegation of the Canada-Europe Parliamentary Association respecting its participation at the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe Parliamentary Assembly's Bureau Meeting and 15th Ministerial Council, held in Madrid, Spain, from November 28 to 30, 2007. —Sessional Paper No. 2/40-274.
Presentation of Petitions
The Honourable Senator Harb presented petitions:
Of Residents of Canada concerning Canada's commercial seal hunt.
ORDERS OF THE DAY
A point of order was raised with respect to the presentation of petitions in the Senate.
Debate.
SPEAKER'S RULING
Honourable senators, there is no point of order as such, but our rules do speak to a process for presenting petitions. The rules indicate that where our rules are light on procedure, we can look to the rules, procedures and practices in the other place. In the other place there is a fairly elaborate process.
However, the practical matter is that Senator Harb did make a presentation of petitions and it was done properly, the presentation of petitions being very much in order. That is the ruling of the chair on that matter.
SPEAKER'S RULING
On Thursday, March 26, before Orders of the Day, the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, Senator Cowan, rose, exceptionally invoking rule 59(10) to bring a possible question of privilege to the Senate's attention. At the end of his remarks he asked the Speaker to determine whether there was a prima facie question of privilege, indicating that he was prepared to move that the matter be referred to the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament.
Senator Cowan's complaint related to a government website, entitled "Canada's Economic Action Plan,'' at www.actionplan.gc.ca. Under the heading "The Rollout,'' there was the following statement, referring to Bill C-10, the Budget Implementation Act:
While the House of Commons has passed this legislation, the Senate must still approve the Act for it to become law. Senators must do their part and ensure quick passage of this vital legislation.
As honourable senators know, the bill had actually passed the Senate and received Royal Assent on March 12, two weeks before Senator Cowan raised his question of privilege. As the record will show, all honourable senators present facilitated passage, granting leave for third reading to take place on the same day the committee reported that bill.
The Leader of the Opposition argued that, because of the lengthy time this inaccurate information had remained on the website, it amounted to "erroneous and incorrect statements,'' which the senator characterized as "purposely untrue and improper.'' He referred to a ruling from 1980 in the other place and suggested that this could amount to deceit, conveying a false message about the Senate and its work. He argued that this misrepresentation impaired all senators' ability to perform their duties on behalf of Canadians.
Senator Cowan indicated that he was using rule 59(10), which allows a question of privilege to be raised without notice, rather than the normal process under rule 43, because of exceptional circumstances, particular to this case. The content of the website had only come to his attention the previous evening, when it was mentioned in the news. As he and Senator Tardif explained, if the matter had been corrected before the sitting, the question of privilege might not have been raised at all. An argument was made that the notice requirements under rule 43 could not, therefore, be met, since it was not clear the question of privilege would actually be pursued.
The Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate, Senator Comeau, then spoke. He noted that this question of privilege had not been preceded by the normal written notice, as stipulated in rule 43. He also suggested that there would be a willingness to correct any erroneous information on the website.
A number of other senators also participated. Senators Banks, Grafstein, and Tardif remarked that this was the first opportunity the matter could have been raised, since they had been unaware of it previously. Senator Carstairs repeated the point made by Senator Cowan that the failure to correct the website, once it was mentioned on the news, made the alleged breach of privilege more egregious.
At the end of these exchanges, the Speaker confirmed that, as of 2:43 p.m., the website did have the wording quoted earlier, and urged that it be corrected. Honourable senators will be interested to know that the website was indeed changed over the course of the night, so that by Friday morning it stated as follows: "Now that Canada's Economic Action Plan has passed parliament it is vital that all parties continue to work together to see it succeed.''
The complaint raised by Senator Cowan is, in essence, a matter of possible contempt, that is to say "Any conduct which offends the authority or dignity of the House, even though no breach of any specific privilege may have been committed ... Contempt may be an act or an omission; it does not have to actually obstruct or impede the House or a [Senator], it merely has to have the tendency to produce such results.'' This definition is taken from page 52 of Marleau and Montpetit. The October 29, 1980 ruling from the other place, cited by Senator Cowan, suggested that "To be false in the context of contempt, an interpretation of our proceedings must be an obviously, purposely distorted one.'' A contempt can, thus, involve either an act or an omission, but an element of purpose, of deliberate intent, should also normally be present.
The basic issue is whether the lengthy delay in updating the website was a purposeful attempt to distort and misrepresent the Senate's work. Since no evidence was presented to the contrary, one must assume that the statement reflected the facts when it was initially posted. As was noted, a correction made before the sitting could have largely resolved the issue. The fact that the website was corrected a few hours after the question of privilege was raised suggests that the presence of the text in question was probably due to a lack of diligence in updating information. The element of purpose, or deliberate intent, which should be present to establish a case of contempt, was not evident, as far as can be determined from the available information.
Although the statements on the website may not constitute a contempt of the Senate, the complaint raised by Senator Cowan is a serious one. While the government does have a legitimate interest in keeping Canadians informed about important developments, it also has a duty to ensure accuracy. This is especially so when the information concerns developments in Parliament.
In this case, the government was strongly urging senators to "do their part'' and pass Bill C-10 quickly. In fact, the Senate did exactly that, even though the decision, as Senator Cowan explained, was difficult for many senators. Once the Senate had passed Bill C-10, the government had a responsibility to rapidly update all relevant information.
Accuracy in the information government provides about Parliament's work is a problem that arises from time to time, and departments must be vigilant to this. A ruling in the Senate from February 24, 1998, provides a convenient summary of the situation: "While ... prepared to accept that no contempt appears to have been committed, ... the actions of the department [are] inexcusable.''
On balance, therefore, it does not appear that a contempt was intended towards the Senate, and its privileges were not violated. All departments must, however, ensure that any information relating to Parliament is appropriate, accurate, and updated in a timely fashion. On this basis, a prima facie question of privilege has not been established.
Before concluding, there is a second issue that must be addressed, having to do with the process whereby the question of privilege came to the Senate's attention. Such matters are normally raised after notice given under rule 43. As far as is known, this was only the second incident attempting to use rule 59(10), which states that no notice is required for a question of privilege, since the rule revisions of 1991.
Rule 43 sets out various criteria an alleged question of privilege must meet to have priority over other matters. A written notice is required several hours before the sitting and an oral notice must be given during Senators' Statements. The putative question of privilege is then considered at an appropriate time during the sitting, and the Speaker determines whether a prima facie case of privilege has been established. Rule 43, and the related provisions of rule 44, date from 1991, and replaced an old rule, 33, which had allowed a motion on a question of privilege to be moved without notice, debated, and indeed adjourned.
The issue of the appropriate use of rule 59(10) was addressed in a ruling of October 26, 2006. As explained at that time, when the 1991 changes were made, the rules were "not properly adjusted, either to delete [rule 59(10)] entirely or to modify it to explain under what conditions a question of privilege could be raised without notice.'' When old rule 33 existed, rule 59(10) was part of a coherent whole. Since the changes of 1991, it is no longer evident how a matter raised under rule 59(10) should be pursued.
In this case, Senator Cowan specifically asked the Speaker to consider whether there was a prima facie question of privilege. It must, however, be recognized that it is problematic to use rule 59(10) to effectively bypass the written and oral notice requirements clearly stipulated in rule 43. As such, this case should not be relied upon as a precedent.
This case demonstrates that the Senate would still benefit from work by the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament looking at rule 59(10) and proposing how it can be reconciled with rule 43.
Whereupon the Speaker's Ruling was appealed.
The question being put on whether the Speaker's Ruling shall be sustained, it was negatived on the following division:
YEAS
The Honourable Senators
Brazeau, Brown, Champagne, Comeau, Dickson, Duffy, Eaton, Fortin-Duplessis, Gerstein, Greene, Housakos, Johnson, Lang, LeBreton, MacDonald, Manning, Mockler, Nancy Ruth, Neufeld, Nolin, Prud'homme, Raine, Rivest, Segal, Stratton, Wallin—26
NAYS
The Honourable Senators
Adams, Atkins, Banks, Callbeck, Chaput, Cook, Corbin, Cordy, Cowan, Day, Eggleton, Fairbairn, Fraser, Grafstein, Harb, Hervieux-Payette, Hubley, Kenny, Mahovlich, Massicotte, McCoy, Milne, Moore, Munson, Pépin, Poy, Ringuette, Rompkey, Sibbeston, Stollery, Tardif, Watt—32
ABSTENTIONS
The Honourable Senators
Nil
The Honourable Senator Cowan moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Tardif:
That the matter of the Government's erroneous statement concerning the proceedings of the Senate, as appeared on its website "actionplan.gc.ca'', be referred to the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament for consideration and report.
Pursuant to rule 44(3), consideration of the motion shall commence when the Senate has completed consideration of the Orders of the Day or no later than 8:00 p.m. today.
GOVERNMENT BUSINESS
Bills
Order No. 1 was called and postponed until the next sitting.
Inquiries
Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Comeau, calling the attention of the Senate to the budget entitled Canada's Economic Action Plan, tabled in the House of Commons on January 27, 2009 by the Minister of Finance, the Honourable James M. Flaherty, P.C., M.P., and in the Senate on January 28, 2009.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Dickson moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Manning, that further debate on the inquiry 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 7 were called and postponed until the next sitting.
° ° °
Second reading of Bill S-230, An Act to amend the Bank of Canada Act (credit rating agency).
The Honourable Senator Grafstein moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Pépin, that the bill be read the second time.
Debate.
A point of order was raised concerning the acceptability of the bill.
After debate,
The Speaker reserved his decision.
° ° °
Orders No. 9 to 19 were called and postponed until the next sitting.
° ° °
Second reading of Bill S-225, An Act to amend the Citizenship Act (oath of citizenship).
The Honourable Senator Segal moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Brown, that the bill be read the second time.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Dickson moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Manning, 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 Grafstein, seconded by the Honourable Senator Bryden, for the second reading of Bill S-205, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (suicide bombings).
After debate,
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
The bill was then read the second time.
The Honourable Senator Grafstein moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Joyal, P.C., that the bill be referred to the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Order No. 22 was called and postponed until the next sitting.
° ° °
Ordered, That notwithstanding rule 27(3), Order No. 23 (Bill S-219) remain on the Order Paper for another fifteen consecutive sitting days.
° ° °
Ordered, That notwithstanding rule 27(3), Order No. 24 (Bill S-220) remain on the Order Paper for another fifteen consecutive sitting days.
° ° °
Order No. 25 was called and postponed until the next sitting.
Reports of Committees
Orders No. 1 and 2 were called and postponed until the next sitting.
Other
Orders No. 5 (motion), 1 (inquiry) and 42 (motion) were called and postponed until the next sitting.
° ° °
Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Hubley, calling the attention of the Senate to the Treaty on Cluster Munitions.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Comeau, for the Honourable Senator Wallin, moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Tkachuk, that further debate on the inquiry be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
° ° °
Orders No. 10 (motion), 6, 8 (inquiries), 23, 6, 7, 8, 9, 25 (motions), 7 (inquiry) and 12 (motion) were called and postponed until the next sitting.
Pursuant to rule 44(3), the Senate proceeded to the consideration of the motion of the Honourable Senator Cowan, seconded by the Honourable Senator Tardif:
That the matter of the Government's erroneous statement concerning the proceedings of the Senate, as appeared on its website "actionplan.gc.ca'', be referred to the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament for consideration and report.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Comeau moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Andreychuk, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted, on division.
INQUIRIES
The Honourable Senator Cowan called the attention of the Senate to the critical importance of scientific research to the future of Canada and to the well-being of Canadians.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Andreychuk moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Manning, that further debate on the inquiry be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
° ° °
The Honourable Senator Harb called the attention of the Senate to the fact that the Government of Canada is ignoring Canadians who are calling for an end to the commercial seal hunt in Canada.
Debate concluded.
MOTIONS
The Honourable Senator Manning moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Brown:
That the Senate of Canada support the Government of Canada's position on the commercial seal hunt, affirming the right of fishermen to lawfully hunt seals, recognizing the integral part the seal hunt plays in the communities where those hunters live; and
That a message be sent to the House of Commons requesting that House to unite with the Senate for the above purpose.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Milne moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Cook, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
° ° °
The Honourable Senator Mockler moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Fortin-Duplessis:
That the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry be authorized to examine and report on the current state and future of Canada's forest sector. In particular, the Committee shall be authorized to:
(a) Examine the causes and origins of the current forestry crisis;
(b) Examine the federal role in the forest sector in Canada;
(c) Develop a vision for the long-term positioning and competitiveness of the forest industry in Canada;
(d) To recommend specific measures to be put forward by the federal government to lay the foundations of that vision.
That the Committee submit its final report to the Senate no later than June 17, 2010.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
° ° °
The Honourable Senator Mockler moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Fortin-Duplessis:
That the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry be authorized to examine and report on the current state and future of agriculture and agri-food in Canada;
That the papers and evidence received and taken on the subject and the work accomplished during the Thirty-ninth Parliament be referred to the Committee; and
That the Committee submit its final report to the Senate no later than June 17, 2010.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
REPORTS DEPOSITED WITH THE CLERK OF THE SENATE PURSUANT TO RULE 28(2):
Report of the Canadian Race Relations Foundation, together with the Auditor General's Report, for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2008, pursuant to the Canadian Race Relations Foundation Act, S.C. 1991, c. 8, sbs. 26(3).—Sessional Paper No. 2/40-263.
Summary of the Corporate Business Plan for 2009-2010 to 2011-2012 of the Canada Revenue Agency, pursuant to the Canada Revenue Agency Act, S.C. 1999, c. 17, sbs. 49(2). —Sessional Paper No. 2/40-264.
Report on the administration of the Members of Parliament Retiring Allowances Act for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2008, pursuant to the Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. M-5, s. 67.—Sessional Paper No. 2/40-265.
Report on the Public Service Pension Plan, together with the Auditor General's Report, for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2008, pursuant to the Public Service Superannuation Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-36, s. 46.—Sessional Paper No. 2/40-266.
Report on the administration of the Supplementary Retirement Benefits Act for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2008, pursuant to the Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. S-24, s. 12.—Sessional Paper No. 2/40-267.
ADJOURNMENT
The Honourable Senator Comeau moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Stratton:
That the Senate do now adjourn.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
(Accordingly, at 6:29 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 Honourable Senator Campbell replaced the Honourable Senator Downe (March 31, 2009).
The Honourable Senator Lovelace Nicholas replaced the Honourable Senator Watt (March 31, 2009).
The Honourable Senator Downe replaced the Honourable Senator Campbell (March 30, 2009).
The Honourable Senator Peterson replaced the Honourable Senator Banks (March 26, 2009).
Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce
The Honourable Senator Meighen replaced the Honourable Senator Duffy (March 26, 2009).
Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans
The Honourable Senator Cowan replaced the Honourable Senator Campbell (March 30, 2009).
The Honourable Senator Campbell replaced the Honourable Senator Munson (March 26, 2009).
Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights
The Honourable Senator Lovelace Nicholas replaced the Honourable Senator Munson (March 31, 2009).
The Honourable Senator Martin replaced the Honourable Senator Stratton (March 31, 2009).
The Honourable Senator Munson replaced the Honourable Senator Lovelace Nicholas (March 30, 2009).
The Honourable Senator Stratton replaced the Honourable Senator Martin (March 30, 2009).
Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration
The Honourable Senator Jaffer replaced the Honourable Senator Cordy (March 30, 2009).
The Honourable Senator Cordy replaced the Honourable Senator Jaffer (March 26, 2009).
Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs
The Honourable Senator Peterson replaced the Honourable Senator Campbell (March 30, 2009).
Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence
The Honourable Senator Day replaced the Honourable Senator Mitchell (March 31, 2009).
The Honourable Senator Manning replaced the Honourable Senator Lang (March 30, 2009).
The Honourable Senator Lang replaced the Honourable Senator Martin (March 30, 2009).
The Honourable Senator Nolin replaced the Honourable Senator Meighen (March 30, 2009).
The Honourable Senator Meighen replaced the Honourable Senator Nolin (March 30, 2009).
The Honourable Senator Martin replaced the Honourable Senator Manning (March 26, 2009).
Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament
The Honourable Senator Fraser replaced the Honourable Senator Milne (March 31, 2009).
The Honourable Senator Milne replaced the Honourable Senator Fraser (March 30, 2009).
Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology
The Honourable Senator Champagne, P.C., replaced the Honourable Senator Stratton (March 30, 2009).
The Honourable Senator Stratton replaced the Honourable Senator Champagne, P.C. (March 27, 2009).
Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications
The Honourable Senator Manning replaced the Honourable Senator Johnson (March 31, 2009).
The Honourable Senator Stratton replaced the Honourable Senator Cochrane (March 31, 2009).