Journals of the Senate
1st Session, 41st Parliament
Issue 161
Wednesday, May 8, 2013
1:30 p.m.
The Honourable Noël A. Kinsella, Speaker
The Members convened were:
The Honourable Senators
Andreychuk, Ataullahjan, Baker, Batters, Bellemare, Black, Boisvenu, Braley, Buth, Callbeck, Campbell, Carignan, Champagne, Chaput, Charette-Poulin, Comeau, Cools, Cordy, Cowan, Dagenais, Dallaire, Dawson, Day, De Bané, Demers, Downe, Doyle, Duffy, Dyck, Eaton, Eggleton, Enverga, Finley, Fortin-Duplessis, Fraser, Frum, Furey, Gerstein, Greene, Harb, Hervieux-Payette, Housakos, Hubley, Jaffer, Johnson, Joyal, Kenny, Kinsella, Lang, LeBreton, Lovelace Nicholas, MacDonald, Maltais, Manning, Marshall, Martin, Massicotte, McInnis, McIntyre, Mercer, Merchant, Meredith, Mitchell, Mockler, Moore, Munson, Nancy Ruth, Neufeld, Ngo, Nolin, Ogilvie, Oh, Oliver, Plett, Poirier, Raine, Ringuette, Rivard, Rivest, Robichaud, Runciman, Seidman, Seth, Smith (Cobourg), Smith (Saurel), Stewart Olsen, Tannas, Tardif, Tkachuk, Unger, Verner, Wallace, Wallin, Wells, White, Zimmer
The Members in attendance to business were:
The Honourable Senators
Andreychuk, Ataullahjan, Baker, Batters, Bellemare, Black, Boisvenu, Braley, Buth, Callbeck, Campbell, Carignan, Champagne, Chaput, Charette-Poulin, Comeau, Cools, Cordy, Cowan, Dagenais, Dallaire, Dawson, Day, De Bané, Demers, Downe, Doyle, Duffy, Dyck, Eaton, Eggleton, Enverga, Finley, Fortin-Duplessis, Fraser, Frum, Furey, Gerstein, Greene, Harb, Hervieux-Payette, Housakos, Hubley, Jaffer, Johnson, Joyal, Kenny, Kinsella, Lang, LeBreton, Lovelace Nicholas, MacDonald, Maltais, Manning, Marshall, Martin, Massicotte, McInnis, McIntyre, Mercer, Merchant, Meredith, Mitchell, Mockler, Moore, Munson, Nancy Ruth, Neufeld, Ngo, Nolin, Ogilvie, Oh, Oliver, Plett, Poirier, Raine, Ringuette, Rivard, Rivest, Robichaud, Runciman, Seidman, Seth, Smith (Cobourg), Smith (Saurel), Stewart Olsen, Tannas, Tardif, Tkachuk, Unger, Verner, Wallace, Wallin, Wells, White, 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.
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Tabling of Reports from Inter-Parliamentary Delegations
The Honourable Senator Champagne, P.C., tabled the following:
Report of the Canadian Delegation of the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie (APF) respecting its participation at the Bureau Meeting of the APF, held in Paris, France, from February 7 to 9, 2013.—Sessional Paper No. 1/41-1611.
SPEAKER'S RULING
Yesterday, Senator Cowan raised a question of privilege about media reports suggesting that a witness invited to appear before the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence during its study of Bill C-42 had not done so because of pressures exerted on him by his employer. The bill had been reported earlier in the sitting, without amendment but with observations. As the Leader of the Opposition explained, Corporal Roland Beaulieu, a member of the RCMP currently on medical leave, had been invited to appear before the committee on Monday, May 6. Senator Cowan indicated that last week Corporal Beaulieu had been informed that if he came to Ottawa to testify his medical leave would be terminated. As a result he did not attend. A number of other honourable senators then participated in consideration of the question of privilege. After these interventions, the chair committed to ruling today.
Before dealing with the substance of the question of privilege — the allegation of deliberate witness intimidation — it should be made clear that the proceedings of the committee at its Monday meeting have not been questioned. The committee heard witnesses, including representatives of the Mounted Police Professional Association of Canada, to which Corporal Beaulieu belongs, and reviewed the bill clause-by-clause. Bill C-42 was then reported back to the Senate. The bill is now on the Order Paper and open to debate at third reading.
As already noted, the fundamental issue is the protection of witnesses. Privilege is the sum of the rights enjoyed by this house and its members that are necessary for us to conduct our work. We must be mindful that this protection of privilege is not limited to parliamentarians alone. More importantly, with respect to the current situation, witnesses also enjoy a range of protection. As stated at page 267 of the 24th edition of Erskine May, "Any conduct calculated to deter prospective witnesses from giving evidence before either House or a committee is a contempt.'' Erskine May then continues to explain "It is also a contempt to molest any person attending either House as witnesses, during their attendance in such House or committee,'' as are threats against those who have previously appeared. These points are repeated at page 840. Similar statements are made at pages 114 and 115 of the second edition of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, which explains that witnesses are protected from threat or intimidation.
On April 13, 2000, the Standing Committee on Privileges, Standing Rules and Orders — now the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament — presented its fifth report, dealing with allegations about reprisals against a witness. The report stated in part as follows:
The Senate, and all Senators, view with great seriousness any allegations of possible intimidation or harassment of a witness or potential witness before a Senate committee. In order for the Senate to discharge its functions and duties properly, it must be able to call and hear from witnesses without their being threatened or fearing any repercussions. Any interference with a person who has given evidence before a Senate committee, or who is planning to, is an interference with the Senate itself, and cannot be tolerated.
The essential issue is not whether representatives of the association appeared before the committee. They did. The issue is whether there was a deliberate attempt to impede the appearance of an invited witness, agreed to by the Steering Committee. Witnesses or potential witnesses who fear retaliation, directly or indirectly, arising from their testimony, whether because of implied or direct threats or because previous witnesses or potential witnesses have suffered due to the fact that they appeared or considered appearing, will either be unwilling to appear or, if they do, will not be forthcoming in their evidence. Since this impedes parliamentarians on the committee in the full exercise of their duties, it would represent a breach of privilege.
Based on the information available, the witness had agreed to travel to Ottawa and come before the committee. He cancelled because an RCMP medical officer informed him that, if he did testify, he would be considered able to return to work and his medical leave would be terminated. Furthermore, on the last working day before the committee meeting, it would seem that a new policy was issued by the RCMP, requiring that a member on medical leave seek approval before undertaking certain types of travel. All this could be coincidental, but the chronology of events and the allegations are such as to raise concern.
I will now turn to the four criteria of rule 13-3(1), all of which must be met for a prima facie case of privilege to be established. Senator Cowan clearly raised this issue at the first opportunity, thereby meeting this first criterion.
In terms of the second criterion, that the matter must "directly concern[] the privileges of the Senate, any of its committees or any Senator,'' the references to the procedural works already given make clear that this matter does involve the privileges of the Senate and its committees. Unlike many other parliamentary bodies, questions of privilege relating to the work of a committee can be raised in the Senate itself, without requiring a report of the committee.
If there were intent to intimidate the witness, it is clearly a grave and serious breach, therefore meeting the third criterion.
The final criterion is that a question of privilege must seek a remedy the Senate can "provide and for which no other parliamentary process is reasonably available.'' In this case, the issue is not whether the committee did its work properly. As far as can be ascertained, it did. Instead, the fundamental issue is whether there was a deliberate attempt to prevent a witness from appearing. Were this to be so, it would constitute contempt. The accepted remedy is to treat such issues as cases of privilege. As such, the final criterion has also been fulfilled. This ruling, to be clear, does not establish that there was a deliberate intent to intimidate, which would be a decision for the Senate to eventually make, but rather that there is reason for concern.
The ruling is, therefore, that there is a prima facie case of privilege. Senator Cowan can now move a motion either calling on the Senate to take some action or referring the case of privilege to the Rules Committee. The motion must be moved now, but will only be considered at the end of Orders of the Day or 8 p.m., whichever comes first. If the Senate adjourns earlier, the motion will be taken up at the next sitting. Debate on the motion can last a maximum of three hours, with each senator limited to speaking once, and for no more than 15 minutes. This debate can be adjourned. When debate ends, the Senate will decide on the motion.
With leave of the Senate,
The Honourable Senator Cowan moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Tardif:
That this case of privilege, relating to the reported interference with Canadians who wished to appear before the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence, be referred to the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament for consideration.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
ORDERS OF THE DAY
GOVERNMENT BUSINESS
Bills — Third Reading
Third reading of Bill C-42, An Act to amend the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts.
The Honourable Senator Lang moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Martin, that the bill be read the third time.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Mitchell moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Day, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Bills — Second Reading
Order No. 1 was called and postponed until the next sitting.
Reports of Committees — Other
Orders No. 1 and 2 were called and postponed until the next sitting.
Inquiries
Order No. 4 was called and postponed until the next sitting.
OTHER BUSINESS
Senate Public Bills — Third Reading
Order No. 1 was called and postponed until the next sitting.
Commons Public Bills — Third Reading
Third reading of Bill C-383, An Act to amend the International Boundary Waters Treaty Act and the International River Improvements Act.
The Honourable Senator Finley moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Frum, 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 has passed this bill, without amendment.
Order No. 2 was called and postponed until the next sitting.
Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Plett, seconded by the Honourable Senator Tannas, for the third reading of Bill C-309, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (concealment of identity).
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Tardif, for the Honourable Senator Joyal, P.C., 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.
Ordered, That Motion No. 164 standing in the name of the Honourable Senator Tkachuk on the Notice Paper be brought forward.
MOTIONS
The Honourable Senator Tkachuk moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Nolin:
That, notwithstanding the provisions of rule 15-2(3), the Honourable Senator Brazeau be authorized to attend meetings of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration during its review of living allowances expense claims, if invited to do so.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
ORDERS OF THE DAY
OTHER BUSINESS
Commons Public Bills — Third Reading
Order No. 4 was called and postponed until the next sitting.
Senate Public Bills — Reports of Committees
Orders No. 1 and 2 were called and postponed until the next sitting.
Senate Public Bills — Second Reading
Orders No. 1 to 3 were called and postponed until the next sitting.
Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Ringuette, seconded by the Honourable Senator Jaffer, for the second reading of Bill S-215, An Act to amend the Payment Card Networks Act (credit card acceptance fees).
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted, on division.
The bill was then read the second time, on division.
The Honourable Senator Tardif moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Jaffer, that the bill be referred to the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Commons Public Bills — Second Reading
Orders No. 1 to 3 were called and postponed until the next sitting.
Reports of Committees — Other
Orders No. 1 to 4 were called and postponed until the next sitting.
Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Smith, P.C. (Cobourg), seconded by the Honourable Senator Fraser, for the adoption of the fifth report of the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament (Amendment to the Rules of the Senate), presented in the Senate on March 5, 2013.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Carignan moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Tkachuk, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Motions
Orders No. 144, 161, 158 and 128 were called and postponed until the next sitting.
Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Segal, seconded by the Honourable Senator Greene:
That whereas the Senate recognizes the values of the Commonwealth of Nations, which include the promotion of democracy, human rights, good governance, the rule of law, individual liberty, egalitarianism, judicial independence and the rights of girls to education—values that the Parliament of Canada has long advanced and defended;
That whereas the Senate recognizes that the Commonwealth is an important association of 54 countries, consisting of 2.4 billion citizens of all faiths and ethnicities, that support each other and work together toward shared goals in democracy and development;
That the Senate take note that the global fight for democracy, the rule of law, religious tolerance and development needs a strong, focused and authoritative Commonwealth;
That the Senate welcome the new Charter of the Commonwealth, which was approved by all Commonwealth Heads of Government in December 2012, and urge its broad circulation in both official languages throughout Canada; and
That the Senate affirm the importance of the Commonwealth to promoting the aforementioned values, which are in the best interest of all nations.
After debate,
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Frum, seconded by the Honourable Senator Greene:
That the Senate declare the Canadian Canoe Museum and its collection a cultural asset of national significance.
After debate,
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Resuming debate on the motion, as amended, of the Honourable Senator Comeau, seconded by the Honourable Senator Di Nino:
That the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament be authorized to examine and report on the powers and responsibilities of the officers of parliament, and their reporting relationships to the two houses; and
That the committee present its final report no later than March 31, 2014.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Carignan moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Housakos, that further debate on the motion, as amended, be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Inquiries
Orders No. 64, 65, 22, 67 and 59 were called and postponed until the next sitting.
Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Cowan, calling the attention of the Senate to the many contributions of Canadian universities and other post-secondary institutions, as well as research institutes, to Canadian innovation and research, and in particular, to those activities they undertake in partnership with the private and not-for-profit sectors, with financial support from domestic and international sources, for the benefit of Canadians and others the world over.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Champagne, P.C., moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Eaton, that further debate on the inquiry be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Orders No. 35, 45, 40, 9, 18, 60, 50, 3, 66, 62 and 56 were called and postponed until the next sitting.
Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Callbeck, calling the attention of the Senate to the inequities of the Old Age Security Allowance for unattached, low-income seniors aged 60-64 years.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Tardif, for the Honourable Senator Callbeck, moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Hubley, that further debate on the inquiry be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
MOTIONS
The Honourable Senator Dallaire moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C.:
That the Special Senate Committee on Anti-Terrorism be authorized to examine and report on the creation, role and mandate of a potential National Security Committee of Parliamentarians;
That the Special Senate Committee on Anti-Terrorism be authorized to examine and report on the role of women in the process of deradicalization in Canada and abroad; and
That the Committee submit its final report to the Senate no later than December 31, 2013, and that the Committee retain all powers necessary to publicize its findings until March 31, 2014.
Debate.
At 4 p.m., pursuant to the order adopted by the Senate on October 18, 2011, the Senate adjourned until 1:30 p.m. tomorrow.
Changes in Membership of Committees Pursuant to Rule 12-5
Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights
The Honourable Senator Andreychuk replaced the Honourable Senator Buth (May 7, 2013).