The Members convened were:

The Honourable Senators

AndersonAndreychukBattersBellemareBernardBeyakBlackBlack (Alberta)BoehmBoisvenuBonifaceBoveyBussonCampbellCarignanChristmasCordyCormierCoyleDagenaisDalphondDaskoDayDeacon (Nova Scotia)DeanDowneDoyleDuffyDuncanDupuisDyckEatonForestForest-NiesingFrumFureyGagnéGalvezGoldGreeneGriffinHarderHartlingHousakosJoyalKlyneKutcherLankinLovelace NicholasMacDonaldMaltaisManningMarshallMartinMarwahMassicotteMcCallumMcCoyMcInnisMcIntyreMcPhedranMégieMercerMitchellMiville-DechêneMocklerMoncionMoodieMunsonNeufeldNgoOhOmidvarPatePattersonPetitclercPlettPoirierPratteRichardsRinguetteSeidmanSinclairSmithStewart OlsenTannasTkachukVernerWallinWellsWetstonWhiteWoo

The Members in attendance to business were:

The Honourable Senators

AndersonAndreychuk*AtaullahjanBattersBellemareBernardBeyakBlackBlack (Alberta)BoehmBoisvenuBonifaceBoveyBussonCampbellCarignanChristmasCordyCormierCoyleDagenaisDalphondDasko*DawsonDayDeacon (Nova Scotia)DeanDowneDoyleDuffyDuncanDupuisDyckEatonForestForest-NiesingFrumFureyGagnéGalvezGoldGreeneGriffinHarderHartlingHousakosJoyalKlyneKutcherLankinLovelace NicholasMacDonaldMaltaisManningMarshallMartinMarwahMassicotteMcCallumMcCoyMcInnisMcIntyreMcPhedranMégieMercerMitchellMiville-DechêneMocklerMoncionMoodieMunsonNeufeldNgoOhOmidvarPatePattersonPetitclercPlettPoirierPratte*RavaliaRichardsRinguetteSeidmanSinclairSmithStewart OlsenTannasTkachukVernerWallinWellsWetstonWhiteWoo

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 Documents

The Honourable the Speaker tabled the following:

Report of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal for the year 2018, pursuant to the Canadian Human Rights Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. H-6, sbs. 61(4).—Sessional Paper No. 1/42-2911.

The Spring 2019 Reports of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development to the Parliament of Canada, pursuant to the Auditor General Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-17, sbs. 7(5). —Sessional Paper No. 1/42-2912.

Presenting or Tabling Reports from Committees

The Honourable Senator Petitclerc, Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology, presented the committee’s thirty-second report (Bill C-376, An Act to designate the month of April as Sikh Heritage Month, without amendment).

The Honourable Senator Marwah moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Wetston, that the bill be placed on the Orders of the Day for third reading at the next sitting.

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.

o o o

The Honourable Senator Manning presented the following:

Thursday, April 4, 2019

The Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans has the honour to present its

TWELFTH REPORT

Your committee, to which was referred Bill C-55, An Act to amend the Oceans Act and the Canada Petroleum Resources Act, has, in obedience to the order of reference of December 11, 2018, examined the said bill and now reports the same with the following amendment:

1.Clause 5, page 4: Add the following after line 32:

“(4) Despite section 35.2, no order may be made under subsection (2) unless the Minister

(a) is able to determine the approximate geographical location of the proposed marine protected area and make a preliminary assessment of any habitat or species in that area that is in need of protection; and

(b) posts a report of the information referred to in paragraph (a) on the departmental website.

35.11 (1) Before an order may be made under subsection 35.1(2), the Minister shall:

(a) cause the proposed order to be posted on the Minister’s website, accompanied by a notice that invites the public to provide comments during a period, to be set by the Minister, of at least 60 days, beginning on the day after the day on which the proposed order is posted;

(b) ensure that the public is provided with an opportunity to participate meaningfully in informing the Minister’s consideration of the proposed order within the period set under paragraph (a);

(c) provide written notice of the proposed order to every jurisdiction whose lands or interests may be affected by the order and consult and cooperate with every such jurisdiction that requests a consultation no later than 30 days after the day on which it received the notice; and

(d) prepare and post on the Minister’s website a report that

(i) summarizes the comments received under paragraph (a),

(ii) describes how the public was provided an opportunity for meaningful participation as required under paragraph (b),

(iii) lists the requests received for consultation under paragraph (c), and

(iv) summarizes the consultations that occurred under paragraph (c).

(2) For the purposes of paragraph (1)(c), jurisdiction means:

(a) the government of a province;

(b) any agency or body that is established under an Act of the legislature of a province and that has powers, duties or functions in relation to the environment;

(c) any body — including a co-management body — that is established under a land claim agreement referred to in section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 and that has powers, duties or functions in relation to the environment; or

(d) any council, government or other entity that is authorized to act on behalf of an Indigenous group, community or people that holds rights recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 and that has powers, duties or functions in relation to the environment

(i) under a land claim agreement referred to in section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, or

(ii) under an Act of Parliament or an Act of the legislature of a province, including a law that implements a self-government agreement.

(3) For greater certainty, the requirement set out in paragraph (1)(c) to consult and cooperate with a jurisdiction includes, when appropriate, a duty to accommodate if the jurisdiction is a body or entity referred to in paragraph (2)(c) or (d).”.

Respectfully submitted,

The Honourable Senator Manning moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Black (Ontario), 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.

Tabling of Reports from Interparliamentary Delegations

The Honourable Senator Forest tabled the following:

Report of the Canadian Delegation of the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie (APF) respecting its participation at the meeting of the Education, Communication and Cultural Affairs Committee of the APF, held in Grand-Bassam, Ivory Coast, on April 20 and 21, 2018.—Sessional Paper No. 1/42-2913.

Report of the Canadian Delegation of the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie (APF) respecting its participation at the meeting of the Cooperation and Development Committee of the APF, held in Rome, Italy, from May 2 to 4, 2018.—Sessional Paper No. 1/42-2914.

Report of the Canadian Delegation of the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie (APF) respecting its participation at the meeting of the Parliamentary Network on HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria of the APF, held in Lomé, Togo, on October 3 and 4, 2018.—Sessional Paper No. 1/42-2915.

Question Period

The Senate proceeded to Question Period.

Orders of the Day

SPEAKER'S RULING

Honourable senators, I am ready to rule on the point of order raised by Senator Plett on March 19, 2019. The point of order concerned an amendment to motion 435 dealing with allegations about interactions between the staff in the Office of the Prime Minister and the former Minister of Justice and Attorney General, which have attracted considerable attention in recent weeks. The original motion, moved by Senator Smith, the Leader of the Opposition, proposes that the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee study the issue. The amendment, moved by Senator Harder, the Government Representative, would change the motion so that the Senate takes note of the fact that the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner is investigating the matter, rather than having the Senate take action by authorizing a committee study.

Senator Plett’s concern is that the amendment is beyond the scope of the original motion. He noted that it would change an order of reference authorizing committee work into a statement of fact. Senator Carignan shared this concern. He argued that the amendment has nothing to do with a committee study. It therefore amounts to the rejection of the original proposal. Both senators noted that Beauchesne and House of Commons Procedure and Practice state that a proposal contrary to the main motion or one that is essentially a new proposal should not come before the Senate by means of an amendment. It requires separate notice.

In dealing with this point of order, let me first address the issue of timing. As explained at page 216 of Senate Procedure in Practice:

While a point of order need not be raised at the first opportunity, it should be raised when the object of the complaint … is still before the Senate, or the issue is still relevant … In particular, a point of order relating to a procedural matter should be raised promptly and before the matter is decided …

While it is preferable that a point of order be raised as soon as possible in proceedings, it is worth remembering that the fact that this did not happen when the amendment was first moved does not render the point of order invalid. Points of order are very different from questions of privilege, where timing is one of the key criteria.

In terms of the specific issue before us, the Senate is often flexible in its procedures. Generally speaking, our practice is that, unless an item is clearly out of order, debate is allowed to continue until a specific concern is raised, and the matter is found to contravene the Rules or practices. When such a concern is raised, however, it is the duty of the Speaker to evaluate the matter in terms of our procedural requirements.

The issue of the receivability of amendments usually arises in terms of proposed changes to bills, where issues of principle, relevancy, and scope have been examined with some regularity. As noted in a ruling of December 9, 2009:

It may generally be helpful to view the principle as the intention underlying a bill. The scope of the bill would then be related to the parameters the bill sets in reaching any goals or objectives that it contains, or the general mechanisms it envisions to fulfil its intentions. Finally, relevancy takes into account how an amendment relates to the scope or principle of the bill under examination.

This general framework can help us when considering amendments to motions. Senate Procedure in Practice, at page 90, identifies other factors to be considered, some of which were mentioned in the point of order. Beauchesne, at citation 579(2) of the sixth edition, explains that “An amendment may not raise a new question which can only be considered as a distinct motion after proper notice”. The third edition of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, at page 541, states that an amendment is out of order if it is “completely contrary to the main motion and would produce the same result as the defeat of the main motion.”

In addition, Erskine May, at page 409 of the 24th edition, notes that an expanded negative, striking out all the words in the motion to propose the opposite conclusion, is out of order. Concerns about an amendment being an expanded negative have led to proposed modifications being rejected in the Senate. On March 30, 1915, for example, a subamendment to a motion dealing with bilingual education in Ontario was found out of order because it contradicted the amendment it proposed to change. As another example, on May 31, 1934, an amendment proposing that Canada remain in the League of Nations was found to be out of order, since the motion proposed that the country leave that organization. To the extent that Senator Harder’s amendment is understood as effectively a lengthy rejection of Senator Smith’s motion, it does cause concern.

Even if the amendment is not seen as an expanded negative, however, other Senate precedents show that amendments to add significant new elements to a motion have been found to be out of order. I would, for example, refer honourable colleagues to the decision of September 9, 1999, dealing with an amendment to expand an investigation about actions by the Canadian Forces in Somalia to include Croatia, as well as a decision of September 19, 2000, which would have tacked on to a proposal to establish two new committees elements relating to the size of all committees and the process by which members are chosen.

In the case before us, the content of the amendment would probably not cause concern if it had been moved as a substantive motion after notice. It takes note of certain facts. The point of order only arises because the process used to bring this proposal before the Senate may have circumvented normal notice. This does indeed raise issues, particularly in relation to the scope of the main motion.

Senator Smith’s motion proposes that the Senate take action by authorizing a committee to conduct work. The committee could then come back to the Senate with its conclusions. The amendment proposes to remove the core of the original proposal. As such, it removes the proposed path, without proposing any other action by the Senate, which is simply asked to acknowledge facts. Replacing a proposal for Senate action with a simple recognition of facts is a major change in the basic goal of the motion. As such, the content of the amendment should more appropriately be brought before the Senate as a separate motion, on notice.

For the foregoing reasons, I find that the amendment is out of order and is to be discharged from the Order Paper. Debate on the main motion can proceed when called.

Government Business

Motions

Order No. 261 was withdrawn pursuant to rule 5-10(2).

Bills – Second Reading

Second reading of Bill C-83, An Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and another Act.

The Honourable Senator Klyne moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Miville-Dechêne, that the bill be read the second time.

After debate,

The Honourable Senator Martin moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Smith, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted, on division.

A point of order was raised with respect to speaking time limits in debate.

The Acting Speaker reserved her decision.

o o o

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Sinclair, seconded by the Honourable Senator Campbell, for the second reading of Bill C-75, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Youth Criminal Justice Act and other Acts and to make consequential amendments to other Acts.

After debate,

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted, on division.

The bill was then read the second time.

The Honourable Senator Sinclair moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Campbell, 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.

o o o

Orders No. 2 and 3 were called and postponed until the next sitting.

o o o

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Wetston, seconded by the Honourable Senator Bovey, for the second reading of Bill C-85, An Act to amend the Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act and to make related amendments to other Acts.

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.

The bill was then read the second time.

The Honourable Senator Omidvar moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Gold, that the bill be referred to the Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade.

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.

Reports of Committees – Other

Orders No. 22 to 28 were called and postponed until the next sitting.

Motions

Orders No. 1, 246 and 251 were called and postponed until the next sitting.

o o o

The Honourable Senator Bellemare moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Harder, P.C.:

That, in order to allow the Senate to receive a Minister of the Crown during Question Period as authorized by the Senate on December 10, 2015, and notwithstanding rule 4-7, when the Senate sits on Tuesday, April 9, 2019, Question Period shall begin at 3:30 p.m., with any proceedings then before the Senate being interrupted until the end of Question Period, which shall last a maximum of 40 minutes;

That, if a standing vote would conflict with the holding of Question Period at 3:30 p.m. on that day, the vote be postponed until immediately after the conclusion of Question Period;

That, if the bells are ringing for a vote at 3:30 p.m. on that day, they be interrupted for Question Period at that time, and resume thereafter for the balance of any time remaining; and

That, if the Senate concludes its business before 3:30 p.m. on that day, the sitting be suspended until that time for the purpose of holding Question Period.

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.

o o o

The Honourable Senator Bellemare moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Harder, P.C.:

That, when the Senate next adjourns after the adoption of this motion, it do stand adjourned until Monday, April 8, 2019, at 6 p.m.;

That committees of the Senate scheduled to meet on that day be authorized to do so for the purpose of considering government business, even though the Senate may then be sitting, and that rule 12-18(1) be suspended in relation thereto;

That, notwithstanding rules 9-6 and 9-10(2), if a vote is deferred to that day, the bells for the vote ring at the start of Orders of the Day, for 15 minutes, with the vote to be held thereafter; and

That rule 3-3(1) be suspended on that day.

With leave of the Senate and pursuant to rule 5-10(1), the motion was modified to read as follows:

That, when the Senate next adjourns after the adoption of this motion, it do stand adjourned until Tuesday, April 9, 2019, at 2 p.m.

The question being put on the motion, as modified, it was adopted.

Inquiries

Order No. 4 was called and postponed until the next sitting.

Other Business

Bills – Messages from the House of Commons

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

Senate Public Bills – Third Reading

Orders No. 1 and 2 were called and postponed until the next sitting.

Commons Public Bills – Third Reading

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

Private Bills – Third Reading

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

Senate Public Bills – Second Reading

Orders No. 1 to 9 were called and postponed until the next sitting.

Commons Public Bills – Second Reading

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Sinclair, seconded by the Honourable Senator Pratte, for the second reading of Bill C-262, An Act to ensure that the laws of Canada are in harmony with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

After debate,

The Honourable Senator Martin moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Smith, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.

The question was put on the motion.

Pursuant to rule 9-3, a standing vote was requested, with the bells to ring for sixty minutes.

Ordered, That the standing vote be not proceeded with.

Further debate on the motion was adjourned until the next sitting, in the name of the Honourable Senator Martin, on division.

SPEAKER'S RULING

Honourable senators, before continuing with the Order Paper, I understand there was a point of order raised earlier regarding time constraints on senators entering debate.

Honourable senators will know that rule 6-3(1) imposes those time constraints, and rule 6-3(2) requires the Speaker to notify senators, when they are in debate, when their time has expired. It is really not a point of order. It is perhaps more of an expression of frustration about not being able to enter debate.

I would advise honourable senators that, if they feel that the rules ought to be changed, they can bring the matter up in the Senate or to the Rules Committee.

Commons Public Bills – Second Reading

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Cormier, seconded by the Honourable Senator Hartling, for the second reading of Bill C-281, An Act to establish a National Local Food Day.

After debate,

With leave of the Senate,

Further debate on the motion was adjourned until the next sitting, in the name of the Honourable Senator Plett.

o o o

Order No. 3 was called and postponed until the next sitting.

o o o

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Galvez, seconded by the Honourable Senator Klyne, for the second reading of Bill C-326, An Act to amend the Department of Health Act (drinking water guidelines).

After debate,

The Honourable Senator Martin moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Smith, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.

o o o

Orders No. 5 to 11 were called and postponed until the next sitting.

Reports of Committees – Other

Orders No. 1, 5 to 7, 50, 100 to 102, 104 and 105, 107, 110 and 114 were called and postponed until the next sitting.

Motions

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Patterson, seconded by the Honourable Senator Runciman:

Whereas the Senate provides representation for groups that are often underrepresented in Parliament, such as Aboriginal peoples, visible minorities and women;

Whereas paragraph (3) of section 23 of the Constitution Act, 1867 requires that, in order to be qualified for appointment to and to maintain a place in the Senate, a person must own land with a net worth of at least four thousand dollars in the province for which he or she is appointed;

Whereas a person’s personal circumstances or the availability of real property in a particular location may prevent him or her from owning the required property;

Whereas appointment to the Senate should not be restricted to those who own real property of a minimum net worth;

Whereas the existing real property qualification is inconsistent with the democratic values of modern Canadian society and is no longer an appropriate or relevant measure of the fitness of a person to serve in the Senate;

Whereas, in the case of Quebec, each of the twenty-four Senators representing the province must be appointed for and must have either their real property qualification in or be resident of a specified Electoral Division;

Whereas an amendment to the Constitution of Canada in relation to any provision that applies to one or more, but not all, provinces may be made by proclamation issued by the Governor General under the Great Seal of Canada only where so authorized by resolutions of the Senate and House of Commons and of the legislative assembly of each province to which the amendment applies;

Whereas the Supreme Court of Canada has determined that a full repeal of paragraph (3) of section 23 of the Constitution Act, 1867, respecting the real property qualification of Senators, would require a resolution of the Quebec National Assembly pursuant to section 43 of the Constitution Act, 1982;

Now, therefore, the Senate resolves that an amendment to the Constitution of Canada be authorized to be made by proclamation issued by His Excellency the Governor General under the Great Seal of Canada in accordance with the Schedule hereto.

SCHEDULE

AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF CANADA

1.(1) Paragraph (3) of section 23 of the Constitution Act, 1867 is repealed.

(2) Section 23 of the Act is amended by replacing the semi-colon at the end of paragraph (5) with a period and by repealing paragraph (6).

2.The Declaration of Qualification set out in The Fifth Schedule to the Act is replaced by the following:

I, A.B., do declare and testify that I am by law duly qualified to be appointed a member of the Senate of Canada.

3. This Amendment may be cited as the Constitution Amendment, [year of proclamation] (Real property qualification of Senators).

With leave of the Senate,

Further debate on the motion was adjourned until the next sitting, in the name of the honourable Senator Gold.

o o o

Orders No. 89, 146, 189, 215, 302, 310, 325, 357 and 358, 371, 407 and 410 were called and postponed until the next sitting.

o o o

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Smith, seconded by the Honourable Senator Martin:

That the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs be authorized to examine and report on the serious and disturbing allegations that persons in the Office of the Prime Minister attempted to exert pressure on the former Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, the Honourable Jody Wilson-Raybould, P.C., M.P., and to interfere with her independence, thereby potentially undermining the integrity of the administration of justice;

That, as part of this study, and without limiting the committee’s right to invite other witnesses as it may decide, the committee invite:

The Right Honourable Justin Trudeau, P.C., M.P., Prime Minister of Canada;

The Honourable Jody Wilson-Raybould, P.C., M.P.;

The Honourable David Lametti, P.C., M.P., Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada;

Michael Wernick, Clerk of the Privy Council;

Kathleen Roussel, Director of Public Prosecutions;

Katie Telford, Chief of Staff to the Prime Minister;

Gerald Butts, former Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister;

Mathieu Bouchard, Senior Advisor to the Prime Minister;

Elder Marques, Senior Advisor to the Prime Minister; and

Jessica Prince, former Chief of Staff to the Minister of Veterans Affairs;

That the committee submit its final report no later than June 1, 2019; and

That the committee retain all powers necessary to publicize its findings until 180 days after tabling the final report.

With leave of the Senate and pursuant to rule 5-10(1), the motion was withdrawn.

SPEAKER'S STATEMENT

Honourable senators, the withdrawal of this motion renders the point of order on motion 470 moot.

Motions

Order No. 439 was called and postponed until the next sitting.

o o o

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Boniface, seconded by the Honourable Senator Deacon (Nova Scotia):

That the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence have the power to meet for the purposes of its study of Bill C-59, An Act respecting national security matters, even though the Senate may then be sitting, and that rule 12-18(1) be suspended in relation thereto.

With leave of the Senate and pursuant to rule 5-10(1), the motion was modified to read as follows:

That the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence have the power to meet for the purposes of its study of Bill C-59, An Act respecting national security matters, on Thursday, May 2, 2019, and Thursday, May 9, 2019, even though the Senate may then be sitting, and that rule 12-18(1) be suspended in relation thereto.

The question being put on the motion, as modified, it was adopted.

o o o

Order No. 470 was called and postponed until the next sitting.

Inquiries

Orders No. 12, 20, 26 and 36 were called and postponed until the next sitting.

o o o

Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Bernard, calling the attention of the Senate to anti-black racism.

After debate,

The Honourable Senator Mercer moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Cordy, that further debate on the inquiry be adjourned until the next sitting.

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.

o o o

Order No. 40 was called and postponed until the next sitting.

o o o

Order No. 45 was called and, pursuant to rule 4-15(2), dropped from the Order Paper and Notice Paper.

o o o

Orders No. 47, 52 and 54 to 56 were called and postponed until the next sitting.

MOTIONS

Order No. 432 was withdrawn pursuant to rule 5-10(2).

o o o

The Honourable Senator Manning moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Black (Ontario):

That the Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans have the power to meet, in order to continue its study of Bill C-68, An Act to amend the Fisheries Act and other Acts in consequence, on Tuesday, April 9, 2019, at 5 p.m., even though the Senate may then be sitting, and that rule 12-18(1) be suspended in relation thereto.

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.

o o o

The Honourable Senator Galvez moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Klyne:

That the Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources have the power to meet, in order to continue its study of Bill C-69, An Act to enact the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, to amend the Navigation Protection Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, on Tuesday, April 30, 2019 and Tuesday, May 7, 2019, at 5 p.m., even though the Senate may then be sitting, and that rule 12-18(1) be suspended in relation thereto.

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.

o o o

The Honourable Senator Pratte moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Marwah:

That a Special Committee on Prosecutorial Independence be appointed to examine and report on the independence of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada and of the Attorney General of Canada;

That the committee be composed of six senators from the Independent Senators Group, three Conservative senators and one Independent Liberal senator, to be nominated by the Committee of Selection, and that four members constitute a quorum;

That the committee examine and report on the separation of the functions of the Minister of Justice and those of the Attorney General of Canada, and on other initiatives that promote the integrity of the administration of justice;

That the committee also examine and report on remediation agreements as provided by PART XXII.1 of the Criminal Code, in particular, the appropriate interpretation of the national economic interest mentioned in subsection 715.32(3) of the Criminal Code;

That the committee have the power to send for persons, papers and records; to examine witnesses; and to publish such papers and evidence from day to day as may be ordered by the committee;

That, notwithstanding rule 12-18(1), the committee be authorized to meet even though the Senate may then be sitting;

That, notwithstanding rule 12-18(2)(b)(i), the committee have the power to meet from Monday to Friday, even though the Senate may then be adjourned for a period exceeding one week; and

That the committee be empowered to report from time to time and submit its final report no later than June 1, 2019, and retain all powers necessary to publicize its findings until 30 days after the tabling of the final report.

After debate,

The Honourable Senator Housakos moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Martin, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.

o o o

The Honourable Senator Griffin moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Busson:

That the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry have the power to meet on Tuesday, April 9, 2019, at 6:00 p.m., even though the Senate may then be sitting, and that rule 12-18(1) be suspended in relation thereto.

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.

o o o

The Honourable Senator Andreychuk moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Tkachuk:

That the Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade have the power to meet on Tuesday, April 9, 2019, at 4:00 p.m., for the purpose of hearing from the Minister of Foreign Affairs, even though the Senate may then be sitting, and that rule 12-18(1) be suspended in relation thereto.

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.

ADJOURNMENT

The Honourable Senator Bellemare moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Harder, P.C.:

That the Senate do now adjourn.

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.

(Accordingly, at 5:56 p.m., the Senate was continued until Tuesday, April 9, 2019, at 2 p.m.)

DOCUMENTS DEPOSITED WITH THE CLERK OF THE SENATE PURSUANT TO RULE 14-1(7)

Copy of the Regulations amending the Special Economic Measures (Burma) Regulations (P.C. 2018-905), pursuant to the Special Economic Measures Act, S.C. 1992, c. 17, sbs. 7(1).—Sessional Paper No. 1/42-2910.

---

Changes in Membership of Committees Pursuant to Rule 12-5

Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples

The Honourable Senator Francis replaced the Honourable Senator Duffy (April 4, 2019).

The Honourable Senator Duffy replaced the Honourable Senator Griffin (April 4, 2019).

Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce

The Honourable Senator Ringuette replaced the Honourable Senator Duncan (April 4, 2019).

Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources

The Honourable Senator Simons replaced the Honourable Senator McCoy (April 4, 2019).

The Honourable Senator Maltais replaced the Honourable Senator Carignan, P.C. (April 4, 2019).

Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans

The Honourable Senator McIntyre replaced the Honourable Senator Patterson (April 3, 2019).

Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration

The Honourable Senator Seidman replaced the Honourable Senator Housakos (April 4, 2019).

Standing Senate Committee on National Finance

The Honourable Senator Deacon (Ontario) replaced the Honourable Senator Omidvar (April 4, 2019).

Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology

The Honourable Senator Deacon (Ontario) replaced the Honourable Senator Kutcher (April 4, 2019).

The Honourable Senator Ravalia replaced the Honourable Senator Moodie (April 4, 2019).

The Honourable Senator Kutcher replaced the Honourable Senator Deacon (Ontario) (April 4, 2019).

The Honourable Senator Moodie replaced the Honourable Senator Kutcher (April 4, 2019).

Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications

The Honourable Senator Simons replaced the Honourable Senator Busson (April 4, 2019).