PARLIAMENT of CANADA
Home Parliamentary Business Senators and Members About Parliament Visitor Information Employment
 

49 Elizabeth II, A.D. 2000, Canada

Journals of the Senate

2nd Session, 36th Parliament


Issue 65

Tuesday, June 13, 2000
2:00 p.m.

The Honourable Rose-Marie Losier-Cool, Speaker pro tempore


The Members convened were:

The Honourable Senators

Adams, Andreychuk, Austin, Bacon, Banks, Beaudoin, Berntson, Bolduc, Boudreau, Bryden, Buchanan, Callbeck, Carney, Carstairs, Chalifoux, Christensen, Cochrane, Cogger, Cohen, Comeau, Cook, Cools, Corbin, Cordy, De Bané, DeWare, Doody, Fairbairn, Ferretti Barth, Finestone, Finnerty, Fitzpatrick, Forrestall, Fraser, Furey, Gauthier, Gill, Grafstein, Graham, Grimard, Gustafson, Hays, Hervieux-Payette, Johnson, Joyal, Kelleher, Kelly, Kenny, Keon, Kinsella, Kirby, Kolber, Kroft, LeBreton, Losier-Cool, Lynch-Staunton, Maheu, Mahovlich, Meighen, Mercier, Milne, Moore, Murray, Nolin, Oliver, Pearson, Pépin, Perrault, Perry (Poirier), Pitfield, Poulin (Charette), Poy, Prud'homme, Robichaud, (L'Acadie-Acadia), Robichaud, (Saint-Louis-de-Kent), Rompkey, Rossiter, Ruck, St. Germain, Sibbeston, Simard, Spivak, Squires, Stollery, Stratton, Taylor, Tkachuk, Watt, Wiebe, Wilson,

The Members in attendance to business were:

The Honourable Senators

Adams, Andreychuk, *Angus, Austin, Bacon, Banks, Beaudoin, Berntson, Bolduc, Boudreau, Bryden, Buchanan, Callbeck, Carney, Carstairs, Chalifoux, Christensen, Cochrane, Cogger, Cohen, Comeau, Cook, Cools, Corbin, Cordy, De Bané, DeWare, Doody, Fairbairn, Ferretti Barth, Finestone, Finnerty, Fitzpatrick, Forrestall, Fraser, Furey, Gauthier, Gill, Grafstein, Graham, Grimard, Gustafson, Hays, Hervieux-Payette, Johnson, Joyal, Kelleher, Kelly, Kenny, Keon, Kinsella, Kirby, Kolber, Kroft, LeBreton, Losier-Cool, Lynch-Staunton, Maheu, Mahovlich, Meighen, Mercier, Milne, Moore, Murray, Nolin, Oliver, Pearson, Pépin, Perrault, Perry (Poirier), Pitfield, Poulin (Charette), Poy, Prud'homme, Robichaud, (L'Acadie-Acadia), Robichaud, (Saint-Louis-de-Kent), Rompkey, Rossiter, Ruck, St. Germain, Sibbeston, Simard, Spivak, Squires, Stollery, Stratton, Taylor, Tkachuk, Watt, Wiebe, Wilson,

PRAYERS

INTRODUCTION OF SENATORS

The Honourable Speaker pro tempore informed the Senate that the Clerk of the Senate had received Certificates from the Registrar General of Canada showing that:-

Raymond G. Squires and

Jane Marie Cordy,

respectively, had been summoned to the Senate. The Honourable Speaker pro tempore informed the Senate that there were Senators without waiting to be introduced. The Honourable Senator Squires was introduced between the Honourable Senator Boudreau, P.C., and the Honourable Senator Rompkey, P.C., and having presented Her Majesty's Writ of Summons it was read by one of the Clerks at the Table as follows:-

CANADA

Adrienne Clarkson (G.S.)

ELIZABETH THE SECOND, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom, Canada and Her other Realms and Territories QUEEN, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith.

TO

Our Trusty and Well-beloved,

RAYMOND G. SQUIRES

of St. Anthony, in the Province of Newfoundland,

GREETING:

KNOW YOU, that as well for the especial trust and confidence We have manifested in you, as for the purpose of obtaining your advice and assistance in all weighty and arduous affairs which may the State and Defence of Canada concern, We have thought fit to summon you to the Senate of Canada.

AND WE do command you that all difficulties and excuses whatsoever laying aside, you be and appear, for the purposes aforesaid, in the Senate of Canada at all times whensoever and wheresoever Our Parliament may be in Canada convoked and holden, and this you are in no wise to omit.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, We have caused these Our Letters to be made Patent and the Great Seal of Canada to be hereunto affixed.

WITNESS:

Our Right Trusty and Well-beloved Adrienne Clarkson, Chancellor and Principal Companion of Our Order of Canada, Chancellor and Commander of Our Order of Military Merit, Governor General and Commander-in-Chief of Canada.
AT OUR GOVERNMENT HOUSE, in Our City of Ottawa, this ninth day of June, in the year of Our Lord two thousand and in the forty-ninth year of Our Reign.

BY COMMAND,

JOHN MANLEY

Registrar General of Canada

The Honourable Senator Squires came to the Table and took and subscribed the Oath prescribed by law, which was administered by the Clerk of the Senate, the Commissioner appointed for that purpose, and took his seat as a Member of the Senate. The Honourable Senator Cordy was introduced between the Honourable Senator Boudreau, P.C., and the Honourable Senator Graham, P.C., and having presented Her Majesty's Writ of Summons it was read by one of the Clerks at the Table as follows:-

CANADA

Adrienne Clarkson (G.S.)

ELIZABETH THE SECOND, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom, Canada and Her other Realms and Territories QUEEN, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith.

TO

Our Trusty and Well-beloved,

JANE MARIE CORDY

of Dartmouth, in the Province of Nova Scotia,

GREETING:

KNOW YOU, that as well for the especial trust and confidence We have manifested in you, as for the purpose of obtaining your advice and assistance in all weighty and arduous affairs which may the State and Defence of Canada concern, We have thought fit to summon you to the Senate of Canada.

AND WE do command you that all difficulties and excuses whatsoever laying aside, you be and appear, for the purposes aforesaid, in the Senate of Canada at all times whensoever and wheresoever Our Parliament may be in Canada convoked and holden, and this you are in no wise to omit.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, We have caused these Our Letters to be made Patent and the Great Seal of Canada to be hereunto affixed.

WITNESS:

Our Right Trusty and Well-beloved Adrienne Clarkson, Chancellor and Principal Companion of Our Order of Canada, Chancellor and Commander of Our Order of Military Merit, Governor General and Commander-in-Chief of Canada.
AT OUR GOVERNMENT HOUSE, in Our City of Ottawa, this ninth day of June in the year of Our Lord two thousand and in the forty-ninth year of Our Reign.

BY COMMAND,

JOHN MANLEY

Registrar General of Canada

The Honourable Senator Cordy came to the Table and took and subscribed the Oath prescribed by law, which was administered by the Clerk of the Senate, the Commissioner appointed for that purpose, and took her seat as a Member of the Senate. The Honourable Speaker pro tempore informed the Senate that the Honourable Senators introduced today had made and subscribed the Declaration of Property Qualification required of them by the Constitution Act 1867, in the presence of the Clerk of the Senate, the Commissioner appointed to receive and witness same.

SENATORS' STATEMENTS

Some Honourable Senators made statements.

DAILY ROUTINE OF BUSINESS

Tabling of Documents

The Honourable Senator Hays tabled the following:

Response by the Government of Canada to the Fourth Report (Interim) of the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce entitled: "Export Development Act." -Sessional Paper No. 2/36-422S.

Presentation of Reports from Standing or Special Committees

The Honourable Senator Stollery presented the following:

TUESDAY, June 13, 2000

The Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs has the honour to present its

NINTH REPORT

Your Committee, which was authorized by the Senate on May 9, 2000, to examine and report on emerging political, social, economic and security developments in Russia and Ukraine, taking into account Canada's policy and interests in the region, and other related matters, respectfully requests that it be empowered to engage the services of such counsel and technical, clerical and other personnel as may be necessary; and to travel from place to place within and outside Canada.

The budget was presented to the Standing Senate Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration and in its Tenth Report, the Committee recommended that an amount of $74,637.00 be released for this study. The report was adopted by the Senate on Wednesday, June 7, 2000.

Respectfully submitted,

PETER A. STOLLERY

Chairman

The Honourable Senator Stollery moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Cordy, 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. The Honourable Senator Fitzpatrick, for the Honourable Senator Gustafson, presented the following:

TUESDAY, June 13, 2000

The Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry has the honour to present its

SECOND REPORT

Your Committee, which was authorized by the Senate on November 24, 1999, to examine the present state and the future of forestry in Canada, respectfully requests that it be empowered to engage the services of such counsel and technical, clerical, and other personnel as may be necessary; and to adjourn from place to place within and outside Canada.

The budget was presented to the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration on Thursday, April 6, 2000. In its Tenth Report, the Internal Economy Committee recommended that an amount of $184,275 be released for this study. The report was adopted by the Senate on Wednesday, June 7, 2000.

Respectfully submitted,

LEONARD J. GUSTAFSON

Chair

The Honourable Senator Fitzpatrick moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Grafstein, 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. The Honourable Senator Mercier presented the following:

TUESDAY, June 13, 2000

The Committee of Selection has the honour to present its

SEVENTH REPORT

Pursuant to Rule 85(1)(b) of the Rules of the Senate, your Committee submits herewith the list of Senators nominated by it to serve on the following Committee:

SPECIAL SENATE COMMITTEE ON ILLEGAL DRUGS

The Honourable Senators Carstairs, Kenny, Nolin, Pépin and Rossiter.

Respectfully submitted,

LÉONCE MERCIER

Chairman

The Honourable Senator Mercier moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Squires, 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 Senate Public Bills

The Honourable Senator Finestone, P.C., presented a Bill S-24, An Act to amend the Broadcasting Act.

The Bill was read the first time.

The Honourable Senator Finestone, P.C., moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Gauthier, that the Bill be placed on the Orders of the Day for a second reading on Thursday next, June 15, 2000.

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

MESSAGES FROM THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

Messages were brought from the House of Commons to return the following Bills:

Bill S-10, An Act to amend the National Defence Act, the DNA Identification Act and the Criminal Code,

Bill S-3, An Act to implement an agreement, conventions and protocols between Canada and Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Algeria, Bulgaria, Portugal, Uzbekistan, Jordan, Japan and Luxembourg for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes on income,

And to acquaint the Senate that the Commons have passed these Bill, without amendment.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

GOVERNMENT BUSINESS

Motions

The Order was called concerning the motion of the Honourable Senator Hays, seconded by the Honourable Senator Mercier:

That, notwithstanding Rules 63(1) and 63(2), the proceedings on Bill C-12, An Act to amend the Canada Labour Code (Part II) in respect of occupational health and safety, to make technical amendments to the Canada Labour Code (Part I) and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, which took place on Thursday, June 1, 2000, be declared null and void; and

That the Standing Committee on Privileges, Standing Rules and Orders review and make recommendations concerning the procedure described in Erskine May's Parliamentary Practice, Twenty-second Edition, at p. 545, as follows: "If a bill is carried to the other House by mistake, or if any other serious error is discovered, a message is sent to have the bill returned or the error otherwise rectified."

SPEAKER'S RULING

Last Thursday, June 8, the Deputy Leader of the Government, Senator Hays, moved a motion with two objectives. The first seeks to nullify the proceedings thus far on Bill C-12 respecting amendments to Part II of the Canada Labour Code. The second objective is to refer the subject of messages between the two Houses and defective bills to the Committee on Privileges, Standing Rules and Orders. Once the motion was moved, the Leader of the Opposition, Senator Lynch-Staunton, promptly rose on a point of order to challenge its procedural acceptability. His remarks were followed by numerous interventions from different Senators. During the course of these exchanges, a variety of objections were raised concerning the motion in addition to what Senator Lynch-Staunton had raised. As well, there was some discussion about the Senate's practices regarding the suspension of the rules, rescinding decisions and multi-purpose motions.

I have reviewed the Senate Debates of last Thursday, I have also studied Canadian and British precedents and consulted my procedural advisors. I am prepared to give my ruling. In doing so, I will try to deal with each of the different issues that were raised.

One question is whether this motion is legitimate procedurally because it seems to deliberately thwart certain explicit rules of the Senate. It must be noted, however, that rule 58(1)(a) allows for this. Any Senator is entitled to propose a motion, after notice, to suspend any rule or any part thereof. As I read it, the motion of Senator Hays seeks, in part, to suspend the application of rule 63 that provides a mechanism for rescinding decisions. Instead, the Senator wants to completely nullify and void the proceedings relative to the introduction and first reading of Bill C-12.

I am not certain, in this case, that this is really a substantive issue. In speaking in defence of his motion, the Deputy Leader of the Government indicated that the reference to rule 63 was made out of a sense of caution. In his view, the introduction of a bill and its first reading do not strictly speaking come within the ambit of rule 63. I find this to be a reasonable assessment.

Rule 23(2) states that;

The Introduction and First Reading of Government, Public and Private Bills are pro forma stages of consideration and shall be decided without debate or standing votes. In such cases the provisions of rule 65(3) shall not apply.

This means, in effect, that the introduction and first reading of a bill do not really involve a decision of the Senate. Whenever a bill is introduced, the entry in the Journals, since 1991, simply states that a bill was read a first time. As an ancillary matter, an order is then adopted fixing the day when the bill will be called for second reading. Consequently, a motion to nullify the proceedings for the introduction and first reading of a bill does not properly involve the use of rule 63 which pertains "to an order, resolution or other decision of the Senate". If the nullification motion were to be adopted, the order fixing the date to begin second reading of the bill would be discharged and stricken from the Order Paper since it would be a nullity.

As I noted, there was considerable discussion last Thursday about rule 63. Even though I do not believe that this rule is directly relevant to the motion of Senator Hays, I would like to take this opportunity to make a comment relating to a reference made by Senator Boudreau. In his intervention, the Leader of the Government cited section 36 of the Constitution Act, 1867 which states that "Questions arising in the Senate shall be decided by a Majority of Voices ..." Normally, as Speaker, I would have no authority to involve myself in this kind of question, but this case is an exception because section 36 is also rule 65(5) word for word.

To my mind, there is a conflict between rule 65(5) and rule 63 and also rule 58(2), both of which set a two-thirds majority vote to rescind or correct orders, resolutions or other votes of the Senate. Given the source of rule 65(5), it might be appropriate for the Committee on Privileges, Standing Rules and Orders to determine the validity of any rule which appears to conflict with an explicit provision of the Constitution.

There was also some discussion about the complexity of the motion. An objection was made suggesting that having more than one proposition invalidated the motion procedurally. I do not accept this argument. While there may indeed be two distinct propositions contained in this motion, it does not render the motion unacceptable. In this particular case, there appears to be a relationship or connection between the two of them and the motion is not out of order because of this.

As I have explained, I find the motion proposed by the Deputy Leader of the Government to be procedurally acceptable. Its effect is to nullify all the proceedings connected with the message that was received June 1 concerning Bill C-12. It was widely acknowledged and admitted last Thursday that the purpose of the motion was to provide an opportunity to bring in a corrected version of the bill. Apparently, there were some textual errors in Bill C-12 as originally transmitted from the House of Commons to the Senate. Once this error was discovered by officials in the House of Commons, the bill was reprinted in its corrected form. The Senate must now be seized of this information so that it can do its work properly with the right bill.

In speaking to the point of order, Senator Lynch-Staunton argued that the proper traditional way to do this is by message. The Leader of the Opposition maintained that there was an obligation for the House where the error occurred to send a message to recall the bill. The Leader of the Opposition cited numerous cases in the British Parliament where bills transmitted from one House to the other that were defective were recalled through a message. As it happens, this process is also known to Canadian practice. There is a precedent dating back to 1913 relating to a bill respecting a canal company. On that occasion, a bill was sent to the Senate from the House of Commons that was defective. On February 20, 1913, the sponsor of the bill in the Commons secured the adoption of a motion recalling the bill from the Senate because it had not been printed as passed.

I am in complete agreement that messages between the two Houses provide the proper formal way to deal with problems of this kind. Furthermore, I am in sympathy with what I perceive to be the irritation underlying much of this point of order. Nonetheless, as an occupant of this Chair, my obligation is to maintain the rules and practices of the Senate. In this specific case, I must note that there is a valid alternative to deal with this problem. This alternative possibility is admitted in the passage of Erskine May that has been cited by both Senator Hays and Senator Lynch-Staunton. At page 545 of the 22nd edition, it is stated that "If a bill is carried to the other House by mistake, or if any other serious error is discovered, a message is sent to have the bill returned or the error otherwise rectified."

The motion of Senator Hays seeks to implement this alternative to rectify the problem of the printing error in Bill C-12. In pursuing this approach, he is doing what was accepted last month when we confronted a similar problem with Bill C-22, a bill dealing with money laundering. Honourable Senators will recall that on that occasion, Senator Hays moved a motion on May 11 to declare the proceedings with respect to the introduction and first reading of Bill C-22 null and void. As noted in the Journals of that day at page 594, the motion was adopted after a brief debate. Later in the same sitting, a message was read leading to the introduction and first reading of Bill C-22. Of course, this message contained the corrected text of the Bill C-22 was the corrected version.

The procedure used with respect to Bill C-22 was reasonable and procedurally acceptable in every way. In the absence of a message asking for the return of the defective bill, there is no reason why the approach proposed in the motion of Senator Hays cannot be used as an alternative. I would also note that the second element of the motion of Senator Hays, if accepted, would mandate the Committee on Privileges, Standing Rules and Orders to review this issue and to provide possible recommendations that might prove more satisfactory in dealing with matters of this kind in the future.

Debate on the motion can now proceed. The Senate proceeded to the debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Hays, seconded by the Honourable Senator Mercier:

That, notwithstanding Rules 63(1) and 63(2), the proceedings on Bill C-12, An Act to amend the Canada Labour Code (Part II) in respect of occupational health and safety, to make technical amendments to the Canada Labour Code (Part I) and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, which took place on Thursday, June 1, 2000, be declared null and void; and

That the Standing Committee on Privileges, Standing Rules and Orders review and make recommendations concerning the procedure described in Erskine May's Parliamentary Practice, Twenty-second Edition, at p. 545, as follows: "If a bill is carried to the other House by mistake, or if any other serious error is discovered, a message is sent to have the bill returned or the error otherwise rectified."

After debate, The question being put on the motion, it was adopted on division. Accordingly, the Order of the Day for the second reading of Bill C-12 was discharged and the Bill withdrawn.

MESSAGES FROM THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

A Message was brought from the House of Commons with a reprinted Bill C-12, An Act to amend the Canada Labour Code (Part II) in respect of occupational health and safety, to make technical amendments to the Canada Labour Code (Part I) and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, to which they desire the concurrence of the Senate.

The Bill was read the first time.

The Honourable Senator Hays moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Pépin, 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.

Bills

Second reading of Bill C-11, An Act to authorize the divestiture of the assets of, and to dissolve, the Cape Breton Development Corporation, to amend the Cape Breton Development Corporation Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts.

The Honourable Senator Boudreau, P.C., moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Graham, P.C., that the Bill be read the second time.

After debate, The Honourable Senator Buchanan, P.C., moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Murray, P.C., that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted. Second reading of Bill C-25, An Act to amend the Income Tax Act, the Excise Tax Act and the Budget Implementation Act, 1999.

The Honourable Senator Poulin moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Mahovlich, that the Bill be read the second time.

After debate, The Honourable Senator Kinsella for the Honourable Senator Eyton moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Johnson, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted. Third reading of Bill C-23, An Act to modernize the Statutes of Canada in relation to benefits and obligations.

The Honourable Senator Pépin moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Callbeck, that the Bill be read the third time.

After debate, The Honourable Senator Cools moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Pearson, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.

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

With leave of the Senate, The Honourable Senator Andreychuk tabled the following:

Letters, dated June 6, 2000, from the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development concerning Bill C-23 (English Text).-Sessional Paper No. 2/36-423S. Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Finestone, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Gauthier, for the second reading of Bill C-16, An Act respecting Canadian citizenship.

After debate, The Honourable Senator Kinsella moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Gustafson, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted. Second reading of Bill C-32, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 28, 2000.

The Honourable Senator Mahovlich moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Cook, that the Bill be read the second time.

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

The Bill was then read the second time.

The Honourable Senator Mahovlich moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Carstairs, that the Bill be referred to the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance.

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

OTHER BUSINESS

Ordered, That Orders No. 2 and 3 under Commons Public Bills be brought forward. Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Rompkey, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C. (Saint-Louis-de-Kent), for the second reading of Bill C-445, An Act to change the name of the electoral district of Rimouski-Mitis.

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

The Bill was then read the second time.

The Honourable Senator Rompkey, P.C., moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C. (Saint-Louis-de-Kent), 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. Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Rompkey, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Austin, P.C., for the second reading of Bill C-473, An Act to change the names of certain electoral districts.

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

The Bill was then read the second time.

The Honourable Senator Rompkey, P.C., moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C. (Saint-Louis-de-Kent), 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.

________________________________________

Ordered, That Motion No. 74 standing in the name of the Honourable Senator Chalifoux be brought forward.

MOTIONS

The Honourable Senator Chalifoux moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Christensen:

That the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples be authorized to examine and report upon the opportunities to expand economic development, including tourism and employment, associated with national parks in Northern Canada, within the parameters of existing comprehensive land claim and associated agreements with Aboriginal Peoples and in accordance with the principles of the National Parks Act; and

That the Committee submit its report no later than December 15, 2000.

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

________________________________________

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

________________________________________

With leave, The Senate reverted to Government Notices of Motions.

With leave of the Senate, The Honourable Senator Hays moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Mercier:

That when the Senate adjourns today, it do stand adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, June 14, 2000, at 1:30 p.m.;

That at 3:30 p.m. tomorrow, if the business of the Senate has not been completed, the Speaker shall interrupt the proceedings to adjourn the Senate;

That should a division be deferred until 5:30 p.m. tomorrow, the Speaker shall interrupt the proceedings at 3:30 p.m. to suspend the sitting until 5:30 p.m. for the taking of the deferred division; and

That all matters on the Orders of the Day and on the Notice Paper, which have not been reached, shall retain their position.

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

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

Report on Port Divestiture and Operations for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2000, pursuant to the Canada Marine Act, S.C. 1998, c. 10, sbs. 72(7).-Sessional Paper No. 2/36-409.

Reports of the Department of National Defence required by the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act for the period ended March 31, 2000, pursuant to the Access to Information Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1, sbs. 72(2) and the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-21, sbs. 72(2).-Sessional Paper No. 2/36-410.

Summary of the Corporate Plan and Operations and Capital Budgets for the period 1999-2002 of the Canada Council of the Arts.-Sessional Paper No. 2/36-411.

Response of the government to the Fifth Report of the Standing Joint Committee for the Scrutiny of Regulations, "Payment of Subsidies to CN for losses incurred operating its Chandler Subdivision, 1996" (Sessional Paper No. 1/36-1089), tabled in the Senate on March 24, 1999.-Sessional Paper No. 2/36-412S.

Report of the Canada Post Corporation, together with the Auditors' Report, for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2000, pursuant to the Financial Administration Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-11, sbs. 150(1).-Sessional Paper No. 2/36-413.

Summaries of the Corporate Plan for 2000-01 to 2004-05 and the Capital Budget for 2000-01 of the Canada Post Corporation, pursuant to the Financial Administration Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-11, sbs. 125(4).-Sessional Paper No. 2/36-414.

Reports of the Copyright Board required by the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act for the period ended March 31, 2000, pursuant to the Access to Information Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1, sbs. 72(2) and the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-21, sbs. 72(2).-Sessional Paper No. 2/36-415.

Reports of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada required by the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act for the period ended March 31, 2000, pursuant to the Access to Information Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1, sbs. 72(2) and the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-21, sbs. 72(2).-Sessional Paper No. 2/36-416.

Report of the Farm Credit Corporation, together with the Auditor General's report, for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2000, pursuant to the Financial Administration Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-11, sbs. 150(1).-Sessional Paper No. 2/36-417.

Reports of the Farm Credit Corporation required by the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act for the period ended March 31, 2000, pursuant to the Access to Information Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1, sbs. 72(2) and the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-21, sbs. 72(2).-Sessional Paper No. 2/36-418.

Reports of the Department of the Environment required by the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act for the period ended March 31, 2000, pursuant to the Access to Information Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1, sbs. 72(2) and the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-21, sbs. 72(2).-Sessional Paper No. 2/36-419.

Report on the operations under the Canada Water Act for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1997, pursuant to the Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-11, s. 38.-Sessional Paper No. 2/36-420.

Report on the operations under the Canada Water Act for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1998, pursuant to the Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-11, s. 38.-Sessional Paper No. 2/36-421.

ADJOURNMENT

The Honourable Senator Hays moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Carstairs:

That the Senate do now adjourn.

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

________________________________________

Changes in Membership of Committees Pursuant to Rule 85(4)

Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration

The name of the Honourable Senator Poulin substituted for that of the Honourable Senator Callbeck (June 9).

Special Committee of the Senate on Bill C-20

The names of the Honourable Senators Gill, Chalifoux, Sibbeston and Gill substituted for those of the Honourable Senators De Bané, Sibbeston, Gill and Sibbeston (June 12).

Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications

The names of the Honourable Senators Poulin and Furey substituted for those of the Honourable Senators Furey and Perrault (June 12).

The name of the Honourable Senator Perrault substituted for that of the Honourable Senator Furey (June 13).

Committee of Selection

The name of the Honourable Senator Nolin substituted for that of the Honourable Senator DeWare (June 13).


Top of document