Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Social Affairs, Science and Technology

Issue 22 - Evidence for Tuesday, March 11, 1997

OTTAWA, Tuesday, March 11, 1997

The Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology, to which was referred Bill S-5, to restrict the manufacture, sale, importation and labelling of tobacco products, met this day at 9:30 am to give consideration to the bill.

Senator Mabel M. DeWare (Chair) in the Chair.

[English]

The Chair: I will turn the microphone over to Senator Bosa.

Senator Bosa: I have been informed that Senator Haidasz will be here in about 10 minutes and that Senator Cools will be here shortly.

I am told that the purpose for this morning's meeting was to present the amendments so that the witnesses who will appear at future meetings will be acquainted with what has been presented in our committee.

Senator Haidasz also wanted to table a letter from the former clerk Mr. Duplessis. The letter is in both English and French. The members of the committee will then have the benefit of his views after his analysis of the bill.

The Chair: You are proposing to table Mr. Duplessis's letter in both languages?

Senator Bonnell: Are there copies for everybody?

Senator Bosa: I am asking that they be distributed now. I also have the amendments.

The Chair: Everyone has received a copy of the amendments. I have received Mr. Duplessis' letter in both languages and we have tabled the draft of the amendments in both languages. Can you make a motion to that effect?

Senator Bosa: I have another comment before I put the motion.

The Chair: Can we agree to table these first?

Senator Bonnell: Make the motion and then comment on your motion. That is the proper way to do it.

Senator Bosa: I move that Mr. Duplessis' letter, as received from Senator Haidasz's executive assistant, be tabled to be considered at a future meeting.

The Chair: Is it agreed?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chair: Carried.

Senator Bosa: Senator Haidasz said he has nothing new to present today. He will be available only to answer questions if we have any. The logical question to ask ourselves, having just received these amendments, is whether or not we are in a position to ask any questions of the witness. If not, perhaps we could adjourn until committee members have had an opportunity to analyze these amendments. We could then meet with the witness, meaning Senator Haidasz, and with other witnesses whom the committee may wish to call.

The Chair: Some of the members may feel that Senator Haidasz should be given the opportunity to explain these amendments to us.

Senator Bonnell: It seems to me that, last week, in the House of Commons, they passed a tobacco bill.

The Chair: That is correct.

Senator Bonnell: Here we are talking about another tobacco bill. Does this tobacco bill that we now have before us say anything that is controversial compared to the other tobacco bill which came before the Senate last night?

The Chair: I do not believe we have that information before us yet.

Senator Bonnell: The bill was given first reading last night.

The Chair: Senator Haidasz has asked to have an independent analysis of both bills to find out whether the bills overlap. He said that report would be available within two weeks.

Senator Bonnell: I would hate to think that we are naive enough to pass one bill one day by saying one thing and another bill another day by saying another thing. We should find out whether the bills agree in principle and complement each other, or we should reject one of them. We should not approve both of them.

I do not think we should go any further with this bill until the decisions are made on the House of Commons bill which may become the law of the land. We do not want to be passing this bill if it is contradictory to the law of the land.

Senator Forest: Perhaps I am a bit naive as a rookie, but I wondered why this committee would receive one tobacco bill and another committee would receive the other tobacco bill.

Senator Bonnell: They did not receive it yet.

Senator Forest: However, it will go to the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs.

Senator Bonnell: We have the information on all the tars and they have to get information on all the laws.

The Chair: The bill is to be sent to the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs to ensure that the bill does not contravene the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Constitution. That is why they have received that bill, rather than us.

We could ask the legal committee to look at this bill in conjunction with the other bill and have the witnesses come forward, but I do not think that would be fair. We must decide what to do with this bill in this committee.

Senator Bonnell: As you just suggested, we could say that these two tobacco bills must be examined by the legal committee to ensure that the bills do not contradict each other. Therefore, we should send this bill to that committee as well.

The Chair: Legally, I am not sure how to do that. I do not think we could do that. We would have to report back to the house and then have the Senate do it.

Senator Bosa: For the benefit of other senators, the steering committee met and debated the very question that you have raised.

Senator Bonnell: Where is the report of the steering committee?

Senator Bosa: We were planning to put into effect the decisions of the steering committee in today's meeting.

Senator Bonnell: Where are those decisions?

Senator Bosa: The steering committee does not make a report whenever it meets.

Senator Bonnell: The steering committee makes a report and it must be approved by the full committee; otherwise, you may as well stay home. That is what a steering committee does. If you have a report from the steering committee, it would save a lot of time in the full committee if we all decide to agree with it. We simply adopt the steering committee's report.

Senator Bosa: In any event, the discussions of the steering committee were to the effect that we would have these amendments presented to us. We would then listen to the witnesses, namely, Senator Haidasz and other witnesses suggested by him. We would then call the officials of the Department of Justice for an opinion on precisely what you have described, namely, to see whether this bill is in harmony with or in contradiction to Bill C-71, which received first reading last night in the Senate.

The Chair: A comparison report is being done. I suggest that this committee adjourn until such time as we have the report. We will know, then, if this bill is in conflict with Bill C-71.

Senator Bosa: I think that is a good idea, Madam Chair.

Senator Bonnell: I should like to get one thing straight, since Senator Bosa brought it up. The steering committee has met and has done this and done that. The steering committee, in my view of Parliament, has no authority unless their view is brought before the full committee and is accepted by the full committee.

Senator Bosa: That is not what we are doing.

Senator Bonnell: In the mean time, you must bring the report to the full committee. If you do not have a report, you might as well say you did not meet. If you have a report, you should bring it here and we can say if we agree or disagree with it.

The Chair: The report was that we agreed to entertain Senator Haidasz's amendments. The idea was that he would come before us this morning to explain the amendments to us.

Senator Bonnell: But he is not here.

The Chair: There are two officials here from the Department of Justice but they are not on our agenda.

Senator Bonnell: I move that we adjourn.

The Chair: Is it agreed?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The committee adjourned.