Hon. Michèle Audette: I have a question for you, Senator Moreau. We recently learned that the Attorney General of Canada is requesting an extension in the Nicholas case currently under way in British Columbia regarding Bill S-2.

Given the tight deadlines in this pending court decision — as you know, Bill S-2 was passed unanimously in this chamber — can you explain why Canada is asking the court for an extension? Bills C-5, C-14 and C-15 demonstrate that there is a way to fast-track bills when it is urgent. Bill S-2 deserves to be treated with the same urgency. Thank you.

Hon. Pierre Moreau (Government Representative in the Senate): Thank you for the question, but I would correct your preamble. The Senate did not pass Bill S-2 unanimously. The bill was amended by the Senate — you should reread the speeches that were given at the time — and procedure required that the bill be sent back to the House of Commons.

As I understand it, the House of Commons has to decide whether or not it will move Bill S-2 forward, as suggested and amended by the Senate. Many interventions mentioned that there was a firm court deadline to meet, and incidentally, this was one of the reasons for passing Bill S-2 without amendments. The House, in its wisdom, decided otherwise. Court deadlines being what they are, the Attorney General has no alternative but to make sure he gets an extension in case Bill S-2 can’t be passed by the deadline.

Senator Audette: Having been in the chamber at the time of the vote, I noticed that all the senators present passed the bill as amended. That’s my understanding. This debate could happen outside the chamber. Could you ask the government, as its representative, why it’s seeking an extension, when debates and studies on this subject are being conducted and Bill S-2 can’t be passed in the other place?

Senator Moreau: I can ask the question, Senator Audette, but you keep saying that consultations have been taking place for 40 years. The government clearly indicated to you that consultations on the part concerning the second-generation cut-off were taking place and wrapped up in December. It’s inaccurate to say that consultations, in the sense of the government’s constitutional obligations, have been going on for 40 years. The reason the government is seeking an extension is very simple. It is to ensure that it won’t be in contempt of court if Bill S-2 can’t be passed before —

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Thank you, Senator Moreau.