House Publications
The Debates are the report—transcribed, edited, and corrected—of what is said in the House. The Journals are the official record of the decisions and other transactions of the House. The Order Paper and Notice Paper contains the listing of all items that may be brought forward on a particular sitting day, and notices for upcoming items.
For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
|
|
|
Notice PaperNo. 19 Thursday, February 26, 2009 10:00 a.m. |
|
|
|
|
Introduction of Government Bills |
|
Introduction of Private Members' Bills |
|
| February 25, 2009 — Ms. Fry (Vancouver Centre) — Bill entitled “An Act to amend the Criminal Code (cyberbullying)”. |
|
|
| February 25, 2009 — Mr. D'Amours (Madawaska—Restigouche) — Bill entitled “An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act (elimination of waiting period)”. |
Notices of Motions (Routine Proceedings) |
|
| February 25, 2009 — Mr. Murphy (Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe) — That the Second Report of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, presented on Monday, February 23, 2009, be concurred in. |
| Debate — limited to 3 hours, pursuant to Standing Order 66(2). |
| Voting — not later than the expiry of the time provided for debate. |
|
|
| February 25, 2009 — Ms. Chow (Trinity—Spadina) — That the First Report of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, presented on Wednesday, February 25, 2009, be concurred in. |
| Debate — limited to 3 hours, pursuant to Standing Order 66(2). |
| Voting — not later than the expiry of the time provided for debate. |
|
|
| February 25, 2009 — Ms. Chow (Trinity—Spadina) — That the Second Report of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, presented on Wednesday, February 25, 2009, be concurred in. |
| Debate — limited to 3 hours, pursuant to Standing Order 66(2). |
| Voting — not later than the expiry of the time provided for debate. |
|
|
| February 25, 2009 — Mr. Bevilacqua (Vaughan) — That the First Report of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, presented on Wednesday, February 25, 2009, be concurred in. |
| Debate — limited to 3 hours, pursuant to Standing Order 66(2). |
| Voting — not later than the expiry of the time provided for debate. |
|
|
| February 25, 2009 — Mr. Bevilacqua (Vaughan) — That the Second Report of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, presented on Wednesday, February 25, 2009, be concurred in. |
| Debate — limited to 3 hours, pursuant to Standing Order 66(2). |
| Voting — not later than the expiry of the time provided for debate. |
|
|
| February 25, 2009 — Mr. Bevilacqua (Vaughan) — That the Third Report of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, presented on Wednesday, February 25, 2009, be concurred in. |
| Debate — limited to 3 hours, pursuant to Standing Order 66(2). |
| Voting — not later than the expiry of the time provided for debate. |
Questions |
|
| Q-642 — February 25, 2009 — Mrs. Mendes (Brossard—La Prairie) — With regard to the $212 million dedicated to the Champlain Bridge, in the Montreal region, in Budget 2009: (a) does the government have a long term plan to spend the money, (i) if yes, a full breakdown per year for the dispersal of funding and to what projects on the bridge they are being spent with a timeline for completion, (ii) if no, does the government intend to consult with local municipalities being directly affected by the deteriorating condition and safety concerns of the bridge while developing a comprehensive rehabilitation plan; (b) is the money slated to extend the life expectancy of the bridge and, if so, by how long; (c) will the money be spent on structural rehabilitation repairs such as the reconstruction of major support devises or for cosmetic repairs such as paint and resurfacing; (d) how does the government plan on rehabilitate the bridge while allowing normal traffic volume to proceed in both directions, especially during peak hours; and (e) is any component of a light rail system being developed under this funding? |
| Q-652 — February 25, 2009 — Mr. Angus (Timmins—James Bay) — With respect to the third party management (TPM) of First Nations by Indian and Northern Affairs (INAC), with specific reference to only those managed by the Northern Ontario office over the last ten years: (a) how many First Nations reserves have been operating under TPM, for how long, which reserves have been so designated and for each of the reserves listed, who acts as their third party manager; (b) according to each band council, on what date did each agreement come into force, what was the amount of debt they held at the time, what debt repayment plan was put into effect for each and what is the current amount of outstanding debt held by each band council; (c) what requirements must be met by a band council to get out of TPM, who determines those requirements, how many bands have met those requirements and when; (d) how many audits has INAC, or its designated proxies, undertaken with respect to TPMs and their direction of First Nations bands, (i) on what date were such audits prepared, (ii) by whom, (iii) with respect to the management of which bands, (iv) what were the key findings of each audit, (v) what recommendations were implemented, (vi) has any audit resulted in the termination or non-renewal of the contract between the TPM and INAC, if so, which ones and why, (vii) has any audit warranted a police investigation, if so, which ones and what was the outcome; (e) according to each community operating under TPM, (i) what management or other fees were charged, on a monthly and annual basis, (ii) for what were the fees charged, (iii) have any TPMs received extra commissions, bonuses or any other financial reward for their work and, if so, on what date were such monies awarded, for what, and to which TPMs, (iv) what percentage of each band’s operating budget do such costs represent, on a monthly and annual basis; (f) how many contracts (separate of TPMs agreements) have been awarded by INAC, or a TPM acting on a First Nation’s behalf, to LTL Construction, Shuniah Financial Services or Mekena Project Management Group, what was the amount of each contract, the date awarded and the intended service; (g) what legal or professional requirements does a company have to meet to become a TPM; (h) what tendering process is followed in the awarding of TPM contracts, do INAC staff have any discretionary powers in awarding a TPM and, if so, who has that power and under what circumstances; (i) with specific reference to the Gull Bay First Nation, how many third party managers have presided over their financial affairs during the above-mentioned period, what are the terms and conditions of each contract, what management fees, bonuses or commissions were paid to these parties and who were the principal officers of each TPM; and (j) for what reasons is Shuniah Financial Services no longer acting as Gull Bay’s TPM? |
| Q-662 — February 25, 2009 — Mr. Malo (Verchères—Les Patriotes) — With respect to Assisted Human Reproduction Canada, for the 2008-2009 fiscal year: (a) how much money has been spent do date; (b) how much money will be spent by the end of the fiscal year; (c) for what specific line item was this money spent; (d) what portion of this money, in detail, was spent on hospitality, transportation, travel or liaising with stakeholders? |
Notices of Motions for the Production of Papers |
|
Business of Supply |
|
Government Business |
|
Private Members' Notices of Motions |
|
| M-321 — February 25, 2009 — Mr. Roy (Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia) — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should set up a working group, whose hearings and findings would be public, to assess the damage caused by climate change as well as the nature and costs of necessary modifications in order to possibly create a new fund that would be used to compensate those who incur costs and that would be funded by the polluters responsible for the rise in greenhouse gas emissions. |
| M-322 — February 25, 2009 — Mr. Martin (Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca) — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should apply the import tax on purchasing ships abroad into a special Canadian shipbuilding infrastructure fund that should involve matching funds from the private sector and apply it to shipbuilding infrastructure in Canada. |
Private Members' Business |
| C-241 — January 26, 2009 — Mr. Ouellet (Brome—Missisquoi) — Second reading and reference to the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities of Bill C-241, An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act (removal of waiting period). |
| Pursuant to Standing Order 86(3), jointly seconded by: |
| Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway) — January 26, 2009 |
| Statement by Speaker regarding Royal Recommendation — February 25, 2009 (See Debates). |
|
|
|
| 2 Response requested within 45 days |
|