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. 23 Monday, April 12, 2010 11:00 a.m. |
|
|
|
|
Introduction of Government Bills |
|
| April 8, 2010 — The Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development — Bill entitled “An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act”. |
| Recommendation |
| (Pursuant to Standing Order 79(2)) |
| Her Excellency the Governor General recommends to the House of Commons the appropriation of public revenue under the circumstances, in the manner and for the purposes set out in a measure entitled “An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act”. |
|
|
| April 8, 2010 — The Minister of Natural Resources — Bill entitled “An Act respecting civil liability and compensation for damage in case of a nuclear incident”. |
| Recommendation |
| (Pursuant to Standing Order 79(2)) |
| Her Excellency the Governor General recommends to the House of Commons the appropriation of public revenue under the circumstances, in the manner and for the purposes set out in a measure entitled “An Act respecting civil liability and compensation for damage in case of a nuclear incident”. |
Introduction of Private Members' Bills |
|
| April 8, 2010 — Mrs. Freeman (Châteauguay—Saint-Constant) — Bill entitled “An Act to amend the Old Age Security Act (application for supplement, retroactive payments and other amendments)”. |
|
|
| April 8, 2010 — Ms. Coady (St. John's South—Mount Pearl) — Bill entitled “An Act to amend the Motor Vehicle Safety Act (side guards)”. |
Notices of Motions (Routine Proceedings) |
|
Questions |
|
| Q-1762 — April 8, 2010 — Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier) — With respect to the advertising to promote the government’s Economic Action Plan, following the introduction of the 2009-2010 Budget, how much was spent in 2009-2010 on advertisements carried by: (a) radio stations belonging to the Alliance des radios communautaires du Canada; (b) community television channels; and (c) media belonging to the Association de la presse francophone? |
| Q-1772 — April 8, 2010 — Mr. Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster) — With regard to nanotechnology: (a) what are the total federal funds spent and committed for expenditure, for each of the fiscal years from 2005-2006 through 2008-2009 inclusive, broken down by department and criterion; (b) who are the recipients of these funds; (c) to what purpose was funding for nanotechnology used by institutions and departments, including the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Canadian Foundation for Innovation, Natural Resources Canada, Industry Canada, and the National Research Council of Canada; (d) what were the amounts allocated to test health, safety, and environmental impacts of nanoproducts and nanomaterials; (e) what is the list of nanomaterials currently in the market; (f) which of these have been extensively tested to determine possible effects on human and environmental health and safety and, of those tested, which, if any, raised concern or required mitigation or prevention; (g) how many assessments on nanomaterial notification packages have been submitted to the New Substances Notification Program to date and (i) of these notification packages, have there been any nanomaterials rejected for entry into Canada, (ii) have there been any conditions of use placed based on assessment results and, if so, how many; (h) did the government ever request notifiers (companies or individuals) providing nanomaterial notification packages to submit additional toxicity data above and beyond what is requested in the schedules of the New Substances Notification Regulations and, if so, did this result in refusal of entry into the Canadian market or justify use of material with conditions; and (i) what information, notifications or advisories have been issued to ensure the safe discovery, production, manufacturing, use and disposal of nanomaterials and nano-enabled products, (i) when, (ii) by which departments? |
| Q-1782 — April 8, 2010 — Mr. Murphy (Charlottetown) — Regarding the 2010 budget, and more specifically the project to upgrade the infrastructure at the University of Prince Edward Island that will create over 300 jobs: (a) what are the projected costs of the upgrades to infrastructure that will take place at the University; (b) when will this work start and when will it be completed; (c) what is the breakdown of other funding partners; and (d) how was the figure of 300 jobs calculated? |
| Q-1792 — April 8, 2010 — Mrs. Hughes (Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing) — With regard to the Health Canada’s Indian Residential Schools (IRS) Resolution Health Support Program: (a) what measures is the government taking to ensure Indian day school survivors are eligible to receive access to this program; (b) is the program meeting the emotional health and wellness needs of day school survivors; (c) to date, how many Indian day school survivors have accessed the professional counselling services offered under the program; (d) how many day school survivors have accessed the emotional and cultural support services; (e) do day school survivors and their families have access to these same emotional and mental health services; (f) how many day school survivors have contacted Health Canada inquiring about their eligibility for this program; (g) how many day school survivors have been denied services and how many, if any, have appealed the decision; (h) how many IRS survivors have been denied services and how many, if any, have appealed the decision; (i) how many family members of IRS survivors have accessed these services and how many, if any, have been denied these services; (j) how is Health Canada ensuring that professional counsellors, recognized as Health Canada service providers, are the best service providers available; (k) how is Health Canada ensuring an efficient and streamlined service provider approval process; and (l) what recommendations from the Aboriginal Working Caucus has the government implemented as part of the IRS Health Support Program? |
| Q-180 — April 8, 2010 — Ms. Fry (Vancouver Centre) — With regard to the Community Access Program: (a) what were the expenditures of the program for fiscal year 2009-2010; and (b) what is the projected budget for fiscal year 2010-2011? |
| Q-1812 — April 8, 2010 — Mr. Martin (Winnipeg Centre) — Since 2006, what grants, contributions, contracts or loan guarantees were applied for either through a crown corporation, department or agency of the government by the holdings of the "blind trust" of Rahim Jaffer, or businesses owned or partially owned by Mr. Jaffer, including (i) the source and dollar amount, (ii) date made, (iii) reason(s) for providing or denying the funding, (iv) present status of the grant, contribution or loan guarantee (whether repaid, partially repaid, or unpaid, including the value of the repayment), (v) in the case of contracts, whether the contract is fulfilled, whether it was tendered and any reason for limiting the tender? |
| Q-1822 — April 8, 2010 — Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — With respect to mental health support in prisons and other detention facilities operated by Correctional Services Canada (CSC): (a) what progress has been made since 2004 in the implementation of the CSC Mental Health Strategy; (b) what plans are in place for the operation of the Community Mental Health and Institutional Mental Health initiatives over the next five years; (c) what plans are in place to act on the recommendations in the 2008-2009 Annual Report of the Office of the Correctional Investigator; (d) what is the total amount of funds allocated to all types of mental health support by CSC for the upcoming fiscal year, broken down by program type; (e) what percentage of overall CSC funds are allocated to mental health support for the upcoming fiscal year; (f) what percentage of overall CSC funds are allocated to security, risk management and control for the upcoming fiscal year; (g) how many offenders have access to intermediate mental healthcare units in the region in which they are incarcerated; (h) what processes are in place to review the effectiveness of existing mental health programs and identify gaps in services; (i) what recommendations have arisen from such reviews in the last two years; (j) what progress has been made in conducting an independent review of long-term segregation cases; (k) what progress has been made in the creation of a measurable set of performance indicators to evaluate CSC’s response to offender mental health concerns; (l) what guidelines does CSC provide to operational staff on the use of segregation placements with offenders who have mental health concerns; (m) what progress has the National Population Management Committee made in reviewing specific cases of the use of lengthy periods in segregation and treatment alternatives for offenders with mental health concerns; (n) what progress has been made on the creation of a national strategy for managing chronic self-harming behaviours; (o) what percentage of offenders who chronically self-harm have clinical management plans in place; (p) what is the definition of a clinical management and intervention plan for offenders with mental health concerns used by CSC; (q) which section of CSC is responsible for the coordination and oversight of clinical management plans; (r) how many regions have specialized, dedicated units to manage chronically self-harming offenders; (s) how many self-harm incidents appear in CSC’s internal situation reporting system for the past five years, broken down by year, gender, and region; (t) what are CSC’s estimates of prison population over the next ten years; (u) what percentage of offenders does CSC estimate deal with diagnosed or undiagnosed mental health issues; (v) in 2009, how many hours did CSC staff psychologists spend conducting risk assessments (including security reclassifications, conditional release reviews, and segregation reviews) and what did this work cost; (w) in 2009, how many hours did CSC staff psychologists spend in clinical intervention, evaluation and treatment of offender’s mental health needs, and what did this work cost; (x) over the past five years, what was the average length of stay for offenders at Regional Treatment Centres; and (y) over the past five years, how many offenders were discharged from a Regional Treatment Centre and subsequently placed in segregation within the same year? |
| Q-1832 — April 8, 2010 — Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — With respect to Correctional Service Canada's drug interdiction activities: (a) what does CSC estimate is the success rate of drug interdiction over the past ten years; (b) what is the capital expenditure on equipment related to drug interdiction over the past five years, broken down by year; (c) what is the total expenditure on drug treatment programs for offenders over the past five years, broken down by year; (d) what is the expected spending on drug interdiction for the fiscal year 2010-2011; (e) what internal assessments, if any, exist regarding the efficacy of CSC’s drug interdiction activities; (f) what internal assessments, if any, exist regarding the efficacy of CSC’s drug interdiction equipment; and (g) what are the conclusions or recommendations of these assessments? |
| Q-1842 — April 8, 2010 — Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — With respect to the new review mechanism for the RCMP outlined in Budget 2010: (a) what will the mandate of the new organization be; (b) how will the organization be structured; (c) how will the $8 million allocated to the new organization be spent over the next two years, broken down by year and type of expenditure; (d) will the new organization have the ability to subpoena documents and witnesses; (e) will the new organization have the ability to investigate other law-enforcement agencies; (f) will the new organization have the ability to share information with other oversight agencies, and if so, which ones; (g) will the new organization have the ability to independently launch investigations into any aspect of the RCMP's activities; (h) will the new organization have the ability to oversee RCMP intelligence activities; (i) what internal and external consultations have taken place on the structure and powers of the new organization; and (j) how will the new organization relate to the existing RCMP complaints commission? |
| Q-1852 — April 8, 2010 — Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — With respect to tasers and other conducted energy weapons used by the RCMP, over the past five years: (a) what is the number and nature of incidents in which a conducted energy weapon was used, broken down by year; (b) what was the type of use (i.e., push stun, probe, threat of use, de-holster, etc.); (c) what was the number of instances medical care was required after use; (d) what was the nature of medical concerns or conditions after use; (e) what was the number of RCMP members and instructors trained in the use of conducted energy weapons; (f) what was the number of RCMP members and instructors that successfully passed training and number that were unsuccessful at training; and (g) what was the number of RCMP members and instructors that successfully re-certified and number that were unsuccessful at re-certification? |
| Q-1862 — April 8, 2010 — Mr. Layton (Toronto—Danforth) — With regard to communications policies for scientists for each department, agency and crown corporation: (a) what is, in full, the current communications policy for scientists, (i) when did that policy come into effect, (ii) who is the lead communications contact person, (iii) at what point does that person need to contact a central agency; (b) what was, in full, the previous communications policy; and (c) what government wide policies exist, (i) when did those policies come into effect, (ii) who is the lead for the implementation and monitoring of these policies? |
| Q-1872 — April 8, 2010 — Mr. Layton (Toronto—Danforth) — With regard to inflation for post-secondary students in Canada for each of the last ten years: (a) what was the rate; (b) does this include the rising cost of tuition, weighted accordingly; (c) does it factor in low-wage types of work; (d) does it factor in the lack of benefits and the loss of benefits (e.g., the loss of Ontario Health Insurance Plan coverage for optical and other medical benefits); and (e) does it factor in the changing costs of debt (e.g., student debt with interest payable, increased credit card debt carrying higher interest rates)? |
| Q-1882 — April 8, 2010 — Mr. Layton (Toronto—Danforth) — With respect to the prison farms program currently operated by Correctional Services Canada (CSC): (a) what plans exist for the use and/or sale of the land currently used by CSC for prison farms over the next five years; (b) what is the estimated value of the land currently used by the prison farms program; (c) what, if any, internal or external consultations have taken place about the sale of the land currently used by the program; (d) how many jobs will be directly and indirectly affected by the closure of the program; (e) how many food banks will be affected by the closure of the program; (f) what internal CSC and external third-party evaluations exist on the efficacy of the program; and (g) how were these evaluations considered in the decision to terminate the program? |
| Q-1892 — April 8, 2010 — Mr. Layton (Toronto—Danforth) — With respect to the Air Passenger Assessment and Security Program: (a) what is the proposed description of the Program; (b) what is the lead department; (c) who is the lead Minister; (d) at what stage is the development of the Program; (e) what is the timeline for the public release of the Program; (f) who has been consulted in the development of the Program; and (g) what relationship does the Program have to the existing “no-fly” list? |
Notices of Motions for the Production of Papers |
|
Business of Supply |
|
Government Business |
|
Private Members' Notices of Motions |
|
| M-509 — April 8, 2010 — Mr. Martin (Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca) — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should declare the month of August to be Sarcoma Awareness Month. |
| M-510 — April 8, 2010 — Mr. Martin (Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca) — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should work with its international partners to create a Global Fund for Maternal and Child Health. |
| M-511 — April 8, 2010 — Mr. Martin (Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca) — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should work with provincial and territorial governments to create a fund, entitled the Catastrophic Drug Fund, to assist Canadian patients in need, and to pay for the prescribed pharmaceuticals and medical devices they need for their care. |
| M-512 — April 8, 2010 — Mrs. McLeod (Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo) — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should work in partnership with non-governmental organizations to launch a national strategy on childhood injury prevention, in order to prevent accidents that harm our children and youth. |
| M-513 — April 8, 2010 — Mrs. McLeod (Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo) — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should encourage and assist provincial and territorial governments, the medical community and other groups to lessen the burden on Canada's health care system through: (a) an increased adoption of technological developments; (b) a better recognition of the changing roles of health care professionals and the needs of Canadians; and (c) a greater focus on strategies for healthy living and injury prevention. |
Private Members' Business |
| C-471 — March 3, 2010 — Mr. Ignatieff (Etobicoke—Lakeshore) — Second reading and reference to the Standing Committee on the Status of Women of Bill C-471, An Act respecting the implementation of the recommendations of the Pay Equity Task Force and amending another Act in consequence. |
|
|
|
| 2 Response requested within 45 days |
|