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.

Previous day publication Next day publication

Bilingual view PDF


Friday, April 16, 2010 (No. 27)

Questions

The complete list of questions on the Order Paper is available for consultation at the Table in the Chamber and on the Internet. Those questions not appearing in the list have been answered, withdrawn or made into orders for return.

Q-2² — March 3, 2010 — — With regard to the Community Adjustment Fund of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, up until November 18, 2009: (a) what amount has been allocated to each Atlantic province; (b) which projects have benefited from this funding, by province; (c) how much have these projects received, by province; and (d) in which city and constituency are these projects being carried out?

Q-3² — March 3, 2010 — — With regard to the transitional measures for Employment Insurance economic regions: (a) will the economic regions change after April 10, 2010; and (b) will the transitional measures for the economic regions be completely eliminated after April 10, 2010?

Q-5² — March 3, 2010 — — With respect to funding for aid in the Horn of Africa Countries (Eritrea, Djibouti, Ethiopia and Somalia): (a) what is the government spending on development aid in each of the Horn of Africa countries, broken down by state, province, district and urban area; (b) what role is Canada taking in the training of security forces in each of the Horn of Africa countries, broken down by state, province, district and urban area; (c) what support, logistical or otherwise, is Canada providing to African Union forces; (d) what institutional and capacity building projects funded by Canada, directly or indirectly, are underway or under consideration in each of the Horn of Africa countries, broken down by state, province, district and urban area; (e) what are the overall Canadian aid levels or aid flows for each of the Horn of Africa countries, broken down by state, province, district and urban area; (f) who are the Canadian and international executing agencies currently delivering aid in all of its forms to each of the Horn of Africa countries, broken down by state, province, district and urban area; (g) how many of these agencies are Canadian; and (h) exhaustively, what bilateral and multilateral aid is provided by Canada in either the United Nations or any United Nations agencies or regional development banks such as the African Development Bank, including trust funds, for each of the Horn of Africa countries, broken down by state, province, district and urban area?

Q-11² — March 3, 2010 — — With respect to the allegations of torture of Afghan detainees: (a) what briefing materials have been prepared on this issue, since January 2006, by (i) the Department of Foreign Affairs, (ii) the Department of National Defence; and (b) what briefing materials have been prepared on this issue for members of the Conservative caucus, since January 2006, in preparation for meetings of (i) the Special Committee on the Canadian Mission in Afghanistan, (ii) the Standing Committee on National Defence?

Q-14 — March 3, 2010 — — With regard to the report entitled “Violence against organized unionized workers and teachers in Colombia 2000-2008”, produced by the Conflict Analysis Resource Centre and funded by the Global Fund for Peace and Security of the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade: (a) what are the statistical findings, conclusions and recommendations of the report on (i) the torture, threats, killings of workers and citizens, including the chronological breakdown, (ii) the types of crimes and violence; (b) what were the judicial procedures enacted in each case; (c) who were those responsible for the reported crimes, violence and threats identified; (d) what were the convictions that resulted from related judicial procedures; and (e) why was the report not released by the government?

Q-15² — March 3, 2010 — — With regard to the $25 million in humanitarian assistance that Canada provided to Lebanon over two years, as mentioned in a August 16, 2006, backgrounder on the Prime Minister’s website (http://www.pm.gc.ca/eng/media.asp?category=5&id=1287): how was this $25 million spent, specifically (i) which United Nations organizations or NGOs received funding, (ii) what was the nature of the projects funded, (iii) how much was provided per project, (iv) in which year were they were carried out?

Q-16² — March 3, 2010 — — With regard to the additional funding the Government of Canada allocated for Lebanon at the International Conference of Support to Lebanon, held in Paris in January 2007 (http://www.canadainternational.gc.ca/lebanon-liban/bilateral_relations_bilaterales/index.aspx?lang=eng&highlights_file=&left_menu_en=&left_menu_fr=&mission=): how has the additional $20 announced by the Government of Canada been spent thus far, specifically (i) which United Nations organizations or NGOs have received funding, (ii) what was the nature of the projects funded, (iii) how much was allocated to each project, (iv) in which year were the projects carried out?

Q-17² — March 3, 2010 — — With regard to the Skills Link program of the Department of Human Resources and Skills Development, which organizations in the Quebec region received funding under this program, how much was allocated per project, what was the duration of the projects and the addresses of the organizations sponsoring the projects (i) in 2007, (ii) in 2008, (iii) in 2009?

Q-18 — March 3, 2010 — — With respect to the second year of the Treasury Board’s four-year cycle to review program spending and performance across the government and ensure value for money: (a) which 21 departments and agencies participated in the exercise and how much did each department or agency contribute towards the (i) $349 million identified for 2009-2010, (ii) $449 million identified for 2010–2011, (iii) $586 million identified for 2011–2012; and (b) for each of the participating departments and agencies, among what programs or services were the savings identified and in what amounts?

Q-22² — March 3, 2010 — — In the matter of global warming, the thawing of the northern permafrost, and damage to infrastructure: (a) has the government conducted any studies to ascertain the level of potential damage to all government infrastructure in the Territories of Yukon, Northwest and Nunavut; (b) what is the cost associated with this damage to replace, reconstruct, or stabilize this infrastructure; (c) what is the time frame in regard to making these repairs or replacing damaged infrastructure; (d) have municipal and territorial partners been advised of the level of damage as a result of thawing permafrost; (e) have residents of the North been advised of potential hazards resulting from global warming; (f) what are the monetary costs associated with the said study; (g) when was the study conducted and by whom; (h) how is the government monitoring northern infrastructure deterioration from global warming; (i) how frequently is the infrastructure being inspected; (j) is any of the economic stimulus money earmarked for the three territories being directed to repairs or new construction of infrastructure damaged or weakened by thawing permafrost, and, if so how much; (k) what are the names of the projects, the associated costs, the location of the projects and the projected completion dates for all projects funded by earmarked money as specified in (j); and (l) given that the MacKenzie Valley pipeline is a major infrastructure project scheduled for the North, has the government applied its assessment of global warming and permafrost melting damage to this project as well, and, if so (i) what were the results, (ii) what are the government’s plans in this matter?

Q-23 — March 3, 2010 — — With regard to the government’s food aid to North Korea: (a) what is the government’s current commitment of food aid to North Korea; (b) is all food aid channelled through the World Food Program; and (c) what actions has the government taken to urge the North Korean government to ensure that food aid is distributed to those most in need?

Q-27² — March 3, 2010 — — With regard to the Recreational Infrastructure Canada Fund: (a) what projects are being funded; (b) in what federal electoral district is each project located; (c) who applied for the funding for each project; and (d) what is the exact amount of money allocated to each project?

Q-29² — March 3, 2010 — — With regard to the Community Adjustment Fund: (a) what projects are being funded; (b) in what federal electoral district is each project located; (c) who applied for the funding for each project; and (d) what is the exact amount of money allocated to each project?

Q-31² — March 3, 2010 — — With specific reference to the Development Assistance Accountability Act, in detail: (a) why has the NGO KAIROS had its funding from the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) removed; and (b) how does KAIROS’ policies and programs not fit within the mandate of the Act or CIDA priorities?

Q-32² — March 3, 2010 — — With respect to the appointment to the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Governing Council of Dr. Bernard Prigent, Vice President and Medical Director of Pfizer Canada: (a) as per the requirements for Order in Council (OIC) selection processes, what were the selection criteria developed to outline qualifications required for the position in question; (b) as per the requirements for OIC selection processes, how was the pool of suitable candidates reached; (c) before the Minister of Health made the recommendation of this appointment to the Governor General in Council, did she consult with the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner on the appointment and, if so, what was the Commissioner’s opinion and the reasons for it on the matter, and, if not, why not; (d) was anyone at CIHR given any opportunity to comment on the appointment prior to its announcement and, if not, why not, and, if so (i) who was given this opportunity, (ii) what responses were received, (iii) were any concerns of objections raised and, if so, what were they; (e) what options are available to the CIHR President, Governing Council members and Scientific Directors before and after an appointment is announced if they disagree with an Order in Council appointment because they anticipate it could negatively affect CIHR’s ability to fulfill its legislative mandate; (f) what options are available to the members of the CIHR Standing Committee on Ethics before and after an appointment is announced if they disagree with an Order in Council appointment because they anticipate it could negatively affect CIHR’s ability to fulfill its ethics mandate; (g) was anyone (apart from anyone at CIHR) outside of the Minister’s Office given any opportunity to comment on the appointment prior to its announcement and, if so, what were the responses, and, if not, why not; (h) did the Minister of Health consider names from pharmaceutical companies other than Pfizer and, if so, why was the Pfizer person selected instead of someone from a different company, and, if not, why not; (i) did the Minister of Health consider names of individuals from business sectors other than the pharmaceutical industry (e.g., banking, natural resources, etc.) and, if so, why was a person from the pharmaceutical industry selected instead of someone from a different sector, and, if not, why not; (j) where did Dr. Prigent’s name originate for consideration for membership on the CIHR Governing Council; and (k) who participated in any discussions with the Minister or her staff about the Minister’s recommendation of Dr. Prigent for membership on the CIHR Governing Council?

Q-38² — March 3, 2010 — — With regard to the Employment Insurance (EI) program: (a) how many individuals applied for EI between September 1, 2008 and November 5, 2009; (b) what percentage of those were women, and what percentage of those women were denied EI; (c) what percentage of (a) were part-time workers and what percentage were full-time workers; (d) what percentage of (a) were the result of (i) job loss, (ii) parental leave, (iii) compassionate leave, (iv) maternity leave; and (e) how many individuals in (b) will receive extended benefits under the legislative changes proposed in Bill C-50 from the second session of the 40th Parliament, An Act to Amend the Employment Insurance Act, of the 2nd Session of the 40th Parliament?

Q-43² — March 3, 2010 — — With regard to Access to Information Requests: (a) how many were made to each department during each fiscal year from 2004 to 2008; (b) how many were made to each department from April 1, 2009 to December 9, 2009; (c) how many were responded to by each department during each fiscal year from 2004 to 2008; and (d) how many were responded to by each department from April 1, 2009 to December 9, 2009?

Q-44² — March 3, 2010 — — With regard to all government advertising from April 1, 2009 to December 9, 2009, including, but not limited to, television commercials, radio ads, magazine ads, newspaper ads, billboards, train wraps and other advertising venues, to promote Canada’s Economic Action plan or www.actionplan.gc.ca: (a) what companies were used to produce each commercial/ad; (b) what media outlets were used to air/publish each commercial/ad; (c) what criteria was used to select the commercial/ad placements; (d) how much did it cost to produce and air/publish each commercial/ad; (e) how often are the commercials/ads aired/published; (f) how much commercial broadcast time, air time, newspaper space and other communication venue available was ordered per outlet; and (g) how much was spent per outlet?

Q-45² — March 3, 2010 — — With regard to the public reports which are issued by or on behalf of the RCMP, in which information is made public as to what took place each time a taser is fired or otherwise used to control a member of the public: (a) since January 1, 2001, what changes have been made, from time to time, with regard to the types of information being released, both in terms of types of information being withheld, which had previously been made public, and types of information being made public, which had previously been withheld; (b) since January 1, 2001, what instructions have been given to the individuals who prepared these reports, regarding the types of information which ought to be withheld or made public; (c) who issued any such instructions, and with whom did the instructions originate; and (d) since January 1, 2001, has additional unreleased information been collected, and, if so, what is the nature of this additional information, on any of the following topics: (i) related injuries which took place during the tasering incident, (ii) the duration of the shocks, (iii) whether the individual who was tasered had been armed, (iv) whether the individual who was tasered was violent, combative or posed a risk of death or grievous bodily harm, (v) what alternative measures the police tried before resorting to a taser, (vi) whether the individual who was tasered was first given a verbal warning, (vii) whether the individual who was tasered had already been handcuffed or otherwise restrained?

Q-46² — March 3, 2010 — — With regard to the case of Adam Dormer, who was tasered by an RCMP officer on July 21, 2007: (a) what instructions were given to the individuals who prepared the public report on this incident, regarding the types of information which ought to be withheld or made public; (b) who issued any such instructions, and with whom did the instructions originate; and (c) has additional information been collected, which is not being released, on any of the following topics: (i) related injuries which may have taken place during the tasering incident, (ii) the duration of the shocks, (iii) whether he was violent, combative or posed a risk of death or grievous bodily harm, (iv) what alternative measures the police tried before resorting to a taser, (v) whether he was first given a verbal warning, (vi) whether he had already been handcuffed or otherwise restrained?

Q-47 — March 3, 2010 — — With regard to the Reciprocal Transfer Agreement process: (a) how many federal public service pensions were actually transferred out through this process between 1996 and 2000 to former federal government employees who left voluntarily during the downsizing in the mid-1990s and formed their own companies; (b) how many of these agreements were eventually taken back by Revenue Canada based on a decision that the pensions were not registered properly or that there was a willful attempt to mislead the government; and (c) what is Treasury Board’s current process for confirmation of pension registration with Revenue Canada and what was the process prior to 2005?

Q-48² — March 3, 2010 — — With regard to Access to Information Requests for 2005-2006, 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, and in 2009: (a) in each of the above mentioned years and broken down by department, how many Access to Information Requests have been responded to (i) within 30 days, (ii) within 30 to 60 days, (iii) within 60 to 90 days; (b) broken down by department, how many Access to Information Requests have taken more than 90 days to respond to in each of the above mentioned years; (c) broken down by department, what was the processing time for each request that took longer than 90 days in each of the above mentioned years; (d) broken down by department, what is the average length of time for processing for each of the above mentioned years; and (e) broken down by department, (i) how many Access to Information Requests were denied in each of the above mentioned years, (ii) what were the reasons given for the denials of these requests?

Q-57² — March 3, 2010 — — What is the total amount of government funding, allocated within the constituency of in fiscal year 2006-2007, listing each department or agency, initiative and amount?

Q-58² — March 3, 2010 — — What is the total amount of government funding, allocated within the constituency of in fiscal year 2007-2008, listing each department or agency, initiative and amount?

Q-59² — March 3, 2010 — — What is the total amount of government funding, allocated within the constituency of in fiscal year 2008-2009, listing each department or agency, initiative and amount?

Q-60² — March 3, 2010 — — With respect to military contracts between $5 million and $100 million awarded since January 2006 that include industrial and regional benefit (IRB) requirements, for each contract: (a) what is the name of the principal contractor; (b) what is the name of the Canadian company that concluded a partnership agreement with the principal contractor under the IRB Policy; (c) briefly, what is the project’s description; (d) where will most of the project be carried out; (e) how long will the project take; and (f) what is the project’s IRB value in terms of the IRB Policy?

Q-61² — March 3, 2010 — — With regard to government print advertising: (a) how much has the government spent on promoting Canada's Economic Action Plan through advertising in Canada, broken down by province; and (b) when was each advertisement published, and in which publication?

Q-62² — March 3, 2010 — — With regard to government non-print advertising, such as television and radio : (a) how much has the government spent on promoting Canada’s Economic Action Plan in Canada, broken down by province; and (b) when was each advertisement aired or broadcast, and by which entity or organization?

Q-63² — March 3, 2010 — — With regard to government non-print advertising, such as television and radio : (a) how much has the government spent on dealing with the H1N1 pandemic, broken down by province; and (b) when was each advertisement aired or broadcast, and by which entity or organization?

Q-64² — March 3, 2010 — — With regard to government print advertising: (a) how much has the government spent on dealing with the H1N1 pandemic through advertising in Canada, broken down by province; and (b) when was each advertisement published, and in which publication?

Q-65² — March 3, 2010 — — With respect to the climate summit in Copenhagen and climate change: (a) what criteria needed to be met in order to be part of the Canadian delegation; (b) what were the name and position of each member of the Canadian delegation, what expertise and skills did each bring to the table, and for what time period were each in Copenhagen; (c) what was the total budget for the delegation, from flights to accommodation and living expenses; (d) what, if any, offsets were purchased for the delegation; (e) what was the description, in detail, of the Canadian climate change plan, and when will it be revealed to Canadians; (f) who were all the stakeholders consulted in the development of the plan, and how does each goal/target reflect or does not reflect each stakeholder's views; (g) did the government include the voice of Canadians who are on the “front line of climate change”, and were those who will be impacted by climate change meaningfully involved, and, if so, how; (h) what accountability measures, if any, were in place to ensure that the Canadian delegation would be responsible to those Canadians who will be particularly impacted (e.g., those living in low-lying areas and Aboriginal peoples); (i) what has been the stakeholder response to the plan, particularly from business, NGOs, scientists, and all stakeholders, and if available, what is the actual response of stakeholders' consulted; (j) what were the specific goals of the Canadian delegation, and how do they compare (in advance and afterward) with those of the G-20 or OECD in terms of baseline, absolute reductions, and target date; (k) did the Canadian delegation support the notion that climate change is not just an environmental issue, but rather a human rights issue and a justice issue and, if so, what is the description, in detail, of Canada's position; (l) did the Canadian delegation listen to the world's “frontline voice”, such as Bangladesh's and the Maldives', and act upon scientific and humanitarian evidence; (m) what were the projected costs of mitigating acid precipitation and reducing chemicals that destroyed stratospheric ozone, the costs of inaction, and what were the actual costs required; (n) what are the projected costs of adapting to and mitigating climate change in Canada today, and what are the costs of inaction for each year, five years, and decade delayed; (o) will the government commit new research dollars to support global climate research and services; (p) in detail, what percentage of 2009's stimulus was “green”, and how was it a “triple win” for the economy, jobs, and the atmosphere, and going forward, what specific targets in Canada's climate change plan will be a “triple win”; and (q) what are the costs the government is willing to pay to mitigate climate change, and how do these costs compare with the projected economic, environmental and social costs of climate change?

Q-66² — March 3, 2010 — — With respect to armed conflicts where Canada is both directly and indirectly involved: (a) what are the sites and in detail, Canada’s involvement; (b) how are civilians, and particularly, children, minorities, and women impacted for each identified site; (c) which identified areas have refugees and refugee camps, with the numbers of civilians, and particularly, children and minorities affected, and what are the living conditions in refugee camps if applicable; (d) what is the process for determining whether Canada becomes either directly or indirectly involved or not in a conflict, and how does Canada become involved; (e) how does the process ensure that good verifiable information is obtained from the field, particularly in areas where there is poor communication; (f) how does Canada obtain information from civilians who might be afraid to speak out, as well as NGOs, who need to have their work protected; (g) what is the process for ensuring that good information is acted upon, and what is the demonstration, if applicable, of where Canada has acted upon such evidence with regard to identified sites; (h) does Canada invest in development and reintegration in areas to ensure alternative lifestyles for civilians and, if so, in which areas specifically; and (i) what are the other sites, by countries, where Canada is aware of an armed conflict but is not involved?

Q-68² — March 3, 2010 — — With respect to the Canadian HIV Vaccine Initiative (CHVI) and the Level 5 Laboratory (L5L): (a) what are the details of the initial request for proposals for the CHVI; (b) what amount were the government and the Gates Foundation planning to invest in the CHVI and what were the scheduled dates for investment; (c) how many bids for the CHVI were submitted and by which organizations; (d) what are the details of the CHVI process for determining suitable award winners; (e) what were the selection criteria for awarding the CHVI bid and who was responsible for identifying the criteria; (f) how many people made up the independent evaluation committee for the CHVI bids, how were they selected, and from which disciplines and geographic areas were they drawn; (g) were representatives from the pharmaceutical industry invited to be part of the independent evaluation committee for the CHVI bids and, if so, on what date did each representative serve and, if not, why not; (h) what were the results for each of the selection criterion for each of the organizations bidding on the CHVI and how were the bids ranked; (i) did the independent evaluation committee for the CHVI bids reach a recommendation, and, if so, on what date, and to whom was the information conveyed in the government; (j) was there a steering committee for the CHVI bids and, if so, who were the members, who was the chair and what was its mandate; (k) were there changes to the steering committee for the CHVI bids and, if so, on what dates and for what reasons; (l) was any organization bidding on the CHVI informed, formally or otherwise, that it had been chosen to host the facility and, if so, how and on what date; (m) did the federal government put up a notice on its Web site to announce that the CHVI project had been cancelled or would not proceed and, if so, on what date; (n) was the notice in (m) removed from the Web site and, if so, on what date and for what reason; (o) have each of the organizations bidding on the CHVI seen the results of the peer-review process and, if so, on what date and, if not, why not; (p) what constructive criticism was given to each of the organizations bidding on the CHVI; (q) what specific problems were identified that prevented each of the organizations bidding on the CHVI from being selected; (r) why were bidding organizations not encouraged to redevelop their CHVI bid; (s) why and by whom was the CHVI cancelled; (t) on what dates was the CHVI project cancelled, were the submitting organizations formally informed and was the Canadian public informed; (u) what do “changing needs” and “reallocation of resources” mean in relation to the cancellation of the CHVI project; (v) what post-mortem audit does the government plan to undertake to investigate how Canadian investigators and research centres failed to meet the selection criteria for the CHVI bid; (w) how will the planned CHVI investment monies be spent; (x) what are the details of both the CHVI’s and the L5L’s history from January 2009; (y) what are the organizations involved in the L5L, and what, if any, overlap (e.g., goals, funds, personnel, etc.) exists between the International Centre for Infectious Diseases, which was bidding for the CHVI, and the L5L; (z) what, if any, involvement does the government have in the L5L; and (aa) what, if any, review process is in place for the L5L?

Q-70² — March 3, 2010 — — With respect to individuals working in Canada under the Temporary Foreign Worker Program, for each of the fiscal years from 2004 to 2009: (a) how many distinct temporary foreign workers were eligible to work in Canada for some or all of the calendar year; (b) how many T4s were issued to temporary foreign workers; (c) how many T1s were filed by and processed for temporary foreign workers; (d) what was the average tax overpayment that was returned to temporary foreign workers who filed a T1; and (e) what was the average tax overpayment that was left unclaimed by temporary foreign workers who were issued a T4 but did not file a T1?

Q-72² — March 3, 2010 — — What was the total amount of government funding since fiscal year 1998-1999 up to and including the current fiscal year, allocated within the constituency of , listing each department or agency, initiative, and amount by fiscal year?

Q-73² — March 3, 2010 — — With respect to the pending sale of the CANDU reactor division of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited: (a) what analysis, if any, has the government conducted into the impact of this sale on (i) Canada’s national security, (ii) energy resilience, (iii) global nuclear non-proliferation, (iv) human rights, (v) global security, and what are their results; (b) what is the full amount of federal funds dispersed to Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, from its inception to present, from 2000 to date, and in the last available fiscal year; (c) what is the amount of federal funds dispersed to Atomic Energy of Canada Limited specifically for the CANDU reactor division, from its inception to present, from 2000 to date, and in the last available fiscal year; (d) what is the government’s estimated surplus or shortfall between the total federal funds dispersed for the CANDU reactor division and the expected sale price of the division; (e) by what other means does the government plan to recover the federal funds dispersed for the CANDU reactor division in the future, and what is the estimated amount to be recovered; (f) what is the division’s net income from its inception to present, from 2000 to present, and for the last available fiscal year; (g) what is the estimated market value of the division; (h) what is the government’s target sale price of the division; (i) what is the government’s full assessment of the present market outlook for CANDU reactor division, including potential for sales and competitive challenges from next-generation light-water reactors; and (j) what steps has the government taken, or will the government take, to ensure that this sale will never result in the enrichment of plutonium to weapon-grade status by any actor as a result of CANDU reactors?

Q-74² — March 3, 2010 — — With regard to the 54th UN Commission on the Status of Women in New York in March 2010: (a) how many NGOs, organizations or individuals applied to be part of the official Canadian delegation; (b) how many groups or individuals were chosen to be delegates; (c) what were the criteria on which the delegation was chosen; (d) what rationale was used to determine those criteria; (e) were both successful and unsuccessful applicants informed of the decision; (f) how were the applicants informed; and (g) what level of support was provided to those delegates?

Q-76² — March 4, 2010 — — With respect to the use of the government owned fleet of Challenger jets since February 2006 and for each use of the aircraft: (a) what are the names and titles of the passengers present on the flight manifest; (b) what were all the departure and arrival points of the aircraft; (c) who requested access to the fleet; and (d) who authorized the flight?

Q-77² — March 4, 2010 — — With regard to the transfer of Canadian offenders from abroad to Canada, what is, for the calendar years 2005 to 2008: (a) the total number of transfer applications carried over from the previous year; (b) the total number of new applications made; (c) the number of applications that were approved; (d) the total number of applications rejected; (e) the total number of applications withdrawn by the offender; (f) the total number of cases that remained open at the end of the year; and (g) the average time that the Minister took to make a decision regarding any decided cases?

Q-78² — March 4, 2010 — — With regard to Infrastructure Canada's answer to question Q-432 in the 2nd Session of the 40th Parliament, what are the details surrounding the $0.25 cost for the announcement of September 13, 2009 concerning the expenditure of $3,250,000?

Q-79² — March 4, 2010 — — With regard to water efficiency and conservation programs in Canada: (a) who is working to ensure a budget will be issued specifically to water efficiency and conservation programs under the Building Canada Plan; (b) when will funds be allocated to supporting innovative municipal and federal water efficiency programs; (c) will programs be implemented to encourage the protection of freshwater resources, and to raise awareness about water efficiency and conservation; (d) what action has been taken thus far to establish goals and objectives regarding water efficiency and conservation; (e) what plans are there to include demand management programs as a funding condition for large-scale water and wastewater projects as is done for transit projects under the Building Canada plan; and (f) what consultations have taken place with federal departments, provinces and territories, and Aboriginal governments to develop strategic plans for each of Canada’s major river basins?

Q-80² — March 4, 2010 — — With regard to Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) staffing levels and use of contracts for each fiscal year since 2004-2005: (a) what is the total number of staff employed at Headquarters, full time and contract; (b) what is the total number of staff employed in each of INAC’s Regional Offices, full time and contract; (c) what is the total number of staff employed by INAC organization, directorate and sector; (d) what is the total number of contracts awarded, their value, contact persons and the names of those organizations that received contracts all broken down by both province and constituency, and whether the contracts are for goods or services; (e) in detail, what was each contract awarded for; (f) was the contract tendered or sole-sourced; (g) in the case of a sole-source contract, was it approved by a minister and, if so, which minister approved it; and (h) in the case of a tendered contract, what is the number of tenders put forward and the length of the tender period?

Q-81² — March 4, 2010 — — With regard to Human Resources and Skills Development Canada and their Social Development Partnerships Program (SDPP): (a) which organizations have received funding over the last three years; (b) in the latest distribution of funds, what percentage of funding went to each province and how was that distribution determined; (c) what are the criteria for deciding what organizations are funded; (d) how much funding has been given to each federal riding over the last three years; and (e) why was there a budget cut for SDPP in 2006 and how has that affected the funding of new programs and the renewal of funding for current projects?

Q-82 — March 4, 2010 — — With regard to the Post-Secondary Student Support Program (PSSSP) through Indian and Northern Affairs Canada: (a) when was the contract awarded for the report “The Post-Secondary Student Support Program: An Examination of Alternative Delivery Mechanisms”; (b) how much was the contract; (c) how many other contracts have been awarded to this company in the last five years and what was their value; (d) how many other contracts have been awarded to study PSSSP or the Indian Studies Support Program in the last five years; and (e) what is the value of those contracts and who were they awarded to?

Q-83² — March 4, 2010 — — With respect to the Economic Action Plan in Budget 2009: (a) under the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund, (i) what applications for projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what is each partner’s contribution, (vi) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects; (b) under the Building Canada Fund – Communities Component, (i) what applications for projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what is each partner’s contribution, (vi) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects; (c) under the Building Canada Fund – Communities Component top-up, (i) what applications for projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what is each partner’s contribution, (vi) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects; (d) under the Building Canada Fund – Major Infrastructure Component, (i) what applications for projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what is each partner’s contribution, (vi) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects; (e) under the Provincial/Territorial Base funding acceleration, (i) what applications for projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what is each partner’s contribution, (vi) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects; (f) under the Recreational Infrastructure program, (i) what applications for projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are the located and in which federal riding, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what is each partner’s contribution, (vi) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects; (g) under the Green Infrastructure Fund, (i) what applications for projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what is each partner’s contribution, (vi) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects; and (h) under the National recreational trails program, (i) what applications for projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what is each partner’s contribution, (vi) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects?

Q-84² — March 4, 2010 — — With respect to the Economic Action Plan in Budget 2009: (a) under the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund, (i) what applications for projects have been rejected for funding to date, (ii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iii) who would have been the partners involved if the project had been approved, (iv) what was the requested federal contribution, (v) what was the requested contribution from each partner, (vi) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects, (vii) in what ways did the project not match the criteria; (b) under the Building Canada Fund – Communities Component, (i) what applications for projects have been rejected for funding to date, (ii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iii) who would have been the partners involved if the project had been approved, (iv) what was the requested federal contribution, (v) what was the requested contribution from each partner, (vi) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects, (vii) in what ways did the project not match the criteria; (c) under the Building Canada Fund – Communities Component top-up, (i) what applications for projects have been rejected for funding to date, (ii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iii) who would have been the partners involved if the project had been approved, (iv) what was the requested federal contribution, (v) what was the requested contribution from each partner, (vi) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects, (vii) in what ways did the project not match the criteria; (d) under the Building Canada Fund – Major Infrastructure Component, (i) what applications for projects have been rejected for funding to date, (ii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iii) who would have been the partners involved if the project had been approved, (iv) what was the requested federal contribution, (v) what was the requested contribution from each partner, (vi) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects, (vii) in what ways did the project not match the criteria; and (e) under the Recreational Infrastructure program, (i) what applications for projects have been rejected for funding to date, (ii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iii) who would have been the partners involved if the project had been approved, (iv) what was the requested federal contribution, (v) what was the requested contribution from each partner, (vi) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects, (vii) in what ways did the project not match the criteria?

Q-85² — March 4, 2010 — — With respect to the Knowledge Infrastructure programs within Budget 2009: (a) under the Universities and colleges program, (i) what applications for projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) has the provincial government approved funding for the project, (iii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iv) who are the partners involved, (v) what is the federal contribution, (vi) what is each partner’s contribution, (vii) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (viii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects; (b) under the Canada Foundation for Innovation, (i) what projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) has the provincial government approved funding for the project, (iii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iv) who are the partners involved, (v) what is the federal contribution, (vi) what is each partner’s contribution, (vii) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (viii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects; (c) under Canada Health Infoway, (i) what applications for projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) has the provincial government approved funding for the project, (iii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iv) who are the partners involved, (v) what is the federal contribution, (vi) what is each partner’s contribution, (vii) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (viii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects; (d) under the broadband in rural communities, (i) what applications for projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) has the provincial government approved funding for the project, (iii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iv) who are the partners involved, (v) what is the federal contribution, (vi) what is each partner’s contribution, (vii) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (viii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects; and (e) under the First Nations infrastructure programs, (i) what applications for projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) has the provincial government approved funding for the project, (iii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iv) who are the partners involved, (v) what is the federal contribution, (vi) what is each partner’s contribution, (vii) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (viii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects?

Q-86² — March 4, 2010 — — With respect to the Economic Action Plan in Budget 2009: (a) for the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund, (i) what meetings have taken place to date between federal government officials and their provincial counterparts, (ii) who was in attendance, (iii) what agenda or minutes were produced in the lead up or subsequent to the meeting, (iv) what briefing notes were prepared for the meeting or as a result of decisions taken at the meeting, (v) when and where did the meetings occur, (vi) was a cabinet minister, parliamentary secretary, or employee of the office of a cabinet minister in attendance and, if so, who; (b) under the Building Canada Fund – Communities Component, (i) what meetings have taken place to date between federal government officials and their provincial counterparts, (ii) who was in attendance, (iii) what agenda or minutes were produced in the lead up or subsequent to the meeting, (iv) what briefing notes were prepared for the meeting or as a result of decisions taken at the meeting, (v) when and where did the meetings occur, (vi) was a cabinet minister, parliamentary secretary, or employee of the office of a cabinet minister in attendance and, if so, who; (c) under the Building Canada Fund – Communities Component top-up, (i) what meetings have taken place to date between federal government officials and their provincial counterparts, (ii) who was in attendance, (iii) what agenda or minutes were produced in the lead up or subsequent to the meeting, (iv) what briefing notes were prepared for the meeting or as a result of decisions taken at the meeting, (v) when and where did the meetings occur, (vi) was a cabinet minister, parliamentary secretary, or employee of the office of a cabinet minister in attendance and, if so, who; (d) under the Building Canada Fund – Major Infrastructure Component, (i) what meetings have taken place to date between federal government officials and their provincial counterparts, (ii) who was in attendance, (iii) what agenda or minutes were produced in the lead up or subsequent to the meeting, (iv) what briefing notes were prepared for the meeting or as a result of decisions taken at the meeting, (v) when and where did the meetings occur, (vi) was a cabinet minister, parliamentary secretary, or employee of the office of a cabinet minister in attendance and, if so, who; (e) under the Provincial/Territorial Base funding acceleration, (i) what meetings have taken place to date between federal government officials and their provincial counterparts, (ii) who was in attendance, (iii) what agenda or minutes were produced in the lead up or subsequent to the meeting, (iv) what briefing notes were prepared for the meeting or as a result of decisions taken at the meeting, (v) when and where did the meetings occur, (vi) was a cabinet minister, parliamentary secretary, or employee of the office of a cabinet minister in attendance and, if so, who; (f) under the Recreational Infrastructure program, (i) what meetings have taken place to date between federal government officials and their provincial counterparts, (ii) who was in attendance, (iii) what agenda or minutes were produced in the lead up or subsequent to the meeting, (iv) what briefing notes were prepared for the meeting or as a result of decisions taken at the meeting, (v) when and where did the meetings occur, (vi) was a cabinet minister, parliamentary secretary, or employee of the office of a cabinet minister in attendance and, if so, who; (g) under the Green Infrastructure Fund, (i) what meetings have taken place to date between federal government officials and their provincial counterparts, (ii) who was in attendance, (iii) what agenda or minutes were produced in the lead up or subsequent to the meeting, (iv) what briefing notes were prepared for the meeting or as a result of decisions taken at the meeting, (v) when and where did the meetings occur, (vi) was a cabinet minister, parliamentary secretary, or employee of the office of a cabinet minister in attendance and, if so, who; and (h) under the National recreational trails program, (i) what meetings have taken place to date between federal government officials and their provincial counterparts, (ii) who was in attendance, (iii) what agenda or minutes were produced in the lead up or subsequent to the meeting, (iv) what briefing notes were prepared for the meeting or as a result of decisions taken at the meeting, (v) when and where did the meetings occur, (vi) was a cabinet minister, parliamentary secretary, or employee of the office of a cabinet minister in attendance and, if so, who?

Q-87² — March 4, 2010 — — With respect to the Enabling Accessibility Fund, since March 2009 to present: (a) how many applications were successful and received funding under this program, and how many were rejected; (b) with respect to successful applications, what was the location and value of each project, broken down by provincial and federal electoral district; (c) what is the total cost of administering the program thus far; (d) how much funding is left; (e) how many major projects under this program will go or went to expand existing centres; (f) what is the value of the successful major projects' applications that went towards (i) the construction of new centres, (ii) the expanding of existing centres; (g) how many of the successful Small Projects Enabling Accessibility Funding applications went towards (i) renovating buildings, (ii) modifying vehicles, (iii) making information and communications more accessible; and (h) what is the value of the successful Small Projects Enabling Accessibility Funding applications that went towards (i) renovating buildings, (ii) modifying vehicles, (iii) making information and communication more accessible?

Q-88² — March 4, 2010 — — With respect to Internet applications: (a) is the government working towards the inclusion of rich Internet applications within its design and development with regard to its Web sites; (b) what is the government’s response to the American response to rich Internet applications made ten years ago; (c) is the government planning on adopting the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 standard; (d) what is the monetary impact of the government’s present use of WCAG 1.0 standard knowing that software contractors have built WCAG 2.0 accessibility into their software; (e) have software contractors requested that the government's Common Look and Feel (CLF) Committee relax or amend their CLF standards to allow for accessibility and, if so, can the government give details of the correspondence; (f) have software contractors required that the government pay extra because it must simplify their software in order to remove these accessibility features; (g) which federal department has the responsibility to ensure that all programs, services and technologies are accessible to people with disabilities and that they are available through the mainstream channels such as the Internet and in alternate formats; (h) is accessibility a mandatory requirement within information and communications procurements to ensure that blind Canadians have access to the same resources as all other Canadians and that they can access all of this through mainstream channels such as the Internet and in alternate formats; (i) how does the government of Canada inform blind Canadians about the availability of information to protect them from incidents of identity theft and fraud; (j) are the government's Web accessibility regulations up to date with today's Web technologies; (k) are Web developers in the government given the support they need to build accessible interactive Web sites, especially when building sites that offer essential services; (l) are Web developers in the government trained in the latest Web accessibility techniques; and (m) are Web developers provided with development tools that support creating accessible Web sites and government services online?

Q-89² — March 4, 2010 — — With respect to the recommendations of the Trans Fat Task Force final report, TRANSforming the Food Supply, and the government’s ensuing two year voluntary trans fat reduction period, that ended in June 2009: (a) what is the status of the release of the final round of trans fat monitoring data which was due in June 2009; (b) what is the government’s official response to the two year voluntary reduction period; and (c) what does the government plan to do regarding its stated commitment, from June 2007, to develop trans fat regulations?

Q-90² — March 4, 2010 — — With respect to the Expert Review Panel on Medical Isotope Production: (a) what were the criteria and rationale to choose the four members of the panel; (b) who declined to sit on the panel; (c) how many times did the panel meet; (d) who did the panel consult; (e) what was the formal mandate of the panel; (f) did the panel have the technical expertise alone to be able to understand the proposals and make recommendations; (g) what is the relation of Dr. Alexander MacEwan, the Special Advisor on Medical Isotopes to the Minister of Health, to the panel; (h) did the panel recommend to the Minister that she implement the four recommendations of the Canadian Association of Nuclear Medicine mentioned at the November 23rd meeting of the Standing Committee on Health; (i) what was the process for the panel to consult with provinces and territories; (j) did the panel consult and meet with each public and private consortium that made a submission to better understand the strengths and weaknesses of their proposal; (k) will the government release the 22 submissions on ideas for isotope supply that were received and reviewed by the panel; (l) what was the role of the firm SECOR in the production of the expert panel report; (m) who, from SECOR, was assigned to this task; (n) what were the recommendations of the panel’s November 30th report to the government; (o) will the panel be dismantled or will it continue its advising role to the government following its November 30th report; and (p) what will be the outcome of the panel and the government’s next steps including, but not limited to, recommendations to proceed with projects, funding recommendations, or another phase of evaluations?

Q-91² — March 5, 2010 — — With regard to the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency (ACOA) and, more specifically, projects approved for funding in Atlantic Canada for fiscal years 2005-2006 to 2008-2009 and for the period ending February 28 of fiscal year 2009-2010, broken down by the provinces of New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, and Newfoundland and Labrador: what specific projects were approved in each fiscal year, including (i) the names of proponents, (ii) the project title, (iii) the total cost of project, (iv) the amount of funding approved by ACOA, (v) the funding programs within ACOA for which the funding was approved?

Q-92² — March 5, 2010 — — With regard to the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency (ACOA) and, more specifically, the Recreational Infrastructure Canada (RInC) Program administered by ACOA in Atlantic Canada: (a) what was the allocation of funding available for projects under RInC for the time period between January 27, 2009 and March 31, 2010 in Atlantic Canada; (b) how much of this allocated funding has been committed as of March 3, 2010; (c) how much of the allocated funding has actually been expended to the applicants as of March 3, 2010; (d) what were the names, addresses and submission dates of the applicants submitting an application between January 27, 2009 and March 3, 2010 from the constituency of Avalon, (i) how much funding did each applicant apply for, (ii) how much funding was approved, (iii) what percentage of the overall project was funded through RInC; and (e) what is the allocation of funding for RInC in Atlantic Canada for fiscal year 2010-2011?

Q-93² — March 5, 2010 — — With regard to Transport Canada and their role in the ongoing risk assessment process for Placentia Bay, Newfoundland, through the 2006 Environmental Risk Assessment Study of the south coast of Newfoundland: (a) what is the current status of this Risk Assessment Study within Transport Canada; (b) what studies have taken place concerning the broad range of information collected from the Risk Assessment; (c) what is the status of Phase II of this Risk Assessment Project to determine the effectiveness of the current response regime; (d) what work has been done within Transport Canada to determine (i) the appropriateness of bringing response equipment closer to Placentia Bay, (ii) any changes necessary under the Canada Shipping Act, 2001 for pollution prevention and emergency response; (e) what, if any, financial assistance is budgeted to improve the response regime in Placentia Bay; and (f) what are the time projections for Transport Canada to conclude an acceptable level of environmental response and pollution prevention response for Placentia Bay?

Q-95 — March 5, 2010 — — With regard to the $2.1 billion earmarked in the Budget Plan 2007 for the new Gateways and Border Crossings Fund: (a) what is the detailed breakdown explaining how much of the $2.1 billion allotment has been spent; and (b) for each individual project, (i) what is its description, (ii) where is it located, (iii) what is its projected cost, (iv) how much of the money has been spent?

Q-96² — March 8, 2010 — — With regard to lifting seniors out of poverty, what has the government done since being elected in January 2006, specifically: (a) what national and local programs have been created to specifically address poverty among seniors; (b) how much money has been spent on addressing poverty among seniors and from which government departments did this money come; (c) how much money has been given to each federal riding to address poverty among seniors; and (d) what initiatives have been undertaken to identify which ethnic groups have the greatest number of seniors living in poverty, and, if identified, what steps have been taken to address the needs of these ethnic groups?

Q-97² — March 8, 2010 — — With regard to the last ten appointments to the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB): (a) how many individuals were considered for these positions; (b) how many were interviewed; (c) what is the process for vetting potential candidates for IRB appointments; and (d) what criteria are used to determine the appropriate candidate for these positions?

Q-98² — March 8, 2010 — — With regard to addressing youth violence: (a) what programs has the government created since being elected in January 2006 to specifically address youth violence; (b) how much money has been spent on addressing youth violence and from which government departments did this money come; and (c) how much money has been given to each federal riding to address youth violence?

Q-99² — March 8, 2010 — — With regard to addressing child poverty in Canada: (a) what programs has the government created since being elected in January 2006 to specifically address child poverty; (b) how much money has been spent on addressing child poverty and from which government departments did this money come; and (c) how much money has been given to each federal riding to address child poverty?

Q-100² — March 8, 2010 — — With regard to the Southern Ontario Development Agency: (a) what grants or contributions have been awarded by the Agency since its inception; (b) how many applications for those grants or contributions have been received; (c) who were the organizations or individuals who applied for those grants; and (d) in which federal electoral district is each successful grantee located?

Q-101 — March 8, 2010 — — Has Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada completed or contracted to have completed any economic impact analyses of removing barley from the jurisdiction of the Canadian Wheat Board on western grain farmers and, if so, (i) on what dates were the studies completed, (ii) what are the titles of the analyses, (iii) what are the names and positions held by the authors of the analyses, (iv) what are the names of the individuals or organizations the analyses were distributed to?

Q-102² — March 8, 2010 — — With regard to the Department of National Defence, what is the list of all equipment procurement projects with a value of over $25 million that are either currently in progress or have been announced publicly, including: (a) the piece of equipment being purchased and the quantity; (b) the date the project was announced; (c) the total value (or expected value) of the project and of any related contracts such as maintenance or repair; (d) the date the project received Treasury Board approval; (e) the date the contract was awarded and to whom; (f) the dates of commencement of delivery and end of delivery; and (g) for each project, what is the breakdown of the original and most recent schedule, including all project phases and costing, and a detailed explanation for each case where the original and most recent schedule are not the same?

Q-103² — March 8, 2010 — — With regard to the announced purchase of Close Combat Vehicles (CCV) and Tactical Armoured Patrol Vehicles (TAPV): (a) why was the solicitation of interest and qualifications (SOIQ) postponed to 2010; (b) what industry feedback contributed to non-issuance of the SOIQ; (c) what changes to the government requirements contributed to this decision; (d) what impact did the Department of National Defence (DND) internal reviews have on the CCV procurement process, including whether resources that had been allotted to the CCV procurement process were reallocated and, if applicable, what was the value of those resources and to where were they reallocated; (e) what are the key procurement priorities of DND; (f) what impact does the end of the military mission in Afghanistan have on the decision to not issue the SOIQ as scheduled; (g) what is the timeframe for issuing the SOIQ for the TAPV project and is this on schedule; and (h) if applicable, what are the details of the revised schedule for either project?

Q-104² — March 8, 2010 — — With regard to the Canadian International Development Agency: (a) what percentage of Official Development Assistance (ODA) is allocated to maternal and child health; (b) which branches of ODA does the funding come from; (c) what are the programs that receive this funding; and (d) how are these programs’ performance evaluated?

Q-105² — March 8, 2010 — — With regard to the Canadian International Development Agency's requirement under the Official Development Assistance Accountability Act to report annually to Parliament on its progress in three key areas: (a) what reporting requirements has the Agency implemented in incorporating the Act; and (b) how are these reporting requirements evaluated?

Q-106² — March 8, 2010 — — With regard to KAIROS, which has lost its funding from the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) as of November 30, 2009 due to KAIROS no longer fitting CIDA priorities: (a) what are the CIDA priorities that did not fit well with the priorities of KAIROS; (b) what sort of criteria does CIDA examine to determine whether or not a non-governmental organization will receive funding; and (c) what specific criteria did KAIROS not meet to have their funding cut by CIDA?

Q-107² — March 8, 2010 — — With regard to the Enhanced Language Training Initiatives since 2006, by year: (a) how much money has been transferred to the provinces or awarded via grants; (b) who were the recipients of each grant and how much money did they get; and (c) how many applications did the government receive requesting funds under the program, and by whom?

Q-108² — March 8, 2010 — — With regard to the Department of National Defence and the purchase of CH-148 Cyclone helicopters: (a) when was the government notified that Sikorsky could not deliver the helicopters according to the agreed-upon schedule in November of 2007; (b) what were the “additional capabilities” that were added in the contract amendments and, if these capabilities were necessary for the Canadian operating environment, why were they not included in the original contract; (c) why did the government not impose late penalties in 2007 as agreed to in the original contract; (d) will the government impose late penalties now that Sikorsky has indicated that it will not be able to meet even the amended schedule; (e) what is the revised schedule for the commencement of delivery, and the end of delivery of both the interim and enhanced helicopters; and (f) how will this delay affect the cost of this procurement project?

Q-109² — March 8, 2010 — — With regard to the grant and business assistance programs that report to the Minister of Industry: (a) what are the names and amounts granted or released to companies for each fiscal year since 2005-2006; (b) what are the reporting requirements for those programs; and (c) what was the amount budgeted and what was the amount spent for each program for each fiscal year since 2005-2006?

Q-110² — March 8, 2010 — — With regard to Pearson International Airport: (a) what are the government’s plans, including timelines to address congestion in the next 25 years; (b) how much government and Greater Toronto Airports Authority funding is budgeted for this expansion; (c) how much has the Department of Transport collected in rent from the Greater Toronto Airports Authority for each year since fiscal year 2005-2006; and (d) how much have the government and its agencies spent on land acquisitions since fiscal year 2005-2006, where is this land located and what are the budget and locations proposed for future acquisitions?

Q-111² — March 8, 2010 — — With regard to infrastructure spending in the Region of Peel by the government: (a) what is the total amount spent in each municipality for each fiscal year since 2005-2006; (b) how much has been spent in each federal electoral district in the Region of Peel for each fiscal year since 2005-2006; (c) how much has been committed under the Infrastructure Stimulus Program for each of the cities in the Region of Peel; and (d) how much has already been spent in the Infrastructure Stimulus Program for each of the cities in the Region of Peel?

Q-112² — March 8, 2010 — — With regard to fees paid by the government: (a) how much does the government pay in merchant fees for accepting credit cards for government services, broken down by fee type and program area; (b) how much does the government pay in transaction fees for processing debit cards for government services, broken down by fee type and program area; (c) what are the details of agreements signed between the government and credit and debit card processing companies, including all terms, contracts and commitments; (d) what is the total cost of agreements signed between the government and credit and debit card processing companies; and (e) what does the government pay to banks in service fees, broken down by fee type and program area?

Q-113² — March 8, 2010 — — With regard to search and rescue (SAR) operations: (a) how many SAR operation reports have been produced since 1980 by the Joint Rescue Coordination Centre in Halifax in accordance with chapter nine of the National Search and Rescue Manual; (b) since 1980, what incidents warranted a SAR operation report; (c) what have been the lessons learned, conclusions and recommendations from each report and what recommendations were adopted from each report; (d) what have been the details of the SAR operation from each report, including a summary of significant decisions and timelines; (e) what are the criteria for warranting a SAR operation report; (f) what are the other methods of documenting SAR operations in the Atlantic region that have been used since 1980; and (g) what are the names of the comprehensive studies conducted by the Canadian Forces in 2003 and 2005 on the location of search and rescue assets, as referred to by the Parliamentary Secretary for the Minister of Defence on October 21, 2009, during Adjournment Proceedings in the House of Commons?

Q-114² — March 9, 2010 — — With regard to the Learning Centre of Library and Archives Canada: (a) what are the costs associated with the Lest We Forget Program; (b) what are the costs associated with the operation of the Learning Centre; (c) in the last year, what changes have been made to the mandate of the Learning Centre; (d) what changes will be made to responsibilities of employees of the Learning Centre who have been working with the Lest We Forget Program when it is eliminated in June 2010; (e) how will staff and resources of the Lest We Forget Program be redirected after the program is eliminated in June 2010; and (f) what changes, if any, have been made to the overall funding provided to Library and Archives Canada for the 2010-2011 fiscal year?

Q-115² — March 9, 2010 — — With regard to chrysotile asbestos: (a) what measures does the government take to ensure that countries to which Canada exports chrysotile asbestos understand the dangers associated with working with this carcinogenic product; (b) what measures, if any, does the government take to verify that countries to which chrysotile asbestos is exported are working in a safe manner with it; and (c) what are the procedures approved or recognized by the government for safely working with chrysotile asbestos?

Q-116² — March 9, 2010 — — With regard to the protection of intellectual property rights: (a) what measures is the government planning to implement in order to comply with the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement; and (b) when will these measures be presented?

Q-117² — March 9, 2010 — — With regard to research and development (R&D): (a) what specific obligations, if any, did the government establish for General Motors and Chrysler to perform R&D activity in Canada when it agreed to provide each company with a financial rescue package in the spring of 2009; (b) what undertaking did each company provide to perform R&D in Canada; and (c) what percentage does their Canadian R&D activity represent with respect to their total R&D activity?

Q-118² — March 9, 2010 — — With respect to the Strategic Aerospace and Defence Initiative (SADI): (a) what funds have been provided by Industry Canada annually from SADI since the inception of the program; and (b) what funds have been announced but not yet allocated at this time?

Q-119² — March 9, 2010 — — With regard to individuals working at the Canadian International Development Agency earning in excess of $80,000 per annum, for the fiscal years 2006-2007 to 2008-2009: (a) what percentage of these individuals received at-risk pay and what was the average annual amount of this at-risk pay; and (b) what percentage of the same class of individuals received annual bonuses, and what was the average amount of these bonuses?

Q-120² — March 9, 2010 — — With regard to contributions for the Atlantic Innovation Fund in the fiscal year 2008-2009: (a) what is the fiscal breakdown of the program objectives; (b) what is the explanation of the program objectives; (c) what are the results of the program objectives; and (d) what are the performance indicators and targets used to audit the performance of the program objectives?

Q-121² — March 9, 2010 — — With regard to Indian and Northern Affairs Canada's operations in British Columbia: (a) what is the total value of grants and contracts awarded to Dayton and Knight Ltd.; and (b) what is the value of contracts and grants awarded to Dayton and Knight Ltd. as a percentage of all engineering awarded in the province?

Q-122² — March 9, 2010 — — What is the total government investment in Atomic Energy of Canada Limited since its creation in 1952 for each year of operation, expressed in both as-spent and in constant 2009 dollars?

Q-123² — March 10, 2010 — — With respect to aviation security: (a) what are all terms of the agreement which Canada signed with Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Panama, the Dominican Republic and the United States in Mexico City on February 17, 2010; (b) what steps will be taken to ensure the personal information of Canadians shared with these countries is protected and not used for any other purpose; and (c) when will this agreement be presented to Parliament for review and debate?

Q-124² — March 10, 2010 — — With regard to Afghan detainees: (a) how many Afghans or other foreign nationals were detained by regular Canadian Forces or Military Police each year since Canada began its operations in Kandahar province; (b) how many Afghans or other foreign nationals were detained by Canadian special forces since Canada began its operations in Kandahar province; (c) were the processes for the handling of detainees different depending on whether they were captured by regular or special forces and, if so, how; (d) do Canadian special forces participate in joint operations with U.S. special forces and, if so, what happens to detainees captured during the course of those operations; (e) since Canada began its operations in Kandahar province, how many Canadian-captured detainees were questioned (i) by agents of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), (ii) in the presence of a CSIS agent; (f) did CSIS provide input on which detainees should be transferred to the Afghan National Directorate of Security (NDS); and (g) was any information from the NDS interrogations of detainees passed on to Canadian authorities?

Q-125² — March 10, 2010 — — With respect to the motion M-465 (Airline Passenger Bill of Rights), which was adopted unanimously by the House during the 2nd Session of the 39th Parliament on June 12, 2008, calling upon the government to bring forward a passenger bill of rights, what actions has the government taken since to bring forward an airline passenger bill of rights similar in scope and effect to legal instruments being either proposed or enacted by jurisdictions within Europe and the United States for the purpose of protecting passenger interests in a consistent and rules-based way and to provide a means of ensuring adequate compensation being offered by the airline industry to airline passengers who experience inconveniences such as flight interruptions, delays, cancellations, issues with checked baggage and other inconveniences incurred while travelling on commercial passenger airline services originating from anywhere in Canada?

Q-126² — March 10, 2010 — — With respect to the evacuation of Lebanese-Canadians from Lebanon during the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah War: (a) what security checks were applied before evacuation to ensure none were members of Hezbollah; (b) how many of the evacuees returned to Lebanon within six months; and (c) what was the final cost of the evacuation itemized by specific category?

Q-127² — March 11, 2010 — — With regard to applications for permanent residence processed by the Canadian High Commission in Nairobi: (a) how many spousal sponsorships, parental sponsorships and independent applicant cases have been received since the 2007-2008 fiscal year up to and including the current; (b) how many of the spousal sponsorships, parental sponsorships and independent applicants since the 2007-2009 fiscal year cases (i) were accepted, (ii) are still in process, (iii) have been refused, and for what reason; (c) what is the current length of time required to process the applications for (i) spousal sponsorships, (ii) parental sponsorships, (iii) independent applicants; (d) how many cases are in backlog and are or were the subject of enhanced security background checks; (e) how many staff are employed to process applications; and (f) what additional resources have been allocated to process the case backlog?

Q-128² — March 11, 2010 — — With regard to the preparation of the Speech from the Throne, which opened the 3rd Session of the 40th Parliament: (a) what is the total number of hours paid for by the government, in employee or contract services, in preparation of the Speech and what is the cost associated with those hours of work; (b) how many copies of the Speech were printed, for what cost and by which company; and (c) what is the distribution cost of the Speech?

Q-129² — March 11, 2010 — — With regard to Variety Village, a charity in the constituency of Scarborough Southwest: (a) on what grounds was its application for funding under the Recreational Infrastructure Canada program denied; (b) on what grounds was its application for $1,633,137 in federal funding under the Infrastructure Stimulus fund denied; and (c) does the government have any intention to allocate funding to Variety Village before it hosts events for the 2015 Paralympics Pan Am Games?

Q-130² — March 11, 2010 — — With regard to the Justice Minister’s announcement on February 24, 2010, that the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations (MMAR) were under review: (a) why is the government reviewing these regulations; (b) what briefing materials were given to the Health Minister and Justice Minister before the decision was made to review the regulations; (c) who will the government consult with during this review; (d) has any consultation already been completed; (e) what does the government expect to learn from this review; and (f) what short- and long-term plans does the government have for the MMAR and the usage of marihuana for medicinal purposes in Canada?

Q-131² — March 11, 2010 — — With respect to unremediated federal contaminated sites: (a) where are those sites located; (b) which federal departments have line responsibility for these sites; and (c) which specific sites have been tested for possible groundwater contamination?

Q-132² — March 11, 2010 — — In respect to sewage treatment in the St. Lawrence River and Great Lakes: (a) how many Canadian cities in each waterway have achieved primary, secondary and tertiary treatment of wastewater effluent, respectively; (b) what is the comparable data for cities on the U.S. side of these aforementioned waterways; and (c) specifically, which Canadian cities fall into the three categories mentioned in (a)?

Q-133² — March 11, 2010 — — With respect to World War II veterans in the Montreal region who require or have required care in long-term community facilities: (a) how many such veterans have been placed in private or semi-private community facilities on the island of Montreal following an evaluation by Department of Veterans Affairs staff or other qualified professionals working on behalf of the department; (b) in which private or semi-private facilities on the island of Montreal have these veterans been placed in each of the past ten years; (c) how many have been cared for in each of these facilities in each of the past ten years; and (d) has the federal government subsidized the costs to veterans of being cared for in these facilities and, if so, what has been the average per capita amount of the monthly subsidy for veterans in each facility in each of the past ten years?

Q-134² — March 12, 2010 — — With regard to potential transfer of Ste. Anne’s Hospital to the provincial government: (a) how many veterans are currently occupying beds in the hospital; (b) how many total beds are currently being unused; (c) what assurances are being given to veterans that their medical care needs will take precedence over non-veterans at the hospital after the transfer; (d) what precedence is given to allied veterans who are now Canadian citizens; (e) what precedence is being given to veterans who served in Korea, as Peacekeepers, and in Afghanistan at this medical facility; (f) what consultations has Veterans Affairs Canada undertaken with Ste. Anne’s residents, staff, local officials, and veterans organizations; (g) when did these consultations occur; and (h) what Veterans Affairs Canada officials were in attendance for these consultations?

Q-135² — March 12, 2010 — — With respect to the new Veterans Charter, since 2006: (a) what percentage of veterans receiving a Disability Award lump sum payment have received the financial advice paid for by Veterans Affairs Canada (valued up to $500); (b) of the total number of veterans' spouses, partners and family members who have been eligible to receive rehabilitation services, what percentage have availed themselves of the services; and (c) of the total number of spouses, partners and family members who have received or are currently receiving rehabilitation services, what is the breakdown of participation in terms of the program's three components (medical, psycho-social and vocational supports)?

Q-136² — March 12, 2010 — — With regard to the Agent Orange ex gratia payments: (a) how many total applications were received by Veterans Affairs Canada for ex gratia payment related to the testing of herbicides, including Agent Orange, at Canadian Forces Base (CFB) Gagetown; (b) of those that submitted applications for the ex gratia payment, how many individuals were awarded compensation; (c) what medical condition did each of the individuals awarded compensation have that made them eligible; (d) of those awarded compensation, were they military or civilian personnel; (e) of those awarded compensation, in what federal electoral riding do they presently reside; and (f) of the funds allocated by the government for the ex gratia payments related to the testing of herbicides, including Agent Orange at CFB Gagetown, how much remains unspent?

Q-137² — March 12, 2010 — — What are the details related to the renewal of the contract between the government and Northumberland Ferries with respect to the ferry service provided between Caribou, Nova Scotia, and Woods Islands, Prince Edward Island?

Q-138² — March 15, 2010 — — With regard to the government’s budgets: (a) what programs in the 2006 budget used less than 50% of their allocated funding and for each of these, (i) what is the total amount of funding they were allocated and how much did they use, (ii) which programs were cancelled or not reintroduced in the 2007 budget, (iii) which programs were continued in the 2007 budget, how much funding did they receive in the 2007 budget and how much did they use; (b) what programs in the 2007 budget used less than 50% of their allocated funding and for each of these, (i) what is the total amount of funding they were allocated and how much did they use, (ii) which programs were cancelled or not reintroduced in the 2008 budget, (iii) which programs were continued in the 2008 budget, how much funding did they receive in the 2008 budget and how much did they use; and (c) what programs in the 2008 budget used less than 50% of their allocated funding and for each of these, (i) what is the total amount of funding they were allocated and how much did they use, (ii) which programs were cancelled or not reintroduced in the 2009 budget, (iii) which programs were continued in the 2009 budget, and how much funding are they to receive?

Q-140² — March 15, 2010 — — With regard to proposed stimulus spending for infrastructure and construction projects outlined in the government’s 2009 budget: (a) how much funding has been allocated for these projects; (b) what projects are currently known to be funded or have been proposed to receive funding; (c) where are these projects occurring; (d) how is the funding for these projects distributed; (e) how are the locations for these projects selected; and (f) what system determines the priority of these locations and projects?

Q-141² — March 15, 2010 — — With regard to government funding for museums, for each of the last four fiscal years, broken down by province and territory: (a) how much has been spent by the Canada Cultural Spaces Fund; (b) what was the funding for (i) exhibits for museums, (ii) for arts, (iii) for other forms of exhibits, displays, etc.; and (c) how much has been spent by the Museums Assistance Program?

Q-142² — March 15, 2010 — — With regard to the Treasury Board and the Department of Finance: (a) what process is in place for gender-based analysis on departmental policies in each department; (b) what measures are put in place to ensure gender-based analysis is done on legislation in each department; (c) if a policy or legislation does not achieve gender parity through a gender-based analysis, what measures, if any, are taken to ensure the policy or legislation is gender appropriate in each department; (d) what measures are taken to ensure gender parity in policies or legislation in each department; (e) are gender-based analyses on any policy or legislation conducted in each department and, if so, what is the content of those analyses; (f) how many staff are dedicated to do gender-based analysis in each department; (g) to whom do staff in (f) report in each department; and (h) what direction does each department give to staff on gender-based analysis?

Q-143² — March 15, 2010 — — With regard to violence against women and the Office of the Coordinator of the Status of Women, since 2006: (a) how many programs have been approved by the Department of Justice and the Office of the Coordinator of the Status of Women to address this issue; (b) how much has been allocated to those projects; (c) what are the priorities of each project approved; (d) how many programs have been denied funding; (e) what is the total funding that would have gone to denied programs; (f) what were the parameters of each project that had been denied; (g) what were the reasons given for each project's denial; (h) what initiatives have been introduced government-wide addressing violence against women; (i) what specific bills have been introduced that address violence against women; (j) what departmental initiatives have been introduced by the Office of the Coordinator of the Status of Women to combat violence against women; (k) what specific bills have been introduced by the Department; (l) what gender-based analysis has been done on all government initiatives addressing violence against women; (m) what gender-based analysis has been done on all government bills concerning violence against women; and (n) what gender-based analysis has been done on all bills put forward by the Department of Justice?

Q-144² — March 15, 2010 — — With regard to the New Horizons for Seniors Program: (a) how many applications have been received from Manitoba in the last three proposal calls; (b) what organizations have received funding from the Program in Manitoba from the last three proposal calls; (c) how many weeks was the call for proposals available for all organizations; (d) what are the criteria for funding in each of the last three proposal calls; and (e) what is the rationale for any changes that have been made in the program criteria over the last three proposal calls?

Q-145² — March 16, 2010 — — With regard to FedNor in 2007, 2008 and 2009: (a) how many funding applications were received by Industry Canada; (b) what were the top ten categories of funding requests; (c) how many funding applications were approved by Industry Canada; (d) what were the top ten categories of approved projects; and (e) what funding projects were approved, what were their value and in which federal constituency were they located?

Q-146² — March 17, 2010 — — With regard to bids submitted for the contract for the Integrated Relocation Program of Public Works and Government Services Canada in the years 2002, 2004 and 2009: (a) how many bids were submitted by qualified bidders and under what names; and (b) how many bids were submitted by all bidders, qualified or otherwise, and under what names?

Q-148² — March 18, 2010 — — With regard to the transfer payment contributions for the Gateways and Border Crossings Fund in the fiscal years 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010 and 2010-2011: (a) what is the fiscal breakdown of the program objectives; (b) what is the explanation of the program objectives; (c) what are the results of the program objectives; (d) what are the performance indicators and targets used to audit the performance of the program objectives; (e) how much was originally budgeted for the fund; (f) how much was included in the estimates for the fund in the four aforementioned fiscal years; and (g) how much has been spent from this budget allocation, including a complete listing of the proposed projects?

Q-149² — March 22, 2010 — — With respect to energy drinks: (a) what is the status of legislation to ban the sale of these products to minors; (b) what regulations and penalties are being put in place to offer policing and consequences that deter aggressive marketing to teens and children; (c) will these drinks be moved from the natural health products category into a different category within Health Canada; (d) what is the status of creating more effective labels to increase public education about the effects of these products; and (e) what is the status of an education campaign concerning the potential adverse health effects of these products?

Q-150² — March 22, 2010 — — With regard to government magazine advertising: (a) how much has the government spent on promoting Canada’s Economic Action Plan through advertising in Saskatchewan; and (b) when was each advertisement published, and in which magazine?

Q-151² — March 22, 2010 — — With regard to government radio advertising: (a) how much has the government spent on promoting Canada’s Economic Action Plan through advertising in Saskatchewan; and (b) when was each advertisement aired, and on which radio station?

Q-152² — March 22, 2010 — — With regard to government television advertising: (a) how much has the government spent on promoting Canada’s Economic Action Plan through advertising in Saskatchewan; and (b) when was each advertisement aired, and on which station?

Q-153² — March 22, 2010 — — With respect to debt owed to the Government of Canada and its agencies and entities by governments of the following seven countries, (i) Colombia, (ii) Peru, (iii) Pakistan, (iv) Bangladesh, (v) Indonesia, (vi) Vietnam, (vii) Ukraine: (a) what is the total amount of concessional debt owed by each country and to which agencies or entities, and in what amounts in each case; and (b) what is the total amount of non-concessional debt owed by each country and to which agencies or entities, and in what amounts in each case?

Q-154² — March 22, 2010 — — With regard to the use of government-owned aircraft by Ministers and Ministers’ staff in the 2009-2010 fiscal year: (a) how many times were government-owned aircraft used by Ministers and exempt staff; (b) on what dates were the aircraft used; (c) who was on board the aircraft; (d) what was the purpose of the travel; (e) what was the origin and destination of each flight; (f) how many of these flights returned to their origin with no passengers on board; (g) what was the cost of each flight; (h) who authorized each flight; (i) what additional costs were incurred as a result of these flights; (j) what are the greenhouse gas emissions from each of these flights; (k) what is the government doing to offset the greenhouse gas emissions from each of these flights; (l) for each flight, what is the principal or usual purpose of the aircraft used; and (m) what is the current government policy on the use of government-owned aircraft for use by Ministers and their exempt staff?

Q-155² — March 22, 2010 — — With regard to the use of chartered aircraft by Ministers and Ministers’ staff in the 2009-2010 fiscal year: (a) how many times were chartered aircraft used by Ministers and exempt staff; (b) on what dates were the aircraft used; (c) who was on board the aircraft; (d) what was the purpose of the travel; (e) what was the origin and destination of each flight; (f) how many of these flights returned to their origin with no passengers on board; (g) what was the cost of each flight; (h) who authorized each flight; (i) what additional costs were incurred as a result of these flights; (j) what are the greenhouse gas emissions from each of these flights; (k) what is the government doing to offset the greenhouse gas emissions from each of these flights; (l) for each flight, what is the principal or usual purpose of the aircraft used; and (m) what is the current government policy on the use of chartered aircraft for use by Ministers and their exempt staff?

Q-156² — March 23, 2010 — — With respect to the Slaughter Improvement Program announced in the last budget: (a) when will it be available; (b) what are the terms and conditions of the $25 million program designed to assist cattle producers in disposing of SRMs (Specified Risk Materials) and, more specifically, (i) what form will the financial assistance take, (ii) what will the maximum amount of funding be per project, (iii) what will the program’s eligibility criteria be; and (c) what are the terms and conditions of the $40 million program for innovation and, more specifically, (i) what form will the financial assistance take, (ii) what will the maximum amount of funding be per project, (iii) what will the program’s eligibility criteria be?

Q-157² — March 23, 2010 — — With respect to the Food Mail Program: (a) how many hearings on this program did the government hold; and (b) for each hearing, what was (i) the exact location where it was held, (ii) the date on which it was held, (iii) the number of participants, (iv) the identity of the participants?

Q-162 — March 25, 2010 — — With regard to the 2010 Olympic Games held in Vancouver from February 12 to 26: (a) what was the total financial and in kind cost of the Olympic Games to the federal government; (b) what did these costs cover (e.g., security and other); (c) what costs and amounts did the federal government commit to prior to the event compared to the final total cost; and (d) will there be a financial audit of these costs?

Q-163² — March 25, 2010 — — With respect to the use of the government-owned fleet of Challenger jets from January 2002 until January 2006 and for each use of the aircraft: (a) what are the names and titles of the passengers present on the flight manifest; (b) what were all the departure and arrival points of the aircraft; (c) who requested access to the fleet; (d) who authorized the flight; (e) what is the number of flying hours accumulated; and (f) what are the associated costs?

Q-164² — March 25, 2010 — — With respect to Senators travelling with the Prime Minister or any other Minister of the Crown outside of Canada during the period of January 1, 2007 to March 25, 2010: (a) what are the names of all Senators who have travelled outside of Canada with the Prime Minister or any other Minister of the Crown; (b) what is the political party affiliation of each individual Senator; (c) to and from where did each Senator travel; (d) what were the dates of each trip; (e) what are the names of all Senators and spouses or partners who have travelled on airplanes operated by the government; (f) what was the total cost of each trip broken down by (i) air travel, (ii) accommodations, (iii) per diem, (iv) meals, (v) hospitality, (vi) other expenses; and (g) who paid all travel-related expenses in (f)?

Q-165² — March 25, 2010 — — With regard to the Labrador Coast Airstrips Restoration Program: (a) was there a hiatus between the commencement of the current program and the previous program announced on or about April 1, 2003, and, if so, (i) what was the duration of the hiatus between the expiry of the previous program and the current program, (ii) what was the reason for the hiatus; (b) what is the total monetary value and duration of the current program; and (c) do the monetary value and duration of the current program differ from the previous program and, if so, (i) in what particulars, (ii) what is the reason for any such differences?

Q-166² — March 26, 2010 — — With regard to the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) and seniors in poverty, what would it cost the government on an annual basis to increase the GIS until the combined GIS and Old Age Security payments raised the income of seniors to the level of the low-income cut-off?

Q-167² — March 26, 2010 — — With regard to the Trans-Canada Highway: (a) what does the government consider the total length of the Trans-Canada Highway to be in kilometres; (b) how many kilometres remain “untwinned”, by province (i.e., single-lane highways designated with the Trans-Canada label); and (c) what is the cost per kilometre to “twin” sections of the Trans-Canada Highway that are currently single-lane and, if there is a difference from province to province, how much does it cost by province to twin the Trans-Canada Highway?

Q-168² — March 29, 2010 — — With regard to the provision of passport services to Canadians: (a) which Canadian communities with a population of at least 100,000 do not currently have access in their community to a Passport Canada office or a receiving agent located in a Service Canada Centre or Canada Post office; (b) what are the costs associated with placing a receiving agent in a Service Canada Centre or Canada Post office in these communities; and (c) are there planned placements of receiving agents in a Service Canada Centre or Canada Post office in these communities?

Q-169² — March 29, 2010 — — With regard to the government's aid to Chile, following the earthquake and tsunami of February 27, 2010: (a) what are the government's current commitments in aid for the victims and rebuilding efforts in Chile; and (b) what other efforts are being considered?

Q-170^1-2 — March 29, 2010 — — With regard to body armour and fortified vehicles used by criminal gangs, what measures is the government planning to introduce to cooperate with provinces, such as Manitoba, to make these security features illegal?

Q-171² — March 30, 2010 — — With respect to the military junta in Burma and the Government of Canada: (a) what measures is the Government of Canada taking to ensure Canadian corporations end all commercial ties with Burma; (b) what measures is the government taking to ensure that no additional commercial contracts form between Canadian companies and Burma; (c) what domestic steps is the Government of Canada pursuing to guarantee those Canadian corporations financially benefiting from economic activity in Burma are restricted from securing any contracts from the government; (d) what steps is the Government of Canada taking to assure the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board does not maintain any direct or indirect holdings in companies conducting business with Burma; (e) what bilateral and multilateral efforts is the Government of Canada using to persuade Burma's military junta to relinquish power; (f) what diplomatic action is occurring between the Government of Canada and members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, China, and India to pressure Burma's military junta to end violence against the people of Burma; and (g) what methods is the Government of Canada employing to pressure Burma's military junta to release Aung San Suu Kyi, the leader of the National League for Democracy party?

Q-172² — March 30, 2010 — — With respect to support for Canadian veterans: (a) why does the government provide up to $13,000 for funeral and burial expenses for Canadian Forces members, but $3,600 for Canadian veterans' funerals; and (b) when will the government increase the financial support it provides to veterans' families for funerals and burials?

Q-173² — March 30, 2010 — — With respect to Agent Orange and Canadian veterans trying to obtain fair compensation for their exposure to Agent Orange spraying at Canadian Forces Base Gagetown: (a) what is the total amount of money spent by all federal departments and agencies, excluding the Department of Justice, for the time period of July 1, 2005, to March 4, 2010, in its defence against the Canadian veterans' Agent Orange class action lawsuit; (b) what is the total amount of money the government has spent to hire outside legal counsel for the time period of July 1, 2005, to March 4, 2010, in its defence against the Canadian veterans' Agent Orange class action lawsuit; and (c) what is the total amount of money spent, including all costs associated with the work of Department of Justice officials, for the time period of January 1, 2009, to March 4, 2010, in its defence against the Canadian veterans' Agent Orange class action lawsuit?

Q-174² — March 30, 2010 — — With respect to segregated fund products (also known as variable annuities) and the decision by the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions Canada (OSFI) to decrease the amount of funds required for capital models of these products: (a) why did OSFI decide to change the required amount of capital insurance companies must hold in order to make future payments; (b) what additional investment risks are assumed by Canadian investors as a result of this policy change; (c) has OSFI requested as quid pro quo that senior management of insurance companies reduce the compensation and bonuses they receive until capital requirements are restored to previous levels; and (d) was OSFI lobbied by then President and Chief Executive Officer of Manulife Financial, Mr. Dominic D'Alessandro, to make the decision?

Q-175² — March 30, 2010 — — With regard to all government advertising to promote the Government of Canada and budget initiatives, such as Canada’s Economic Action plan, from January 1, 2006 to March 30, 2010: (a) how much has been spent on an annual basis on combined advertising, by department and budgetary initiative; (b) by how much did the government’s overall advertising budget increase or decrease during that period; (c) was any completed advertising audited or rejected for not adhering to Treasury Board rules and, if so, (i) what advertising, (ii) what was the total value of rejected or audited advertising; (d) what advertising was related to tax relief and what was its total cost by year; (e) what companies received contracts to complete this advertising work and what is the total cost, by department and budgetary initiative, on an annual basis; (f) how much has been spent per province on an annual basis; and (g) what contracts were awarded without tender and what is the total amount, by department and budgetary initiative, on an annual basis?

Q-176² — April 8, 2010 — — 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 — — 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-179² — April 8, 2010 — — 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 — — 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 — — 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 — — 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 is allocated to mental health support for the upcoming fiscal year; (f) what percentage of overall CSC funds is allocated to security, risk management and control for the upcoming fiscal year; (g) how many offenders have access to intermediate mental health care 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 — — With respect to Correctional Service Canada's (CSC) 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 — — 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 — — 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 — — 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 — — 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 — — 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 — — 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?

Q-190^1-2 — April 12, 2010 — — With regard to government of Canada interactions with the Afghan National Directorate of Security (NDS): (a) is the government aware of any allegations of torture or abuse by the NDS within Kandahar province since August 2005 and, if so, (i) what were the dates and locations of those allegations, (ii) what follow-up was done, (iii) what Canadian Forces or Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade investigations were carried out, (iv) what were the conclusions of those investigations, (v) is the government aware of any NDS investigations, (vi) what outcomes from NDS investigations were communicated back to the government; (b) have site visits been conducted on NDS facilities and, if so, (i) what date were they carried out, (ii) where were they carried out; and (c) did the government come to the assessment that "Canadian partnership in NDS projects without prior insight into its methods runs the risk of appearing to condone human rights abuses and acts which would be illegal under Canadian law" and, if so, when?

Q-191² — April 12, 2010 — — With regard to temporary resident visa applications for both the applicant and the applicant's Canadian host, for each application, what is the breakdown of the following admissibility criteria: (a) minimum salary range; (b) minimum income; (c) relationship to remaining family members in the applicant's country; and (d) property value in order to be granted a temporary visitor visa in the visa offices of (i) Accra, (ii) Beijing, (iii) Chandigarh, (iv) Colombo, (v) Damascus, (vi) Harare, (vii) Havana, (viii) Hong Kong, (ix) Islamabad, (x) Lagos, (xi) Manila, (xii) New Delhi, (xiii) Port-au-Prince, (xiv) Shanghai, (xv) Tehran?

Q-192² — April 12, 2010 — — With respect to the 2010 G20 summit: (a) what is the expected cost of the summit to the federal government; (b) what financial analyses or studies have been done on the impact the summit will have on small businesses; (c) what compensation will be provided to small businesses and tourism event organizers for costs directly related to the summit; (d) what compensation will be provided to the City of Toronto for costs directly related to the summit; (e) what were the costs incurred in the past by Canadian host cities of similar summits; (f) what compensation has been provided by the federal government in the past to host cities of similar summits; and (g) will the federal government post bonds up front to cover costs incurred as a direct result of the summit to (i) the City of Toronto, (ii) small businesses, (iii) tourism event organizers?

Q-193² — April 12, 2010 — — With regard to the Toronto Port Authority (TPA), on a yearly basis and since its inception: (a) what amounts were incurred by the TPA on (i) public relations, (ii) lobbying; and (b) what is the breakdown of legal fees incurred by the TPA, with the justification for each amount spent, for (i) the TPA, (ii) senior executives, (iii) employees?

Q-194² — April 12, 2010 — — With respect to government spending or contracts with Harbour 60 Steakhouse in Toronto by each department, agency, and crown corporation for the last ten years: (a) which have spent funds; (b) what were the amount of funds spent; (c) when were those funds spent; (d) who authorized payments; (e) which events included the use of funds for alcohol; (f) which events were linked to private business; and (g) which events were attended by lobbyists?

Q-195² — April 12, 2010 — — With respect to full body scanners: (a) what is the approximate cost of each unit; (b) what is the total cost for all scanners purchased or slated to be purchased between 2009 and 2013; (c) what is the average cost of installing a full body scanner in an airport; (d) what proportion of passengers screened in Canadian airports is expected to be scanned by full body scanners; (e) how many passengers does this amount to in a year; (f) what is the average time needed to scan a single passenger using a full body scanner; (g) what is the average time needed to scan a passenger using conventional security measures; (h) how many Canadian Air Transport Security Authority (CATSA) screening officers have been trained to operate the scanners since 2009; (i) how many CATSA screening officers will be trained to operate the scanners once they are fully implemented; (j) what kind of training do CATSA screening officers receive before operating the scanners; (k) what was the number of CATSA screening officers and instructors that successfully received certification and the number that were unsuccessful since 2009; (l) what internal assessments, if any, exist regarding the efficacy of full body scanners; (m) what are the conclusions or recommendations of these assessments; and (n) what is the number and nature of complaints to CATSA pertaining to the use of full body scanners since 2009?

Q-196² — April 12, 2010 — — With regard to corporate taxation: (a) how many corporations in Canada paid no tax in each of the last ten years, (i) what were the names of these corporations, (ii) what were their combined revenues and profits in each of the last ten years; (b) how many corporations in Canada had an effective tax rate of less than ten percent in each of the last five years, (i) what were the names of these corporations, (ii) what were their combined revenues and profits in each of the last ten years; (c) what is the total amount of deferred corporate taxes for the last ten years; and (d) which corporations deferred more than $1,000,000 and what were their combined revenues and profits in each of the last ten years?

Q-197² — April 12, 2010 — — With regard to poverty in First Nations, Métis and Inuit populations in Canada: (a) what has the poverty rate been in each of the last ten years by (i) province, (ii) age group, (iii) First Nations, (iv) status Indians, (v) non-status Indians, (vi) Métis, (vii) Inuit; (b) what are the goals for poverty reduction for each of these groups for the next (i) five years, (ii) ten years, (iii) 20 years; (c) what are the leading indicators for tracking poverty; and (d) what has been the average household income in each of the last ten years by (i) province, (ii) age group, (iii) First Nations, (iv) status Indians, (v) non-status Indians, (vi) Métis, (vii) Inuit?

Q-198² — April 13, 2010 — — With regard to government jobs in the National Capital Region between 2000 and 2010, how many federal public servants were located in the Outaouais region and how many were located in the Ottawa region?

Q-199² — April 13, 2010 — — With regard to leases signed by the government in the National Capital Region, what is: (a) the number of such leases that expired in 2005 in the Ottawa region and in the Outaouais region; (b) the number of such leases that expired in 2006 in the Ottawa region and in the Outaouais region; (c) the number of such leases that expired in 2007 in the Ottawa region and in the Outaouais region; (d) the number of such leases that expired in 2008 in the Ottawa region and in the Outaouais region; (e) the number of such leases that expired in 2009 in the Ottawa region and in the Outaouais region; (f) the number of such leases that expire in 2010 in the Ottawa region and in the Outaouais region; and (g) the number of vacant premises in the Ottawa region and in the Outaouais region in 2010?

Q-200² — April 13, 2010 — — With respect to government agency and Crown corporation positions in the National Capital Region, what is the number of employees with the following government agencies, Crown corporations and other government organizations from 2000 to 2010, broken down by those in the Outaouais region and those in the Ottawa region: (a) Atlantic Pilotage Authority; (b) Great Lakes Pilotage Authority; (c) Northern Pipeline Agency Canada; (d) Laurentian Pilotage Authority; (e) Pacific Pilotage Authority; (f) Canadian Pari-Mutuel Agency; (g) National Literacy Secretariat; (h) Competition Bureau; (i) Office of the Correctional Investigator; (j) Transportation Safety Board of Canada; (k) Public Service Integrity Office; (l) Office of the Communications Security Establishment Commissioner; (m) Office of the Commissioner of Review Tribunals for Canada Pension Plan and Old Age Security appeals; (n) Office of the Prime Minister; (o) Cadets Canada; (p) Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety; (q) Canadian Police College; (r) Security Intelligence Review Committee; (s) Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development; (t) Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner; (u) Pension Appeals Board; (v) Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada; (w) National Battlefields Commission; (x) Status of Women Canada; (y) Employment Insurance Board of Referees; (z) Canadian Judicial Council; (aa) National Joint Council; (bb) Cape Breton Growth Fund Corporation; (cc) Tax Court of Canada; (dd) Federal Court of Appeal; (ee) Federal Court; (ff) Supreme Court of Canada; (gg) Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying of Canada; (hh) Elections Canada; (ii) Federal Labour Standards Review Commission; (jj) ExportSource.ca; (kk) Canadian Race Relations Foundation; (ll) Canadian Coast Guard; (mm) Governor General of Canada; (nn) Interagency Advisory Panel on Research Ethics; (oo) Infrastructure Canada; (pp) Royal Canadian Mint; (qq) Marine Atlantic; (rr) Currency Museum; (ss) Public Sector Pension Investment Board; (tt) Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation; (uu) Canadian Intellectual Property Office; (vv) Federal Healthcare Partnership; (ww) Technology Partnerships Canada; (xx) Policy Research Initiative; (yy) Receiver General for Canada; (zz) Defence Research and Development Canada; (aaa) Species at Risk Act Public Registry; (bbb) Leadership Network; (ccc) Canada Business Network; (ddd) Networks of Centres of Excellence; (eee) Environmental Protection Review Canada; (fff) National Search and Rescue Secretariat; (ggg) Service Canada; (hhh) Criminal Intelligence Service Canada; (iii) Public Prosecution Service of Canada; (jjj) Enterprise Cape Breton Corporation; (kkk) Federal Bridge Corporation Limited; (lll) Canada Lands Company Limited; (mmm) Canadian Biodiversity Information Facility; and (nnn) Veteran Review and Appeal Board?

Q-201² — April 14, 2010 — — With respect to changes to the Public Service Employment Regulations announced by the President of the Public Service Commission, Maria Barrados, in December 2008 that would give spouses of Canada’s military, reservists, RCMP and public servants who are killed in the line of duty appointment priority in the federal public service, when does the government intend to implement these measures?

Q-202² — April 14, 2010 — — With regard to the $12 million grant awarded to the Wind Energy Institute of Canada under the Clean Energy Fund at Natural Resources Canada (NRC), did meetings take place between the Minister of Natural Resources, the Minister’s exempt staff or NRC departmental officials and other Ministers of the Crown or their exempt staff, and, if so (i) when did the meetings take place, (ii) where were they held, (iii) who attended?

Q-203² — April 14, 2010 — — With respect to deputy minister, assistant deputy minister and associate deputy minister positions, as of December 31, 2009, what was the breakdown: (a) by first official language spoken; and (b) between Anglophones and Francophones who did or did not meet the linguistic requirements of their positions?


¹ Requires Oral Answer ² Response requested within 45 days