House Publications
The Debates are the report—transcribed, edited, and corrected—of what is said in the House. The Journals are the official record of the decisions and other transactions of the House. The Order Paper and Notice Paper contains the listing of all items that may be brought forward on a particular sitting day, and notices for upcoming items.
For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
|
|
|
Notice PaperNo. 62 Wednesday, December 7, 2011 2:00 p.m. |
|
|
|
|
Introduction of Government Bills |
|
Introduction of Private Members' Bills |
|
Notices of Motions (Routine Proceedings) |
|
Questions |
|
| Q-2822 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North) — With respect to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration’s power to exercise discretionary authority under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) to permit an individual, who would otherwise be inadmissible, to enter Canada: (a) how many times has the Minister exercised his discretionary authority in the last five years; and (b) in each such case, what reasons were provided to the Minister to explain why the individual had been deemed inadmissible? |
| Q-2832 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North) — With respect to visa applications: (a) what percentage of foreign nationals who apply for temporary resident visas get rejected by a Canadian visa office; and (b) how many applications for temporary resident visas did each office reject in the last five years? |
| Q-2842 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North) — How many estimated foreign nationals are currently in Canada without permanent or temporary working visas or student visas? |
| Q-2852 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North) — With respect to individuals in Canada on temporary resident visas, does the government record the number of individuals who return to their home countries after their temporary resident visa has expired and, if so, how many foreign nationals do not return to their home countries once the temporary resident visa has expired? |
| Q-2862 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Atamanenko (British Columbia Southern Interior) — With regard to the horse slaughter industry in Canada: (a) does the government know whether third party monitoring of video footage is occurring at Viandes Richelieu and Bouvry Exports and, if so, (i) what is the monitoring criteria, (ii) who is monitoring the footage, (iii) what actions, if any, have been taken as a result of observations, (iv) is footage monitoring to be a daily practice at this and other Canadian horse slaughter plants, (v) how many hours have been monitored, (vi) is footage archived and for how long, (vii) does the recording continuously loop over previous footage; (b) which tissue types and/or bodily fluids are targeted by the government when testing for phenylbutazone and other drugs in horsemeat, (i) what percentage of drug testing is performed on equine organs (particularly kidney and liver) as opposed to other tissues, such as muscle, (ii) what is the exact methodology and specific testing mechanisms that are used to detect phenylbutazone and other drugs in horsemeat; (c) what surveys or studies has the government undertaken or relied on to determine the number of overall horse owners and keepers that have administered to horses under their care, even once in the horse's lifetime, substances that are banned for human consumption, in (i) Canada, (ii) the United States (US); (d) what surveys or studies encompassing the overall horse population has the government undertaken or relied on to determine the percentage of veterinarians who routinely administer to horse patients under their care, at any time in the horse's lifetime, substances that are banned for use in food animals, in (i) Canada, (ii) the US; (e) what was the ratio between the number of horses and the number of prescriptions of substances banned for use in food animals at any time in their lifetime, issued by veterinarians to the overall horse population in (i) Canada, (ii) the US; (f) what were the results of European Commission audits of federally-inspected Canadian equine slaughter plants in 2010; (g) does the government have any plans to adopt a policy similar to that of the European Union which stamps new passports on horses over the age of six months as ineligible for the food supply; (h) are the Equine Identity Documents (EID) being kept on record by the slaughter plants; (i) are the EID records being audited by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency; (j) what were the results of the most recent audit; (k) has a database been started that can track the EIDs; (l) how many times has the information provided on the EIDs for horses imported from the US been investigated and verified by the slaughterhouse owners, (i) how many slaughterhouse investigations into information on US-sourced EIDs led to horses being rejected as unsuitable for human consumption, (ii) how were the US horses deemed unsuitable for human consumption following EID investigations disposed of by the slaughterhouses; (m) how many times has the information provided on the EIDs for horses acquired from Canadian sources been investigated and verified by the slaughterhouse owners, (i) how many investigations on Canadian horses led to their rejection as unsuitable for human consumption, (ii) how were Canadian horses deemed unsuitable for human consumption disposed of by the slaughterhouses, (iii) how many slaughterhouse investigations into the EID information on Canadian-sourced horses led to them being rejected as unsuitable for human consumption; (n) as a result of information provided on the EIDs, how many horses were quarantined (i) from US sources, (ii) from Canadian sources; (o) how many downer horses were discovered by slaughterhouses in trucks arriving with shipments of equines from (i) US sources, (ii) Canadian sources; (p) for in each case in (n), how were the downer horses and their carcasses and meat disposed of; (q) in response to the findings of the February 2010 undercover investigations at Bouvry Exports and Viandes Richelieu, what changes have been made in the regulations, operations, inspections and infrastructure at federally-inspected facilities that slaughter equines; and (r) in what ways was the individual and management held accountable by the government or in the courts for the incident revealed in the 2010 undercover footage of an employee hitting a horse in the face multiple times? |
| Q-2872 — December 6, 2011 — Ms. Perreault (Montcalm) — With regard to the Community Inclusion Initiative (CII): (a) will the program be renewed after March 2012; (b) will funding remain the same as in previous years, namely $3 million per year shared among each province and territory; (c) are any changes to the program being considered and, if so, what are they; (d) when will the agencies concerned, namely the Canadian Association for Community Living and People First of Canada, receive an answer regarding the funding available for their projects; (e) how long will the funding period be after March 2012; (f) how many projects have been able to be funded through this program each year, since the start of the program; (g) for each CII-funded project since the start of the program, (i) how much money did it receive, (ii) how many individuals were directly affected, (iii) in which cities did it take place; and (h) what changes have been made to the program since the July 2007 formative evaluation? |
| Q-2882 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. LeBlanc (Beauséjour) — With regard to the Gulf Fisheries Centre, located in Moncton, New Brunswick: (a) what are the terms and conditions of the shared ownership of the building between Public Works and Government Services Canada and SNC Lavalin; (b) what decision-making role does SNC Lavalin have in terms of requests for renovations and structural changes to the Gulf Fisheries Centre; (c) what decision-making role does SNC Lavalin have with regards to the potential sale of the Gulf Fisheries Centre; and (d) what are the terms and conditions of revenue sharing between Public Works and Government Services Canada and SNC Lavalin should the Gulf Fisheries Centre ever be sold? |
| Q-2892 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. LeBlanc (Beauséjour) — With regard to all expenditures under $10,000 by the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade since January 1, 2006, excluding grants and contributions, what are the details of these expenditures, categorized by (i) the names of the people or organizations to whom the expenditures were made, (ii) the amounts of the expenditures per recipient, (iii) the dates the expenditures were issued, (iv) the description of the purpose of each expenditure? |
| Q-2902 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. LeBlanc (Beauséjour) — With regard to Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency funding in the riding of Beauséjour since January 1, 2006: (a) what is the total amount of spending by (i) fiscal year, (ii) program; and (b) what is the amount of each spending item by (i) the Atlantic Innovation Fund, (ii) Building Canada Fund, (iii) Business Development Program, (iv) Canada-Atlantic Provinces Agreement on International Business Development, (v) Community Adjustment Fund, (vi) Export Internship for Trade Graduate Initiative, (vii) Innovative Communities Fund, (viii) Recreational Infrastructure Canada, (ix) Sector Export Strategies, (x) Trade Education and Skills Development, (xi) Young Entrepreneurs Development Initiative, (xii) Women in Business Initiative? |
| Q-2912 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. LeBlanc (Beauséjour) — With regard to all expenditures under $10,000 by the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency since January 1, 2006, what are the details of these expenditures, categorized by (i) the names of the people or organizations to whom the expenditures were made, (ii) the amounts of the expenditures per recipient, (iii) the dates the expenditures were issued, (iv) the description of the purpose of each expenditure? |
| Q-2922 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. MacAulay (Cardigan) — With regard to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans' (DFO) budget cuts, including the loss of approximately 275 jobs over the next three years: (a) from what regions will these job losses occur; (b) from what DFO branches will the job losses occur; (c) how many jobs will be lost through (i) attrition, (ii) retirement, (iii) relocation; (d) what is the total payroll for employees that are expected to be cut; (e) what levels of public service seniority are expected to be most affected; (f) what is the projected impact on services to (i) fishers, (ii) the aquaculture industry; (g) how will DFO integrated management plans be affected; (h) how will the output of scientific data, studies, and reports be affected; (i) have any senior DFO officials been offered or given salary bonuses based on how much is cut from their specific budgets; and (j) what is the total DFO expenditure for these types of bonuses thus far in 2011? |
| Q-2932 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. MacAulay (Cardigan) — With regard to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans’ (DFO) budget for Small Craft Harbours (SCH): (a) what was the total budget for SCH for each of the years from 1988 to present and what were the regional budgets for SCH in each of the years from 1988 to present; (b) what is the current projected budget for SCH for 2012; (c) are any of the SCH budget funds allocated for the regions being held back in a reserve; (d) what, if any, harbours are currently identified as “national priorities”; (e) are there any harbours which are slated to become “national priorities” in the next five years; (f) how much money has been spent to date on the Pangnirtung, Nunavut wharf and from what budget; (g) how much remains to be spent on the Pangnirtung wharf in the future; (h) is the money being spent on Pangnirtung affecting the money available for regional budgets for SCH; (i) what is the total breakdown of all money spent on any and all “national priority” harbours to date; (j) what is the complete breakdown of money spent to date from the $71.6 million in storm damage funding for Small Craft Harbours announced in March 2011; and (k) if the full amount of $71.6 million in storm damage funding has not yet been spent, does the government intend to spend that money and when and where will it be spent? |
| Q-2942 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Valeriote (Guelph) — With respect to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) and its responsibilities for the administration of the food labelling, packaging and advertising policies under the Consumer Packaging and Labelling Act: (a) what is the total number, for each of the fiscal years from 2005-2006 to 2011-2012, across Canada as a whole and broken down by province, of (i) inspectors at the CFIA, (ii) newly hired inspectors at the CFIA, (iii) inspectors who retired from the CFIA, (iv) employees assigned to the CFIA Process, Formulation and Label Registration Unit; (b) what is the total number, for each of the fiscal years from 2005-2006 to 2011-2012, across Canada, as a whole and broken down by province, of inspections conducted by a CFIA inspector of a product at a dealer, broken down by (i) retailer, (ii) manufacturer, (iii) processor, (iv) producer, (v) business engaged in importing any product, (vi) business engaged in packing any product, (vii) business engaged in selling any product; (c) for the answer to each part of (b), was the inspection at (i) a site randomly selected, (ii) a site in which the inspection was pre-arranged with any of the individuals or groups identified in (b); (d) for the answer to each part of (c), was the reason for the inspection related to (i) misleading advertising or labelling of exaggerated or unproven nutrition and health claims, (ii) misleading labelling information of the country of origin claims; (e) for the answer to each part of (b), (c) and (d), how many, (i) products or any labelling, packaging or advertising materials were seized and detained by the inspectors, (ii) cases of non-compliance were identified during inspections; (f) for the answer to each part of (e), how many inspections lead to (i) the prosecution of an individual, (ii) the prosecution of a dealer, (iii) a summary conviction or a conviction on indictments of an individual with a fine, (iv) a summary conviction or a conviction on indictments of a dealer with a fine, (v) a summary conviction or a conviction on indictments of an individual with a prison term? |
| Q-2952 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Garneau (Westmount—Ville-Marie) — With regard to Canada’s involvement in the Wideband Global Satcom system: (a) which criteria were used to determine the maximum amount to be spent on the project ($477 million); (b) within which timeframe and (i) on which budget items is this $477 million budget planned to be used; (c) does the government’s proposal to join the Wideband Global Satcom system explicitly include industrial benefits for Canada; and (d) does the government’s proposal include the participation of Canadian aerospace companies and (ii) what are the anticipated economic benefits for them of Canada’s membership in the system? |
| Q-2962 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Garneau (Westmount—Ville-Marie) — With regard to the planned funding for the National Homelessness Partnering Strategy: (a) what is the government’s strategy to end homelessness in urban and rural communities; (b) how many new transitional supportive and permanent affordable housing units will be funded next year; (c) what is the government’s strategy to preserve and modernize Canada’s existing social housing stock; (d) what were the economic justifications and social analysis that supported the decision not to renew Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation subsidies for cooperatives, not for profit and other social housing units; (e) what alternatives to social housing are being offered to low income seniors and others who cannot afford market housing and where provinces are not mandated or funded by the federal government, to ensure that social housing stock is preserved; (f) what is the planned budget for the National Homelessness Partnering Strategy funding for 2011-2015 and 2015 and beyond; (g) how much money has been disbursed to the National Homelessness Partnering Strategy since 2006 (i) by province, (ii) by city for Victoria, Vancouver, Calgary, Regina, Winnipeg, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, Moncton, St. Johns and Halifax; and (h) what is the long term strategy for the National Homelessness Partnering Strategy and the National Homeless Initiative? |
| Q-2972 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Pacetti (Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel) — With regard to the funding of enterprises and projects by the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA): (a) which enterprises or which projects that received direct or indirect funding from CIDA for fiscal years 2009, 2010 and 2011 have declared bankruptcy; (b) of these enterprises, which ones have not paid their Canadian employees or subcontractors; and (c) is the department continuing to fund enterprises that have declared bankruptcy, knowing that they have not paid their employees or subcontractors following their bankruptcy? |
| Q-2982 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Goodale (Wascana) — For each of the years from 2006 to 2011 inclusive, on average across Canada, how much money has the government invested, per child, in the K to 12 education of First Nations children, and what is the breakdown of all the component parts of this amount? |
| Q-2992 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Goodale (Wascana) — With regard to the Department of National Defence, how much did the department spend to conduct the reconnaissance flight to find a suitable landing spot near the Burnt Rattle fishing camp on the Gander River to pick up the Minister of National Defence in July 2010? |
| Q-3002 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Goodale (Wascana) — With regard to all regulatory co-management land and resource boards in the Yukon, Northwest Territories and Nunavut, which are regulatory bodies that have been established based on the settlement of comprehensive land claim agreements in these territories: (a) for each co-management board, since February 6, 2006, (i) how long, on average, has it taken to fill board vacancies, (ii) how long, on average, has it taken to complete the nomination process, (iii) how long, on average, has it taken to complete the ministerial appointment process, (iv) how many times have boards been unable to meet due to lack of quorum; (b) what steps has the government taken to implement recommendations 29, 30, 31 and 32 of the Third Report of the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, Northerners’ Perspectives for Prosperity, published in December 2010; and (c) what is the government’s plan to streamline the ministerial appointment process to co-management boards? |
| Q-3012 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis) — With regard to Correctional Services Canada (CSC): (a) does CSC have a national accommodation strategy and, if so, what is it, what time period does it cover and when was it last updated; (b) does CSC have a long-term accommodation strategy and, if so, what is it, what time period does it cover and when was it last updated; (c) does CSC’s accommodation strategy take into account bills that amend the Criminal Code passed in the 39th and 40th Parliaments that may result in an influx of inmates to federal correctional institutions and, if so, how does the CSC plan on managing this influx of inmates; (d) if CSC’s accommodation strategy doesn’t take into account bills passed in the 39th and 40th Parliaments that may result in an influx of inmates to federal correctional institutions, does CSC have a short-term accommodation strategy to address the influx of inmates resulting from bills passed in the 39th and 40th Parliaments and, if so, what is it; (e) does the CSC’s accommodation strategy take into account bills currently before the 41st Parliament, 1st session, that may result in more inmates and, if so, how; (f) if CSC’s accommodation strategy doesn’t take into account bills currently before the 41st Parliament, 1st session, that may result in more inmates, does CSC have a short-term accommodation strategy to address the influx of inmates resulting from bills before Parliament and, if so, what is it; (g) does CSC’s accommodation strategy include new program space, education space and other non-accommodation space and, if so, what does it include; (h) does CSC’s accommodation strategy mention double-bunking and/or triple-bunking and, if so, what does it say about it; (i) is CSC working on, or has CSC completed, a capital plan for regional complexes and, if so, does this plan involve private-public partnerships for building, financing and maintaining these new facilities; (j) is CSC considering and/or investigating the involvement of private industry in the building, financing or administration of existing federal institutions; (k) has CSC consulted with any outside contractors regarding the construction of new facilities and, if so, who and when; (l) has the CSC consulted with any outside contractors regarding the administration of existing correctional institutions and, if so, who and when; (m) since 2006, broken down annually, how much has CSC spent on creating double-bunking cells, including on design, fabrication and installation; (n) how much does CSC plan to spend over the next ten years on creating double-bunking cells, including on design, fabrication and installation; (o) how does CSC plan to address the growing proportion of inmates affected by mental health issues; (p) what does CSC policy and guidelines say about the use of segregation for mentally ill inmates; and (q) how often over the last 5 years have inmates with diagnosed mental illnesses been put in segregation and, if so, for how long? |
| Q-3022 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis) — With regard to the National Parole Board (NPB): (a) specifically with reference to Bill C-59, An Act to Amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (Accelerated Parole Review) and to Make Consequential Amendments to Other Acts, which was passed by Parliament in the 3rd Session of the 40th Parliament, (i) has the NPB seen an increase in the number of files they are dealing with directly, and, if so, by how many, (ii) does the NPB have an estimate of how many additional cases on an annual basis they expect to have to handle as a result of this bill’s passage, (iii) has the government allocated additional monetary or personnel resources to the NPB to help them cope with the influx of cases as a result of this bill; (b) with reference to all other criminal justice bills passed in the 39th and 40th Parliaments, (i) has the NPB seen an increase in the number of files they are dealing with directly, and, if so, by how many, (ii) does the NPB have an estimate of how many additional cases on an annual basis they expect to have to handle as a result of each bill’s passage, (iii) has the government allocated additional monetary or personnel resources to the NPB to help them cope with the influx of cases as a result of these bills; and (c) with regard to the criminal justice bills currently before the 41st Parliament, (i) does the NPB anticipate seeing an increase in the number of files they are dealing with directly, and, if so, by how many, (ii) does the government plan on allocating additional monetary or personnel resources to the NPB to help them cope with the influx of cases as a result of these bills; and (d) has the NPB received any complaints about their ability to meet their mandate, and, if so, when, what types of complaints and from whom? |
| Q-3032 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Hsu (Kingston and the Islands) — With regard to the criteria governing the granting of single and multiple entry visas: (a) what are the criteria used to determine whether an applicant is approved or rejected for a single-entry visa; (b) what are the criteria used to determine whether an applicant is approved or rejected for a multiple-entry visa; and (c) what are the reasons that an applicant might be granted a single-entry visa but denied a multiple-entry visa? |
| Q-3042 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Hsu (Kingston and the Islands) — With regard to Environment Canada, for every year since 2006: (a) how many requests have been made to have departmental employees, and not ministerial exempt staff, give scientific information to members of the media; (b) how many of these requests were declined and for what reason; and (c) who gave the order to decline each request? |
| Q-3052 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Dion (Saint-Laurent—Cartierville) — With regard to nuclear safety and earthquake preparedness: (a) for each Canadian nuclear reactor, what is the maximum seismic force that each facility is believed to be equipped to withstand; (b) what facilities are currently receiving seismic upgrades: (c) what tests are used to assess earthquake preparedness at each facility; and (d) at what interval are these tests carried out? |
| Q-3062 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Dion (Saint-Laurent—Cartierville) — With regard to the unanimous resolution passed in the House of Commons on December 7, 2010 that endorsed a nuclear weapons convention: (a) what meetings has the government held to follow up on this resolution; (b) what briefing notes were prepared for these meetings; (c) will the government be attending the 2012 Nuclear Security Summit in South Korea, as a follow-up to the 2010 summit that was commended in the resolution; and (d) has the government engaged with other countries to follow up on the principles outlined in the unanimous resolution and, if so, which countries? |
| Q-3072 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. McGuinty (Ottawa South) — With regard to the Department of Natural Resources and Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, as a follow-up to Q-85 and Q-92, given that the Low Level Radioactive Waste Management Office (LLRWMO) has a mandate to service all of Canada and the Port Hope Area Initiative Management Office has a mandate to service only the Port Hope area, what are the reasons why the Port Hope Area Initiative Management Office currently employs more than three times as many staff as the LLRWMO? |
| Q-3082 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. McGuinty (Ottawa South) — Does the Department of Natural Resources have any plans to abolish the Low Level Radioactive Waste Management Office or merge it with another office? |
| Q-3092 — December 6, 2011 — Ms. Fry (Vancouver Centre) — With regard to the Privy Council Office, specifically the Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet (Communications and Consultations division): (a) how many people does it employ; (b) what is its function; and (c) how much has been spent by the division each year since 2006? |
| Q-3102 — December 6, 2011 — Ms. Fry (Vancouver Centre) — With regard to the Prime Minister’s Office and the Privy Council Office, for all correspondence they have received between February 6, 2006, and December 1, 2011, and which was addressed to the Prime Minister, how many pieces of correspondence had personal contact information recorded and transferred to the Conservative Party of Canada? |
| Q-3112 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Eyking (Sydney—Victoria) — With regard to the renting of venues or properties for executive retreats or meetings outside of a government department, agency or Crown Corporation’s own offices (i.e., where an expense for rental of rooms is made to an outside party), from 2006 to December 1, 2011, for all government departments, agencies and Crown corporations: (a) what was the total cost of the rental of these venues for each department, agency or Crown corporation; (b) for each department, agency and Crown corporation, how many times were venues or properties contracted for or rented; and (c) in each case, (i) what was the name and location of the venue or property, (ii) what was the reason or purpose of the venue or property rental, (iii) how many people attended the retreat or meeting, (iv) what was the overall cost of the rental of the venue? |
| Q-3122 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Eyking (Sydney—Victoria) — With regard to the Department of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, for each year since 2006, how many applications for registration under the Indian Act have been approved and how many have been rejected? |
| Q-3132 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Eyking (Sydney—Victoria) — What is the date, time, location, and nature of all government business conducted by the Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism from July 29, 2011, to August 9, 2011, inclusively? |
| Q-3142 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Pacetti (Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel) — With regard to the Stabilization and Reconstruction Task Force (START): (a) what projects have been approved in the last fiscal year and this year; (b) what has the budget been for the last fiscal year and this year; and (c) what is the proposed budget for next year? |
| Q-3152 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Pacetti (Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel) — With regard to the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, does the department have any plans to close any Canadian embassies, consulates or missions abroad and, if so, which ones? |
| Q-3162 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Simms (Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor) — With regard to the Northern Resident Deduction: (a) what is the current criteria for a community to qualify for the deduction; (b) what was the criteria for a community to qualify for the deduction before Tax Regulation 7303 was amended, as printed in the Canada Gazette Part II, Income Tax Regulations, amendment SOR/93-440; (c) what was the rationale for any change in criteria; and (d) what was the rationale for excluding all previously included remote areas in Newfoundland from the Northern Resident Deduction in both Zone A and Zone B after the change in policy? |
| Q-3172 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Simms (Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor) — With regard to the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, as of December 1, 2011, how many Canadian citizens have been detained, arrested or imprisoned abroad and by which countries? |
| Q-3182 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Coderre (Bourassa) — With regard to the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, how many Temporary Residency Permit applications were submitted to the Department by the current Member for Brampton-Springdale before May 2, 2011? |
| Q-3192 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Coderre (Bourassa) — With regard to the Haiti earthquake relief fund put in place by the government following the devastating January 2010 event: (a) what is the total amount of the fund; (b) what are all the programs that have received funding from it; and (c) what is the amount and the name of the organisations that have received the funding? |
| Q-3202 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Coderre (Bourassa) — With regard to the Department of National Defence and the operational capability of our fleet of Buffalo aircraft: (a) what is their percentage of availability; (b) how many hours of maintenance do they require per hour of flight; (c) what is the number of in-flight incidents that have required an aircraft to abort its rescue mission; (d) what is the number of missions that have been conducted since 2006; and (e) what has been the cost of maintaining this fleet since 2006? |
| Q-3212 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Coderre (Bourassa) — With respect to Minister’s Regional Offices, what is the itemized list of expenses for hospitality, food, drink, hotels and transportation for each Minister’s Regional Office since 2006? |
| Q-3222 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Cuzner (Cape Breton—Canso) — With respect to the fiscal framework in the year 2015-2016 and the $600 million surplus identified in the 2011 Update of Economic and Fiscal Projections, how will the budgetary balance be affected by government plans to (i) double the value of the Children’s Fitness Tax Credit and make it refundable, (ii) introduce an Adult Fitness Tax Credit, (iii) allow spouses to share up to $50,000 of their household income for federal income tax purposes, (iv) double the Tax Free Savings Account limit? |
| Q-3232 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Trudeau (Papineau) — With regard to the 2006 Economic and Fiscal Update’s commitment to work towards the elimination of Canada’s total government net debt by 2021: (a) what progress has been made to date; and (b) what is the current target date to reduce Canada’s total government net debt to zero? |
| Q-3242 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Trudeau (Papineau) — With respect to Environment Canada’s water-monitoring stations in the Northwest Territories and Nunavut: (a) when did Environment Canada begin considering shutting down 21 stations in the Northwest Territories and 10 stations in Nunavut; (b) what studies were undertaken to estimate the impact of the closures; (c) what consultations, if any, were conducted with the territorial governments about the closures; (d) when were the territorial governments alerted that a decision had been made to shut the stations down; and (e) when was the decision to shut the stations down reversed? |
| Q-3252 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Trudeau (Papineau) — With regard to the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT), how much has the department spent to install the portraits of Her Majesty the Queen, the Prime Minister and all DFAIT Ministers at all of Canada’s Embassies, High Commissions, Consulates and Foreign Missions? |
| Q-3262 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Trudeau (Papineau) — With regard to the Department of Canadian Heritage and its plans to commemorate the War of 1812: (a) what is the complete list of each event planned; (b) how much is the government spending on each event; and (c) where is each event located? |
| Q-3272 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis) — With regard to National Parole Board (NPB) appointments since 2006: (a) what are the names of the appointees; (b) what is the professional background of each appointee; (c) what is the appointment length for each appointee; and (d) what is the remuneration for each appointee? |
Notices of Motions for the Production of Papers |
|
| P-5 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Angus (Timmins—James Bay) — That an Order of the House do issue for a copy of all project proposals submitted for the G8 Legacy Fund using the form entitled “2010 G8 Community Project Summary”. |
| P-6 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Angus (Timmins—James Bay) — That an Order of the House do issue for a copy of minutes, meetings notes and memos relating to the 2010 G8 Summit Liaison Implementation Team. |
Business of Supply |
|
Government Business |
|
Private Members' Notices of Motions |
|
| M-298 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Rafferty (Thunder Bay—Rainy River) — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should consider helping the forestry industry integrate new bio-technologies with traditional forest products with the goal of promoting the increased use of clean energy, higher employment, and more rapid economic recovery by implementing the following measures: (a) developing a made-in-Canada clean energy action plan that will help Canada become a clean energy economy and advance the development of Canadian technology; (b) creating a repayable revolving fund that addresses the need for capital investment in clean energy; (c) establishing a capital investment tax credit to encourage private sector investment in a new, integrated forest products industry; (d) expanding and extending existing government programs that drive the integration of clean technology in the forest products industry; and (e) increasing investment in research, development and innovation. |
| M-299 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Rafferty (Thunder Bay—Rainy River) — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should consider responding to the decade-long crisis in the forestry sector by immediately convening the first bi-annual national forestry summit with representatives from the provinces, municipalities, forestry related industries, labour unions, First Nation leaders, environmentalists, and financial institutions to discuss the nature of the crisis and to develop a comprehensive forestry strategy to promote growth within the forestry sector that benefits the forestry industry, forestry dependent families, and forestry dependent communities. |
| M-300 — December 6, 2011 — Mr. Rafferty (Thunder Bay—Rainy River) — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should: (a) consider committing to monitoring the implementation of potentially unfair subsidies and trade practices related to the forestry sector in foreign jurisdictions, such as the former Black Liquor tax credit and the Biomass Crop Assistance Plan regimes in the United States; and (b) as appropriate, negotiate an end to those subsidies or match the benefits for domestic producers dollar for dollar. |
Private Members' Business |
| C-311 — October 20, 2011 — Resuming consideration of the motion of Mr. Albas (Okanagan—Coquihalla), seconded by Mr. Kerr (West Nova), — That Bill C-311, An Act to amend the Importation of Intoxicating Liquors Act (interprovincial importation of wine for personal use), be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Finance. |
| Pursuant to Standing Order 86(3), jointly seconded by: |
| Mr. Mayes (Okanagan—Shuswap), Mr. Lunney (Nanaimo—Alberni), Mr. Allison (Niagara West—Glanbrook), Ms. Bateman (Winnipeg South Centre), Mr. Aspin (Nipissing—Timiskaming) and Mr. Cannan (Kelowna—Lake Country) — October 3, 2011 |
| Mr. Strahl (Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon) — October 4, 2011 |
| Mr. Brison (Kings—Hants) — October 20, 2011 |
| Debate — 1 hour remaining, pursuant to Standing Order 93(1). |
| Voting — at the expiry of the time provided for debate, pursuant to Standing Order 93(1). |
|
|
|
| 2 Response requested within 45 days |
|