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. 45 Friday, April 24, 2009 10:00 a.m. |
|
|
|
|
Introduction of Government Bills |
|
Introduction of Private Members' Bills |
|
| April 23, 2009 — Mr. Bevington (Western Arctic) — Bill entitled “An Act to amend the Northwest Territories Act (legislative powers)”. |
Notices of Motions (Routine Proceedings) |
|
Questions |
|
| Q-1322 — April 23, 2009 — Mr. Oliphant (Don Valley West) — With respect to the new United States Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service’s (APHIS) user fee requirements for Canada: (a) what did the government do, if anything, to negotiate this fee change with the United States; (b) what communications occurred between Canada and the United States in preparation for this fee change; (c) what notice, if any, was provided to Canadian railway companies by the United States government of the August 25, 2007 interim rule authorizing APHIS to collect fees to cover costs for agricultural quarantine, inspection as well as planned increases to the program’s inspection capacity related to ports of entry in Canada; (d) does the Government of Canada know why the exemption removal was issued by the United States government, as an interim rule, as opposed to publishing a proposed rule for comments; (e) why was the targeted risk management model for customs reforms in North America not followed; (f) what overall purpose did the additional inspection under the APHIS proposal demonstrate; and (g) why is this fee being imposed on railway companies seeing as railways do not engage in the shipping of any substantial quantities of agricultural products across the border? |
| Q-1332 — April 23, 2009 — Mr. Bagnell (Yukon) — With respect to the April 9, 2009 release of the Environment Canada Scientific Review for the Identification of Critical Habitat for Woodland Caribou, Boreal Population in Canada: (a) who wrote the preface for the review; (b) under who’s direction was this preface inserted; (c) what is the author’s background; (d) what additional studies were conducted to supplement the information for the preface; (e) when will the report for the western science study, referenced in the preface, be released; (f) what are (i) the plans for the regional workshops associated with this study, (ii) their timeframes, (iii) their budgets, (iv) their participants, (v) their goals; (g) what is the actual recovery planning and implementation for the herds; (h) what consultations, if any, are anticipated with other key stakeholders such as land management regimes, industry, provinces, territories, wildlife management boards, environmental non-government organizations, industry associations and the public; and (i) why was this report released ten months after its completion by the research team? |
| Q-1342 — April 23, 2009 — Mr. Bagnell (Yukon) — With respect to the Alaska-Yukon boundary dispute, since 2006: (a) what steps have been taken to resolve the Alaska-Yukon boundary dispute; (b) what discussions have been held involving the governments of Canada and the United States; (c) where were these discussions held; (d) who was involved in these discussions; (e) what departments or agencies from both governments were represented at these discussions; (f) what were the outcomes of the discussions; (g) who has been involved and who has been consulted in the efforts to develop Canada’s position in these negotiations; (h) what is Canada’s position; (i) when does the government anticipate a resolution in this dispute; and (j) has the government placed a high level of importance to this issue in its relations with the United States? |
| Q-1352 — April 23, 2009 — Mr. McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood) — With respect to access and compensation for medically necessary drugs and treatments that are not covered by provincial drug programs due to the fact that they are not approved by Health Canada: (a) what action has Health Canada taken to ensure that any drugs or medication that have been approved for treatment of a specific illness in one province are then approved for treatment in the rest of the provinces; (b) what steps has Health Canada taken to ensure that those who had to independently pay for their own medically necessary medication as a result of the drug being used off label, or the result of the drug not having been approved by Health Canada for use in general or in a particular illness, or are used in an unconventional manner and are therefore not qualifying for conventional insurance regulations are then compensated for these costs, or have the treatment subsidized in some manner; (c) for Canadians suffering from rare medical conditions, what steps is Health Canada taking to ensure that (i) research in treatment for these conditions is being pursued, (ii) orphan drugs that have been developed and proven to be effective are being actively manufactured, (iii) drugs that have been developed are being actively approved by Health Canada, (iv) legislation is being introduced to guarantee the continuation of these practices; and (d) has Health Canada or the government investigated the creation of a National Drug Program or plan which would allow equal access to medications for all Canadians, regardless of the province that they reside in? |
| Q-1362 — April 23, 2009 — Mr. McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood) — What is the total loss to government revenue due to Tax Free Savings Account? |
| Q-1372 — April 23, 2009 — Mr. McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood) — With respect to family and spousal sponsorship how many people have been disqualified for sponsorship based on default of financial obligations and how many have been reinstated for sponsorship eligibility upon curing of the default? |
| Q-1382 — April 23, 2009 — Mr. McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood) — With respect to Canadians with diabetes who suffer severe and life-threatening adverse reactions to synthetic insulin and are unable to obtain domestically, an alternative animal-based insulin: (a) what actions has Health Canada taken or will take to ensure that Canadians who require such medication will continue to have access to it; (b) is the government (i) investigating methods of producing the medication via public funds or public-private partnership, (ii) initiating a process seeking approval of the drug for domestic production and distribution, (iii) initiating a consultation process with the manufacturers of animal insulin seeking domestic production and distribution, (iv) providing incentives to manufacturers to produce animal insulin domestically, (v) securing a guarantee from the manufacturer that the drug will be permanently available, (vi) stockpiling the medication to ensure near-term supply; (c) what has Health Canada done or what will it do to ensure that these Canadians receive financial assistance due to high costs as a result of provincial health insurance plans not covering certain medications or treatments;(d) what action has Health Canada taken or will take to ensure (i) that people who suffer negative effects from synthetic insulin are aware of and have access to proper treatment as well as expanded choice in treatment options, (ii) that medical professionals who are responsible for treating Canadians with diabetes are aware of the availability of alternative forms of medication such as beef and pork based insulin; (e) what action has Health Canada taken or will take to ascertain how many Canadians suffer adverse reactions from synthetic insulin; (f) has Health Canada investigated or will be investigating the implementation of a protocol to address this issue, if not, why have steps not been taken to address this issue; and (g) does the lack of the availability of this type of medically necessary treatment represent a barrier to equal access to healthcare services and, if so, what steps has Health Canada taken or will take towards addressing this situation? |
Notices of Motions for the Production of Papers |
|
Business of Supply |
|
Government Business |
|
Private Members' Notices of Motions |
|
| M-359 — April 23, 2009 — Mr. Martin (Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca) — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should ban the sale, installation and export of chrysotile asbestos and that the government should support the recommendation of the Chemical Review Committee to the Conference of the Parties for the inclusion of chrysotile asbestos in Annex III of the Rotterdam Convention. |
Private Members' Business |
| M-284 — February 4, 2009 — Mr. MacAulay (Cardigan) — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should implement a program to reduce the effort on the Atlantic Lobster Fishery to ensure a viable industry for future generations with a lobster license retirement plan, and provide adequate funding to remove a number of lobster fleets from the water by cancelling licenses. |
|
|
|
| 2 Response requested within 45 days |
|