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 24, 2009 (No. 45)

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 Those questions not appearing in the list have been answered, withdrawn or made into orders for return.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-2 — January 26, 2009 — — With regard to federal spending, how much financial support, both capital and otherwise, was given to individual airports over the last three fiscal years (2005-2006, 2006-2007, 2007-2008) in each federal riding?

Q-3 — January 26, 2009 — — With respect to the government's hospitality spending: (a) how much did the government spend on the purchase of alcoholic drinks for hospitality purposes including wine, beer and hard liquor, during receptions and other similar events, such as lunches, dinners, meetings, and all such similar gatherings, hosted in the Parliamentary precinct, for the fiscal year 2007-2008; and (b) what departmental measures are in place to monitor expenditures on alcohol at public expense?

Q-13 — January 26, 2009 — — With respect to the Registered Disability Savings Plan (RDSP), when will the government have the necessary administrative mechanisms in place so that Canadians can benefit from the RDSP program?

Q-38 — January 28, 2009 — — With regards to the $33 billion Building Canada plan announced in Budget 2007: (a) what are the total federal funds committed for expenditure, as well as the amount effectively spent, to Canadian municipalities, through the Building Canada plan, per year, since its inception; (b) who are the recipients of these funds, what is the breakdown for every province and territory, as well as the criteria used for allocating these funds; and (c) what are the changes to the allocation criteria in Budget 2009?

Q-75 — March 4, 2009 — — With respect to investing in research and innovation, specifically regarding York University in Toronto, Ontario: (a) what is the government's plan to ensure that Canadian research and development remain an example to the rest of the world; (b) what is the government prepared to do to ensure that the best and brightest remain in Canada; (c) what research grants will the government be making available this year, both at York University and across Canada; (d) what new programs will the government undertake to assist students; (e) what will the government's response be to the issue of rising tuition; (f) what specific steps will the government take to invest in research and development, to improve the lives of Canadians, and to partner to help Canadian industries grow in these difficult economic times; and (g) what future investments is the government planning in colleges and universities?

Q-79 — March 9, 2009 — — What is 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?

Q-84² — March 11, 2009 — — With regard to the employment insurance program: (a) what written advice have the departments obtained from and given to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development on (i) reducing the two week waiting period for employment insurance, (ii) reducing or changing qualifying hours to a uniform national standard; and (b) what are the monthly statistical breakdown for waiting periods (times) for processing employment claims for the years 2006, 2007 and 2008?

Q-85² — March 11, 2009 — — With respect to the Enabling Accessibility Fund: (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 province 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 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-86² — March 11, 2009 — — With regards to mortgages: (a) how many loans for 40 year amortization mortgages has the government guaranteed (i) since January 1, 1993, (ii) since February 6, 2006; (b) since February 6, 2006, how many loans for 40 year amortization mortgages has the government guaranteed with zero down payment from the client; (c) as of March 10, 2009, what is the government’s contingent liability related to guarantees for all mortgages which were entered into with (i) a 40 year amortization period, (ii) a 35 year amortization period; and (d) as of March 10, 2009, how many mortgages entered into with a 40 year amortization period have been purchased by the government through the Insured Mortgage Purchase Program?

Q-88² — March 12, 2009 — — With regard to the Canada Ecotrust for Clean Air and Climate Change that was announced by the government in February 2007: (a) what are the details of each project, including its explanation, cost, start date and current status; (b) what is the detailed explanation of the amount of all greenhouse gas emission reduction attained by virtue of the projects; and (c) what is the detailed explanation whether or not the funding of these projects was incremental to existing provincial or territorial environmental spending?

Q-89² — March 12, 2009 — — With regard to the previously cancelled procurement processes by the Department of Public Works and Government Services for two Joint Support Ships (JSS), on behalf of the Department of National Defence, and 12 mid-shore patrol vessels, on behalf of the Canadian Coast Guard: (a) is there a procurement process for vessels under the JSS project currently being pursued and, if so, (i) is there a plan to move forward with another request for proposals for the vessels during the 2009-2010 fiscal year, (ii) what funding has been allocated to pursue this project in the 2009-2010 fiscal year; and (b) is there a plan to pursue a competitive bidding process for the acquisition of mid-shore patrol vessels for use by the Canadian Coast Guard and, if so, (i) has money been budgeted to pursue this project in the 2009-2010 fiscal year and, if so, (ii) how much, (iii) through which department?

Q-90² — March 23, 2009 — — Since January 2006 to present date have Canadian aircraft responded to near border violations by foreign aircraft and, if so: (a) what was the date and location of each incident; (b) what was the response by Canadian aircraft, including the number of aircraft involved and the point of contact with the foreign aircraft; (c) was Canadian airspace actually breached and, if so, to what extent; (d) what was the country of origin of each of the implicated aircraft; (e) who ordered each of the interceptor flights and what was the rationale behind the threat risk; (f) what was the purported mission of each of the implicated foreign aircraft; (g) what was the outcome of each interception, the cost of each response mission, the damage to Canadian aircraft if any and what were the risks involved for the pilots; (h) for each incident, was a diplomatic note filed with the country in question and what was the response from the involved country; and (i) under the same criteria used above what is the response to any incursions or near incursions into Canadian territory by naval vessels or land based forces?

Q-91² — March 23, 2009 — — With regard to the Federal Student Work Experience Program (FSWEP), since 2006 for all 308 constituencies: (a) what are the names, address and contact information of employers that hired FSWEP students, (i) what is the number of students hired, (ii) what is the amount of money received by each student and by each employer; (b) what criteria are followed in order to hire a student; (c) what are the number of points scored by the employers receiving the students; (d) what is the number of students that moved on to further secondary or post-secondary studies; (e) what is the number of students hired that completed the FSWEP; (f) what is the exact amount of money spent per constituency for the program as broken down to actual hiring; (g) what are the program administration costs by the department; and (h) was the program cost on budget or over budget and to what extent?

Q-92² — March 23, 2009 — — With respect to the development of an Action Plan to advance the equality of women across Canada, announced in Budget 2008: (a) what is the time frame for the development of the Action Plan; (b) what department or departments are responsible for developing the Action Plan; (c) what monetary resources are being allocated to develop an Action Plan; (d) how many full time employees are being allocated to develop an Action Plan; (e) will there be any public consultation on the development of an Action Plan; (f) what organizations have been consulted; (g) what organizations will be consulted; (h) will Canada's commitment under the 1995 Beijing Declaration serve as the basis for the Action Plan; (i) what mechanisms of accountability will be built into the Action Plan; and (j) will eliminating systemic discrimination against women be the main objective of the plan?

Q-93² — March 23, 2009 — — With regard to the issue between the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and the Department of Public Safety, and more specifically Correctional Services of Canada (CSC), regarding a new prison in Newfoundland and Labrador to be located in Harbour Grace: (a) are discussions currently ongoing between the federal government and the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador with regards to a new prison and, if so, (i) what is the status of these discussions, (ii) who has been involved in these discussions on behalf of the federal government, (iii) has there been any discussions with the federal Department of Finance or the Treasury Board Secretariat with regards to financing a new prison for Newfoundland and Labrador; and (b) has any investigation been undertaken with regard to structural requirements and, if so, (i) what is the capacity of any proposed new structure, (ii) what are estimated construction costs of a building to meet existing demand, (iii) what are the timelines for constructing such a facility?

Q-94² — March 24, 2009 — — With regard to the employment insurance program, what are the monthly statistical breakdowns for waiting periods for processing employment claims for each processing centre for the months of December 2008, January 2009 and February 2009?

Q-95² — March 24, 2009 — — With respect to the government task force announced May 7, 2008 to stem the trade in illicit tobacco products, headed by the Department of Public Safety and including the RCMP, Canada Border Services Agency, Canada Revenue Agency, Finance Canada, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Health Canada and Indian Affairs and Northern Development Canada: (a) on what occasions has the task force met between May 7, 2008 and March 1, 2009; (b) what resources (personnel and budget) have been allocated to the task force’s work; (c) what concrete measures to prevent contraband tobacco has the task force recommended be implemented; and (d) what communications have taken place between the task force and First Nations communities and other organizations that have expressed concern over the contraband issue?

Q-96² — March 25, 2009 — — With regard to travel to the Northwest Territories (NWT) by federal officials or employees of Indian Affairs and Northern Development Canada, National Defence, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Environment Canada, the Prime Minister’s Office and the Canadian Revenue Agency, based in the provinces, for each year since 2006 to 2008: (a) on what dates did they travel between Edmonton, Alberta and (i) Hay River, NWT, (ii) Yellowknife, NWT, (iii) Norman Wells, NWT, (iv) Inuvik, NWT; (b) what was the total air fare paid for the air portion of the Edmonton to and from the location in the NWT destination listed above, per flight; (c) what is the basis for that fare, including but not limited to class of fare, taxes and surcharges, discounts or passes used; (d) in each instance where the fare paid exceeded the lowest available airfare on that date, why was the lowest fare not used; (e) were T4As or other taxable benefit advice issued to these officials or employees with respect to this air travel; (f) if such advice was issued, what were the amounts; (g) for each official or employee who travelled to the NWT what was the amount paid, per official or employee for meals and incidental expenses; (h) in each instance where an official or employee was reimbursed for meals and incidental expenses and receipts were not provided and an allowance greater than $45 for the year 2006 or $51 for the years 2007 and 2008 was given, was the official or employee issued with a T4A or other taxable benefit advice; and (i) in each instance where such advice was issued what were the individual amounts?

Q-97^1-2 — March 25, 2009 — — Concerning the rehabilitation of the Disraeli bridges in the riding of Elmwood—Transcona in Winnipeg, which are expected to be closed for 16 months, did the government have any communications or requests for assistance from the Mayor of Winnipeg to shorten the length of that closure or to construct an additional span which when finished would allow for no closure at all and, if so, what are the details of these communications?

Q-98² — March 25, 2009 — — With respect to sole source contracts for goods and services issued by or on behalf of the Privy Council Office and the Prime Minister's Office only, for the last four years: (a) how many contracts have so been awarded; (b) who received the contracts, on what date and for what amount; (c) what good or service did they provide in return; (d) what was the duration of each contract; and (e) who was responsible for authorizing each contract?

Q-99² — March 25, 2009 — — With respect to public opinion polling undertaken by the Privy Council Office and the Prime Minister's Office only, for the last four years: (a) how many contracts have been awarded to public opinion firms; (b) which firms won contracts, on what date and in what amount; and (c) what was the general topic probed by each contract?

Q-100² — March 25, 2009 — — With respect to equipment issued to personnel of Crown corporations, agencies, organizations and departments, on an annual basis over the last four years: (a) how many uniforms, firearms, explosive devices, stun grenades, tasers, and pepper spray canisters have been lost in this period; (b) to which Crown entity did the items belong; (c) when and in which locations did they go missing; (d) what is the estimated cost of these losses, by item; (e) how many vehicles were stolen during this period; (f) to which Crown entity did the vehicles belong; (g) when and in which locations did they go missing; (h) what is the estimated cost of these losses, by incident; (i) how many security passes have gone missing from locations that could pose a threat to national security or public safety; (j) to which facilities did the passes belong; (k) in which month and year were the losses reported; (l) what was the evaluated security threat posed by each loss; (m) how many laptop computers containing information sensitive to national security have gone missing; (n) to which facilities did the computers belong; (o) on which month and year were the losses reported; and (p) what was the evaluated security threat posed by each loss?

Q-101 — March 26, 2009 — — With respect to providing safe, quality, and affordable housing to the most vulnerable: (a) how much money will the government invest for the fiscal year of 2009-2010 in affordable housing; (b) how much investment will the government make in 2009-2010 in affordable housing specifically allocated for seniors; (c) will the government enter into new provincial agreements in order to work to facilitate the building and renovation of affordable housing units; and (d) will the government commit to make affordable housing a priority and expedite the building and maintenance of these critical units?

Q-102² — March 27, 2009 — — With respect to the death of Canadian Forces member MCpl. Joshua Roberts: (a) what information did the government possess that informed Lt Gen. Leslie’s initial explanation to MCpl. Roberts’ family at the repatriation ceremony that MCpl. Roberts was killed by gunfire from Afghans contracted by Compass Security; (b) what information did the government uncover subsequent to Lt Gen. Leslie’s explanation which resulted in the conclusion reached by the National Investigation Service (NIS) that MCpl. Roberts was killed by insurgent gunfire; (c) what information does the government possess that is sufficient to dismiss the statements by Afghans working for Compass Security that they fired their weapons during the firefight in which MCpl. Roberts was killed; (d) what information does the government possess that is sufficient to dismiss the statements made by Canadian and U.S. soldiers present at a roadblock a short distance away from the firefight that indicated they believed it was Compass Security personnel who fired on MCpl. Roberts’ unit; (e) how can the government consider the investigation to be closed and Compass Security completely exonerated when the forensic examination from the bullet that killed MCpl. Roberts was inconclusive; (f) what information does the government possess to explain how the bullet that killed MCpl. Roberts fell out of his body during transit; (g) as the medical officer who wrote the initial report into MCpl. Roberts death concluded that the direction of the bullet that killed MCpl. Roberts could not be determined, what information does the government possess that informed the conclusion in the NIS report that the bullet was fired from an insurgent position; (h) as the NIS report notes that Canadian soldiers came under fire from friendly call signs during the firefight in which MCpl. Roberts was killed, what information does the government possess which definitively rules out any role for friendly fire in causing the death of MCpl. Roberts; (i) why was the video footage from the helmet cameras of soldiers present during the death of MCpl. Roberts ordered erased before it could be analyzed as part of an investigation; (j) why was the family of MCpl. Roberts repeatedly told that they had to realize that an election was going on in response to their repeated requests for the release of information related to the death of MCpl. Roberts; and (k) is it the policy of the government to require families of Canadian soldiers killed in action to go through access to information mechanisms to obtain the official documentation, such as NIS reports or autopsy reports, into the death of their relative?

Q-103² — March 30, 2009 — — With regard to the Mountain Pine Beetle infestation: (a) what is the financial commitment for the current fiscal year to combat the spread of the Mountain Pine Beetle, and what department is responsible for the expenditure; and (b) from the $200 million invested by the government in the Mountain Pine Beetle Program, what is the breakdown of the money spent by (i) the Department of Natural Resources, (ii) the Department of Transport, (iii) the Department of Western Economic Diversification?

Q-104² — March 31, 2009 — — What was the total amount of government funding since fiscal year 2005-2006 up to and including the current fiscal year, allocated within the constituency of Nickel Belt, listing each department or agency, initiative, and amount by fiscal year?

Q-105² — April 1, 2009 — — With regards to the disposal of surplus federal property in the Greater Halifax Area: (a) how many federal properties have been designated as surplus properties since 1999; (b) for what reasons were the properties determined as surplus; (c) which properties have been designated as routine; (d) which properties have been designated as strategic; (e) when were those designations declared; (f) were any properties changed from a routine designation to a strategic designation and, if so, what was the reason for the change in designation, and when did the change in designation occur; (g) what was the market value for each of the surplus properties; (h) what was the purchase price of each disposal property that was successfully transferred; (i) who conducted the independent third party appraisals of each property; (j) which properties, if any, were transferred under the Surplus Federal Real Property for Homelessness Initiative (SFRPHI); (k) which properties, if any, are currently in the process of transfer through SFRPHI; and (l) how many homelessness related community service providers have tendered bids on disposal properties?

Q-106 — April 1, 2009 — — With regard to funding applications submitted to the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, for each fiscal year from 2006-2007 to 2008-2009: (a) which projects were submitted under each Agency program; (b) which project were approved; (c) what amount was allocated to each of these projects; and (d) which projects were not processed?

Q-107 — April 1, 2009 — — With respect to funding applications made to each of the regional offices of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, for each fiscal year from 2004-2005 to 2008-2009: (a) how many applications were received under each of the Agency’s programs; and (b) of this number, how many were approved?

Q-108 — April 1, 2009 — — 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-109² — April 1, 2009 — — With respect to performance pay for the Chief Executives of Crown corporations in 2008, for each individual, without identifying him or her by name: (a) what is his or her level in the salary scale; (b) what is his or her performance appraisal rating; (c) what is the maximum bonus, in percentage terms, which he or she could be entitled to receive; (d) what was the amount of the bonus paid, as a percentage of salary; and (e) what was the amount of the bonus paid, in dollars?

Q-110² — April 1, 2009 — — With regard to the hiring of translators for the Canadian Forces, who are citizens of Afghanistan: (a) at the end of their service with the Canadian Forces, are translators offered any form of protection for themselves or their families; and (b) does Canada, or any of its NATO allies deployed to Afghanistan offer any form of immigration to translators and their families and, if not, is a special program of immigration being developed or considered for those citizens of Afghanistan who have placed themselves at personal risk for providing translation services to the Canadian Forces?

Q-111² — April 1, 2009 — — With regard to Employment Insurance: (a) how many part-time staff have been hired since June 2008, by month; (b) how many full-time staff have been hired since June 2008, by month; (c) how many part-time and full-time staff have been hired in each region since June 2008, by month; and (d) how many service telephone lines are working in each region and how many of these telephone lines are staffed at one time?

Q-112 — April 1, 2009 — — What is the total amount of government funding since fiscal year 1998-1999 up to and including the current fiscal year, allocated within the constituency of Vancouver Quadra, listing each department or agency, initiative, and amount?

Q-113 — April 1, 2009 — — What is the total amount of government funding since fiscal year 1998-1999 up to and including the current fiscal year, allocated within the constituency of Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, listing each department or agency, initiative, and amount?

Q-114² — April 2, 2009 — — With respect to the money provided by the government in 2008 to the International Organization on Migration (IOM) for assistance to Darfur refugees in the Aweil State in Sudan: (a) did the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) or any other government department or agency contribute funds to help the Darfur refugees and, if so, what was the exact dollar amount contributed, on what date or dates, and to whom were these funds contributed; (b) was a budget proposed or requested by any government agency, department, non-governmental organization or international organization relating to these particular relief funds; (c) what information was provided to CIDA, and by whom, from which the government’s contribution amount was assessed for this particular crisis; (d) did the government provide any on-ground support or monitoring of relief work for this particular circumstance and, if so, in what capacity, and for how long; (e) have CIDA officials or any other government agency or department requested updates on the Darfur refugees and, if so, were any provided and by whom and what has been done with that information; and (f) what current measures is the government providing to ensure continued monitoring of mass migration and relief aid for refugees migrating into other ill-equipped areas of Southern Sudan?

Q-115^1-2 — April 2, 2009 — — With regard to the regional development agency for Southern Ontario mentioned in the 2009 budget: (a) what economic studies were conducted by the government with respect to the creation of a separate regional development agency for Southern Ontario, (i) when did these studies begin, (ii) which stakeholders, organizations, municipal governments were consulted, (iii) how much money has been earmarked for this new agency by the government, (iv) were any of the Community Futures Development Corporations (CFDC’s) consulted and, if so, which ones; (b) which federal electoral ridings will be under the jurisdiction of this new agency; (c) have any Aboriginal communities been consulted, especially on the Six Nations and New Credit reserves and, if so, which ones; (d) will the new agency be modeled after any of the existing regional development agencies; (e) will the new agency have a dedicated Minister, Assistant Deputy Minister and, if not, under which department will the new agency be governed; (f) what is the government’s planned date for this new agency to be fully operational; (g) have any rural groups, organizations, stakeholders been consulted in terms of the scope or mandate of this new agency and, if so, which ones; (h) what will be the mandate of this new agency; (i) what, if any, are the specific programs this agency has already committed to support and in which town or cities are these programs based; (j) what specific programs will this agency invest that will help workers, communities and businesses in Southern Ontario position themselves to take advantage of opportunities, as economic growth recovers in Canada and around the world; and (k) will the $20 million earmarked for the Eastern Ontario Development Program as stated in the 2009 Budget be in addition to the promised $1 billion for the new Southern Ontario agency, or will this $20 million come out of the $1 billion budget?

Q-116^1-2 — April 2, 2009 — — With regards to the announcement that the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) will steer its foreign aid toward a smaller pool of 20 countries, down from 25 announced under the previous government in 2005: (a) what were the criteria established by the department by which countries were (i) removed from the 2005 list, (ii) added to the new list of recipients; (b) when did consultation begin to discuss removing or adding countries from focus list; (c) who took part in these discussions; (d) were any non-governmental organizations, multilateral organizations, church organizations or any other third party stakeholders consulted about the proposed changes to CIDA’s focus list and, if so, which ones specifically; (e) how specifically were the obligations of the Official Development Assistance Accountability Act taken into consideration by the Agency when establishing criteria for adding or removing countries and how were the perspectives of the poor taken into account during the decision making process; (f) when, how and by whom were countries removed from the list informed of CIDA’s decision; (g) what are the projected funds to be delivered to each specific country on the new focus list; (h) what are the specific programs to be funded in each country on the new focus list; (i) does CIDA have on-the-ground field workers in each of the countries on the new focus list and, if so, how many; and (j) what accountability measures are being put in place in each of the new countries of focus to ensure that the provisions of the Act are being adhered to?

Q-117² — April 2, 2009 — — With respect to Measurement Canada, what changes have been or will be made to the agency from January 2006 to January 2010, including: (a) changes to services that the agency provides; (b) changes to who is accredited to test and inspect devices; and (c) who pays the salaries of those accredited to test and inspect devices?

Q-118² — April 16, 2009 — — With regard to the Afghan Family Law: (a) when did Canadian officials in Afghanistan first become aware of the proposed legislation; (b) when was knowledge of the proposed law communicated to the government; (c) to which branches, in which departments, was this information sent; (d) what action did the government take upon knowledge of the proposed legislation; (e) on what dates did the Ministers of Foreign Affairs, International Trade, and International Cooperation first become aware of these proposals; and (f) on what date did Canadian representatives in Afghanistan receive a copy of the proposed law and with whom have they shared this information outside of government?

Q-119² — April 16, 2009 — — What is the total amount of government funding since fiscal year 1998-1999 up to and including the current fiscal year, allocated within the constituency of Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, listing each department or agency, initiative, and amount?

Q-120² — April 16, 2009 — — With respect to the contract for private motor vehicle (PMV) relocation services and the Department of Defence and the Department of Public Works and Government Services: (a) why did the departments terminate the contract with Colley Motorships Ltd.; (b) when do the departments intend to re-tender the contract for PMVs; (c) when do the departments expect to award the PMV contract; (d) in the meantime, do the departments intend to tender a number of contracts containing a single shipment request so as to remain under the $25,000 limit, in accordance with Government Contracts Regulations and, if so, will this method be used as a temporary solution until the final call for tenders; and (e) how many complaints about Autorail Forwarder did the departments receive during the contract period?

Q-121² — April 20, 2009 — — With regard to projects funded in whole or in part by Treasury Board Vote 35 in the Main Estimates 2009-2010: (a) what appropriations have been created or supplemented with funds from Vote 35; (b) what is the name of each project which has received funding from Vote 35; (c) what is the amount of total federal funding, including funds other than money from Vote 35, for each project; (d) how much of the federal funding was provided directly by Vote 35 for each project; (e) which federal department and program is the funding being provided to; and (f) what was the rationale for using Vote 35 to fund this project as opposed to other funds available to the government under other authorities?

Q-122² — April 20, 2009 — — With regard to departmental programming: (a) what was the total funding allocated to each program in each department in the 2008-2009 fiscal year; (b) what was the total funding spent in each program in each department during the 2008-2009 fiscal year; and (c) where were the funds spent under each program in each department, allocated by (i) town or city, (ii) project name, if applicable, (iii) dollar value?

Q-123² — April 20, 2009 — — With regard to two government contracts or retainers awarded to Mike McCurry and Ari Fleischer: (a) what criteria did the government use in awarding these contracts or retainers; (b) what are the terms of each contract or retainer; (c) what is the value of each contract or retainer; (d) where will Mr. McCurry and Mr. Fleischer be travelling to; (e) what are the travel expenses and per diem rates for Mr. McCurry and Mr. Fleischer; and (f) was any document or record provided to a minister or MP regarding these two contracts and, if so, what are the details?

Q-124² — April 20, 2009 — — With regards to the New Horizons for Seniors program: (a) to which projects and to which organizations has funding been allocated from this program; (b) what is the amount pledged for each project; (c) on which dates were the funding decisions made for each project funded by the program; (d) what are the names of each federal riding that received funding from the program; and (e) what is the total for each project?

Q-125² — April 20, 2009 — — With respect to the Building Canada Plan (2007-2014): (a) under the Building Canada Fund, (i) what projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what are each partner's contribution, (vi) has the funding flowed; (b) under the Public-Private Partnerships Fund, (i) what projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what are each partner's contribution, (vi) has the funding flowed; (c) under the Gateways and Border Crossings Fund, (i) what projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what are each partner's contribution, (vi) has the funding flowed; (d) under the Asia-Pacific Gateway and Corridor Initiative, (i) what projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what are each partner's contribution, (vi) has the funding flowed; and (e) under the Provincial-Territorial Base Funding, (i) what projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what are each partner's contribution, (vi) has the funding flowed?

Q-126² — April 20, 2009 — — With regards to requests for financial assistance made to the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec for the 2005-2006 and 2008-2009 fiscal years, and by regional office: (a) for requests submitted for the authorization of the Regional Director, how many did he approve, and how many did he reject; (b) for requests submitted for the authorization of the General Director for Regional Coordination, how many did he approve, and how many did he reject; (c) for requests submitted for the authorization of the Vice-President for Operations, how many did he approve, and how many did he reject; (d) for requests submitted for the authorization of the President, how many did he approve, and how many did he reject; and (e) for requests submitted for the authorization of the Minister, how many did he approve, and how many did he reject?

Q-127² — April 20, 2009 — — With regards to projects for which a contribution was authorized by the Economic Development Agency of Canada for Quebec Regions in the Capital Fund for Business Succession and Venture: (a) what is the name of the beneficiary; (b) in what region is located the beneficiary; (c) what is the description of the project; (d) what is the maximum authorized contribution; (e) how much of the authorized maximum contribution has been paid out; (f) how many jobs were maintained by the project; (g) how many jobs were created by the project; (h) what is the value of total investments in the project; and (i) what Agency partner forwarded the request for funding to the Agency?

Q-128² — April 20, 2009 — — With respect to projects for which a contribution was authorized by the Economic Development Agency of Canada for Quebec Regions in the Capital Fund for Business Startups in the Regions: (a) what is the name of the beneficiary; (b) in what region is located the beneficiary; (c) what is the description of the project; (d) what is the maximum authorized contribution; (e) how much of the authorized maximum contribution has been paid out; (f) how many jobs were maintained by the project; (g) how many jobs were created by the project; (h) what is the value of total investments in the project; and (i) what Agency partner forwarded the request for funding to the Agency?

Q-129² — April 20, 2009 — — With regard to all government advertising which promote Canada’s Economic Action Plan or its website: (a) what companies were used to produce each ad; (b) what media outlets were used to air or publish each ad; (c) what criteria were used to select the ad placements; (d) how much did it cost to produce and air or publish each ad; (e) how often are the ads aired or published; (f) how much commercial broadcast time, air time, newspaper space and other communication venues available was ordered per outlet; and (g) how much was spent per outlet?

Q-130² — April 20, 2009 — — With respect to the Minister of Industry’s and the government's activities prior to Xstrata’s February 9, 2009 announcement regarding the layoff of 686 employees in their Sudbury Operations: (a) was the Minister contacted by representatives from Xstrata prior to February 9, 2009 and, if so, (i) when did Xstrata contact the Minister, (ii) by what method was the Minister contacted by Xstrata, (iii) who from Xstrata contacted the Minister, (iv) were there emails sent or received by the Minister or Industry Canada from or to representatives from Xstrata concerning the layoff announcement, (v) was there any other forms of written correspondence to the Minister or Industry Canada from Xstrata; (b) did the Minister or anyone from Industry Canada meet with any representatives from Xstrata, either in person, by phone or in any other form and, if so, (i) who were the representatives from Xstrata that the Minister or his representative met with, (ii) was there more than one meeting, (iii) when did the meetings take place, (iv) who participated or observed the meetings, (v) was there an agenda for the meetings, (vi) who developed the agenda for the meetings, (vii) did anyone from Industry Canada take notes during these meetings, (viii) who specifically took notes, (ix) where are these notes currently being stored; (c) was Xstrata’s acquisition agreement over Falconbridge reviewed by the Minister or a representative from Industry Canada between February 5 and February 16, 2009 and, if so, (i) who reviewed the agreement, (ii) what date was the agreement reviewed (iii) were any documents created based on the review and, if so, (iv) what are they, (v) where are the documents being stored currently; (d) was the clause concerning no layoffs for three years discussed with representatives from Xstrata; (e) was the clause concerning no layoffs for three years discussed with any other federal or provincial ministry; (f) why did Industry Canada decide not to bring in consequences against Xstrata for laying off workers prior to the conclusion of the three year agreement; (g) how did the government make the decision not to enforce the agreement and who was consulted in this decision; (h) was the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) ever contacted concerning the Xstrata layoffs by representatives from Xstrata, the Minister or Industry Canada or one of his representatives and, if so, (i) when was the PMO contacted, (ii) by whom; and (i) did the Minister or anyone from Industry Canada make contact or attempt to make contact with representatives from Mine Mill 598 CAW and, if not, (i) why not, (ii) how was the decision made, (iii) who made that decision?

Q-131² — April 21, 2009 — — With regard to the Home Renovation Tax Credit: (a) what kind of analysis of this tax credit has been provided to the Ministers of Environment, Finance and Revenue; and (b) how many income tax audits does the government anticipate conducting to verify the use of this tax credit?


¹ Requires Oral Answer ² Response requested within 45 days