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

Notice Paper

No. 71

Tuesday, April 8, 2014

10:00 a.m.

Introduction of Government Bills

Introduction of Private Members' Bills

April 7, 2014 — — Bill entitled “An Act to amend the Canada Pension Plan and the Old Age Security Act (pension and benefits)”.

April 7, 2014 — — Bill entitled “An Act to amend the Department of Veterans Affairs Act, the National Defence Act, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act and the Access to Information Act (personal information and medical records)”.

April 7, 2014 — — Bill entitled “An Act to amend the Criminal Code (blood alcohol content)”.

Notices of Motions (Routine Proceedings)

April 7, 2014 — — That the Second Report of the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development, presented on Wednesday, February 5, 2014, be concurred in.

Concurrence motion — may not be moved before either a comprehensive response has been tabled or Monday, September 15, 2014, whichever shall come first, pursuant to Standing Order 109.

April 7, 2014 — — That the Fourth Report of the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, presented on Wednesday, March 26, 2014, be concurred in.

Concurrence motion — may not be moved before either a comprehensive response has been tabled or Monday, September 15, 2014, whichever shall come first, pursuant to Standing Order 109.

April 7, 2014 — — That the Fourth Report of the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, presented on Wednesday, March 26, 2014, be concurred in.

Concurrence motion — may not be moved before either a comprehensive response has been tabled or Monday, September 15, 2014, whichever shall come first, pursuant to Standing Order 109.

April 7, 2014 — — That the Fourth Report of the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, presented on Wednesday, March 26, 2014, be concurred in.

Concurrence motion — may not be moved before either a comprehensive response has been tabled or Monday, September 15, 2014, whichever shall come first, pursuant to Standing Order 109.

April 7, 2014 — — That the Fourth Report of the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, presented on Wednesday, March 26, 2014, be concurred in.

Concurrence motion — may not be moved before either a comprehensive response has been tabled or Monday, September 15, 2014, whichever shall come first, pursuant to Standing Order 109.

April 7, 2014 — — That the First Report of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, presented on Thursday, March 27, 2014, be concurred in.

Concurrence motion — may not be moved before either a comprehensive response has been tabled or Monday, September 15, 2014, whichever shall come first, pursuant to Standing Order 109.

April 7, 2014 — — That the First Report of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, presented on Thursday, March 27, 2014, be concurred in.

Concurrence motion — may not be moved before either a comprehensive response has been tabled or Monday, September 15, 2014, whichever shall come first, pursuant to Standing Order 109.

April 7, 2014 — — That the First Report of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, presented on Thursday, March 27, 2014, be concurred in.

Concurrence motion — may not be moved before either a comprehensive response has been tabled or Monday, September 15, 2014, whichever shall come first, pursuant to Standing Order 109.

April 7, 2014 — — That the Second Report of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, presented on Monday, March 24, 2014, be concurred in.

Concurrence motion — may not be moved before either a comprehensive response has been tabled or Monday, September 15, 2014, whichever shall come first, pursuant to Standing Order 109.

April 7, 2014 — — That the Second Report of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, presented on Monday, March 24, 2014, be concurred in.

Concurrence motion — may not be moved before either a comprehensive response has been tabled or Monday, September 15, 2014, whichever shall come first, pursuant to Standing Order 109.

Questions

Q-463² — April 7, 2014 — — With regard to the use of the government-owned fleet of Challenger jets since September 2009: 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-464² — April 7, 2014 — — With regard to unauthorized attempts to access government networks, for each year from 2003 to 2013: (a) how many incidents occurred in total, broken down by (i) department, institution, or agency, (ii) how many were successful, (iii) whether sensitive, classified, private, or proprietary information was stolen, (iv) the number of occasions where departments were forced offline, (v) the number of occasions on which it was determined where the attempt originated and, of those determined, what was the country of origin; (b) of those hacks identified in (a), how many have been reported to the Office of the Privacy Commissioner, broken down by (i) department, institution or agency, (ii) the number of individuals affected by the breach; and (c) how many breaches are known to have led to criminal activity such as fraud or identity theft, broken down by department, institution or agency?

Q-465² — April 7, 2014 — — With regard to the Nuclear Liability and Compensation Act enacted as part of Bill C-22, with particular reference to the government's decision to increase the absolute liability amount and mandatory insurance coverage for nuclear operators to $1 billion: (a) has the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) asked Ontario Power Generation whether removing the cap on operator liability, while maintaining the level of absolute liability and mandatory insurance coverage required under the Act at $1 billion, would increase its generation costs and, if so, what were the details of the response, including the estimated increased cost-per-kWh; (b) has the DNR asked Bruce Power whether removing the cap on operator liability, while maintaining the level of absolute liability and mandatory insurance coverage required under the Act at $1 billion, would increase its generation costs and, if so, what were the details of the response, including the estimated increased cost-per-kWh; (c) has the DNR asked New Brunswick Power whether removing the cap on operator liability, while maintaining the level of absolute liability and mandatory insurance coverage, would increase its generation costs and, if so, what were the details of the response, including the estimated increased cost-per-kWh; (d) in the scenario in which the limit on reactor liability is removed while the mandatory insurance coverage and absolute liability of the operator remain at $1 billion, what is the DNR's estimate of the impacts that removing the cap on liability would have on provincial electricity rates, (i) what additional impacts would there be if the mandatory insurance coverage and absolute liability of the operator were increased to $1.5 billion, all other things being equal, (ii) what would the additional impacts be if the mandatory insurance coverage and absolute liability of the operator were increased to $2 billion, all other things being equal; (e) does the government determine the amount of liability required of nuclear operators by estimating whether it will be within the capacity of insurers to provide insurance at reasonable costs and, if so, (i) did the government use the same criterion for determining the absolute liability and insurance requirement for offshore operators, (ii) how does the government define "reasonable costs" for insurance, (iii) what is the limit in cost-per-kWh for what the DNR considers "reasonable costs" for insurance, (iv) did the government use the same definition of "reasonable costs" for insurance for the nuclear and oil industries; (f) what are the insurance costs-per-kWh for the $1 billion in insurance that is currently required for nuclear operators under C-22, (i) what would these insurance costs-per-kWh be for the insurance requirement of $1.5 billion, (ii) what would these insurance costs be for the insurance requirement of $2 billion; (g) does the DNR determine the amount of liability required of nuclear operators by estimating its commensurability with the consequences of controlled releases of radiation and, if so, (i) what studies has the DNR undertaken regarding the consequences of accidents involving controlled releases of radiation, (ii) what is the estimated likelihood of such accidents, (iii) how has the DNR determined that the current amount of liability for nuclear operators under C-22 is commensurate with the risk of such accidents; and (h) has the DNR commissioned any studies to estimate the implicit subsidy per kWh that would be created by imposing a cap on liability since the time it commissioned an empirical analysis of the Nuclear Liability Act (Heyes, Anthony, and Catherine Heyes. 2000. An Empirical Analysis of the Nuclear Liability Act (1970) in Canada. Resource & Energy Economics 22 (1):91-101) and, if so, what were the results of any such study?

Notices of Motions for the Production of Papers

Business of Supply

Government Business

Private Members' Notices of Motions

M-502 — April 7, 2014 — — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should consider the advisability of measures to deepen and straighten the vessel navigation channel which provides access between Georgian Bay and the westerly limit of the Trent-Severn Waterway, at Port Severn.

M-503 — April 7, 2014 — — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should: (a) identify and focus on ways to work collaboratively on innovative voluntary stewardship approaches to species at risk with groups such as communities, agricultural and business sectors, and private landowners; (b) ensure that the aforementioned groups shall have the opportunity for meaningful participation; (c) confirm the protection of species as a public responsibility; and (d) proclaim that such principles be included as a key pillar of the government's National Conservation Plan.

Private Members' Business

C-525 — March 26, 2014 — — Resuming consideration at report stage of Bill C-525, An Act to amend the Canada Labour Code, the Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act and the Public Service Labour Relations Act (certification and revocation — bargaining agent), as reported by the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities with amendments.

Resuming debate on the motions in Group No. 1.

Committee Report — presented on Monday, February 24, 2014, Sessional Paper No. 8510-412-45.

Report and third reading stages — limited to 2 sitting days, pursuant to Standing Order 98(2).

Report stage motions — see “Report Stage of Bills” in today's Notice Paper.

Report stage concurrence motion — question to be put immediately after the report stage motions are disposed of, pursuant to Standing Order 76.1(9).

Motion for third reading — may be made in the same sitting, pursuant to Standing Order 98(2).

Voting for report stage and third reading — at the expiry of the time provided for debate, pursuant to Standing Order 98(4).


² Response requested within 45 days