Skip to main content Start of content

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
HOUSE OF COMMONS OF CANADA
41st PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION

Journals

No. 169

Thursday, October 25, 2012

10:00 a.m.



Prayers
Statement by the Speaker

Pursuant to subsection 532(4) of the Canada Elections Act, the Speaker communicated to the House the Supreme Court decision that the election of Mr. Ted Opitz, Member for the Electoral District of Etobicoke Centre, remained valid.

Daily Routine Of Business

Tabling of Documents

Pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), Mr. Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) laid upon the Table, — Government responses, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), to the following petitions:

— Nos. 411-1608, 411-1779 and 411-1811 concerning federal electoral districts. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-411-110-01;

— No. 411-1789 concerning official languages of Canada. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-411-93-04;

— No. 411-1790 concerning cruelty to animals. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-411-3-10;

— No. 411-1818 concerning budget measures. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-411-103-02.


Pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), Mr. Nicholson (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada) — Report on the activities of the Courts Administration Service for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2012, pursuant to the Courts Administration Service Act, S.C. 2002, c. 8, sbs. 12(2). — Sessional Paper No. 8560-411-872-02. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(5), permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights)


Introduction of Private Members' Bills

Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Bellavance (Richmond—Arthabaska), seconded by Mr. Plamondon (Bas-Richelieu—Nicolet—Bécancour), Bill C-457, An Act to repeal the Clarity Act, was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.


Presenting Petitions

Pursuant to Standing Order 36, petitions certified correct by the Clerk of Petitions were presented as follows:

— by Mr. Goodale (Wascana), one concerning funding aid (No. 411-2213);

— by Ms. St-Denis (Saint-Maurice—Champlain), one concerning the Employment Insurance Program (No. 411-2214);

— by Mr. Hyer (Thunder Bay—Superior North), one concerning the protection of the environment (No. 411-2215);

— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning the protection of the environment (No. 411-2216) and one concerning international agreements (No. 411-2217).


Questions on the Order Paper

Mr. Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) presented the answer to question Q-865 on the Order Paper.


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(7), Mr. Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) presented the returns to the following questions made into Orders for Return:

Q-824 — Ms. Chow (Trinity—Spadina) — With regard to Canada Post, what is the structure and development of its office and branch location network since 2006 broken down by (i) year, (ii) provinces and territories, (iii) municipalities or equivalent level of government, (iv) number of residents served, (v) yearly revenues by location, (vi) employees by location, (vii) year of establishment or disestablishment in the case of closures, (viii) where applicable, the rationale for closing the location, (ix) the number of complaints related to such closures by location? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-824.


Q-846 — Mr. Cash (Davenport) — With regard to the Canada Border Services Agency: (a) how many firearms were seized at border crossings from January 2005 to present, broken down on a monthly basis by type of firearm and by crossing location; (b) what was the total number of direct border crossing Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) hours from 2005 to present, broken down by province, month, and crossing location; (c) what are the projected number of direct border crossing FTE hours until the year 2015, broken down by province, month, and crossing location; and (d) will staff members be terminated following the implementation of Budget 2012 and, if so, how many? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-846.


Q-850 — Mr. Kellway (Beaches—East York) — With regard to the Action Plan for the National Fighter Procurement Secretariat: (a) will the Department of National Defence’s evaluation of options related to the Canadian Forces’ fighter capability, as per point four of the plan, include looking at aircraft other than the F-35 as a potential replacement for the CF-18; (b) if the answer to (a) is yes, what criteria will be used to determine whether other aircraft are suitable; (c) will the criteria in (b) be made public, (i) if yes, when, (ii) if no, why not; (d) will the results of the evaluation in (a) be made public, (i) if yes, when, (ii) if no, why not; (e) will the results of the evaluation in (a) be shared with parliament, (i) if yes, when, (ii) if no, why not; and (f) if other aircraft are considered as part of the evaluation, will the Secretariat make public what other aircraft are looked at, and (i) if another aircraft is selected, will it make public why, (ii) if another aircraft is not selected, will it make public the reasons why not? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-850.


Q-853 — Mrs. Day (Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles) — With regard to Labour Market Opinions performed by Human Resources and Skills Development Canada for the purposes of the Temporary Foreign Worker Program: (a) is there a quantitative metric used to weigh the factors used in the assessment of an employer’s application and, if so, what is the metric; (b) are any of these factors treated with a greater weight than any other factors in the assessment of an employer’s application and, if so, what are they and what are the weights; (c) can an employer’s application succeed if it fails to address all of these factors; and (d) for the Labour Market Opinions applied for since 2000, organized by year and region or province, what is (i) the total number of applications, (ii) the number of applications approved, (iii) the number of applications denied, (iv) the average length of time between the receipt of an application and the issuance of the decision? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-853.


Q-854 — Mrs. Day (Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles) — With regard to Employment Insurance appeals: (a) how many appeals were made to the Board of Referees in each year since 2000, broken down by (i) appeals made by claimants, (ii) appeals made by employers, (iii) province, (iv) region, (v) language, (vi) gender, (vii) appeals resulting in an overturn of the Department’s original decision, (viii) appeals not resulting in an overturn of the Department’s original decision, (ix) appeals withdrawn before hearing, (x) appeals withdrawn at hearing, (xi) appeals which were heard within 30 days of receipt of appeal notice, (xii) average number of days after receiving appeal notice before the hearing takes place; and (b) how many appeals were made to umpires in each year since 2000, broken down by (i) appeals made by claimants, (ii) appeals made by employers, (iii) appeals made by the EI commission, (iv) province, (v) region, (vi) language, (vii) gender, (viii) appeals resulting in an overturn of the Board of Referee’s decision, (ix) appeals not resulting in an overturn of the Board of Referee’s decision, (x) appeals withdrawn before hearing, (xi) appeals withdrawn at hearing, (xii) appeals which were heard within 60 days of receipt of appeal notice, (xiii) average number of days after receiving appeal notice before the hearing takes place? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-854.


Q-862 — Ms. Morin (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot) — With regard to Human Resources and Skills Development Canada’s Targeted Initiative for Older Workers (TIOW): (a) how many clients have been served, for all provinces, since the program was created; (b) what is the program’s total cost to date; (c) what amounts were directed toward older workers in the riding of Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot (i) for the year 2007, (ii) for the year 2008, (iii) for the year 2009, (iv) for the year 2010, (v) for the year 2011, (vi) for the year 2012; (d) which programs support older workers who do not live in an eligible community; and (e) what are the impacts of the changes to employment insurance on TIOW following the 2012 federal budget announcements? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-862.


Q-869 — Ms. Boutin-Sweet (Hochelaga) — With regard to the Direct Lending Program of the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, for each fiscal year from 2005-2006 to 2012-2013: (a) what was the total annual expenditure; (b) how many projects received loans annually; (c) what proportion of projects were for First Nations projects and what proportion were for social housing projects; (d) how many new units of housing were constructed annually; (e) broken down by year, how many applications for funding were (i) presented, (ii) accepted, (iii) denied; (f) how long were applications accepted for each year; (g) on which date were decisions for funding made each year; (h) what criteria were used to decide where funding will be allocated and who made the decision; (i) at what stage of the construction project were funds paid out; (j) how many projects did not reach that stage of construction by the end of fiscal year 2010-2011 and what happened to their funding; k) what are the reporting requirements once funds have been received; l) what happens with the funds from repaid loans; and m) how many loans have defaulted. — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-869.


Q-870 — Ms. Boutin-Sweet (Hochelaga) — With regard to the working group with representatives from the provinces, territories and the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation that is charged with examining the financial viability of the existing social housing stock as operating agreements expire: (a) with regard to its membership and its mandate, (i) who determines the group’s membership, (ii) how many people are on the working group, (iii) what are the names and official titles of each person currently sitting on the working group, which province or territory are they from and what organization do they represent, (iv) what are the names and official titles of each person who previously sat on the working group, which province or territory are they from and what organization did they represent, (v) what is this working group’s mandate; (b) with regard to its meetings, (i) what is on the agenda, (ii) how often do the meetings take place, (iii) what are the criteria for evaluating the financial viability of the existing social housing stock as operating agreements expire, (iv) if members disagree, how are decisions made; (c) for each social housing unit that has already been evaluated for viability by the working group, (i) what is its name, (ii) in which province or territory is it located, (iii) what decision was made regarding its viability, (iv) what criteria supported the decision that was made for each of these social housing units; (d) for each social housing unit that has not yet been evaluated for viability by the working group, (i) what is its name, (ii) in which province or territory is it located, (iii) when will the working group evaluate its viability; and (e) with regard to the results published by the working group, (i) what are the names and titles of the reports that have already been published or will be published and what are their publication dates, (ii) what organization released or will release these reports, (iii) will these reports be made public and, if so, when? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-870.

Government Orders

Notice having been given at a previous sitting under the provisions of Standing Order 78(3), Mr. Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons), seconded by Mr. Menzies (Minister of State (Finance)), moved, — That, in relation to Bill C-45, A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 29, 2012 and other measures, not more than four further sitting days shall be allotted to the consideration at second reading stage of the Bill; and

that, 15 minutes before the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders on the fourth day allotted to the consideration at second reading stage of the said Bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this Order, and, in turn, every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the Bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment.

Pursuant to Standing Order 67.1, the House proceeded to the question period regarding the moving of the time allocation motion.

The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to on the following division:

(Division No. 485 -- Vote no 485)
YEAS: 142, NAYS: 111

YEAS -- POUR

Ablonczy
Adams
Adler
Aglukkaq
Albas
Albrecht
Allen (Tobique—Mactaquac)
Allison
Ambler
Ambrose
Anders
Anderson
Aspin
Baird
Bateman
Benoit
Bergen
Bernier
Blaney
Block
Boughen
Braid
Brown (Leeds—Grenville)
Brown (Newmarket—Aurora)
Brown (Barrie)
Butt
Calandra
Cannan
Carmichael
Carrie
Chong
Clarke
Clement
Daniel
Davidson
Dechert
Del Mastro
Devolin
Dreeshen
Dykstra
Fantino
Fast
Findlay (Delta—Richmond East)
Finley (Haldimand—Norfolk)
Fletcher
Galipeau
Gallant
Gill
Glover
Goguen
Goodyear
Gosal
Gourde
Grewal
Harris (Cariboo—Prince George)
Hawn
Hayes
Hiebert
Hillyer
Hoback
Holder
James
Jean
Kamp (Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission)
Kenney (Calgary Southeast)
Kent
Kerr
Kramp (Prince Edward—Hastings)
Lake
Lauzon
Lebel
Leef
Leitch
Lemieux
Leung
Lobb
Lukiwski
Lunney
MacKay (Central Nova)
MacKenzie
Mayes
McColeman
McLeod
Menegakis
Menzies
Merrifield
Miller
Nicholson
Norlock
Obhrai
O'Connor
Oliver
O'Neill Gordon
Opitz
Paradis
Payne
Penashue
Poilievre
Preston
Raitt
Rajotte
Rathgeber
Reid
Rempel
Richards
Ritz
Saxton
Schellenberger
Seeback
Shipley
Shory
Smith
Sopuck
Sorenson
Stanton
Storseth
Strahl
Sweet
Tilson
Toet
Toews
Trost
Trottier
Truppe
Tweed
Uppal
Valcourt
Van Kesteren
Van Loan
Vellacott
Wallace
Warawa
Warkentin
Watson
Weston (West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country)
Wilks
Wong
Woodworth
Yelich
Young (Oakville)
Young (Vancouver South)
Zimmer
Total: -- 142

NAYS -- CONTRE

Allen (Welland)
Andrews
Angus
Ashton
Atamanenko
Aubin
Ayala
Bélanger
Bellavance
Benskin
Bevington
Blanchette
Blanchette-Lamothe
Boivin
Borg
Boulerice
Byrne
Caron
Casey
Cash
Chicoine
Chisholm
Choquette
Chow
Christopherson
Cleary
Coderre
Côté
Cullen
Cuzner
Davies (Vancouver Kingsway)
Davies (Vancouver East)
Day
Dewar
Dion
Dionne Labelle
Donnelly
Doré Lefebvre
Dubé
Dusseault
Easter
Eyking
Foote
Freeman
Fry
Garneau
Garrison
Genest
Giguère
Godin
Goodale
Gravelle
Groguhé
Harris (Scarborough Southwest)
Harris (St. John's East)
Hassainia
Hsu
Hughes
Hyer
Jacob
Julian
Karygiannis
Kellway
Lamoureux
Lapointe
Larose
Latendresse
LeBlanc (LaSalle—Émard)
Leslie
Liu
Mai
Marston
Martin
Masse
Mathyssen
May
McCallum
McGuinty
McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood)
Michaud
Moore (Abitibi—Témiscamingue)
Morin (Chicoutimi—Le Fjord)
Morin (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine)
Morin (Laurentides—Labelle)
Morin (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot)
Mulcair
Nantel
Nunez-Melo
Pacetti
Papillon
Patry
Perreault
Pilon
Quach
Rae
Rafferty
Regan
Rousseau
Sandhu
Scarpaleggia
Scott
Simms (Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor)
Sims (Newton—North Delta)
Sitsabaiesan
St-Denis
Stewart
Stoffer
Sullivan
Thibeault
Turmel
Valeriote
Total: -- 111

PAIRED -- PAIRÉS

Nil--Aucun

The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Flaherty (Minister of Finance), seconded by Mr. O'Connor (Minister of State), — That Bill C-45, A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 29, 2012 and other measures, be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Finance.

The debate continued.

Statements By Members

Pursuant to Standing Order 31, Members made statements.

Oral Questions

Pursuant to Standing Order 30(5), the House proceeded to Oral Questions.

Government Orders

The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Flaherty (Minister of Finance), seconded by Mr. O'Connor (Minister of State), — That Bill C-45, A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 29, 2012 and other measures, be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Finance.

The debate continued.

Private Members' Business

At 6:01 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 30(7), the House proceeded to the consideration of Private Members' Business.

The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Tilson (Dufferin—Caledon), seconded by Mr. Chisu (Pickering—Scarborough East), — That Bill C-217, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (mischief relating to war memorials), be now read a third time and do pass.

The debate continued.

The question was put on the motion and, pursuant to Standing Order 98(4), the recorded division was deferred until Wednesday, October 31, 2012, immediately before the time provided for Private Members' Business.

Returns and Reports Deposited with the Clerk of the House

Pursuant to Standing Order 32(1), papers deposited with the Clerk of the House were laid upon the Table as follows:

— by Mr. Clement (President of the Treasury Board) — Report on the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2012, pursuant to the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act, S.C. 2005, c. 46, sbs. 38.1(4). — Sessional Paper No. 8560-411-1006-02. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(5), permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates)

— by Mr. Fletcher (Minister of State (Transport)) — Report of the Federal Bridge Corporation Limited, together with the Auditor General's Report, for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2012, pursuant to the Financial Administration Act, R.S. 1985, c. F-11, sbs. 150(1). — Sessional Paper No. 8560-411-2-02. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(5), permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities)

Adjournment Proceedings

At 6:50 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 38(1), the question “That this House do now adjourn” was deemed to have been proposed.

After debate, the question was deemed to have been adopted.

Accordingly, at 7:10 p.m., the Speaker adjourned the House until tomorrow at 10:00 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).