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
41st PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION

Journals

No. 260

Friday, May 31, 2013

10:00 a.m.



Prayers
Government Orders

The Order was read for the consideration at report stage of Bill C-60, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 21, 2013 and other measures, as reported by the Standing Committee on Finance without amendment.

Pursuant to Standing Order 76.1(5), the Speaker selected and grouped for debate the following motions:

Group No. 1 — Motions Nos. 1 to 3, 6 to 20, 24, 26, 27, 29 to 43, 47 to 74 and 78 to 80.

Group No. 1

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 1, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 1.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 2, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 12.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 3, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 15.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 6, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 104.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 7, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 105.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 8, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 106.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 9, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 107.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 10, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 108.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 11, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 109.

Mr. Bellavance (Richmond—Arthabaska), seconded by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), moved Motion No. 12, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 112.

Mr. Bellavance (Richmond—Arthabaska), seconded by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), moved Motion No. 13, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 113.

Mr. Bellavance (Richmond—Arthabaska), seconded by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), moved Motion No. 14, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 114.

Mr. Bellavance (Richmond—Arthabaska), seconded by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), moved Motion No. 15, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 115.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 16, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 125.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 17, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 133.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 18, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 134.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 19, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 135.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 20, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 136.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 24, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 137.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 26, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 143.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 27, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 144.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 29, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 147.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 30, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 148.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 31, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 149.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 32, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 150.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 33, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 151.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 34, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 152.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 35, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 153.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 36, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 154.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 37, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 162.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 38, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 167.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 39, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 168.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 40, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 169.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 41, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 170.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 42, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 171.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 43, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 172.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 47, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 200.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 48, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 201.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 49, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 202.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 50, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 203.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 51, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 204.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 52, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 205.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 53, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 206.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 54, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 207.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 55, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 208.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 56, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 209.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 57, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 210.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 58, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 211.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 59, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 212.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 60, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 213.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 61, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 214.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 62, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 215.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 63, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 216.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 64, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 217.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 65, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 218.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 66, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 219.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 67, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 220.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 68, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 221.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 69, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 222.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 70, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 223.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 71, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 224.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 72, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 225.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 73, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 228.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 74, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 229.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 78, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 230.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 79, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 231.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), moved Motion No. 80, — That Bill C-60 be amended by deleting Clause 232.

Debate arose on the motions in Group No. 1.

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.

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:

— No. 411-3564 concerning China. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-411-18-20;
— Nos. 411-3572 and 411-3573 concerning international agreements. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-411-121-09;
— Nos. 411-3591 to 411-3593 concerning international trade. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-411-10-09;
— Nos. 411-3606 to 411-3608 concerning horse meat. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-411-38-18;
— Nos. 411-3613 to 411-3616 and 411-3646 concerning the protection of the environment. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-411-12-31;
— Nos. 411-3621, 411-3682, 411-3774, 411-3783, 411-3819 to 411-3822 and 411-3842 to 411-3850 concerning the Criminal Code of Canada. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-411-32-40;
— Nos. 411-3622, 411-3638, 411-3639, 411-3649, 411-3653, 411-3654, 411-3662, 411-3669, 411-3675, 411-3676, 411-3773, 411-3784, 411-3788 to 411-3790, 411-3797 to 411-3815, 411-3818, 411-3827 to 411-3839 and 411-3851 concerning sex selection. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-411-132-07;
— No. 411-3627 concerning prostitution. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-411-50-09;
— No. 411-3631 concerning genetic engineering. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-411-26-18;
— No. 411-3640 concerning the fishing industry. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-411-4-26;
— No. 411-3641 concerning the Canadian Coast Guard. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-411-19-22;
— Nos. 411-3655, 411-3656 and 411-3737 concerning foreign aid. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-411-39-22;
— Nos. 411-3687 and 411-3768 concerning the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-411-6-19;
— Nos. 411-3704 and 411-3733 concerning navigable waters. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-411-68-23;
— Nos. 411-3748 to 411-3751 and 411-3871 concerning climate change. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-411-34-27;
— Nos. 411-3779 and 411-3816 concerning human trafficking. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-411-51-15;
— Nos. 411-3840 and 411-3841 concerning abortion. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-411-61-26.

Pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), Mr. Alexander (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence) laid upon the Table, — Document entitled "Canadian Industrial Participation in the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Program — Spring 2013". — Sessional Paper No. 8525-411-57.

Motions

By unanimous consent, it was ordered, — That, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practice of the House, Ways and Means Motion No. 22 to introduce An Act to give effect to the Yale First Nation Final Agreement and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, be deemed adopted.


Introduction of Government Bills

Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Valcourt (Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development), seconded by Mr. Goodyear (Minister of State (Science and Technology) (Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario)), Bill C-62, An Act to give effect to the Yale First Nation Final Agreement and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.

Recommendation
(Pursuant to Standing Order 79(2))
His Excellency the Governor General recommends to the House of Commons the appropriation of public revenue under the circumstances, in the manner and for the purposes set out in a measure entitled “An Act to give effect to the Yale First Nation Final Agreement and to make consequential amendments to other Acts”.


Presenting Reports from Committees

Ms. Brown (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Cooperation), from the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development, presented the 11th Report of the Committee (Main Estimates 2013-14 — Votes 1, 5, 10, 15, 25, 30, L35, L40, 45 and 50 FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE). — Sessional Paper No. 8510-411-249.

A copy of the relevant Minutes of Proceedings (Meetings Nos. 76 and 83) was tabled.


Presenting Petitions

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

— by Mr. Albrecht (Kitchener—Conestoga), one concerning landmines (No. 411-3991) and four concerning sex selection (Nos. 411-3992 to 411-3995);
— by Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), one concerning landmines (No. 411-3996) and one concerning genetic engineering (No. 411-3997);
— by Mr. Cotler (Mount Royal), one concerning Burma (No. 411-3998);
— by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), one concerning Old Age Security benefits (No. 411-3999) and two concerning genetic engineering (Nos. 411-4000 and 411-4001);
— by Mr. Valeriote (Guelph), two concerning genetic engineering (Nos. 411-4002 and 411-4003);
— by Mrs. Day (Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles), three concerning budget measures (Nos. 411-4004 to 411-4006);
— by Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), four concerning budget measures (Nos. 411-4007 to 411-4010);
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning the democratic process (No. 411-4011) and one concerning environmental assessment and review (No. 411-4012).

Questions 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-1302 — Mr. Toone (Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine) — With regard to funding in the electoral district of Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, what is the total amount of federal funding allocated to the electoral district from fiscal year 2011-2012 up to and including the current fiscal year, broken down by year, department, agency, initiative and amount? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1302.

Q-1304 — Ms. Boivin (Gatineau) — With regard to the distribution of jobs with federal departments and agencies in the National Capital Region (NCR): (a) how many jobs were located in the Quebec part of the NCR in 2013; (b) how many jobs were located in the Ontario part of the NCR in 2013; (c) how many jobs in the Quebec part of the NCR will be eliminated as a result of the cuts introduced in the last budget; and (d) how many jobs in the Ontario part of the NCR will be eliminated as a result of the cuts introduced in the last budget? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1304.

Q-1305 — Mr. Cotler (Mount Royal) — With regard to Bill C-10, in the year after it received royal assent: (a) broken down by offence, how many people have been charged for offences created by the bill; (b) broken down by offence, how many people have been convicted of offences created by the bill; (c) broken down by offence, what sentences have been issued to people convicted of offences created by the bill; (d) broken down by offence, how many people have been charged under the provisions of the bill; (e) broken down by offence, how many people have been convicted under the provisions of the bill; (f) broken down by offence, how many people have been sentenced under the provisions of the bill; (g) broken down by offence, what sentences have been issued to people sentenced under the provisions of the bill; (h) in how many of the cases in (d) was a constitutional argument raised by the offender (i) at trial, (ii) on appeal; (i) broken down by geographic jurisdiction and instance, how many cases in (d) are pending (i) at the trial level, (ii) on appeal; (j) how much money has the government spent on prosecutions under the provisions of the bill; (k) how much money has the government spent defending the constitutionality of the bill; (l) in what cases, if any, did the bill provide for punishment where none was provided for under previously-existing provisions of the Criminal Code; (m) broken down by offence and length of sentence, in what cases, if any, did an offender sentenced under the provisions of the bill receive a longer sentence than what was allowed for under previously-existing provisions of the Criminal Code; (n) in what ways has the bill made streets and communities safer; (o) in what ways, if any, has the government reviewed the effectiveness of the bill; (p) what were the results of any such reviews; (q) what reviews of the effectiveness of the bill, if any, are ongoing; (r) when will the results of any such reviews be made available to Parliament; (s) what factors has the government considered when evaluating the effectiveness of the bill; (t) by what standard does the government determine whether repeal of the bill for ineffectiveness is appropriate; (u) what is the prosecution rate for offences created by the bill; (v) what is the prosecution rate for offences with one or more sentencing provisions modified by the bill; (w) what was the prosecution rate for the offences in (v) prior to the coming-into-force of the bill; (x) what is the prosecution rate for offences otherwise modified by the bill; (y) what was the prosecution rate for offences in (x) prior to the coming-into-force of the bill; (z) what is the prosecution rate for all federal offences in Canada; (aa) what is the projected rate of recidivism for offenders convicted under the provisions of the bill; (bb) in what ways has the government worked with provinces and territories to inform prosecutors and police services of the provisions of the bill; (cc) broken down by province or territory, what funding has the government provided to provinces and territories to assist with the implementation of the bill; (dd) what studies, if any, have been undertaken of the impact of the bill on the number of inmates in (i) federal custody, (ii) provincial custody; (ee) what are the results of any such studies; (ff) what is the projected impact of the bill on the number of inmates in (i) federal custody, (ii) provincial custody; (gg) what evidence exists to suggest that the provisions in the bill have deterred criminal activity; (hh) broken down by province and territory, which specific communities, if any, have been made safer by the bill; (ii) in what ways have the communities in (hh) been made safer; (jj) what evidence exists to demonstrate that the communities in (hh) have been made safer; (kk) broken down by province and territory, which specific streets, if any, have been made safer by the bill; (ll) in what ways have the streets in (kk) been made safer; (mm) what evidence exists to demonstrate that the streets in (kk) have been made safer; (nn) which First Nations, Métis, and Inuit communities, if any, have been made safer by the bill; (oo) in what ways have the communities in (nn) been made safer; (pp) what evidence exists to demonstrate that the communities in (nn) have been made safer; (qq) in what ways have people traditionally marginalized by the criminal justice system, such as women, aboriginal Canadians, and low-income Canadians, been made safer by the bill; and (rr) what evidence exists to demonstrate that the people in (qq) have been made safer? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1305.

Q-1306 — Mr. Cotler (Mount Royal) — With regard to the crisis in Syria: (a) what criteria does the government use to determine (i) whether to intervene, (ii) when to intervene, (iii) the nature and scope of any intervention; (b) who makes the determination in (a) and how; (c) what sources does the government rely upon in determining (a); (d) what legal obligations are considered with respect to (a) and in what ways does the Responsibility to Protect doctrine factor into decision making under (a); (e) in what ways has the government evaluated its obligations under the Responsibility to Protect doctrine with respect to Syria; (f) when were such evaluations done, by whom, and with what outcome; (g) have the criteria by which the government determines its official policy towards the crisis in Syria changed since 2012; (h) when the Minister of Foreign Affairs publicly expressed his support for an indictment of Bashar al-Assad by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 2012, was this the position of the government and does it remain the position of the government that al-Assad ought to be indicted by the ICC; (j) with respect to Canada’s decision not to sign on to the request of 57 countries made in January, 2013, to ask the Security Council to refer the situation in Syria to the ICC, did Canada support this request; (k) with respect to (j), when, why, how, and by whom were the determinations made in this regard, and when was Canada approached to join in this endeavor and by what means; (l) what criteria were applied in determining whether to support this effort; (m) are there any specific policies or directives within the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade that guide decision-making with regard to Canadian intervention in situations of humanitarian crisis; (n) was the decision not to sign the Swiss-led letter asking the United Nations Security Council to refer the situation in Syria to the ICC made by the Minister of Foreign Affairs; (o) were any other officials at the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade involved in the decision-making process to determine whether to support the Swiss-led international request letter; (p) were any other cabinet officials involved in the decision-making process to determine whether to support the Swiss-led international request letter; (q) was the government made aware of this specific international initiative in advance of the official lodging of the request with the United Nations on January 14, 2013, and (i) if so, how was the government made aware of this initiative, (ii) when was the government made aware of this initiative; (r) did the decision-making process to determine whether to support the Swiss-led international request letter include (i) consultations with the Minister’s counterparts from any other countries, (ii) consultations with the Minister’s counterparts in any of the 56 countries that ultimately supported the Swiss-led initiative, (iii) consultations with any international or intergovernmental organizations; (s) did the government make submissions promoting a specific policy approach with regard to the Swiss-led initiative to (i) the governments of any other countries, (ii) the governments of any of the 50-plus countries that ultimately supported the Swiss-led initiative, (iii) any international or intergovernmental organizations; (t) what steps is the government taking to bring al-Assad before the ICC; (u) has Canada raised al-Assad’s conduct as an issue before the Security Council; (v) what legal remedies has the government invoked with respect to addressing the situation in Syria; (w) what legal remedies has the government invoked with respect to al-Assad in particular; and (x) does the government support an International Criminal Tribunal for Syria? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1306.

Q-1307 — Ms. Duncan (Etobicoke North) — With regard to Canada's submission under the Convention on the Law of the Sea: (a) what is the precise extent that will be included in the claim and what scientific research supports that claim; (b) does the government anticipate that Canada's submission will overlap with claims of other nations, (i) if so, has Canada begun consultation with other nations with which its submission may overlap, (ii) which countries has Canada consulted, (iii) what were the dates of those consultations, (iv) what briefings were prepared for those consultations, (v) what briefings were prepared for the Minister responsible after the consultations; (c) which department is the lead agency on Canada’s submission and which other departments are involved; (d) who are the external researchers and institutions involved in Canada’s submission; (e) how much money has been allocated for Canada’s submission and how much of that money has been spent to date; and (f) regarding any Requests for Proposals for research in support of Canada’s submission, (i) what was the process, (ii) what are the milestones, (iii) what reporting has been done so far, (iv) what oversight is in place? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1307.

Q-1308 — Ms. Davies (Vancouver East) — With regard to government funding, what is the total amount of government funding allocated within the constituency of Vancouver East during the fiscal year 2012-2013, broken down by: (a) department or agency; and (b) for each body mentioned in (a), by initiative or project? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1308.

Q-1309 — Ms. Laverdière (Laurier—Sainte-Marie) — With regard to the amalgamation of the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) into the department of Foreign Affairs and International Affairs (DFAIT): (a) what is the timeline for the amalgamation; (b) which officials within CIDA, DFAIT and other government Ministries, including the Privy Council Office, will be in charge of the amalgamation; (c) what are the expected job losses among CIDA staff and in which divisions; (d) what changes will be made at the senior management level, including CIDA president; (e) will there be a deputy minister for development; (f) will employees be re-located; (g) will the respective unions be consulted; (h) will there be further cuts to funding for development programmes for the purposes of poverty reduction; (i) will CIDA’s countries of focus be changing; and (j) will the promised legislation ensure that Official Development Assistance will continue to be provided only if it (i) contributes to poverty reduction, (ii) takes into account the perspectives of the poor, (iii) is consistent with an international human rights perspective? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1309.

Q-1310 — Ms. Laverdière (Laurier—Sainte-Marie) — With regard to the Partnership with Canadians program at the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), for each year from 2006 to 2010: (a) how many proposals were received, broken down by year and type of call for proposal, if applicable; and (b) how many proposals were approved, broken down by (i) year, (ii) partner, (iii) CIDA priority theme or cross cutting theme, (iv) total dollar amount contributed by CIDA, (v) total dollar amount contributed by partner, (vi) description of project, (vii) recipient country, (viii) length of days of approval, (ix) length of project, (x) grant or contribution? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1310.
Government Orders

The Order was read for the second reading and reference to the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development of Bill S-15, An Act to amend the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001.

Mr. Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) for Mr. Kent (Minister of the Environment), seconded by Mr. Goodyear (Minister of State (Science and Technology) (Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario)), moved, — That the Bill be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development.

Notices of Motions

Mr. Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) gave notice of the intention to move a motion at the next sitting of the House, pursuant to Standing Order 78(3), for the purpose of allotting a specified number of days or hours for the consideration and disposal of the report stage and third reading stage of Bill C-60, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 21, 2013 and other measures.


Mr. Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) gave notice of the intention to move a motion at the next sitting of the House, pursuant to Standing Order 78(3), for the purpose of allotting a specified number of days or hours for the consideration and disposal of the third reading of Bill S-2, An Act respecting family homes situated on First Nation reserves and matrimonial interests or rights in or to structures and lands situated on those reserves.

Government Orders

The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Kent (Minister of the Environment), seconded by Mr. Goodyear (Minister of State (Science and Technology) (Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario)), — That Bill S-15, An Act to amend the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001, be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development.

Debate arose thereon.

Private Members' Business

At 1:30 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 30(6), the House proceeded to the consideration of Private Members' Business.

The Order was read for the consideration at report stage of Bill C-444, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (personating peace officer or public officer), as reported by the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights without amendment.

Mr. Dreeshen (Red Deer), seconded by Mr. Hayes (Sault Ste. Marie), moved, — That the Bill be concurred in at report stage.

The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to.

Accordingly, the Bill was concurred in at report stage.

Pursuant to Standing Order 76.1(11), Mr. Dreeshen (Red Deer), seconded by Mr. Hayes (Sault Ste. Marie), moved, — That the Bill be now read a third time and do pass.

Debate arose thereon.

Pursuant to Standing Order 93(1), the Order was dropped to the bottom of the order of precedence on the Order Paper.

Returns and Reports Deposited with the Clerk of the House

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

— by Mr. Clement (President of the Treasury Board) — Actuarial Report Updating the Actuarial Report on the Pension Plan for the Members of Parliament for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010, pursuant to the Public Pensions Reporting Act, R.S. 1985, c.13 (2nd Supp.), sbs. 9(1). — Sessional Paper No. 8560-411-519-02. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(5), permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates)
Adjournment

At 2:30 p.m., the Speaker adjourned the House until Monday at 11:00 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).