Madam Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Nos. 1256, 1259, 1261, 1263, 1265, 1267, 1270 and 1271.
Question No. 1256—Ms. Rachel Blaney
With regard to disability benefit payments provided by Veterans Affairs Canada, and broken down by province or territory and by fiscal year since 2019-20: (a) how many individuals receiving disability benefit payments have had their payments clawed back because they received compensation under the Merlo Davidson class action lawsuit; (b) how many notifications of the claw back were sent, including by (i) letter, (ii) email, (iii) phone call; (c) what is the total amount of disability benefit payments that have been clawed back, including the (i) total dollar value, (ii) percentage of benefits distributed to individuals in (a); (d) how many appeals have been made to restore or reverse claw backs by individuals in (a); (e) for each appeal in (d), how many appeals (i) were successful, (ii) were denied, (iii) are still under consideration; and (f) what is the total amount of costs incurred by Veterans Affairs Canada to (i) issue notices of claw backs to veterans, (ii) perform audits of benefits received by individuals in the Merlo Davidson class action lawsuit, (iii) challenge appeals made by individuals having their compensation clawed back?Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence, Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, to be fully transparent and to ensure that Veterans Affairs Canada has exercised its legislative requirements properly, the following initiatives have been implemented.
During the week of March 27, 2023, Veterans Affairs Canada sent a letter to current or former Royal Canadian Mounted Police, RCMP, members who have had their disability pension offset due to having received a payment under the court-ordered Merlo Davidson class action settlement agreement, to invite them to provide further information about the settlement compensation. In addition to sending the letter, a Veterans Affairs Canada representative has been, or will be, in contact with these individuals to provide support and answer questions. Those veterans affected will also have the option of contacting the Office of the Veterans Ombud on the matter.
Veterans Affairs Canada will update information on its external website to clearly articulate how offsets to disability benefits are implemented. Veterans Affairs Canada implements offsets in accordance with its legislation and the legal requirements of court-ordered settlement agreements.
With regard to part (a), Veterans Affairs Canada conducted a manual review of its files to identify individuals who had reported to Veterans Affairs Canada that they had received compensation under the court-ordered Merlo Davidson settlement agreement. Fewer than 10 files were identified. For those that have been processed, Veterans Affairs Canada is deducting amounts from the monthly pension due to the compensation received, in accordance with the court-ordered Merlo Davidson settlement agreement and Veterans Affairs Canada’s legislative obligations.
With regard to part (b), when Veterans Affairs Canada completes a decision, an official notification is sent to the applicant explaining the decision and the impact relating to their file. The current or former RCMP members associated with the files where Veterans Affairs Canada has offset amounts from their monthly pension have received a letter explaining the decision.
With regard to part (c), disability pensions are reduced by court settlement compensation on a case-by-case basis. Each claimant receives a different level of compensation as set out in the court-ordered settlement agreement. Veterans Affairs Canada cannot comment on individual files due to privacy.
With regard to parts (d), (e) and (f), as of February 14, 2023, Veterans Affairs Canada has not been made aware of any appeals associated with the files where offsets were made. The Veterans Review and Appeal Board is unable to provide this information as the cases in their file system are not differentiated by reason of appeal.Question No. 1259—Mr. Tom Kmiec
With regard to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), since June 18, 2019: (a) how many Canadian businesses are investing in projects in the AIIB, broken down by year; (b) how much Canadian money is spent on projects in the AIIB, broken down by year; and (c) of the projects listed in (a), how many of these businesses are operating through, either directly or indirectly, the Canadian government?Hon. Chrystia Freeland (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, with regard to part (a), the Department of Finance is unaware of any Canadian businesses directly investing in AIIB-financed projects.
The Department of Finance has been informed that seven Canadian businesses have been awarded one or more contracts related to AIIB operations since Canada officially joined in March 2018. Such contracts were either in AIIB-financed projects or under AIIB’s own corporate procurement. Broken down by year, there were two contracts in 2022, three contracts in 2020, four contracts in 2019 and two contracts in 2018.
The Department of Finance also understands that Canadian banks are engaged with core functions of the AIIB. For example, the Bank of Montreal, the Bank of Nova Scotia and the Royal Bank of Canada are frequently engaged by the AIIB in their capacity as underwriters in bond issuances and as derivative trading counterparties.
With regard to part (b), Canada became a member of the AIIB on March 19, 2018, pursuant to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Agreement Act. Canada’s investment, like that of all other shareholders in the AIIB, is in the form of 20% paid-in capital and 80% callable capital. As of February 14, 2023, Canada has subscribed to 9,954 shares at the AIIB. The total value of these shares is $995.4 million U.S., of which $199.1 million U.S. is to be paid-in and the remaining portion is callable. To date, Canada has made four equal annual payments of $39.8 million U.S.
With regard to part (c), Canadian businesses that are awarded contracts, either in AIIB-financed projects or under AIIB’s own corporate procurement, do so on their own and do not operate through the Government of Canada.Question No. 1261—Mr. Richard Bragdon
With regard to inquiries and reports received by the RCMP in a language other than English or French, broken down by year for each of the last five years: (a) how many oral inquiries or reports did the RCMP receive, broken down by language; (b) how many written inquiries and reports, including emailed or online, did the RCMP receive, broken down by language; and (c) of the items in (b), how many were translated?Ms. Pam Damoff (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety, Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, or RCMP, undertook an extensive preliminary search in order to determine the amount of information that would fall within the scope of the question and the amount of time that would be required to prepare a comprehensive response. The RCMP does not consistently or centrally track the number of inquiries or reports received in languages other than English or French, nor does it have a standard mechanism for recording the provision of services, on an ad-hoc basis, in other languages. The RCMP concluded that producing and validating a comprehensive response to this question would require a manual collection of information that is not possible in the time allotted, and this could lead to the disclosure of incomplete and misleading information.Question No. 1263—Mr. Adam Chambers
With regard to the statement by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) Commissioner, Bob Hamilton, at the House of Commons Standing Committee of Public Accounts on January 26, 2023, that it "wouldn't be worth the effort" to fully review $15.5 billion in potentially ineligible Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS) payments: (a) did the Minister of National Revenue sign off or agree with this decision and, if not, why did the minister not intervene; (b) did the CRA perform a cost-benefit analysis prior to making the decision not to review these payments and, if so, (i) who conducted the analysis, (ii) what were the results; (c) how many recipients and what total dollar amount is represented by the potentially ineligible CEWS payments that the CRA considers to be (i) worth the effort, (ii) not worth the effort, to review; (d) what dollar amounts are represented by the amounts in (c) (i) and (ii); and (e) what is the estimated cost to the CRA of fully reviewing the $15.5 billion of payments?Hon. Diane Lebouthillier (Minister of National Revenue, Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, with respect to the above-noted question, what follows is the response from the Canada Revenue Agency, or CRA, as of February 14, 2023, the date of the question.
With regard to part (a), given the nature of the mandate of the CRA in administering Canada’s tax system, the Minister of National Revenue does not intervene in the operations of the CRA or in specific taxpayer files or audit processes. The CRA’s approach to audits is based on its assessment of compliance or non-compliance with existing legislation and regulations. Furthermore, as stated in the January 26 follow-up document tabled with PACP on page 12, the CRA has conducted audits of some of the CEWS recipients identified as being at risk by the Auditor General and to date has found that 97% of the amounts claimed of the examined files complied with program rules.
With regard to parts (b)(i) and (ii), the CRA employs a risk-based approach, in alignment with international best practices and with existing audit programs, that incorporates many elements, including cost-benefit considerations. The reason for this is that a risk-based approach ensures that the highest risk cases are addressed with appropriate compliance actions and optimizes recoveries while adhering to principles of sound stewardship of public funds. This approach ensures the CRA’s efforts are focused on claims that are of highest risk of being ineligible or overstated and allows the CRA to focus on risk without creating undue hardship for Canadian business owners as they continue to recover from the COVID-19 pandemic.
The CRA’s risk-based approach uses business intelligence tools and algorithms to assist in identifying claims that are considered high-risk and warrant a further review. These algorithms take into consideration a variety of data elements, including GST/HST, payroll and income tax filing information, claim-by-claim comparisons, compliance history and accounting methodologies, among others.
With regard to parts (c), (d), and (e), the CRA is interpreting these questions as relating to the $15.5 billion in CEWS payments identified in the Auditor General’s “Report 10—Specific COVID-19 Benefits”.
The CRA considered the “Report 10 —Specific COVID-19 Benefits” observations and can confirm that all CEWS claimants, including the 51,049 employers, representing $9.87 billion in CEWS payments identified by the Office of the Auditor General, were risk-assessed by the CRA using business intelligence tools. In addition, the CRA can confirm that a segment of the 51,049 claimants, 92% of which are small and medium businesses, has also been identified by the CRA for audit. Of the audits that have been completed so far, 97% of the amounts claimed have been approved without changes.
“Report 10—Specific COVID-19 Benefits” did not identify any businesses associated with the additional $5.6 billion in estimated payments. The CEWS audits completed to date demonstrate high levels of compliance and suggest that the number of ineligible claims may be significantly lower than estimated in “Report 10—Specific COVID-19 Benefits”.
As of January 3, 2023, the CRA has reviewed $33 billion through prepayment work and is auditing $14.7 billion, which is currently in progress or completed. The CRA is planning to continue this work until 2025 using a risk-based approach to target the claims with the most risk to ensure the integrity of the tax and benefits system.
The CRA is also carrying out additional postpayment validation reviews of approximately 70,000 businesses across all business subsidies. A specific breakdown for each subsidy is not available, as this information is not captured in this manner. Where intentional non-compliance has been identified, the CRA is pursuing these cases to the fullest extent.
The CRA conducts its compliance activities and allocates its resources commensurate with the risk, complexity and population segment of the business. As it relates to CEWS postpayment audit programs, resources were allocated following a risk-based model, in alignment with international best practices and other existing audit programs, that incorporates many elements, including cost-benefit considerations. Overall, results of CEWS compliance audits are demonstrating a high level of compliance. As noted above, cost-benefit considerations are incorporated into the risk-based approach model as factors for consideration.Question No. 1265—Ms. Louise Chabot
With regard to processing delays for applications for employment insurance benefits, as of February 10, 2023, broken down for Canada and Quebec (as a number, not a percentage): (a) how many unprocessed employment insurance applications had a processing time of over (i) 28 days, (ii) 60 days, (iii) 90 days; and (b) how many unprocessed employment insurance applications were attributable to fraud or attempted fraud?Mr. Irek Kusmierczyk (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion, Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, Canada's employment insurance, or EI, program plays an important role in providing support to workers during periods of temporary unemployment and in helping to stabilize the economy during periods of economic hardship.
Service Canada continues to put in place measures to provide effective and efficient service that meets the needs of clients and ensures that Canadians continue to have timely access to the EI benefits to which they are entitled when they need them most. Service Canada understands that delays in the payment of EI benefits can cause hardship to clients and is committed to ensuring that Canadians receive the benefits they are entitled to in a timely manner.
Between April 1, 2022, and January 31, 2023, Service Canada processed 78.1% of EI claims within 28 days. It sometimes takes longer than 28 days to process an EI claim, especially during peak periods or for the most complex cases. The most common reasons why it takes longer are, one, waiting for information or documentation from the claimant or employer; two, additional fact-finding is required; and three, certain files have been referred to integrity operations for review or investigation.
Once Service Canada has received all necessary information and/or documentation from the applicant or employer, a claim may be fully automated the same day, and payment will be received through direct deposit within two to three days. If a cheque needs to be issued, it could take five to 10 business days for the client to receive the payment. If an officer needs to render a decision about entitlement to benefits, these timelines would be extended depending on the complexity of the issue to be decided.
Between April 1, 2022, and January 31, 2023, the average number of days it took for a client to receive their first EI benefit payment was 23 days in Canada and 25 days in the Quebec region.
The EI workload initial and renewal, or I and R, claim inventory based on the breakdown of available weekly results is as follows. As of February 11, 2023, there were 175,894 I and R claims pending in the inventory. Of these, 74,578, or 42.4%, were 29 days or older, 31,729 were four to six weeks old, 19,344 were six to eight weeks old, 14,283 were eight to 12 weeks old and 9,222 were 12 weeks or older. Our data is reflective of the date of February 11 and not February 10. Data for employment insurance is pulled as of the week ending Saturday, as an EI week goes from Sunday to Saturday. We are unable to pull this breakdown on a Friday, which February 10 was, as it would not portray the true reflection of the pending results for the week.
Of the 175,894 I and R claims pending, there were 63,147 claims from the Quebec region. Of these, 36,648, or 58%, were 29 days or older, 12,881 were four to six weeks old, 9,213 were six to eight weeks old, 7,998 were eight to 12 weeks old and 6,556 were 12 weeks or older.
On November 3, 2022, the fall economic statement announced approximately $1 billion in funding for Service Canada to process EI claims faster, while reducing EI claim inventory and reducing contact centre wait times.
With regard to fraud in the EI workload, as of February 11, 2023, there were 4,104 claims in the I and R inventory with a stop payment because they were suspected of being fraudulent, and 3,435 were from the Quebec region. These have been referred to integrity operations for review or investigation. Of these, 2,797, or 68.2%, are 29 days or older and 2,371 are from the Quebec region.
Service Canada officers make every effort to finalize the processing of EI claims. In addition, officers provide claimants with information and options outside the EI program to support them while their claim is being processed.
Claimants must ensure that they have submitted all the information and documentation required to ensure timely processing, and have received their access code to complete their biweekly reports to reduce delays in receiving their benefits. Claimants should also consult the EI benefits web page, at https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/programs/ei/statistics.html#s1, for any additional information.Question No. 1267—Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen
With regard to the government’s response to the Report of the Independent External Comprehensive Review on the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces, prepared by the Honourable Louise Arbour in May 2022: (a) what is the total number of working groups and internal committees formed to respond to the recommendations; (b) what are the details of all working groups and committees formed, including the (i) title or name, (ii) recommendations being examined, (iii) number of anticipated or scheduled meetings, (iv) date of the first meeting, (v) number of members, (vi) names and titles of all individuals participating; and (c) for each committee or working group in (b), is the Minister of National Defence a member and, if so, what is the expected role of the minister?Mr. Bryan May (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence, Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, with regard to parts (a), (b) and (c), culture evolution is National Defence’s top priority, which is why we have mainstreamed efforts, that is, incorporated organizational changes directly within the National Defence structure, to build an inclusive and diverse defence team free from harassment, discrimination, racism, sexual misconduct and violence. These organizations are also directly charged with leading the implementation of external review recommendations in a holistic manner.
For example, the chief professional conduct and culture, or CPCC, was established in April 2021 to continue the defence team’s efforts to eliminate inappropriate sexual behaviour and other harmful conduct and to effect a culture change where all feel respected and included. The CPCC is composed of 378 personnel, including from the public service, the regular force and the reserve force. The CPCC is supporting the review of all external recommendations and the integration of the declaration of victims rights into the code of service discipline within the National Defence Act.
In October 2021, National Defence established the External Comprehensive Reviews Implementation Committee, or ECRIC. The committee is co-chaired by the vice-chief of the defence staff and judge advocate general. The committee is responsible for developing and overseeing a plan to implement the recommendations from former Justice Fish, former Justice Deschamps and other external reviews, including most recently the independent external comprehensive review, or IECR. All organizations within National Defence, both military and civilian, are invited to participate in the committee. The committee is supported by the Director General External Reviews Implementation Secretariat, which is composed of eight personnel, both military and civilian.
National Defence’s efforts to advance culture evolution are also discussed regularly by senior management at governance committees. In October 2022, the Minister of National Defence appointed Madame Jocelyne Therrien as external monitor to monitor the defence team’s efforts to implement the remaining recommendations.
Finally, while no new working groups were directly established to respond to the IECR recommendations, the pre-existing duty to report working group reconvened to examine recommendation 11 of the IECR. The group met biweekly from September to November 2022, led by the CPCC. Membership was not centrally tracked; however, it was composed of approximately 36 members at the working level, with substitutions being permitted, from the following organizations within National Defence: chief professional conduct and culture, the judge advocate general, military personnel command, the vice-chief of the defence staff, the Sexual Misconduct Support and Resource Centre; and the assistant deputy minister of finance. The Minister of National Defence was not a member of the working group.Question No. 1270—Mr. Adam Chambers
With regard to the government's early learning and child care plan: (a) what is the breakdown in the number of affordable (i) spaces, (ii) daycares or similar facilities, that have been created or signed into the program, broken down by each federal riding; and (b) if a breakdown of (a) by federal riding is not available, what is the breakdown by municipality or metropolitan region?Ms. Ya’ara Saks (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development, Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, in budget 2021, the Government of Canada committed to providing provinces and territories with over $27 billion over five years to build a Canada-wide early learning and child care, or ELCC, system. In their Canada-wide ELCC agreements, provinces and territories have agreed to develop action plans that detail how they will achieve the commitments outlined in their respective agreements, which are intended to increase access to high-quality, affordable, flexible and inclusive child care for families in Canada. The agreements and associated action plans are publicly available at the following link: https://www.canada.ca/en/early-learning-child-care-agreement/agreements-provinces-territories.html.
Commitments outlined under the Canada-wide ELCC agreements are at the provincial and territorial levels and are tracked on the basis of fees and spaces created. For example, Manitoba has committed to creating 23,000 spaces across the province by March 2026. As such, the provinces or territories are not required to report data by riding or municipality. Question No. 1271—Mr. Scot Davidson
With regard to government expenditures on home Internet services for public service employees: (a) what is the government's policy on which employees are eligible to have their home Internet service paid for; (b) as of January 1, 2023, how many employees have had their home Internet service paid for by the government, broken down by department, agency, or other government entity; and (c) what was the total in expenditures by the government related to home Internet services for employees during the (i) 2022 calendar year, (ii) 2021-22 fiscal year?Mr. Greg Fergus (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and to the President of the Treasury Board), Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, while the information requested is not centrally tracked by the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, or TBS, as per the directive on telework, which is at https://www.tbs-sct.canada.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=32636, employees who wish to participate in a formal telework arrangement, or who are already doing so, are responsible for assuming all utility costs related to maintaining their telework location.
Madam Speaker, if the government's responses to Questions Nos. 1254, 1255, 1257, 1258, 1260, 1262, 1264, 1266, 1268, 1269, 1272-1280, 1283 and 1284 could made orders for return, these returns would be tabled immediately.
Some hon. members: Agreed.
Question No. 1254—Mr. Todd Doherty
With regard to the government’s commitment in budget 2017 to provide $5 billion over 10 years to support mental health initiatives: (a) how much of the money has been spent to date; and (b) what is the breakdown of how the money in (a) was spent, including which initiatives have been funded and how much has been spent on each initiative?
(Return tabled)Question No. 1255—Ms. Bonita Zarrillo
With regard to the funding of operational stress injury clinics and satellite services by Veterans Affairs Canada, broken down by province or territory: (a) what are the details of each clinic or satellite service, including (i) the name of the clinic, (ii) the number of veterans, Canadian Armed Forces members, or active RCMP members served, (iii) the services available, (iv) whether the clinic is for-profit, (v) the regulatory oversight body; (b) what are the details of the funding arrangement with each clinic or satellite service in (a), including the (i) duration of the existing arrangement, (ii) amount received, (iii) services to be provided with public funding; and (c) for each clinic in (a), what is the process for complaint escalation for common issues, such as quality of service received, client satisfaction, or wait times?
(Return tabled)Question No. 1257—Mr. Alexandre Boulerice
With regard to the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat's announcement of the return-to-office plan for federal public servants, broken down by office building or workspace in the National Capital Region: (a) were the buildings assessed by heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) professionals to improve ventilation; (b) were new HVAC systems installed or improved to reduce the transmission of airborne viruses; (c) was ventilation improved in the buildings or workspaces; (d) were new workspaces provided or created with the intention of creating physical distance between public servants; (e) was proper ventilation in the workspaces or buildings considered in the decision to have employees return to the office; and (f) is personal protective equipment available at no cost to employees in these buildings or workplaces?
(Return tabled)Question No. 1258—Mr. Tom Kmiec
With regard to citizenship ceremonies completed in 2022, broken down by month: (a) how many citizenship ceremonies took place (i) in person, (ii) virtually, (iii) in a hybrid way; (b) how many individuals (i) were scheduled to become Canadian citizens, (ii) became Canadians citizens at the ceremonies, (iii) were considered no-shows, broken down by each type of ceremony in (a); (c) how many individuals scheduled to become citizens requested to attend a ceremony (i) in person, (ii) virtually; and (d) of the requests in (c), how many were granted?
(Return tabled)Question No. 1260—Mr. Warren Steinley
With regard to the statement made by the Minister of Labour on February 9, 2023, in the Senate that "I need more workers in the oil and gas industry, not less. We need more.": (a) has the Minister of Labour taken any action aimed at increasing the number of workers in the oil and gas sector and, if so, what action has been taken; (b) has the Minister of Labour taken any action aimed at ensuring that oil and gas companies are able to retain workers currently employed in the oil and gas sector; (c) how many oil and gas workers have received training through the government's Just Transition Initiative to date, in total and broken down by program; (d) how many workers does Natural Resources Canada estimate are no longer working in the oil and gas sector as a result of the government's Just Transition strategy; and (e) what action, if any, is the Minister of Natural Resources taking to get more workers in the oil and gas industry?
(Return tabled)Question No. 1262—Mr. Eric Duncan
With regard to Health Canada's funding for PrescribeIT and e-Prescribing: (a) how much funding has the government provided to Prescribe IT (i) directly, (ii) indirectly, through the Canada Health lnfoway, broken down by year since November 4, 2015; (b) what are Health Canada's estimates based on the reports it has received as to how many (i) doctors, (ii) pharmacists, used PrescribeIT, broken down by each of the last five years; (c) what is the breakdown of (b) by province or territory; and (d) what metrics is the government using to measure the success or failure of Prescribe IT and how has the project measured up to the metrics?
(Return tabled)Question No. 1264—Mr. John Nater
With regard to information services (IS) employees (Treasury Board code 305) within the civil service, broken down by department, agency, or other government entity: (a) how many IS workers are currently employed by the government, in total; and (b) how many executives or workers, at the EX level or higher, do the IS workers report to, in total?
(Return tabled)Question No. 1266—Mr. Kelly McCauley
With regard to the Canada Revenue Agency and post-payment assessment for compliance of Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS) recipients: (a) what risk parameters are used in assessing whether CEWS payments need post-payment verification; (b) how is each risk parameter used in assessing whether CEWS payments need post-payment verification and are all CEWS payments assessed for post-payment verification using the same formula; (c) what data was provided to the Office of the Auditor General in conjunction with their 2022 audit of the CEWS outlined in 2022 Report 10 published by the Office of the Auditor General; (d) considering the statement made by Bob Hamilton in his testimony at the Standing Committee on Public Accounts on January 26, 2023, what specific factors are great indicators of whether someone is eligible for the CEWS or not; (e) what data sources are considered to identify risk and build audit plans; (f) how is each data source used in the identification of risk and construction of an audit plan; (g) until January 31, 2021 inclusive, how many companies who received the CEWS were audited for suspected non-compliance, and how many of those audits (i) have been completed, (ii) were undertaken only after the company's final CEWS payment period, (iii) resulted in a finding of non-compliance; and (h) how many companies at a high risk of non-compliance were not audited due to a low potential for recovery?
(Return tabled)Question No. 1268—Mr. Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe
With regard to the Government of Canada’s discussions with the United States of America on the Safe Third Country Agreement, since January 1, 2022: (a) how many meetings, virtual, in-person or by phone, have there been where Roxham Road was discussed; (b) for each meeting in (a), which public office holders participated in those discussions, including their full name and title; (c) what briefing documents, internal memos or emails were written in preparation for or as a result of those meetings; (d) which departments were involved in preparing for those discussions?
(Return tabled)Question No. 1269—Ms. Lori Idlout
With regard to applications for registration under the Indian Act, broken down by province or territory and fiscal year since January 2016: (a) what is the total number of applications (i) received, (ii) processed; (b) what is the total number of applications that were (i) approved, (ii) denied; (c) how many applications for registration were processed within (i) less than six months, (ii) six to eight months, (iii) 12 to 18 months, (iv) 18 to 24 months, (v) longer than 24 months; (d) what is the total number of applications in (a) from individuals affected by known sex-based inequities in the Indian Act; and (e) as of February 9, 2023, what is the current backlog of applications for registration that remain unprocessed?
(Return tabled)Question No. 1272—Mr. Warren Steinley
With regard to section 31 of the Conflict of Interest Act: what are the details of all administrative costs which were incurred by and reimbursed to public office holders, since November 4, 2015, including, for each cost, the (i) title of the public office holder who incurred the cost, (ii) amount, (iii) date, (iv) description of items reimbursed?
(Return tabled)Question No. 1273—Mrs. Laila Goodridge
With regard to pharmaceutical drugs, treatments and therapies authorized by Health Canada since January 1, 2022: (a) how many treatments or therapies for rare diseases, known as orphan drugs, were granted authorization; and (b) what are the details of each drug in (a), including the (i) name of the drug, (ii) date of the approval, (iii) purpose of the drug, including the disease or condition treated by the drug?
(Return tabled)Question No. 1274—Mr. Richard Bragdon
With regard to the First-Time Home Buyer Incentive (FTHBI) announced by the government in 2019, from September 1, 2019, to date: (a) how many applicants have applied for mortgages through the FTHBI program, broken down by province and municipality; (b) of the applicants in (a), how many have been approved and have accepted mortgages through the FTHBI program, broken down by province and municipality; (c) of the applicants listed in (b), how many approved applicants have been issued the incentive in the form of a shared equity mortgage; (d) what is the total value of incentives, shared equity mortgages, under the program that have been issued, in dollars; (e) for applicants who have obtained mortgages through the FTHBI, what is the (i) value of each mortgage granted, (ii) average mortgage value of the mortgages granted; and (f) what is the total aggregate amount of money lent to homebuyers through the FTHBI?
(Return tabled)Question No. 1275—Mr. Philip Lawrence
With regard to section 19 of the Conflict of Interest Act: (a) what is the government's understanding of Parliament's requirement that "Compliance with this Act is a condition of a person's appointment or employment as a public office holder"; (b) does the understanding described in (a) vary with respect to (i) the Prime Minister, (ii) ministers and ministers of state, (iii) parliamentary secretaries, (iv) ministerial exempt staff, (v) other public office holders; and (c) what impact has the Prime Minister's multiple breaches of the act had on the government's ability to require ministers and parliamentary secretaries to abide by the act?
(Return tabled)Question No. 1276—Mr. Philip Lawrence
With regard to the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner's February 14, 2023, recommendation "that the government consider mandating all ministers and parliamentary secretaries to receive training from the [Commissioner's] Office": (a) does the government accept the commissioner's recommendation and, if so, when will training (i) begin, (ii) be completed by; (b) on what date is the Prime Minister scheduled to receive the additional training; (c) if the answer to (a) is negative, why; and (d) what training have ministers, including the Prime Minister and parliamentary secretaries, received from the Commissioner's Office since November 4, 2015, broken down by (i) minister or parliamentary secretary, (ii) date of the training, (iii) subject-matter, topics or rules covered during the training?
(Return tabled)Question No. 1277—Mr. Marty Morantz
With regard to compliance measures taken by the Canada Revenue Agency, broken down by income bracket and for each of the last five tax years: (a) what was the total number of filers in each income bracket; (b) what was the number of requests for additional documentation; (c) what was the number of audits conducted; (d) what was the number of criminal investigations instigated; (e) what is the rate per thousand tax filers represented by each action from (b) to (d); and (f) how much additional taxes were due as a result of each action from (b) to (d)?
(Return tabled)Question No. 1278—Mrs. Tracy Gray
With regard to the government's National Housing Strategy, since November 4, 2015: (a) has any funding been provided through the strategy to (i) Encasa Financial Inc., (ii) Mainstreet Equity Corp., (iii) Pan Pacific Mercantile Group, (v) Atira Women's Resource Society, (vi) Southwest Properties limited, (vii) Saskatchewan First Nations Water Association Inc.; and (b) what are the details for each payment in (a), including the (i) recipient, (ii) date, (iii) amount, (iv) funding stream under which the money was allocated, (v) project description or purpose of the funding?
(Return tabled)Question No. 1279—Mr. Gord Johns
With regard to federal contracts given to Deloitte Canada for the purpose of creating a nation-wide system to track the roll-out of COVID-19 vaccinations: (a) what is the value of all contracts, including, for each, the (i) date of the contract, (ii) value of the contract, (iii) products to be delivered, (iv) timeline for delivery; (b) on what date was the nation-wide computer system rolled out; (c) with which provincial and territorial vaccination systems was the national system connected to; (d) what enhancements, improvements, and added functionality did the national system, created by Deloitte Canada, make; (e) what are the details of all national system outages, including, for each, the (i) duration of the outage, (ii) functionality and services impacted, (iii) costs incurred by the federal government to restore functionality, (iv) number of users impacted; and (f) does the government own the intellectual property for any products created under the terms of these contracts?
(Return tabled)Question No. 1280—Mrs. Cheryl Gallant
With regard to the Department of National Defence, and in reference to vaccine doses sorted by brand listed on the government's response to Order Paper question Q-1069: (a) what was the number of each type of injection, including anti-COVID-19 injections, administered to each member of the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF); (b) what was number of myocarditis cases that were reported after receiving the anti-COVlD-19 injections; (c) what are the details, including the numbers, of all non-serious and serious adverse events after receiving anti-COVID-19 injections; and (d) for each non-serious and serious event listed in (c), what is the breakdown by age of the CAF members?
(Return tabled)Question No. 1283—Mr. Gord Johns
With regard to federal contracts awarded since fiscal year 2015-16, broken down by fiscal year: what is the total value of contracts awarded to (i) McKinsey & Company, (ii) Deloitte, (iii) PricewaterhouseCoopers, (iv) Accenture, (v) KPMG, (vi) Ernst and Young?
(Return tabled)Question No. 1284—Mr. Gord Johns
With regard to services provided to Export Development Canada (EDC) by Accenture related to the administration of the Canada Emergency Business Account (CEBA) program: (a) what are the details of all contracts given to Accenture, including the (i) date of the contract, (ii) value of the contract, (iii) products to be delivered, (iv) timeline for delivery; (b) what is the total cost of external services procured for the administration of CEBA; (c) what is the total amount of internal resources at EDC committed to the administration of CEBA; and (d) what is the total amount of external services procured through Accenture for the (i) repayment of loans, (ii) collection of loans deemed ineligible after delivery, (iii) collection of fraudulently obtained loans?
Madam Speaker, finally, I would ask that all remaining questions be allowed to stand at this time, please.
Some hon. members: Agreed.