Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Nos. 267, 277, 278, 280, 283, 286 to 289, 295, 299 and 301 to 303.
Question No. 267—Mr. Daniel Blaikie
With regard to the annual funding provided to Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, since fiscal year 2015-16, broken down by year and by each of the entities it owns: (a) what is the detail of the annual funding provided, broken down by its expenditures for (i) Canadian Nuclear Laboratories, (ii) Canadian National Energy Alliance; (b) what is the financial position of each owned entity, broken down by (i) total financial assets, (ii) total liabilities, (iii) total net debt, (iv) total non-financial assets, (v) total accumulated deficit, (vi) total revenues, (vii) total expenses, (viii) total surplus or deficit, (ix) accumulated deficit related to operations at the beginning and the end of the year; and (c) do the Canadian Nuclear Laboratories and the Canadian National Energy Alliance plan to release their own quarterly and annual financial statements, and if not, why not?Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson (Minister of Natural Resources, Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, AECL’s payments to its contractors are provided in its annual report, available publicly at www.aecl.ca/reports-resources/.
As part of the restructuring of AECL, in 2014 the CNL was created and operated as a wholly owned subsidiary of AECL until September 2015, at which point the shares of the CNL were transferred to a private sector contractor selected as part of a government-run procurement process for the management and operations of AECL’s sites. As such, for part of the 2015-16 fiscal year, the CNL was a wholly owned subsidiary of AECL; however, its financial statements were integrated into those of AECL. For the subsequent period, the CNL has operated as a private sector entity. As a result, AECL does not maintain the financial records of this separate private organization. Information on AECL’s financial position is provided in its annual reports, available publicly at www.aecl.ca/reports-resources/.
AECL is not responsible for either the CNL or the CNEA, both of which are private sector organizations. As such, AECL does not maintain information regarding the respective financial position of each entity. Question No. 277—Ms. Laurel Collins
With regard to the government's commitment to plant two billion trees by 2030 and create almost 4,300 jobs, broken down by fiscal year and by federal riding: (a) how many jobs have been created to date, broken down by (i) seasonal employment, (ii) full-time employment, (iii) part-time employment; and (b) is the promise to create 4,300 jobs an annual commitment, or a cumulative total to be achieved by 2030?Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson (Minister of Natural Resources, Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Natural Resources, with support from the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, was mandated to develop and implement a plan to plant two billion trees over 10 years as part of a broader commitment to natural climate solutions.
The program is on track to plant two billion trees over 10 years, resulting in a permanent increase in forest cover in Canada. The program provided funding to plant 30 million trees during the 2021 season, and that number will increase as the government’s partners ramp up their activities.
The 2 Billion Trees program is a proposal-based grants and contribution program. Interested and eligible organizations are required to submit project proposals. Expert evaluation panels assess projects to ensure they meet program objectives and co-benefits, including carbon sequestration, biodiversity, habitat restoration and human well-being. Projects must also pass risk and due diligence requirements before they are retained for funding via contribution agreements. As a result, specific tree-planting locations and any related employment benefits will depend on the funding proposals put forward by provinces, territories, indigenous communities, and organizations across Canada.
Following a call for expressions of interest in February 2021, the program received 120 applications for early tree planting in 2021. NRCan has finalized most of its funding agreements to support the planting of over 30 million trees across the country, in both urban and rural areas. Many of the projects began planting in spring 2021, and planting continued through the 2021 planting season. NRCan proactively discloses these grants and contributions on Open Canada at https: //search. open.canada.ca/en/gc/.
Similar to other government grants and contribution programs, contribution agreements with federal funding recipients outline planned projects or activities. In the case of the 2 Billion Trees program, the exact number of trees planted is reported by the funding recipients on a quarterly basis and after all of their planting activities have been completed. Program recipients will have 60 days after the end of the fiscal year on March 31, 2022, to provide their final reporting. At that stage, NRCan will consolidate and validate the data and is expected to publicly disclose the results on the 2021 tree planting season in spring 2022.
Funding recipients are required to report on their program activities, including details on the number and types of jobs created. Canada’s 2 Billion Trees program will create up to 4,300 jobs across the country. The data collected from funding recipients will serve as the basis of performance reporting for the program. Details on the program’s performance indicators can be found at https://www.canada.ca /en/campaign/ 2-billion-trees/ natural-climate-solutions -fund-performance- indicators.html.Question No. 278—Ms. Laurel Collins
With regard to recommendation 4.43 in Report 4 on non-tax subsidies for fossil fuels of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development: (a) following consultations to solicit feedback, has Environment and Climate Change Canada developed clearly defined criteria to determine whether a fossil fuel non-tax subsidy is inefficient, and, if so, what are these criteria and what is the department’s definition of “inefficient”; (b) does Environment and Climate Change Canada still refuse to implement this recommendation; and (c) what is the status and expected completion date of the review of inefficient fossil fuel subsidies as part the G20 peer review process with Argentina?Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, Environment and Climate Change Canada is continuing its work with a number of federal departments and agencies to develop a comprehensive framework and guidance to assess whether a non-tax measure may constitute an “inefficient fossil fuel subsidy”. The department is finalizing its criteria for determining “inefficiency” and is conducting ongoing consultations as part of the process.
ECCC recognizes that the issues of economic, social and environmental sustainability are important considerations, and the framework and guidance will include those considerations. The department will assess how to strike a balance between the issues of economic, social and environmental sustainability. ECCC and the Department of Finance are working together to finalize the framework and guidance to identify and assess relevant measures in order to fulfill the G20 commitment.
Canada recently committed to accelerate the timing of its G20 commitment to phase out or rationalize inefficient fossil fuel subsidies from 2025 to 2023. A report listing Canada’s inefficient fossil fuel subsidies is being developed and will be submitted to a panel of experts as part of Canada’s G20 peer review process with Argentina.Question No. 280—Mr. Daniel Blaikie
With regard to the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) and the one-time payment to recipients announced in the fiscal update of December 14, 2021: (a) what are the eligibility criteria for the one-time payment; (b) when does the government expect to begin making one-time payments; (c) will this one-time payment be taxable; and (d) will this one-time payment be included in the definition of income for purposes of eligibility for the GIS in 2022?Hon. Kamal Khera (Minister of Seniors, Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, with regard to (a), in order for individuals to be eligible for this one-time grant payment for guaranteed income supplement-Canada emergency response benefits, it is proposed that recipients must be eligible to receive the GIS or allowances in March 2022, and have received a pandemic benefit in 2020, been in receipt of GIS or allowance benefits in June 2021 and faced a reduction or loss in GIS or allowance benefits in July 2021.
With regard to (b), payments will be made in April 2022. A small number of payments, up to 1,000, will be issued in March 2022 to address the immediate financial hardship that some seniors are experiencing.
With regard to (c), the proposed one-time grant payment for GIS-CERB recipients would be non-taxable and non-reportable.
With regard to (d), the proposed one-time grant payment for GIS-CERB recipients would be non-taxable. As such, it would not be included in the definition of income for the GIS or allowance.Question No. 283—Mr. Colin Carrie
With regard to Health Canada and the Pfizer/BioNtech Phase 3 vaccine clinical trial that was used for a population-wide approval of novel medical intervention: (a) what are, in percentages, the benefits conferred by vaccination versus control (placebo) considering all-cause morbidity (level 1 evidence of benefit or harm) in the said trial in terms of (i) adverse events, (ii) severe adverse events, (iii) serious adverse events, (iv) deaths; (b) what is, in terms of percentage, the amount that the vaccine reduced the transmission of COVID-19 in the vaccine arm compared to the placebo arm in the said trial; (c) what were the bio-markers for which trial participants were systematically tested at the commencement, during, and at the conclusion of the trial to test for the safety of the product evaluated in the said trial; and (d) what were, in terms of percentage, the absolute risk reduction provided by the vaccine?Mr. Adam van Koeverden (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health and to the Minister of Sport, Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, Health Canada has authorized several COVID-19 vaccines for use in Canada. Each of these underwent a careful scientific review and met our standards for safety, efficacy and quality.
Information about all of the authorized vaccines can be found on the COVID-19 vaccines and treatments portal, https://bit.ly/3EH07IB, by clicking on the individual vaccine names and then the “all resources” tab. For each of the vaccines that have been authorized, detailed information can be accessed, such as the product monograph, which is the prescribing information for consumers and health care professionals on a manufacturer insert, the summary basis of a decision, which provides a detailed overview of the data considered by Health Canada, and the terms and conditions placed on the authorizations, which are the requirements for further data submission that manufacturers are required to meet.
Note that information in the portal is being updated regularly and can be found at https://bit.ly/3lo1svI. Also, the clinical study reports related to the approval of Comirnaty can be accessed on Health Canada’s public release of clinical information website, at https://bit.ly/3GFvDHE. It has specific details related to various aspects of the review, including the summaries of clinical efficacy and safety.
Information on the questions regarding the trial, including those on adverse events and severe adverse events, the biomarkers for which trial participants were systematically tested, and on the absolute risk reduction provided by the vaccine, is all publicly available. The information can be found at https://bit.ly/3HLiZYU. Please note that how the vaccine reduced the transmission of COVID-19 in the vaccine arm compared with the placebo arm was not assessed during the said clinical trials.
For public convenience, here are some useful links. The product monograph for Comirnaty, with a date of revision of January 20, 2022, is at https://bit.ly/3uEsNQF, and the summary basis of decision for Comirnaty is at https://bit.ly/3GNlhWg.Question No. 286—Mr. Damien C. Kurek
With regard to the impact of the federal carbon tax on registered charities: (a) why are registered charities not eligible to receive Climate Action Incentive payments even though they are forced to pay higher prices on goods as a result of the federal carbon tax; (b) what are the government’s estimates on the amount of federal carbon tax paid by charities or projected to be paid by charities, broken down by province, in (i) 2019, (ii) 2020, (iii) 2021, (iv) 2022, (v) 2023, (vi) 2024; (c) what are the government’s estimates related to (b) for charities who do work in Canada in primarily (i) urban settings, (ii) rural settings; (d) does the government have any plans to directly reimburse charities for the amount they pay in carbon taxes, and, if so, what are the plans, including the formula used to determine how much each charity will receive; and (e) what are the government’s estimates on the reductions in donations charities may receive in (i) 2022, (ii) 2023, (iii) 2024, as a result of Canadians having less disposable income because of the carbon tax and other inflationary pressures?Hon. Chrystia Freeland (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, under the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, or GGPPA, all proceeds from the federal fuel charge must be returned to the jurisdiction of origin.
In the case of the two voluntary jurisdictions of Yukon and Nunavut, all direct proceeds are returned to the territorial governments, and these governments can in turn return proceeds to any sector of the economy they see fit, including the non-profit sector.
In the case of jurisdictions not meeting the federal benchmark, those being Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, the bulk of the direct proceeds from the fuel charge is returned to households through climate action incentive payments, known as CAI payments. Remaining proceeds are being returned to small and medium-sized enterprises, or SMEs; indigenous communities; and other organizations.
Monthly fuel charge returns only account for aggregate amounts by fuel type and by jurisdiction. Typically, once the fuel charge has been paid by a fuel producer or distributor, there is no further reporting of who ultimately directly bears the cost of the federal fuel charge. The amount of the fuel charge is ultimately embedded in the price of fuels sold to consumers and other organizations.
In the four provinces where CAI payments are available, the majority of households receive more in CAI payments than they incur in carbon pricing-related costs. This would mitigate the impact of the federal carbon pricing system on disposable incomes.Question No. 287—Mr. Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay
With regard to the intermodal terminal project for the storage and transshipment of propane gas that is currently being discussed and that would be located in the Municipality of Upton, Quebec: (a) has Distribution Upton requested ministerial approval for the construction of a new railroad that links with the transfer station in the Municipality of Upton; (b) has Propane Suroît requested ministerial approval for the construction of a new railroad that links with the transfer station in the Municipality of Upton; (c) does St Laurent & Atlantique have the certificates to proceed with the transshipment of propane; (d) does St. Laurent & Atlantique need to make any changes to the existing rail line for the terminal project; and (e) has St. Laurent & Atlantique filed any applications for adding rails to the proposed terminal construction site?Hon. Omar Alghabra (Minister of Transport, Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, Transport Canada does not have information on this, as the Canadian Transportation Agency is the authorizing body. The Canadian Transportation Agency is unaware of the proposed intermodal terminal project for the storage and transshipment of propane gas. The agency confirms that to date it has not received any request from entities mentioned in the query.
With regard to part (a) and part (b), to date the agency has not received any request.
With regard to part (c), yes, St. Lawrence Atlantic Railroad (Quebec) Inc. has a valid certificate of fitness that authorizes them to operate a railway that includes the carriage, per calendar year, of less than 4,000 tonnes of toxic inhalation hazard materials, and other dangerous goods, other than crude oil, as defined in section 2 of the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, 1992, SC 1992, chapter 34.
With regard to part (d), as per section 94 of the Canada Transportation Act, St. Lawrence Atlantic Railroad (Quebec) Inc. has to notify the agency in writing if there are any changes to the construction or operation that may affect the liability insurance coverage. To date the agency has not received any notification of any such changes from St. Lawrence Atlantic Railroad (Quebec) Inc.
With regard to part (e), to date the agency has not received any application.Question No. 288—Mr. John Barlow
With regard to the Federal Ministerial Coordinating Committee on PEI Potatoes: (a) what is the exact mandate of the committee; (b) what specific goals or assignments have been issued to each minister on the committee, broken down by minister; (c) what is the time period provided related to each goal or assignment in (b); and (d) what are the (i) dates, (ii) locations, (iii) ministers in attendance, for each meeting of the committee which occurred to date?Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, with regard to (a), the committee is a forum for exchange of information, development of strategies and coordination of activities to resolve the trade situation, while minimizing negative impacts on the P.E.I. potato sector. It is an ad hoc interdepartmental setting where ministers bring together their perspectives from their respective mandates, as well as views from their engagement on the issue, to ensure a coordinated and consistent approach to advancing government objectives.
With regard to (b), the committee members include me, as the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, under my mandate for the growth and development of a competitive, innovative, and sustainable Canadian agriculture and agri-food sector; the Minister of Official Languages and Minister responsible for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, under her mandate to create opportunities for economic growth in the region by helping businesses become more competitive, innovative, and productive; the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Infrastructure and Communities, under his mandate to engage with lead ministers to ensure a well-coordinated and strategic approach on key priorities that have significant provincial and territorial implications; the Minister of International Trade, Export Promotion, Small Business and Economic Development, under her mandate to engage the United States to address bilateral trade issues and protectionist measures, including with respect to the agricultural sector; and the Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence, in his role as member of Parliament for Cardigan.
I am the government’s policy lead on the potato wart file. The Minister of Official Languages and I are co-chairs of this committee. In response to the P.E.I. potato situation, each minister is undertaking activities in line with their respective mandates and responsibilities. The committee is ensuring those activities are coordinated and complementary and are collectively advancing resolution of the situation.
With regard to (c), the creation of the committee was announced on January 7, 2022. The committee meets via video conference or teleconference approximately every two weeks, and will continue until such time as the members agree to dissolve the committee.
With regard to (d), the first meeting, and the only one to be held prior to January 27, took place January 13, 2022, via video conference. I attended with my colleagues, the hon. ministers of official languages, veterans affairs and international trade.Question No. 289—Mr. Ron Liepert
With regard to the government's contract with Switch Health to conduct COVID-19 PCR tests for international passengers arriving at the Calgary International Airport: (a) what is the number of COVID-19 PCR tests performed on travellers who entered Canada at the Calgary International Airport between December 1, 2021, and January 31, 2022; (b) what percentage of the tests in (a) were positive for COVID-19; and (c) what are the details of the contract with Switch Health related to the testing for international arrivals at the Calgary International Airport including (i) the value or amount, (ii) the start and end dates of the contract, (iii) whether the contract was sole-sourced or awarded through a competitive bid process, (iv) the number of PCR tests expected to be conducted under the contract?Mr. Adam van Koeverden (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health and to the Minister of Sport, Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, Switch Health reported results for 78,377 COVID-19 PCR tests from international arrivals entering the Calgary International Airport between December 1, 2021, and January 31, 2022. Of these tests, 4% were positive.
The scope of the contract with Switch Health and its basis of payment involves the entire testing process from start to finish, including on-site sample collection, as well as several deliverables in support of the Public Health Agency of Canada’s testing efforts and reporting requirements. These are centrally managed overhead costs and are not directly assigned to testing performed at a specified port of entry. Accordingly, PHAC is unable to confirm a specific value or amount that can be attributed definitively to the testing of travellers at the Calgary International Airport.
The Switch Health contract was awarded on February 20, 2021, with an end date of February 28, 2022. The contract originally awarded to Switch Health was done through a competitive procurement process in January 2021 that was carried out by Public Services and Procurement Canada under solicitation H1051-204342. More information can be found at https://buyandsell.gc.ca/procurement-data/tender-notice/PW-AC-007-79580.
The contract was set up to allow the flexibility to process a variable number of tests as required, based on changes to border policy in response to the changing nature of the pandemic. As such, the contracts do not contain a set number of PCR tests expected to be conducted for the Calgary International Airport.Question No. 295—Mr. Martin Shields
With regard to the government's Wellness Together website and the PocketWell application: (a) have there been any data or privacy breaches or related incidents concerning the website, application, or any data collected since January 1, 2020, and, if so, what are the details, including the (i) incident summary, (ii) type of data involved, (iii) number of users whose data was involved, (iv) corrective action taken, including whether or not the users were notified, (v) date of the incident; and (b) what specific processes are in place to deal with any data or privacy breaches concerning the website or the application?Mr. Adam van Koeverden (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health and to the Minister of Sport, Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, there has been no breach of Wellness Together Canada, WTC, portal or PocketWell app privacy or data. The Government of Canada commissioned the portal and app, funding both their establishment and maintenance. They are led by a consortium of established leaders in mental health and substance use care, including Stepped Care Solutions, Homewood Health and Kids Help Phone. The contract between the Government of Canada and the WTC consortium stipulates that all involved organizations, resources and third party service providers are subject to legal privacy obligations, privacy policies or contractual agreements that include appropriate privacy standards. All services must comply with applicable privacy and health information legislation to maintain the security of client information.
The WTC consortium contracts Greenspace Health to host and maintain the WTC portal platform. Privacy practices for WTC Portal and PocketWell app by Greenspace are service organization control, SOC, type 2 compliant, meeting the industry standard for best practices. SOC 2 defines criteria for managing customer data based on five trust service principles: security, availability, processing integrity, confidentiality and privacy. WTC’s SOC 2 compliance means that an independent auditing firm has reviewed and examined their control objectives and activities and tested the controls to ensure operational excellence. The independent auditing firm found that WTC complies with these principles and has the proper systems and controls in place to protect client information and interests.
Specific details on response activities under Greenspace’s privacy breach policy cannot be disclosed, as protected proprietary information. However, any breach would be subject to Greenspace’s incident response plan, which structures Greenspace’s investigation and resolution of privacy and security incidents using a three-phased approach: identification and notification of relevant individuals, partners and authorities in accordance with applicable laws and contractual obligations; containment and eradication of the threat; and post-incident activity, including reporting, review and prevention.
The incident response training and testing policy requires Greenspace to be prepared to respond to all potential and actual security and privacy incidents by training an incident response team on the company’s incident response plan, and by conducting incident response exercises.
With regard to the authorizations of the collection of datasets by the Minister of Public Safety since January 1, 2016: (a) which classes of Canadian datasets were authorized for collection by the minister pursuant to section 11.03 (1) of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act, broken down by year and date of authorization; and (b) for each class of datasets authorized by collection, is the authorization still valid, or has it since been rescinded, and, if so, on what date was it rescinded?Ms. Pam Damoff (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety, Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, with the coming into force of the National Security Act, 2017, on June 13, 2019, Parliament provided CSIS with the authority to collect and retain datasets relevant to its mandate while implementing appropriate measures to ensure the privacy of Canadians.
As part of these measures, the Minister of Public Safety must determine annually, by order, the classes of Canadian datasets that the service may collect under section 11.05 of the CSIS Act. The minister may determine that a class of Canadian datasets is authorized to be collected only if the querying or exploitation of any dataset in the class could lead to results that are relevant to the performance of CSIS’s duties and functions. This includes the ability to collect intelligence regarding threats to the security of Canada, to take measures to reduce threats to the security of Canada or to collect foreign intelligence within Canada. This decision must then be reviewed and approved by the intelligence commissioner, or IC, before it can take effect.
In 2019, the Minister of Public Safety issued an order determining four classes of Canadian datasets. The IC found the minister’s conclusions to be reasonable and consequently approved the determination of these four classes. The titles of these classes of Canadian datasets are classified and have not been released publicly. In 2021, the minister again determined the same four classes with minor adjustments, to respond to recommendations from the IC. Again, in 2022, the minister issued a determination for these same four classes of Canadian datasets, which the IC again found to be reasonable. None of these determinations have ever been refused or rescinded by the minister or the IC.
CSIS is working closely with the Department of Justice to ensure correct implementation of the requirements of this new and complex authority. The service is working cautiously to implement the framework, which is built upon layers of oversight and review to ensure the privacy interests of Canadians are adequately protected as it fulfills its national security mandateQuestion No. 301—Mr. Adam Chambers
With regard to the Shared Equity Mortgage Providers Fund that launched on July 31, 2019: (a) how many applications have been (i) received, (ii) approved to date; (b) what is the total value of funds distributed to date through the program; and (c) how many units have been built under the program?Ms. Soraya Martinez Ferrada (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Housing and Diversity and Inclusion (Housing), Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, the shared equity mortgage providers, or SEMP, fund supports existing shared equity mortgage providers. Repayable loans are offered to eligible proponents to commence new housing projects where shared equity mortgages will be provided, under stream one, or to fund lending directly through shared equity mortgage providers to first-time homebuyers, under stream two. The fund aims to assist in the completion of 1,500 new units and help at least 1,500 homebuyers buy their first home.
The program offers to eligible proponents repayable loans from one of two possible funding streams. Preconstruction loans, under stream one, provide funding for preconstruction cost loans to commence new housing projects in which shared equity mortgages will be provided to homebuyers via SEMPs. Shared equity mortgages, SEM, under stream two, provide loans to SEMPs to fund shared equity mortgages that they provide directly to first-time homebuyers.
For more details visit https://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/professionals/project-funding-and-mortgage-financing/funding-programs/all-funding-programs/shared-equity-mortgage-providers-fund.
In response to part (a), Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation has received nine applications under the shared equity mortgage providers fund, and five applications have been approved in the amount of $17 million.
In response to part (b), $1.3 million has been distributed to date through the SEMP.
In response to part (c), this will support the creation of 700 new housing units.
The data used in the response is as of December 31, 2021.Question No. 302—Mr. Ed Fast
With regard to the government's decision on whether or not to ban Huawei from Canada's 5G infrastructure: (a) what is the specific time period for the government to make a decision; and (b) will the government guarantee that a decision will be announced before April 1, 2022?Hon. François-Philippe Champagne (Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry, Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada will make a decision when the appropriate deliberations have concluded. The government takes the security of Canada’s telecommunications infrastructure very seriously.Question No. 303—Mr. Arnold Viersen
With regard to the Vaccine Injury Support Program funded by the Public Health Agency of Canada: (a) what is the budget for the program; (b) how much is being paid to Raymond Chabot Grant Thornton Consulting Incorporated to administer the program; (c) what is the criteria for determining if an applicant will be eligible to receive funding under the program and how much funding will be provided; (d) how many applications have been (i) received, (ii) successful and granted funding, to date; (e) what are the minimum and maximum funding amounts for which recipients are eligible; and (f) how much funding has been paid out to recipients so far, through the program?Mr. Adam van Koeverden (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health and to the Minister of Sport, Lib.)
Mr. Speaker, the vaccine injury support program, or VISP, provides financial support to people in Canada in the rare event that they experience a serious and permanent injury as a result of receiving a Health Canada authorized vaccine, administered in Canada, on or after December 8, 2020. The program also provides death benefits and support for funeral expenses in the rare case of a death as a result of receiving a Health Canada authorized vaccine.
The VISP was launched on June 1, 2021, and is being administered independently by Raymond Chabot Grant Thornton Consulting Inc., referred to as RCGT, with funding from the Public Health Agency of Canada. The Public Health Agency of Canada is not involved in individual cases, including in the determination of decisions regarding causality or compensation.
As the independent third party administrator, RCGT oversees all aspects of claims intake and assessment and is responsible for providing periodic public reporting on program statistics. Public reporting began on December 15, 2021, and reflects the first six months of data on the VISP. Public reporting can be found at https://vaccineinjurysupport.ca/en/program-statistics.
The Province of Quebec continues to administer its long-standing vaccine injury compensation program. Information on Quebec’s vaccine injury compensation program, including program statistics, can be found at https://www.quebec.ca/en/health/advice-and-prevention/vaccination/vaccine-injury-compensation-program#c3895.
In response to part (a) of the question, a total of $75 million has been earmarked for the first five years of the program. The actual overall cost of the program will be dependent on the volume of claims and compensation awarded over time.
In response to part (b), a total of $21.2 million over five years has been allocated to RCGT for the administration of the program. This amount does not include financial support to claimants. Funding will also be provided to the Government of Quebec for the continued delivery of its provincial vaccine injury compensation program.
In response to part (c), the Public Health Agency of Canada has set out the policy parameters under which RCGT is responsible for implementing the VISP, such as the eligibility criteria and the maximum financial support amounts available.
To be eligible for the VISP, an individual must have experienced a serious and permanent injury as a result of receiving a Health Canada authorized vaccine, administered in Canada on or after December 8, 2020.
A serious and permanent injury is defined as a severe, life-threatening or life-altering injury that may require in-person hospitalization or a prolongation of existing hospitalization, and results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, or where the outcome is a congenital malformation or death.
Claimants will have up to three years after the date of vaccination or date of death, in case of a claim for a death benefit, to file a claim. When a serious and permanent injury becomes apparent gradually, the time limit will run only from the day the injury first becomes apparent.
RCGT’s claims assessment process includes a review of all required and relevant medical documentation, as well as current medical evidence, to determine if there is a probable link between the injury and the vaccine. If the RCGT team of medical experts determines a probable link, they will also assess the severity and duration of the injury. This information is used to determine the type and level of financial support awarded to the individual or their survivors.
RCGT is responsible for providing financial support that is comparable to what is provided through the Government Quebec’s vaccine injury compensation program and informed by other public and private sector injury compensation practices.
Quebec is continuing to administer its existing provincial program, which has been in place for over 30 years. Individuals vaccinated in all other provinces and territories are eligible under the pan-Canadian program.
In response to part (d), public reporting began on December 15, 2021, and reflects the first six months of data on the VISP. As of November 30, 2021, 400 claims have been received by RCGT, and fewer than five claims have been approved by RCGT. Due to privacy reasons, specific figures cannot be disclosed until a sufficient number of claims have been approved. This approach ensures the anonymity of claimants.
In response to part (d), the program parameters established by PHAC include the following maximum thresholds for financial support categories: income replacement indemnities up to a maximum of $100,000 per year; injury indemnities up to a maximum of $275,000; death benefits up to a maximum of $450,000; funeral costs up to a maximum of $7,000; and reimbursement of eligible costs including but not limited to medical and rehabilitation costs otherwise not covered by public or private insurance or benefit programs.
As the independent third party administrator of the VISP, RCGT is responsible for establishing a financial support payment framework within these thresholds, while taking into consideration accepted industry practices for injury compensation and ensuring comparable financial support payments to what is provided through the Quebec vaccine injury compensation program.
The amount of compensation an eligible individual receives is determined on a case-by-case basis, depending on the nature of the injury.
In response to part (f), as of November 30, 2021, less than five claims have been approved by RCGT. Due to privacy reasons, specific figures, including total compensation cannot be disclosed until a sufficient number of claims have been approved. This approach ensures the anonymity of claimants.
Mr. Speaker, if the government's responses to Questions No. 265 and 266, 268 to 276, 279, 281 and 282, 284 and 285, 290 to 294, 296 to 298 and 300 and 304 could be made orders for return, these returns would be tabled immediately.
The Speaker: Is that agreed?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
Question No. 265—Mr. Brian Masse
With regard to the automotive and manufacturing industry in Canada: (a) has the government worked with any global automotive or manufacturing companies to increase existing, or to bring in a brand new automotive investment in the form of new factories, products, including electric vehicles or batteries, or jobs, to Canada since 2018; (b) is the government considering greenfield or brownfield investment for the automotive and manufacturing industry in Canada; (c) what efforts have been made to invest in existing automotive plants in Canada; (d) has the government requested that the Canadian Automotive Partnership Council meet and consider new investment and greenfield or brownfield investment in the automotive and manufacturing industry in Canada; (e) has the government considered investments for new plants, and, if so, what municipal locations were considered; and (f) what departments, programs and funding have been allocated for the use of hydrogen as part of the auto sector?
(Return tabled)Question No. 266—Ms. Leah Gazan
With regard to spending directed towards children in foster care, broken down by fiscal year since 2015-16: (a) which programs, initiatives, and funding streams have received funding; (b) what accountability measures does the government use to ensure that the funding is spent in the best interests of the children in care; (c) how much funding in (a) has been recalled due to accountability measures in (b); (d) what enforcement actions have been taken by the government to protect the best interest of children in care; and (e) what is the total number of First Nations, Inuit, and Metis children in care, reflected as a percentage of all children in care and as a number?
(Return tabled)Question No. 268—Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen
With regard to employee diversity at Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC), since 2015: (a) what are the titles of reports or reviews commissioned by IRCC relating to (i) workforce diversity, (ii) workplace culture; (b) what reports or reviews commissioned by IRCC are currently ongoing relating to (i) workforce diversity, (ii) workplace culture; (c) broken down by year, occupational group and process (advertised process or non-advertised process), what is the number and percentage of positions that were filled by equity-seeking groups; and (d) broken down by year, occupational group, hiring process used and equity-seeking group, what is the number and percentage of positions that were filled by equity-seeking groups?
(Return tabled)Question No. 269—Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen
With regard to enforcement of quarantine and COVID-19 testing orders, broken down by period (May to June 2020; July to December 2020; January to June 2021) and nationality of the traveller: (a) how many travellers who were required to quarantine received at least one call to verify compliance; and (b) how many travellers who were required to quarantine were not verified to be in compliance?
(Return tabled)Question No. 270—Mr. Alexandre Boulerice
With regard to harassment complaints, workplace violence complaints, and disclosures of wrongdoing related to harassment and discrimination in federal organizations (departments, agencies, Crown corporations, etc.), for fiscal years 2019-20 and 2020-21, broken down by federal organization, by fiscal year, and for each type of complaint mentioned: (a) how many decisions were made by the organization without conducting an initial assessment; (b) how many complaints were (i) dismissed, (ii) accepted?
(Return tabled)Question No. 271—Mr. Arnold Viersen
With regard to government measures to address systemic racism in Canada, since January 1, 2016: (a) has the government conducted research to identify and quantify the specific barriers preventing Black, Indigenous, and other minority communities from receiving equal access to financial services; (b) what were the dates and parameters of the research referred to in (a) and what were the institutions directed to carry out this research; (c) what were the conclusions and recommendations of the analyses referred to in (a); (d) which of the recommendations referred to in (c) have been implemented by the government; (e) when and by whom were the recommendations referred to in (c) implemented; (f) has the government conducted research to identify and quantify the specific barriers preventing Black, Indigenous, and other minority communities from receiving equal access to higher education; (g) what were the dates and parameters of the research referred to in (f) and what were the institutions directed to carry out this research; (h) what were the conclusions and recommendations of the analyses referred to in (f); (i) which of the recommendations referred to in (h) have been implemented by the government; (j) when and by whom were the recommendations referred to in (h) implemented; (k) has the government conducted research to identify and quantify the specific barriers preventing Black, Indigenous, and other minority communities from receiving equal treatment in the justice system; (l) what were the dates and parameters of the research referred to in (k) and what were the institutions directed to carry out this research; (m) what were the conclusions and recommendations of the analyses referred to in (k); (n) which of the recommendations referred to in (m) have been implemented by the government; and (o) when and by whom were the recommendations referred to in (m) implemented?
(Return tabled)Question No. 272—Mr. Dave MacKenzie
With regard to the salmon farming industry and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans: (a) what is the (i) total economic impact of the industry per year from 2011 to 2021 in terms of jobs created, broken down by province, (ii) number of First Nations or Indigenous groups who benefit from agreements with salmon farming companies, (iii) names of First Nations groups who have signed economic benefit agreements with salmon farming companies, (iv) total federal, provincial, and municipal taxes paid per year from the industry, (v) total exports generated per year in terms of tons of salmon and dollar value, (vi) total Gross Domestic Product (GDP) contribution of the industry; (b) what is the total economic impact of the salmon farming industry expected per year between 2021 and 2031 in terms of (i) jobs expected to be created in each province, (ii) the number of First Nations or Indigenous groups who are expected to benefit from agreements with salmon farming companies, (iii) the names of First Nations groups who signed economic benefit agreements with salmon farming companies, (iv) the expected value of benefits in terms of dollars per year to Indigenous or First Nations group by nation and province, (v) total federal, provincial, and municipal taxes expected to be paid by salmon farming companies, (vi) total exports expected to be generated per year in terms of tons of salmon and dollar value, (vii) total projected GDP contribution of the industry to the economy by province; (c) what is the impact of the decision to close the salmon farms on Discovery Island in terms of (i) lost jobs, broken down by province, (ii) lost economic revenue and future revenue by First Nations and Indigenous groups, (iii) the specific actions taken to ensure those who lost jobs have been retrained, (iv) the cost of retaining those who have lost jobs, (v) the estimated cost of reimbursing Indigenous or First Nations groups for lost opportunity, (vi) the incurred cost to date and estimated total cost of litigation to defend the decision to close salmon farms on and around Discovery Island; (d) were prior and informed consultations undertaken by the Crown with each and every impacted First Nations group impacted by the Discovery Island decision prior to the decision being made by the Crown, and, if so, what were the results of the related consultations, including the (i) name of each impacted First Nation or Indigenous group that was consulted, (ii) date and number of times each impacted First Nation or Indigenous group was consulted, (iii) feedback from each impacted First Nation or Indigenous group; (e) what are the details of all consultations the government held with senior officials in the British Columbia government before making the Discovery Island decision, including (i) the name and title of each official, (ii) the dates of the consultations, (iii) the number of times each official was consulted, (iv) whether the official was in support of or opposed to the decision that was eventually made by the government; and (f) what are the government’s plans to support the salmon farming industry between 2021 and 2030, including any (i) proposed tax incentives, (ii) research grants, (iii) export or trade promotion support, (iv) innovation and technology support, (v) other incentives to support foreign direct investments in the salmon farming industry in Canada?
(Return tabled)Question No. 273—Mr. Doug Shipley
With regard to the National Shipbuilding Strategy: (a) what is the total cost, including working hours, of the first delivered Arctic and Offshore Patrol Ship (AOPS) (Harry DeWolf), broken down by amount spent on (i) engineering, (ii) design, (iii) construction, (iv) commissioning, (v) total hours it took to construct, (vi) overhead under the contract, (vii) the project office; (b) what is the total expected cost for each AOPS from ships one to eight, specifically, the amount spent to date; (c) what is the total spent to date redesigning the AOPS for the Coast Guard and the total expected to be spent by the end of the re-design phase; (d) what are the specific design changes which are to be made on the AOPS for the Navy and the AOPS for the Coast Guard; (e) what is the total anticipated cost to date for the Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC), broken down by amount spent on (i) engineering, (ii) design, (iii) construction, (iv) commissioning; (f) how many hours will it take to construct the CSC; (g) what are the specific itemized differences between the T26 and the CSC; (h) what are the top ten risks identified on the CSC program; (i) what are the expected costs of any additional infrastructure required to construct the CSC; (j) are there risks related to the radar systems for the CSC, and, if so, what are they; (k) will the CSC be capable of travelling to the Canadian arctic unescorted and, if so, for how many months of each year during its anticipated 40 years of operational life will it be able to do so;
(l) what is the expected date each CSC will achieve full operational capability to replace the Halifax Class Frigates; (m) what is the anticipated total cost for the Polar Icebreakers, broken down by amount spent on (i) engineering, (ii) design, (iii) construction, (iv) commissioning; (n) what is the total hours it will take to construct the Polar Icebreakers; (o) what are the top ten risks identified on the Polar Icebreakers program; (p) what are the expected costs of any additional infrastructure required to construct the Polar Icebreakers by shipyard; (q) what is the expected delivery date for each Polar Icebreaker; (r) what is the itemized breakdown of the expected savings or value for money for taxpayers from building two identical ships in different shipyards; (s) what is the total cost to date or estimated total cost for the Joint Support Ship (JSS), broken down by amount spent on (i) engineering, (ii) design, (iii) construction, (iv) commissioning; (r) what is the total number of hours it will take to construct the JSS; (t) what are the itemized specific savings or value for money of building two identical ships in the same shipyard; (u) what is the cost of repair for the Halifax Class Frigates between 2019 and 2021 at each shipyard, broken down by the (i) name of shipyard, (ii) name of frigate repairs, (iii) total hours per ship; (v) what is the total anticipated cost to maintain the Halifax Class Frigates from 2021 to 2040, broken down by ship; (w) what is the date of anticipated end of life service for each Halifax Class Frigate ship; and (x) what are the top ten risks related to maintaining each frigate to the end of their anticipated service life, broken down by ship?
(Return tabled)Question No. 274—Mr. Blake Desjarlais
With regard to the Canada Student Financial Assistance Program since October 1, 2020, broken down by month: (a) what is the total amount the government has collected in repayments of student loans; (b) what is the total amount of new loans and grants delivered to (i) full-time and part-time students, (ii) students from low-income and middle-income families, (iii) students with dependants, (iv) students with permanent disabilities; and (c) how many new applications have been received under the (i) Repayment Assistance Plan, (ii) Repayment Assistance Plan for Borrowers with a Permanent Disability?
(Return tabled)Question No. 275—Mr. Blake Desjarlais
With regard to government funding for fiscal years 2019-20 and 2020-21 allocated within the constituency of Edmonton Griesbach: what is the total funding amount, broken down by (i) fiscal year, (ii) department or agency, (iii) initiative, (iv) amount?
(Return tabled)Question No. 276—Mr. Blake Desjarlais
With regard to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC), Public Services and Procurement Canada, and Visa Application Centers (VAC): (a) what differences were there between the VAC tender notice posted in June 2020, and the VAC tender notice posted in June 2021; (b) why was the tender notice re-posted; (c) how many bids have been submitted for each tender notice; (d) broken down by start and end date, how many reviews have been conducted on VFS Global since learning that one of their subcontractors was controlled by the Beijing Public Security Bureau; and (e) what recommendations have been made by any such reviews?
(Return tabled)Question No. 279—Mr. Daniel Blaikie
With regard to the information collected by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) regarding electronic funds transfers of $10,000 and over, broken down by fiscal year since 2019-20: (a) how many audits were completed; (b) how many foreign jurisdictions have been reviewed; (c) how many financial institutions have been reviewed; (d) how many international electronic funds transfer operations have been analyzed; (e) what is the total dollar value of the transactions analyzed in (d); (f) how many new files were opened; (g) how many files were closed; (h) of the files closed in (g), what was the average time it took to process the files before they were closed; (i) of the files closed in (g), what was the risk level of each file; (j) how much was spent on contractors and subcontractors; (k) of the contractors and subcontractors in (j), what is the initial and final value of each contract; (l) among the contractors and subcontractors in (j), what is the description of each service contract; (m) how many reassessments were issued; (n) what is the total amount recovered; (o) how many taxpayer files were referred to the CRA's Criminal Investigations Program; (p) of the investigations in (o), how many were referred to the Public Prosecution Service of Canada; (q) of the investigations in (p), how many resulted in convictions?
(Return tabled)Question No. 281—Mr. Daniel Blaikie
With regard to housing and the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC): (a) how much insured lending did the CMHC approve for rental financing and refinancing of multi-unit rental assets since 2010, broken down by (i) year, (ii) type of investor (e.g. Real Estate Income Trusts, other capital corporations, property companies, holding companies, individuals, etc.); and (b) how much insured lending approved in (a) is associated with the purchase of existing moderate rent assets, further broken down by (i) average rent of units prior to the acquisition, (ii) the rent trajectory for each year following the acquisition that can be linked to the use of the Annual Rental Market Survey managed by CMHC?
(Return tabled)Question No. 282—Mrs. Carol Hughes
With regard to the Canadian Transportation Agency (CTA), between March 2020 and now, broken down by month: (a) how many air passenger complaints have been received, broken down by the subject matter of the complaint; (b) of the complaints received in (a), how many have been resolved, broken down by (i) facilitation process, (ii) mediation process, (iii) adjudication; (c) how many air passenger complaints were dismissed, withdrawn, and declined, broken down by (i) subject matter of the complaint, (ii) mediation process, (iii) adjudication; (d) for each complaint in (a), how many cases were resolved by a settlement; (e) how many full-time equivalent agency case officers are assigned to deal with air travel complaints, broken down by agency case officers dealing with the (i) facilitation process, (ii) mediation process, (iii) adjudication; (f) what is the average number of air travel complaints handled by an agency case officer, broken down by agency case officers dealing with the (i) facilitation process, (ii) mediation process, (iii) adjudication; (g) what is the number of air travel complaints received but not yet handled by an agency case officer, broken down by agency case officers dealing with the (i) facilitation process, (ii) mediation process, (iii) adjudication; (h) in how many cases were passengers told by CTA facilitators that they were not entitled to compensation, broken down by rejection category; (i) among cases in (h), what was the reason for CTA facilitators not to refer the passengers and the airlines to the Montréal Convention that is incorporated in the international tariff (terms and conditions) of the airlines; (j) how does the CTA define a "resolved" complaint for the purposes of reporting it in its statistics; (k) when a complainant chooses not to pursue a complaint, does it count as "resolved"; (l) how many business days on average does it effectively take from the filing of a complaint to an officer to be assigned to the case, broken down by the (i) facilitation process, (ii) mediation process, (iii) adjudication; (m) how many business days on average does it effectively take from the filing of a complaint to reaching a settlement, broken down by the (i) facilitation process, (ii) mediation process, (iii) adjudication; and (n) for complaints in (a), what is the percentage of complaints that were not resolved in accordance with the service standards?
(Return tabled)Question No. 284—Mr. Don Davies
With regard to the Public Health Agency of Canada’s designated quarantine facility (DQF) program: (a) of the $200 million or more spent to house incoming travellers at DQF sites, what is the complete and detailed accounting of how much Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) has spent, from March 2020 to August 2021, broken down by (i) hotel property, (ii) monthly revenue per hotel, (iii) daily room rate per quarantine hotel; (b) for each of the existing DQF hotels, what is the complete and detailed accounting of how much PHAC has spent, from August 2021 to December 2021, broken down by (i) hotel property, (ii) monthly revenue per hotel, (iii) daily room rate per quarantine hotel; (c) for each of the 13 DQF hotels, what is the number of guest rooms designated under quarantine order; (d) what hotels, if any, are no longer participating in the DQF program as of December 2021; (e) for hotels no longer participating in the DQF program, what was the process for ending the quarantine order at that hotel; (f) what was the process for entering into contracts or, if no formal contract was entered into, the financial arrangements to secure each hotel for the DQF program; (g) what oversight mechanism is in place to review the financial arrangements with DQF hotels; (h) for DQF sites at Pacific Gateway and Westin Calgary Airport, what was the process for selecting these sites for the quarantine program; (i) for the DQF at Pacific Gateway, what is the number of contractors hired by PHAC at this site and what services do they perform; (j) for the DQF at Pacific Gateway hotel, what is the complete and detailed accounting of how many travellers have been housed at this facility, since March 27, 2020, including the (i) daily occupancy or number of rooms occupied by travellers, (ii) daily number of rooms occupied by staff or contractors (non-travellers); (k) for the DQF at Pacific Gateway, what efforts did PHAC undertake to seek out an alternative DQF site in 2021; (l) what future plans does PHAC have to contract out management of the DQF program; (m) what is the end date for use of Pacific Gateway hotel as a DQF site; (n) what is the end date for the DQF program at all current sites; (o) how did PHAC apply a gender-based analysis to the impact of the quarantine program on hotel workers displaced by the program; and (p) if undertaken, what was the conclusion of any gender-based analysis to examine the impact of the quarantine program on hotel workers?
(Return tabled)Question No. 285—Mrs. Cathay Wagantall
With regard to Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) and the government’s arrangement with the Royal Canadian Legion (RCL) pertaining to accessing VAC’s clients’ files and My VAC account: (a) what are the confidentiality policies currently in place within (i) VAC, (ii) the RCL, pertaining to the privacy of a client’s files and My VAC account; (b) which employees of (i) VAC, (ii) the RCL, are authorized to access a client’s files and My VAC account and under what conditions are employees authorized to access a client’s files and My VAC account; (c) what steps are taken by (i) VAC, (ii) the RCL, if confidentiality policies pertaining to a client’s files and My VAC account are violated; (d) what vetting procedures are (i) VAC, (ii) RCL, employees empowered with the ability to access a client’s files and My VAC account subjected to, such as security clearances and background checks; and (e) since January 1, 2016, broken down by year, how many instances is VAC aware of where an RCL employee improperly accessed a VAC client’s files or My VAC account, and what corrective action, if any, was taken by VAC in response?
(Return tabled)Question No. 290—Mr. Warren Steinley
With regard to expenditures on social media influencers, including any contracts which would use social media influencers as part of a public relations campaign, since January 1, 2021, and broken down by department, agency, or other government entity: (a) what are the details of all expenditures, including the (i) vendor, (ii) amount, (iii) campaign description, (iv) date of the contract, (v) name or handle of the influencer; and (b) for each campaign that paid an influencer, was there a requirement to make public, as part of a disclaimer, the fact that the influencer was being paid by the government and, if not, why not?
(Return tabled)Question No. 291—Mr. Warren Steinley
With regard to the increases in the federal carbon tax or price on carbon: (a) has the government calculated or estimated how much the increase in the carbon tax on April 1, 2022, will cost a family, and, if so, what are the projections; (b) has the government calculated or estimated how much the increase in the carbon tax that takes effect on April 1, 2023, and in subsequent years, will cost a family, and, if so, what are the projections; and (c) what is the detailed breakdown of how the projections in (a) and (b) were arrived at?
(Return tabled)Question No. 292—Mr. Robert Kitchen
With regard to the seizure of drugs by the Canada Border Services Agency since 2018, broken down by quarter and by type of drug: (a) what is the quantity of drugs that were seized; (b) how many shipments were seized; (c) what is the estimated street value of the drugs that were seized; (d) what is the breakdown of (a) through (c) by country of origin, or suspected country of origin; and (e) what is the government doing to prevent the future attempted importation of drugs from the countries with significant amounts referenced in (d)?
(Return tabled)Question No. 293—Mr. Robert Kitchen
With regard to expenditures on outside auditors to audit government financial statements, since January 1, 2016, broken down by department, agency, or other government entity: what are the details of each expenditure, including (i) the vendor, (ii) the date, (iii) the amount, (iv) which financial statements were audited related to the expenditure?
(Return tabled)Question No. 294—Mr. Martin Shields
With regard to the comments from the Director of Media Relations at the Bank of Canada (BOC) that "I do not want to be in a situation where we're allowing Blacklocks' to be asking us": (a) how did the BOC determine that they did not want to be in a situation where they're allowing Blacklocks' Reporter to ask them questions; (b) has the BOC received any advice or direction from anyone outside of the BOC, including the Privy Council Office or the Office of the Prime Minister, related to Blacklocks' Reporter, and, if so, what are the details including the dates and summaries of the advice or direction; and (c) what corrective action, if any, is being taken by (i) the BOC, (ii) every other department or agency, broken down by each department or agency, to address any biases against Blacklocks' Reporter, including what measures are being taken to ensure that Blacklocks' gets their fair share of questions in government news conferences?
(Return tabled)Question No. 296—Mr. Scott Aitchison
With regard to the 2021 Canada Summer Jobs (CSJ) program: (a) how many employers were randomly selected for inspections or audits; (b) what is the breakdown of (a) by federal riding; (c) how many employees hired through CSJ were interviewed by government officials as part of the inspections or audits; and (d) what is the breakdown of (c) by federal riding?
(Return tabled)Question No. 297—Mr. Scott Aitchison
With regard to the $2,959,500,151 in expenditures on transportation machinery and equipment, as listed in Volume Ill of the 2021 Public Accounts of Canada: what are the details of each expenditure, broken down by department and agency, including, for each, the (i) vendor, (ii) amount, (iii) date, (iv) description of goods, including the volume purchased, as well as the make and model, if applicable?
(Return tabled)Question No. 298—Mr. Kyle Seeback
With regard to reports to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada and media reports that applications for Permanent Residency which are listed under officer DM10032 have not been advanced through the process since March 2020: (a) who or what is DM10032; (b) how many applications are currently assigned to or marked with DM10032; (c) of the DM10032 applications still awaiting a decision as of January 31, 2022, how many were received more than (i) 30 days, (ii) 60 days, (iii) 6 months, (iv) one year, (v) two years, ago; and (d) why have numerous applications assigned to or marked with DM10032 been subject to significant delays?
(Return tabled)Question No. 300—Mr. Earl Dreeshen
With regard to the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS): (a) how many companies who received payments under CEWS have since entered receivership or bankruptcy proceedings; and (b) what is the breakdown of (a) by industry sector and by province or territory?
(Return tabled)Question No. 304—Mr. Arnold Viersen
With regard to expenditures by the government on data and telecommunication services related to mobile devices, such as smartphones or tablets, and broken down by month, since January 1, 2020: (a) what are the total expenditures; (b) how many devices' services are being paid for; (c) how much of the expenditures in (a) are related to roaming or similar charges, such as usage while travelling; and (d) how many devices incurred roaming or similar charges?
Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all remaining questions be allowed to stand.
The Speaker: Is that agreed?
Some hon. members: Agreed.