|
Q-472
|
Thursday, October 16, 2025 |
With regard to government statistics on the Medical Assistance in Dying Program and human organ donation, since June 2016: (a) how many individuals that applied for medical assistance in dying included a referral for organ donation, broken down by (i) year, (ii) province or territory, (iii) age, (iv) gender; (b) of the referrals for organ donation in (a), how many were excluded for the following reasons (i) being medically unsuitable, (ii) consent for donation not being obtained after medical assistance in dying, (iii) patient withdrawing from the medical assistance in dying process, (iv) the patient dying before medical assistance in dying, (v) other reasons; (c) of the referrals for organ donation retained in (a), how many individuals become actual organ donors, broken down by (i) year, (ii) province or territory, (iii) type of organ, (iv) age, (v) gender; (d) how many organs from Canadian medical assistance in dying donors are sent abroad, broken down by (i) year, (ii) province or territory of the donor, (iii) age of the donor, (iv) gender of the donor, (v) country of the recipient, (vi) type of organ; (e) what is the percentage of all deceased organ donors that involved medical assistance in dying, broken down by year and province or territory; (f) does the government require export permits for human organs being transported out of the country, and, if so, how many have been issued each year since 2016; and (g) is the government aware of any cases of organ donation involving medical assistance in dying that contravened section 240.1 of the Criminal Code, and, if so, what are the details of each, including whether or not charges were laid? |
Awaiting response |
Wednesday, December 3, 2025 |
|
Q-430
|
Tuesday, October 7, 2025 |
With regard to the housing announcement in Nepean, on September 14, 2025, attended by the Prime Minister: (a) who made the decision to temporarily erect unfinished prop houses for the announcement; (b) were the houses used during the announcement built up to code and suitable for inhabitants, and, if so, when was the inspection done, and who conducted the inspection; (c) were any safety inspections done on the houses prior to the announcement, and, if so, what was inspected and who conducted the inspection; (d) why were the houses torn down following the announcement rather than completed and inhabited; (e) was the location of the announcement properly zoned for housing, and are there any plans to build homes on that specific location in the future; (f) which departments and agencies were responsible for organizing the announcement; and (g) what were all the costs incurred by the government related to the announcement, in total, and broken down by type of expense? |
Awaiting response |
Monday, November 24, 2025 |
|
Q-373
|
Thursday, September 25, 2025 |
With regard to the government’s relationship to Aylo, formerly known as MindGeek, and the company’s owner, Ethical Capital Partners, since November 4, 2015: (a) has the Canadian government given assistance to Aylo, MindGeek, or Ethical Capital Partners in relation to national or international cases, through (i) legal aid and advice, (ii) consular aid, and, if so, when was it and what type of advice was provided; (b) has the Canadian government ever given funds (i) as a direct transfer, (ii) as a grant, (iii) in the form of tax cuts, to Aylo, MindGeek, or any subsidiaries, and, if so, what are the details, including when and how much; (c) has Aylo or MindGeek ever requested consular or economic aid from the Canadian government, including from any department, agency, or other government entity, and, if so, what are the details, including the dates and summaries of the requests; (d) has the government received any advice or direction from anyone outside of the government related to Aylo, MindGeek, or any subsidiaries, and, if so, what are the details, including the dates and summaries of the advice or direction; (e) what are the details of any emails, texts, briefing notes, memos or correspondence related to (a), (b), (c) and (d), including the (i) title, (ii) date, (iii) sender, (iv) recipient, (v) subject matter, (vi) file number; (f) what documents have been prepared by the government departments or agencies about Aylo, MindGeek or Ethical Capital Partners, including the (i) date, (ii) title or subject matter, (iii) type of document (routine correspondence, directive, options to consider, etc.), (iv) department’s internal tracking number, (v) sender and recipient, if applicable, (vi) summary of the contents; and (g) how many reports has the Royal Canadian Mounted Police received concerning Aylo, MindGeek or any subsidiaries, including a breakdown by (i) report type, (ii) date, (iii) outcome of the report? |
Awaiting response |
Monday, November 17, 2025 |
|
Q-372
|
Thursday, September 25, 2025 |
With regard to the Temporary Foreign Worker Program, Labour Market Impact Assessments, human trafficking, and forced labour, since 2020, broken down by year, National Occupational Classification and province: (a) how many Labour Market Impact Assessment applications were (i) submitted, (ii) approved, (iii) rejected, (iv) withdrawn; (b) how many Labour Market Impact Assessment applications were refused or revoked on public policy grounds under sections 30(1.2) or 30(1.4) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, and what is the breakdown; (c) for open work permit applications submitted by temporary foreign workers holding Labour Market Impact Assessment-based employer-specific permits who have been identified as being abused or at risk of abuse in relation to their employment in Canada, how many applications were (i) received, (ii) approved, (iii) rejected, (iv) withdrawn; (d) of the Labour Market Impact Assessment-based employer-specific work permits that later transitioned to an open work permit for vulnerable workers, what percentage of those were flagged as high-risk, broken down by sector; and (e) with regard to policies to protect vulnerable populations from forced labour and exploitation, has the government consulted with law enforcement and stakeholders regarding at-risk or vulnerable occupations or undertaken an assessment in the past five years, and, if not, why not? |
Awaiting response |
Monday, November 17, 2025 |
|
Q-31
|
Tuesday, May 27, 2025 |
With regard to the government’s provision of goods and services to irregular border crossers seeking asylum, since 2015: how many claimants have been provided accommodations in Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada operated hotels or similar types of accommodations, broken down by month and province? |
Answered |
Monday, September 15, 2025 |
|
Q-30
|
Tuesday, May 27, 2025 |
With regard to the Sex Offender Information Registration Act for each year since 2015: (a) how many sex offenders in total leave the country; (b) how many sex offenders fail to report their absence; (c) how many notifications have been received under Section 6(1), broken down by each subsection; and (d) how many notifications have been received under Section 6(1.01), broken down by each subsection? |
Answered |
Monday, September 15, 2025 |
|
Q-29
|
Tuesday, May 27, 2025 |
With regard to the government’s announcement on November 4, 2024, to cap emissions on the Canadian oil and gas sector by about one-third over the next eight years: (a) has the government undertaken an assessment on how this will impact Canadian families, and, if so, what were the results of the assessment; (b) what will be the estimated increased cost to average Canadians as a result of increased prices for groceries, gas and home heating, broken down by year over the next eight years; (c) what increases does the government expect in Canadian energy imports from countries with lower environmental and ethical standards as a results of the cap; (d) did the government consider the impact that an increased reliance on oil and gas from countries with lower environmental standards will have as a result of imposing this cap, and, if not, why was it not considered; (e) what assessments, if any, has the government undertaken to examine the impact of the emissions cap across the (i) construction, (ii) manufacturing, (iii) finance, (iv) hospitality, sectors; (f) how many jobs have been cut by oil and gas companies as a result of emissions caps in the last nine years; and (g) how does the government plan to ensure that Canada’s oil and gas competitors (United States, Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, United Arab Emirates) have comparable emissions caps, and, if they do not, how does the government plan to allow Canadian oil and gas companies to compete with them? |
Answered |
Monday, September 15, 2025 |
|
Q-28
|
Tuesday, May 27, 2025 |
With regard to spending by the government related to the production of cricket protein, since January 1, 2016: (a) how much funding has been provided for projects supporting the production of cricket protein, broken down by year; (b) what are the details of each project in (a), including the (i) location, (ii) project description, (iii) amount of funding originally announced, (iv) amount of funding distributed to date, (v) date on which the funding was transferred to the recipient, (vi) recipient, (vii) current status, (viii) original projected completion date for the project, (ix) actual completion date for the project, if applicable, (x) current projected completion date for the project, (xi) reason for the project delay, if applicable, (xii) type of funding (grant, repayable loan, etc.), (xiii) amount repaid to date, if applicable; (c) for the announcement on June 27, 2022, to invest up to $8.5 million for Aspire to support the building of a commercial facility to produce cricket protein, (i) what was the reason for exceeding the AgriInnovate Program’s maximum contribution amount of $5 million, (ii) how many jobs were expected to be generated, (iii) how many jobs initially were generated, (iv) how many jobs are currently supported by the grant; (d) has Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada or Health Canada conducted studies or analyses on the production of cricket protein or the human consumption of cricket protein, and, if so, what are the details, including findings of any studies or analyses; (e) did Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada consider any negative impact on agriculture that the production of cricket protein would have, and, if not, why not; (f) did Health Canada seek any feedback on the human consumption of cricket protein, and, if so, what are the details, including what feedback was given; (g) what is the government’s official position on the human consumption of cricket protein; and (h) for each year since 2016, what was the annual amount of cricket protein produced in Canada, in total and broken down by (i) domestic versus exported usage, (ii) human consumption versus animal consumption? |
Answered |
Monday, September 15, 2025 |
