Journals
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 60 of 758
2013-06-10 [p.3357]
Q-1324 — Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands) — With regard to the Canada-China Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (FIPA), and new developments in investment arbitration which have arisen since the text of the agreement was finalized in early 2012: (a) has the government conducted any study on the fiscal risk or regulatory impacts that may arise from the litigation and resolution of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) claim against Quebec’s moratorium on gas fracturing (also known as fracking); (b) has the government reviewed its approach to reservations in the FIPA and other treaties that provide for investor-state arbitration in light of the decision in Mobil Investments Inc. and Murphy Oil Corporation v. Government of Canada, with particular reference to the fact that a majority of the tribunal rejected Canada’s argument by concluding that subsidiary measures (introduced under legislation that was reserved under the treaty) must be consistent not only with the reserved legislation but also with prior subsidiary measures introduced under the relevant legislation; (c) has the government examined Canada’s vulnerability to investor claims arising from domestic court decisions and domestic judicial doctrines, as in the recent Eli Lilly claim against Canada and the Deutsche Bank award against Sri Lanka; (d) on what basis does the government conclude that its previously-stated intention not to violate the Canada-China FIPA is a prudent and reasonable assumption given that Canada has been found to have violated similar obligations in Chapter 11 of NAFTA in the past and faces numerous outstanding NAFTA Chapter 11 claims; (e) has the government assessed its risks and liabilities arising from investor-state arbitration under the Canada-China FIPA in light of the experience of other countries pursuant to other treaties that provide for investor-state arbitration (for example, bilateral investment treaties, Central America Free Trade Agreement, the Energy Charter Treaty) or has the government limited its assessment in this regard to the experience under Chapter 11 of NAFTA, and, if so, on what basis does the government conclude that the experience under the former is not relevant to the Canada-China FIPA; (f) with particular reference to the fact that the government has cited projections that Chinese outbound investment may reach $1 trillion by 2020, and given that Canada’s share of Chinese outbound investment in 2011 was approximately one sixth of total Chinese outbound investment, does the government accept that it is reasonable to expect that Chinese investment in Canada will reach one hundred billion dollars or more during the minimum lifespan of the Canada-China FIPA, and, if the government does not accept this, what steps does the government intend to take to limit the amount of Chinese investment in Canada; (g) has the government committed in writing to cover all costs and liabilities arising from investor-state arbitration claims under the Canada-China FIPA where such claims arise from measures of a provincial, territorial, municipal, aboriginal, or other sub-national decision-maker in Canada; (h) is the government aware of any connection between the payment of $15 million by Ontario to the claimant in St. Mary's VCNA, LLC v. Government of Canada and the claimant's agreement to withdraw its NAFTA claim against Canada and to agree to the related consent award with the government; (i) is the government aware of any payment of compensation by Quebec to the claimant in William Jay Greiner and Malbaie River Outfitters Inc. v. Government of Canada in relation to the claimant’s withdrawal of its NAFTA claim against Canada in that case; (j) were Canadian Embassy staff in Beijing consulted on or involved in the negotiation of the Canada-China FIPA during 2011 and 2012, and if so, (i) what was the process for consulting Canadian Embassy staff and how were they involved, (ii) was the process similar to that used in previous consultations with the in-country Canadian embassy or consulate for the negotiation of other bilateral investment treaties, and if so, in what respects; (k) with regard to the Canada-China FIPA, has the government done an assessment of the implications of extending the FIPA's performance requirements obligation to provincial and other sub-national decision-makers, with particular reference to the fact that Article 1109 of NAFTA exempts existing provincial measures from the performance requirements obligation referred to in NAFTA Article 1108; (l) as a result of the most-favoured-nation treatment clause in NAFTA, will the Canada-China FIPA’s extension of the performance requirements obligation to the provinces and other sub-national decision-makers allow U.S. investors to bring claims against Canada arising from provincial decisions or other measures in circumstances where Canadian investors would not be able to bring claims against the U.S. where the challenged measure was taken by a U.S. state or other sub-national decision-maker; (m) has the government done any assessment of the implications of not extending the treaty’s reservations on aboriginal rights, pursuant to Annex II of the Canada-Peru Free Trade Agreement, to Article 9 of the Canada-China FIPA on performance requirements, with particular reference to the fact that the comparator reservation in NAFTA does extend to NAFTA Article 1108 on performance requirements; (n) has the government done any assessments of potential conflicts or inconsistencies between the provisions of the Canada-China FIPA and Chapter 6 (Energy and Basic Petrochemicals) of NAFTA and, in particular, the provisions on measures restricting imports and exports of energy and basic petrochemical goods; (o) with regard to the Final Environmental Assessment of the Canada-China FIPA, who decided and how was it determined that (i) there was no causal relationship between the Canada-China FIPA and inbound Chinese investment in Canada, (ii) there was, as a result, no environmental impact from the FIPA, and on what evidence did the government rely to make these determinations; (p) how many public submissions did the government receive as part of its Environmental Assessment of the Canada–China FIPA, and how many public submissions did the government receive for each other FIPA negotiated for which an Environmental Assessment was conducted; (q) which negotiators and environmental experts were involved in the Environmental Assessment of the Canada-China FIPA and how were the environmental considerations of the experts and the public integrated into the negotiating strategy; (r) what, if any, studies has the government undertaken to assess the impact on future model bilateral investment treaties of extending most-favoured-nation treatment in the Canada-China FIPA to treatment accorded under any bilateral or multilateral international agreement in force on or after January 1, 1994; (s) how will the government ensure that any settlements of claims against Canada under the Canada-China FIPA, or under any other treaty that provides for investor-state arbitration, to which a provincial government is a party will be made public; and (t) does the government know if China has ratified the Canada-China FIPA? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1324.
2013-06-06 [p.3329]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning international agreements (No. 411-4087) and two concerning environmental assessment and review (Nos. 411-4088 and 411-4089);
2013-06-05 [p.3306]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning national parks (No. 411-4069);
2013-05-29 [p.3219]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (No. 411-3960) and one concerning navigable waters (No. 411-3961).
2013-05-27 [p.3184]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning certain diseases (No. 411-3918) and one concerning international agreements (No. 411-3919);
2013-05-23 [p.3168]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning climate change (No. 411-3871) and one concerning the democratic process (No. 411-3872);
2013-05-09 [p.3120]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning international agreements (No. 411-3795) and one concerning the fishing industry (No. 411-3796).
2013-05-07 [p.3092]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning certain diseases (No. 411-3781) and one concerning navigable waters (No. 411-3782);
2013-05-06 [p.3086]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning international agreements (No. 411-3767) and one concerning the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (No. 411-3768);
2013-05-01 [p.3057]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), seconded by Mr. Hyer (Thunder Bay—Superior North), Bill C-503, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act (local endorsement of candidate), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
2013-05-01 [p.3058]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning international agreements (No. 411-3716) and one concerning certain diseases (No. 411-3717);
2013-04-29 [p.3043]
Group No. 1
Motion No. 1 of Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), seconded by Mr. Hyer (Thunder Bay—Superior North), — That Bill C-15, in Clause 4, be amended by replacing lines 11 to 13 on page 4 with the following:“(3) The Vice Chief of the Defence Staff may, with the consent of the Provost Marshal and in accordance with the respective roles, responsibilities and principles set out in the Accountability Framework signed by the Vice Chief of the Defence Staff and the Provost Marshal on March 2, 1998, issue instructions or guidelines in writing in respect of a particular investigation, providing that the rationale for issuing the instructions or guidelines is also stated.”
2013-04-29 [p.3044]
Motion No. 2 of Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), seconded by Mr. Hyer (Thunder Bay—Superior North), — That Bill C-15, in Clause 4, be amended by replacing line 16 on page 4 with the following:“section (3) and the relevant rationale are available to the public.”
The debate continued on the motions in Group No. 1.
2013-04-29 [p.3046]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning certain diseases (No. 411-3686) and one concerning the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (No. 411-3687);
2013-04-22 [p.3011]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning China (No. 411-3611) and one concerning international agreements (No. 411-3612);
2013-04-18 [p.2997]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), two concerning certain diseases (Nos. 411-3570 and 411-3571) and two concerning international agreements (Nos. 411-3572 and 411-3573);
2013-03-27 [p.2933]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning certain diseases (No. 411-3523) and one concerning the fishing industry (No. 411-3524);
2013-03-25 [p.2920]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning the fishing industry (No. 411-3491), one concerning environmental assessment and review (No. 411-3492), two concerning international agreements (Nos. 411-3493 and 411-3494) and one concerning sources of energy (No. 411-3495);
2013-03-22 [p.2910]
By unanimous consent, it was ordered, — That, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practice of the House, following Oral Questions on Wednesday, March 27, 2013, a Member from each recognized party, as well as the Member for Bas-Richelieu—Nicolet—Bécancour and the Member for Saanich—Gulf Islands may make a brief statement and the time taken for these statements shall be added to the time provided for Government Orders.
2013-03-21 [p.2905]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning certain diseases (No. 411-3424) and one concerning international agreements (No. 411-3425);
2013-03-20 [p.2878]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), seconded by Mr. Hyer (Thunder Bay—Superior North), Bill C-484, An Act Respecting the Amendment of the Reduction of Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Coal-fired Generation of Electricity Regulations, was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
2013-03-20 [p.2879]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning the protection of the environment (No. 411-3351) and one concerning climate change (No. 411-3352);
2013-03-18 [p.2864]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning certain diseases (No. 411-3310) and one concerning climate change (No. 411-3311);
2013-03-18 [p.2869]
Group No. 1
The House proceeded to the putting of the question on Motion No. 1 of Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), seconded by Mr. Hyer (Thunder Bay—Superior North), — That Bill C-55, in Clause 2, be amended by replacing lines 10 and 11 on page 1 with the following:““police officer” means any officer or constable employed for the preservation and”
The question was put on Motion No. 1 and it was negatived on division.
Accordingly, Motions Nos. 3 and 5 were also negatived on division.
2013-03-18 [p.2869]
The House proceeded to the putting of the question on Motion No. 4 of Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), seconded by Mr. Hyer (Thunder Bay—Superior North), — That Bill C-55, in Clause 5, be amended by adding after line 27 on page 3 the following:“(d.1) the number of interceptions in respect of which no proceedings were commenced and, for each such interception, the offence that the police officer sought to prevent in making the interception;”
The question was put on Motion No. 4 and it was negatived on division.
Accordingly, Motion No. 6 was also negatived on division.
2013-03-05 [p.2817]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning navigable waters (No. 411-3270) and one concerning international agreements (No. 411-3271);
2013-03-04 [p.2814]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning certain diseases (No. 411-3263) and one concerning the fishing industry (No. 411-3264);
2013-02-27 [p.2793]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning navigable waters (No. 411-3226) and one concerning international agreements (No. 411-3227);
2013-02-25 [p.2783]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning the democratic process (No. 411-3198) and one concerning certain diseases (No. 411-3199);
2013-02-13 [p.2763]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning navigable waters (No. 411-3162) and one concerning international agreements (No. 411-3163);
2013-02-12 [p.2755]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (No. 411-3133) and one concerning international agreements (No. 411-3134);
2013-02-06 [p.2740]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning certain diseases (No. 411-3070) and one concerning navigable waters (No. 411-3071);
2013-02-05 [p.2731]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning certain diseases (No. 411-3051) and one concerning international agreements (No. 411-3052).
2013-01-30 [p.2699]
Motion No. 2 of Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), seconded by Mr. Bellavance (Richmond—Arthabaska), — That Bill C-43 be amended by deleting Clause 5.
2013-01-30 [p.2699]
Motion No. 4 of Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), seconded by Mr. Bellavance (Richmond—Arthabaska), — That Bill C-43, in Clause 6, be amended by replacing, in the English version, line 20 on page 2 with the following:“may not seek to enter or remain in Canada as a”
2013-01-30 [p.2699]
Motion No. 6 of Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), seconded by Mr. Bellavance (Richmond—Arthabaska), — That Bill C-43 be amended by deleting Clause 8.
2013-01-30 [p.2699]
Motion No. 7 of Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), seconded by Mr. Bellavance (Richmond—Arthabaska), — That Bill C-43 be amended by deleting Clause 9.
2013-01-30 [p.2699]
Motion No. 8 of Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), seconded by Mr. Bellavance (Richmond—Arthabaska), — That Bill C-43, in Clause 9, be amended by replacing lines 12 to 15 on page 3 with the following:“— other than under section 34, 35 or 37 with respect to an adult foreign national — or who does not meet the requirements of this Act, and may, on request of a foreign national outside Canada — other than an adult foreign national”
2013-01-30 [p.2699]
Motion No. 9 of Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), seconded by Mr. Bellavance (Richmond—Arthabaska), — That Bill C-43 be amended by deleting Clause 10.
2013-01-30 [p.2700]
Motion No. 11 of Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), seconded by Mr. Bellavance (Richmond—Arthabaska), — That Bill C-43, in Clause 13, be amended by replacing line 21 on page 4 with the following:“interests, based on a balance of probabilities;”
2013-01-30 [p.2700]
Motion No. 12 of Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), seconded by Mr. Bellavance (Richmond—Arthabaska), — That Bill C-43, in Clause 13, be amended by replacing line 26 on page 4 with the following:“or process as they are understood in Canada, based on a balance of probabilities;”
Results: 1 - 60 of 758 | Page: 1 of 13

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data