Journals
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 19
2015-06-16 [p.2789]
Q-1312 — Ms. Doré Lefebvre (Alfred-Pellan) — With regard to the Canada Post service reductions announced in December 2013: (a) what are the planned locations for community mailboxes in Laval; (b) how many employees were assigned to Laval before the elimination of home delivery was announced; (c) how many Canada Post employees will be required following the mailbox transition; (d) what was the volume of mail sent in the last ten years (i) from Laval to another destination, (ii) to Laval; (e) how many complaints have been received concerning (i) the transition from home delivery to community mailboxes, (ii) the location of community mailboxes in Laval; (f) how many complaints resulted in (i) an opened file, (ii) a change of location of these community mailboxes; (g) what steps are being taken to look after the needs of (i) persons with mobility impairments, (ii) seniors; (h) will current post offices still be active following the transition to community mailboxes; (i) what recourse will be available to residents affected by the location of mailboxes they consider to be dangerous or harmful; (j) what recourse was or continues to be available to residents affected by the installation of a community mailbox over the last 30 years, excluding the current transition; and (k) how many customer service employees at Canada Post, broken down by language of service, are assigned to complaints concerning the installation of community mailboxes from (i) across Canada, (ii) Quebec, (iii) Laval, (iv) the residents of Alfred-Pellan? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-412-1312.
2015-06-09 [p.2677]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Ms. Sims (Newton—North Delta), Bill C-687, An Act respecting the development of a national employment strategy for persons with disabilities, was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
2015-03-27 [p.2296]
— No. 412-5049 concerning disabled and handicapped persons. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-412-153-01.
2015-02-25 [p.2185]
— by Mr. Stewart (Burnaby—Douglas), one concerning disabled and handicapped persons (No. 412-5049).
2015-01-26 [p.2001]
Q-869 — Mr. Simms (Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor) — With respect to the Enabling Accessibility Fund, since September 2011: (a) how many applications (i) were successful and received funding under this program, (ii) were rejected through calls for proposals; (b) with respect to successful applications, what was the location and value of each project, broken down by (i) province, (ii) federal electoral district, (iii) corresponding file and reference number; (c) what is the total cost of administering the program thus far for each year since 2011; (d) how much funding is left; (e) how many major projects under this program will go to, or went to, expanding existing centres; (f) what is the value of the successful major projects applications that went to (i) the construction of new centres, (ii) the expanding of existing centres; (g) how many of the successful Mid-Sized Projects Enabling Accessibility Fund applications went to (i) renovating buildings, (ii) modifying vehicles, (iii) making information and communications more accessible; (h) what is the value of the successful Small Projects Enabling Accessibility Fund applications that went to (i) renovating buildings, (ii) modifying vehicles, (iii) making information and communications more accessible; (i) what is the reason most often given for rejecting an application; (j) what are the reasons given for rejecting an application and what is the frequency of each reason; (k) will the program be renovated next year and, if so, when will the next call for proposals be issued; and (l) with respect to rejected applications, what was the location and value of each proposal, broken down by (i) province, (ii) federal electoral district, (iii) corresponding file and reference number? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-412-869.
2014-12-01 [p.1864]
Pursuant to Standing Order 45, the House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion, as amended, of Ms. Davies (Vancouver East), seconded by Ms. Raynault (Joliette), — That, in the opinion of the House: (a) full support should be offered to survivors of thalidomide; (b) the urgent need to defend the rights and dignity of those affected by thalidomide should be recognized; and (c) the government should provide support to survivors, in cooperation with the Thalidomide Survivors Taskforce.
The question was put on the motion, as amended, and it was agreed to on the following division:
(Division No. 290 -- Vote no 290) - View vote details.
YEAS: 256, NAYS: 0
2014-11-27 [p.1850]
The Order was read for the consideration of the Business of Supply.
Ms. Davies (Vancouver East), seconded by Ms. Raynault (Joliette), moved, — That, in the opinion of the House: (a) full support should be offered to survivors of thalidomide; (b) the urgent need to defend the rights and dignity of those affected by thalidomide should be recognized; and (c) the government should provide support to survivors, as requested by the Thalidomide Survivors Taskforce.
Debate arose thereon.
2014-11-27 [p.1850]
Mrs. Sellah (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert), seconded by Mr. Pilon (Laval—Les Îles), moved the following amendment, — That the motion be amended by replacing the words “as requested by” with the words “in cooperation with”.
Debate arose thereon.
2014-11-27 [p.1851]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Ms. Davies (Vancouver East), seconded by Ms. Raynault (Joliette), in relation to the Business of Supply;
And of the amendment of Mrs. Sellah (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert), seconded by Mr. Pilon (Laval—Les Îles).
The debate continued.
2014-11-27 [p.1851]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Ms. Davies (Vancouver East), seconded by Ms. Raynault (Joliette), in relation to the Business of Supply;
And of the amendment of Mrs. Sellah (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert), seconded by Mr. Pilon (Laval—Les Îles).
The debate continued.
2014-11-27 [p.1852]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Ms. Davies (Vancouver East), seconded by Ms. Raynault (Joliette), in relation to the Business of Supply;
And of the amendment of Mrs. Sellah (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert), seconded by Mr. Pilon (Laval—Les Îles).
The debate continued.
2014-11-27 [p.1852]
The question was put on the amendment and it was agreed to.
2014-11-27 [p.1852]
Pursuant to Standing Order 81(16), the House proceeded to the putting of the question on the main motion, as amended, of Ms. Davies (Vancouver East), seconded by Ms. Raynault (Joliette), — That, in the opinion of the House: (a) full support should be offered to survivors of thalidomide; (b) the urgent need to defend the rights and dignity of those affected by thalidomide should be recognized; and (c) the government should provide support to survivors, in cooperation with the Thalidomide Survivors Taskforce.
The question was put on the main motion, as amended, and, pursuant to Standing Order 45, the recorded division was deferred until Monday, December 1, 2014, at the ordinary hour of daily adjournment.
2014-02-12 [p.545]
Pursuant to Standing Order 93(1), the House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion of Mr. McColeman (Brant), seconded by Mrs. Gallant (Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke), — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should endorse the report of the Panel on Labour Market Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities entitled “Rethinking disAbility in the Private Sector”, and its findings, and commit to furthering public-private cooperation by: (a) building on existing government initiatives, such as the Opportunities Fund, the Registered Disability Savings Plan, the ratification of the United Nations Convention of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and the Labour Market Agreements for Persons with Disabilities; (b) issuing a call to action for Canadian employers to examine the expert panel's findings and encouraging employers to take advantage of private sector-led initiatives to increase employment levels for persons with disabilities in Canada; (c) pursuing greater accountability and coordination of its labour market funding for persons with disabilities and ensuring that funding is demand driven and focussed on suitable performance indicators with strong demonstrable results; (d) establishing an increased focus on young people with disabilities to include support mechanisms specifically targeted at increasing employment levels among youth with disabilities, through programs such as the Youth Employment Strategy; and (e) strengthening efforts to identify existing innovative approaches to increasing the employment of persons with disabilities occurring in communities across Canada and ensuring that programs have the flexibility to help replicate such approaches. (Private Members' Business M-430)
The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to on the following division:
(Division No. 60 -- Vote no 60) - View vote details.
YEAS: 282, NAYS: 0
2014-02-05 [p.513]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. McColeman (Brant), seconded by Mrs. Gallant (Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke), — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should endorse the report of the Panel on Labour Market Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities entitled “Rethinking disAbility in the Private Sector”, and its findings, and commit to furthering public-private cooperation by: (a) building on existing government initiatives, such as the Opportunities Fund, the Registered Disability Savings Plan, the ratification of the United Nations Convention of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and the Labour Market Agreements for Persons with Disabilities; (b) issuing a call to action for Canadian employers to examine the expert panel's findings and encouraging employers to take advantage of private sector-led initiatives to increase employment levels for persons with disabilities in Canada; (c) pursuing greater accountability and coordination of its labour market funding for persons with disabilities and ensuring that funding is demand driven and focussed on suitable performance indicators with strong demonstrable results; (d) establishing an increased focus on young people with disabilities to include support mechanisms specifically targeted at increasing employment levels among youth with disabilities, through programs such as the Youth Employment Strategy; and (e) strengthening efforts to identify existing innovative approaches to increasing the employment of persons with disabilities occurring in communities across Canada and ensuring that programs have the flexibility to help replicate such approaches. (Private Members' Business M-430)
The debate continued.
Results: 1 - 15 of 19 | Page: 1 of 2

1
2
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data