Journals
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 28 of 28
2021-05-31 [p.1005]
Pursuant to Standing Order 39(7), Mr. Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) presented the returns to the following questions made into orders for return:
Q-607 — Ms. Michaud (Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia) — With regard to the Centennial Flame unveiled on July 1, 1967, on Parliament Hill in Ottawa: (a) what fuel is used to enable the flame to burn perpetually; (b) what is the price per cubic metre of the fuel used and, if applicable, how much gas is used annually to keep the flame burning; (c) what is the estimated amount of greenhouse gases emitted annually by (i) the flame itself, (ii) the infrastructure supporting the flame’s operation; (d) since the unveiling of the Centennial Flame in 1967, has the government estimated the cumulative amount of greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere; and (e) has the government purchased carbon credits to offset these greenhouse gas emissions and, if so, what is the total amount that has been spent to offset greenhouse gas emissions, broken down by (i) year, (ii) annual amount spent? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-607.
2021-05-28 [p.996]
Pursuant to Standing Order 39(7), Mr. Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) presented the returns to the following questions made into orders for return:
Q-596 — Mr. Trudel (Longueuil—Saint-Hubert) — With regard to the initiative to dispose of surplus federal properties to create affordable housing, since it was established in 2018: for each project, which organizations or corporations benefited from the initiative, broken down by (i) the name of the recipient organization, (ii) the city where the organization operates, (iii) a short description of the project and how many housing units will be built or renovated, (iv) the properties disposed of and the address, (v) the date the renovation work began, (vi) whether the housing is currently occupied or, if not, the anticipated date when prospective tenants may move in? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-596.
2021-05-28 [p.998]
Q-605 — Mr. Barsalou-Duval (Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères) — With regard to federal spending, since January 1, 2006: what is the total amount of federal investments to control golden nematode, broken down by (i) year, (ii) department, (iii) city, (iv) project? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-605.
2021-05-10 [p.918]
Q-578 — Ms. Chabot (Thérèse-De Blainville) — With regard to federal spending in the constituency of Thérèse-De Blainville, in each fiscal year since 2019-20, inclusively: what are the details of all grants and contributions and all loans to any organization, group, business or municipality, broken down by the (i) name of the recipient, (ii) municipality in which the recipient is located, (iii) date the funding was received, (iv) amount received, (v) department or agency that provided the funding, (vi) program under which the grant, contribution or loan was made, (vii) nature or purpose? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-578.
2021-05-10 [p.918]
Q-579 — Ms. Chabot (Thérèse-De Blainville) — With regard to resolving complaint files associated with the Phoenix pay system: (a) what is the total number of tickets or claims pending; (b) of the claims in (a), how many have been waiting to be resolved for (i) 6 to 12 months, (ii) 12 to 24 months, (iii) over 24 months; (c) of the claims in (a), how many are from citizens residing (i) in Quebec, (ii) in the constituency of Thérèse-De Blainville; (d) of the claims in (a), how many have been identified as priorities by complaint resolution directorates; and (e) of the claims in (d), how many were in the category (i) 1, missing pay, (ii) 2, leave of absence or layoff, (iii) 3, promotion, secondment or acting position? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-579.
2021-05-10 [p.919]
Q-584 — Mr. Savard-Tremblay (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot) — With regard to federal spending in the constituency of Papineau, in each fiscal year since 2018-19, inclusively: what are the details of all grants and contributions and all loans to any organization, group, business or municipality, broken down by the (i) name of the recipient, (ii) municipality in which the recipient is located, (iii) date the funding was received, (iv) amount received, (v) department or agency that provided the funding, (vi) program under which the grant, contribution or loan was made, (vii) nature or purpose? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-584.
2021-05-10 [p.920]
Q-585 — Mr. Savard-Tremblay (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot) — With regard to federal spending in the constituency of Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, in each fiscal year since 2018-19, inclusively: what are the details of all grants and contributions and all loans to any organization, group, business or municipality, broken down by the (i) name of the recipient, (ii) municipality in which the recipient is located, (iii) date the funding was received, (iv) amount received, (v) department or agency that provided the funding, (vi) program under which the grant, contribution or loan was made, (vii) nature or purpose? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-585.
2021-05-07 [p.910]
Q-574 — Mrs. Gill (Manicouagan) — With regard to the port facilities owned by Transport Canada and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada, since January 1, 1996: (a) what was the total amount invested in the rehabilitation, maintenance and improvement of wharves and port facilities, broken down by (i) province, (ii) year, (iii) port facility, further broken down by year; (b) of the port facilities in (a)(iii), how many detailed infrastructure inspections were conducted to ensure compliance with safety standards, broken down by (i) year, (ii) port facility, further broken down by year; (c) of the port facilities in (a)(iii) located in Quebec and included in the Ports Asset Transfer Program, what are the investments planned for the next five years, broken down by port facility; (d) since 1996, which facilities were transferred under the Ports Asset Transfer Program and to which firm or individual were they transferred; and (e) of the port facilities in (d), what pre-transfer amounts were provided to individuals or firms for the rehabilitation of the facilities? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-574.
2021-05-05 [p.899]
Q-565 — Mr. Trudel (Longueuil—Saint-Hubert) — With regard to federal government investments in housing, for each fiscal year since 2017–18, broken down by province and territory: (a) what was the total amount of federal funding allocated to housing in Canada; (b) how many applications were received for (i) the National Housing Strategy (NHS) overall, (ii) the Affordable Housing Innovation Fund, (iii) the Rental Construction Financing Initiative, (iv) the National Housing Co-Investment Fund, (v) the Rapid Housing Initiative under the projects stream, (vi) the Federal Lands Initiative, (vii) the Federal Community Housing Initiative, (viii) Reaching Home, (ix) the Shared Equity Mortgage Providers Fund, (x) the First-Time Home Buyer Incentive, (xi) the NHS's Solutions Labs Initiative; (c) of the applications under (b), for each funding program and initiative, how many were accepted; (d) of the applications under (c), for each funding program and initiative, what was the amount of federal funding allocated; (e) of the amounts in (d) allocated in the Province of Quebec, for each funding program and initiative, what is the breakdown per region; and (f) of the amounts in (b)(xi), what criteria were used for project selection? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-565.
2021-04-12 [p.738]
Q-403 — Mr. Barsalou-Duval (Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères) — With regard to Canada’s constitutional system: has the Privy Council Office produced any documents, studies, opinion polls, memos or scenarios exploring the possibility of a fundamental change to Canada’s constitutional system, including the abolition of the monarchy, and, if so, what are (i) the nature of the constitutional changes being considered, (ii) the anticipated timeline for such a change, (iii) the steps that might be taken to bring about such a change, (iv) the concerns of the Privy Council Office with respect to the constitutional demands of the provinces? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-403.
2021-04-12 [p.738]
Q-404 — Mr. Blanchette-Joncas (Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques) — With regard to government spending in the ridings of Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane–Matapédia, Manicouagan, Montmagny—L’Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine, Papineau, Honoré-Mercier, Ahuntsic-Cartierville and Québec, since 2015 and broken down by constituency: (a) what is the total annual amount, broken down by year; (b) what is the detailed annual amount, broken down by department, Crown corporation, agency or body; and (c) what grants and contributions have been made, broken down by year according to the source of the funding? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-404.
2021-04-12 [p.740]
Q-419 — Mr. Beaulieu (La Pointe-de-l'Île) — With regard to the positions of deputy ministers, assistant deputy ministers and associate deputy ministers, as of December 31, 2020: (a) what are the language requirements for the positions of deputy minister, assistant deputy minister and associate deputy minister; (b) what was the breakdown by first official language spoken; and (c) what was the breakdown of anglophones and francophones in positions that do or do not meet the language requirements of their position? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-419.
2021-04-12 [p.741]
Q-421 — Ms. Chabot (Thérèse-De Blainville) — With regard to the Canada Summer Jobs program: (a) for each of the 338 ridings in Canada, how much money, how many positions and how many hours of work were requested for fiscal year 2019-20; (b) for each of the 338 ridings in Canada, how much money, how many positions and how many hours of work were allocated for fiscal year 2019-20; (c) what is, in mathematical terms, and defining all variables, the formula that was used in fiscal year 2019-20 to determine the funding allocated to each riding; and (d) what is the share of overall funding, expressed both as a percentage and in dollars, that has been allocated to ridings in Quebec, broken down by fiscal year, since 2015-16? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-421.
2021-04-12 [p.744]
Q-432 — Mr. Barsalou-Duval (Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères) — With regard to federal spending in the constituency of Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, since October 19, 2015: what is the total amount of federal investment, broken down by (i) year, (ii) department, (iii) project? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-432.
2021-04-12 [p.747]
Q-448 — Mrs. Gill (Manicouagan) — With regard to federal spending in the riding of Manicouagan for each fiscal year since 2019-20, inclusively: what are the details of all grants and contributions, and all loans to every organization, group, business or municipality, broken down by the (i) name of the recipient, (ii) municipality of the recipient, (iii) date on which the funding was received, (iv) amount received, (v) department or agency that provided the funding, (vi) program under which the grant, contribution or loan was made, (vii) nature or purpose? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-448.
2021-03-10 [p.629]
Q-348 — Mr. Beaulieu (La Pointe-de-l'Île) — With regard to the Court Challenges Program, since the announcement on February 7, 2017, that it would be reinstated: (a) what is the total amount offered under the program; and (b) what are the specifics regarding each funding recipient, including the (i) name, (ii) amount promised by the government, (iii) amount received by the person concerned, (iv) court case concerned, (v) date on which the funding decision was made? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-348.
2021-03-10 [p.629]
Q-349 — Ms. Normandin (Saint-Jean) — With regard to visa requirements for foreign nationals entering Canada, since December 1, 2016: (a) what formal review of the visa exemption has been undertaken by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada; (b) what consultations with federal departments and agencies have been undertaken with respect to the visa lift, including, for each consultation (i) the date, (ii) the place, (iii) the agencies and departments consulted, (iv) the country under review; (c) what are the criteria established by Canada in its visa policy framework to assess eligibility for a visa exemption; and (d) what aspects, in detail, are taken into consideration when Canada conducts a review of visa requirements, with respect to (i) socio-economic trends, (ii) migration issues, (iii) the integrity of travel documents, (iv) border management, (v) safety and security issues, (vi) human rights issues, (vii) bilateral and multilateral issues? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-349.
2021-01-25 [p.437]
Q-246 — Ms. Pauzé (Repentigny) — With regard to the fossil fuel sector and the renewable energy sector, and for all the departments and agencies affected: (a) what regulatory amendments, including amendments to federal-provincial partnership programs, have been made since March 15, 2020, that affect the funding or regulation of one of these sectors, including (i) the duration of each of these amendments, (ii) the impact of each amendment; and (b) for these two sectors, what financial support measures have been implemented (i) through programs administered by Export Development Canada, (ii) by any other governmental or quasi-governmental department or agency? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-246.
2020-11-18 [p.282]
Q-105 — Ms. Normandin (Saint-Jean) — With regard to the activities of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB) during the pandemic: (a) for each of the IRB’s four divisions, broken down by month and for the Eastern, Central and Vancouver divisions, how many hearings were held during the months of April to September in (i) 2019, (ii) 2020; (b) broken down by month, how many refugee protection claims eligible for file review were processed during the months of April to August in (i) 2019, (ii) 2020; (c) between April and August 2020, how many members, as a percentage, received their full pay; (d) what work was required for members working for the IRB; (e) on what date did the IRB Registry and mail room resume processing claims received by mail and fax; (f) as of March 16, 2020, how many Refugee Protection Division (RPD), Refugee Appeal Division (RAD), Immigration Division (ID) and Immigration Appeal Division (IAD) files were pending (backlog) and what was the average time between referral and decision; (g) to date, how many RPD, RAD, ID and IAD files are awaiting a hearing; (h) to date, what is the average time between referral and decision; and (i) how many IRB employees have had vacation leave since the resumption of operations? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-105.
2020-11-18 [p.283]
Q-106 — Ms. Normandin (Saint-Jean) — With regard to the activities of Immigration, Refugee and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) during the pandemic: (a) broken down by month, how many confirmations of permanent residence were issued during the months of April to August in (i) 2019, (ii) 2020; (b) broken down by month, how many visas (tourist, student, etc.) were issued during the months of April to August in (i) 2019, (ii) 2020; (c) to date, how many IRCC officers, as a percentage, received the necessary information equipment (telephones, computers, etc.) to enable them to work from home; (d) how many refugee protection claims were received by IRCC between March 17, 2020, and July 31, 2020, and of these, how many were referred to the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB); and (e) what is the current processing time for permanent resident cards, and what was the processing time for the same period in 2019? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-106.
2020-11-18 [p.283]
Q-107 — Mr. Ste-Marie (Joliette) — With regard to federal public servants living in the National Capital Region (NCR): (a) how many public servants worked in the NCR between 2010 and 2019, inclusively, broken down by year and province of residence, and what percentage of public servants (i) lived in Quebec but worked in Ontario, (ii) lived in Ontario, but worked in Quebec, (iii) lived and worked in Ontario, (iv) lived and worked in Quebec; (b) for each year between 2010 and 2019, inclusively, what percentage of the public service payroll is represented by the wages of federal public servants living in the NCR and working in (i) Ontario, (ii) Quebec; and (c) for each year between 2010 and 2019, inclusively, what is the mother tongue of federal public servants living in the NCR and the language most often spoken at work, broken down by province of (i) residence, (ii) work? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-107.
2020-11-16 [p.266]
Q-83 — Mr. Beaulieu (La Pointe-de-l'Île) — With regard to permanent residents who went through the Canadian citizenship process and citizenship ceremonies held between 2009 and 2019, broken down by province: (a) how many permanent residents demonstrated their language proficiency in (i) French, (ii) English; (b) how many permanent residents demonstrated an adequate knowledge of Canada and of the responsibilities and privileges of citizenship in (i) French, (ii) English; and (c) how many citizenship ceremonies took place in (i) French, (ii) English? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-83.
2020-07-20 [p.505]
Q-444 — Mrs. Gill (Manicouagan) — With regard to evaluating the stock status of all of Canada’s fisheries resources since 2000: (a) has the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) used indicators to evaluate the various stocks and, if so, what is the breakdown of indicators by (i) species, (ii) province, (iii) area, (iv) sub-area, (v) year;?(b) if the answer to (a) is negative, what does the DFO use as a basis for (i) evaluating stocks, (ii) making decisions on fisheries management; (c) has the DFO assessed the quality of its estimates for all of the various stocks and, if so, what is the breakdown of this qualitative assessment by (i) species, (ii) province, (iii) area, (iv) sub-area, (v) year; (d) if the answer to (c) is negative, (i) are there plans to carry out this assessment, (ii) why is this type of assessment not conducted; (e) has the DFO put together an action plan to increase the number of indicators used for evaluating various stocks and, if so, what are the names, measures taken or considered, and conclusions, broken down by (i) species, (ii) province, (iii) area, (iv) sub-area, (v) year; (f) if the answer to (e) is negative, (i) is this type of action plan being considered, (ii) why is there no action plan on this issue; (g) has the DFO expended funds to increase the number of indicators for evaluating the various stocks and, if so, what is the spending breakdown by (i) species, (ii) province, (iii) area, (iv) sub-area, (v) year; (h) if the answer to (g) is negative, (i) are there plans for this type of expenditure, (ii) why is there a lack of spending on this issue; (i) has the DFO begun to “rapidly develop or update the biological knowledge essential for the sustainable management” of lobsters in areas 15, 16, 17 and 18, as recommended in Science Advisory Report 2019/059, and, if so, what is the breakdown of measures taken by (i) area, (ii) sub-area, (iii) year; (j) if the answer to (i) is negative, (i) are there plans to do so, (ii) why have no measures been taken; (k) can the DFO explain why the confidence limit has increased to 95% in the past 10 years regarding the evaluation of the estimated biomass of stock in NAFO 4T and, if so, what is the explanation; and (l) if the answer to (k) is negative, why is the DFO unable to explain this increase? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-431-444.
2020-07-20 [p.506]
Q-445 — Mrs. Gill (Manicouagan) — With regard to the peer review process coordinated by the Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat (CSAS) for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO): (a) exactly how is the peer review process carried out; (b) is participation in science advisory meetings by invitation only and, if so, (i) why is this the case, (ii) how are peers selected, (iii) who is responsible for peer selection or, if not, what is the procedure for participating in meetings; (c) in advance of a science advisory meeting, do all peers receive (i) the preliminary study and, if so, how long do they have to review it or, if not, what are the reasons for this decision, (ii) the data for this study and, if so, how long do they have to review it or, if not, what are the reasons behind this decision; (d) is it possible for an individual or a group to express their views (i) without having been invited and, if so, what is the procedure to follow or, if not, what are the reasons for this decision, (ii) without attending the science advisory meetings despite having been invited and, if so, what is the procedure to follow or, if not, what are the reasons for this decision, (iii) without attending the science advisory meetings and without having been invited and, if so, what is the procedure to follow or, if not, what are the reasons for this decision; (e) is it possible to attend meetings as an observer and, if so, (i) what is the procedure to follow, (ii) is an invitation required or, if not, what are the reasons for this decision; (f) for each of the DFO peer review processes coordinated by the CSAS, what is the breakdown for each meeting since 2010 by number of representatives affiliated with (i) DFO, (ii) the federal government excluding DFO, (iii) the Government of Quebec, (iv) the Government of British Columbia, (v) the Government of Alberta, (vi) the Government of Prince Edward Island, (vii) the Government of Manitoba, (viii) the Government of New Brunswick, (ix) the Government of Nova Scotia, (x) the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, (xi) the Government of Ontario, (xii) the Government of Saskatchewan, (xiii) the Government of Nunavut, (xiv) the Government of Yukon, (xv) the Government of Northwest Territories, (xvi) band councils, (xvii) a Quebec university, (xviii) a Canadian university, (xix) an American university, (xx) the non-Indigenous fishing industry, (xxi) the Indigenous fishing industry, (xxii) an Indigenous group not affiliated with the fishing industry, (xxiii) an environmental group, (xxiv) a wildlife protection group, (xxv) another group; (g) how is consensus defined in the DFO peer review processes coordinated by the CSAS; (h) are stakeholders selected in order to encourage a lack of opposition to the conclusions put forward by the DFO; (i) do the procedures for the peer review process encourage a lack of opposition to the conclusions put forward by the DFO; and (j) does the methodology for the peer review process encourage a lack of opposition to the conclusions put forward by the DFO? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-431-445.
2020-07-20 [p.507]
Q-446 — Mrs. Gill (Manicouagan) — With regard to recreational fishing managed by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) since 2000: (a) what is the total amount of revenue generated by the DFO from the sale of recreational licences, broken down by (i) year, (ii) federal entity, (iii) fishing area, (iv) sub-area, (v) species; (b) what is the total amount of spending by the DFO to support recreational fishing, broken down by (i) year, (ii) federal entity, (iii) fishing area, (iv) sub-area, (v) species; (c) what measures are being taken to ensure compliance with recreational fishing regulations, broken down by (i) year, (ii) federal entity, (iii) fishing area, (iv) sub-area, (v) species; (d) what is the average number of fishery officers dedicated specifically to overseeing recreational fishing, broken down by (i) year, (ii) federal entity, (iii) fishing area, (iv) sub-area, (v) species; (e) what technological tools are used to ensure compliance with recreational fishing regulations, broken down by (i) year, (ii) federal entity, (iii) fishing area, (iv) sub-area, (v) species; (f) what is the number of tickets issued by the DFO using technological tools, broken down by (i) year, (ii) federal entity, (iii) fishing area, (iv) sub-area, (v) technological tool; (g) what is the total amount of all tickets issued by the DFO using technological tools, broken down by (i) year, (ii) federal entity, (iii) fishing area, (iv) sub-area, (v) technological tool; and (h) what is the total amount of all recreational fishing tickets issued by the DFO, broken down by (i) year, (ii) federal entity, (iii) fishing area, (iv) sub-area, (v) species? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-431-446.
 
2020-05-25 [p.441]
Q-389 — Ms. Bérubé (Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou) — With regard to the consultations that the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations is currently holding in order to develop an action plan to implement the 231 calls for justice of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls: (a) has the Department of Crown-Indigenous Relations established a committee to develop this action plan; (b) if so, what mechanisms have been put in place to consult the Government of Quebec about the development of this action plan, including the implementation of the 21 Quebec-specific calls for justice in the report; and (c) if a committee has been established, will the Government of Quebec participate in its work? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-431-389.
2020-05-25 [p.441]
Q-390 — Ms. Bérubé (Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou) — With regard to the drinking water situation in Kitigan Zibi: has the Department of Indigenous Services (i) analyzed the plans that were submitted by the band council to connect to the Maniwaki water system, (ii) decided whether it will proceed with the connection, (iii) released the funding necessary to complete the connection work, (iv) set a timeline so that the community has access to running water within a reasonable time? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-431-390.
2020-05-25 [p.445]
Q-401 — Mr. Savard-Tremblay (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot) — With regard to the criminal charges the government laid in December 2019 against the Volkswagen Group concerning the approximately 120,000 diesel vehicles whose nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions exceeded the standards allowed, broken down by the German companies of the Volkswagen Group, the Canadian companies of the Volkswagen Group, the U.S. companies of the Volkswagen Group, and directors, executives and employees: (a) why did the government file charges for 58 counts of importing non-compliant vehicles instead of one count for each of the 120,000 offences; (b) why did the government file charges for two counts of misleading information instead of one count for each of the 120,000 offences; (c) why did the government not file any charges against the Canadian companies of the Volkswagen Group; (d) why did the government not file any charges against the U.S. companies of the Volkswagen Group that took part in the illegal acts that affected Canada; (e) why did the government not file any charges against the directors, executives and employees who were involved in these offences; (f) why did the government not file any charges regarding the 120,000 offences for selling, renting or distributing these non-compliant vehicles; (g) why did the government not file any charges of fraud concerning the 120,000 pieces of software that prevented the non-compliance from being detected; and (h) why did the government not file any charges regarding the illegal pollution caused by these 120,000 vehicles in Canada? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-431-401.
Results: 1 - 28 of 28

Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data