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 1276
2021-05-06 [p.903]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Gourde (Lévis—Lotbinière), seconded by Mr. Généreux (Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup), Bill C-293, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and to make consequential amendments to another Act (interim release and domestic violence recognizance orders), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
2021-05-06 [p.905]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Jeneroux (Edmonton Riverbend), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-220, An Act to amend the Canada Labour Code (bereavement leave), be now read a third time and do pass.
The debate continued.
2021-05-06 [p.905]
Pursuant to Standing Order 52(10), the House proceeded to the consideration of a motion to adjourn the House for the purpose of discussing an important matter requiring urgent consideration, namely, the line 5 pipeline shutdown.
Mr. Richards (Banff—Airdrie), seconded by Mr. O'Toole (Durham), moved, — That this House do now adjourn.
Debate arose thereon.
2021-05-06 [p.905]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Richards (Banff—Airdrie), seconded by Mr. O'Toole (Durham), — That this House do now adjourn.
The debate continued.
2021-05-06 [p.906]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Richards (Banff—Airdrie), seconded by Mr. O'Toole (Durham), — That this House do now adjourn.
The debate continued.
At midnight, the Speaker declared the motion adopted.
2021-05-05 [p.891]
Pursuant to order made Monday, January 25, 2021, the House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion of Mr. Bragdon (Tobique—Mactaquac), seconded by Mr. Paul-Hus (Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles), — That Bill C-228, An Act to establish a federal framework to reduce recidivism, be now read a third time and do pass.
The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to on the following division:
(Division No. 107 -- Vote no 107) - View vote details.
YEAS: 297, NAYS: 32
Accordingly, the bill was read the third time and passed.
2021-05-05 [p.893]
Pursuant to order made Monday, January 25, 2021, the House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion of Ms. Bergen (Portage—Lisgar), seconded by Mr. Bezan (Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman), — That, given that:
(a) women and all members of the Canadian Armed Forces placed their trust in this government to act on claims of sexual misconduct;
(b) the Prime Minister's Chief of Staff was informed about a specific sexual harassment allegation against General Jonathan Vance three years ago;
(c) the Prime Minister asserts that this sexual harassment allegation was never brought to his attention; and
(d) the Prime Minister said that those in a position of authority have a duty to act upon allegations,
the House call upon the Prime Minister to dismiss his Chief of Staff for failing to notify him about a serious sexual harassment allegation at the highest ranks of the Canadian Armed Forces and for being complicit in hiding the truth from Canadians.
The question was put on the motion and it was negatived on the following division:
(Division No. 108 -- Vote no 108) - View vote details.
YEAS: 122, NAYS: 209
2021-05-05 [p.896]
— by Ms. Rempel Garner (Calgary Nose Hill), one concerning health (No. 432-00910);
2021-05-05 [p.896]
— by Mr. Lewis (Essex), one concerning business and trade (No. 432-00913);
2021-05-05 [p.896]
— by Mr. Falk (Provencher), one concerning justice (No. 432-00914).
2021-05-05 [p.897]
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-555 — Mrs. Gallant (Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke) — With regard to the Canadian Coast Guard fleet renewal and the National Shipbuilding Strategy (NSS): (a) what is the list of each vessel, including the (i) name, (ii) region, (iii) home port, (iv) area of operations, i.e. north or south or both, (v) year commissioned, (vi) notional operational life, (vii) current age, (viii) percentage of operational notional life, as of 2021, (ix) planned end of service life (EOSL), (x) age at the end of EOSL, (xi) percentage of notional operational life at EOSL, (xii) confirm whether funding has been provided for a replacement or not, (xiii) how much funding has been provided or allocated, including taxes and contingencies for each vessel replacement, (xiv) date funding provided, (xv) date on which a replacement vessel is expected to be (A) designed, (B) constructed, (C) commissioned; (b) what are all the reasons why the polar icebreaker was removed from the Seaspan’s umbrella agreement in 2019 and substituted by 16 multi-purpose vessels; (c) what are all the risks identified with building a polar icebreaker at the Vancouver Shipyards; (d) what are the proposed scope, the schedule and the draft or anticipated budget for the replacement of the CCGS Louis S. St-Laurent and the CCGS Terry Fox polar icebreaker; (e) what is the summary of risks, including the (i) scope, (ii) budget, (iii) schedule, related to building the offshore oceanographic science vessel and the multi-purpose vessels; and (f) what are the anticipated benefits for the Royal Canadian Navy and Canadian Coast Guard of adding a third shipyard to the NSS? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-555.
2021-05-05 [p.897]
Q-556 — Mrs. Gallant (Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke) — With regard to the National Shipbuilding Strategy (NSS): (a) what is the full budget for the Canadian Surface Combatants (CSC), including (i) design, (ii) construction, (iii) licences, including intellectual property (IP) licences, (iv) spares, (v) taxes, (vi) contingencies, (vii) any specific infrastructure required for building the CSC in Halifax and all associated costs and considerations; (b) what is the total expected cost or value of the Industrial and Technological Benefits (ITB) Policies on each vessel built under the NSS, including an explanation of how these costs are calculated and how the ITB costs are validated; (c) what is the list of estimated costs that the ITB policies is adding to each vessel under the NSS, and the summary of any discussion had at the NSS Secretariat, Privy Council Office or at the deputy minister level regarding costs of the ITB policies as it relates to NSS; (d) what is the summary of any analysis conducted on the ITB policies, and a comparison in relation to any similar policy existing in the United Kingdom or in the United States frigate programs; and (e) what is the full costing of the first Arctic and offshore patrol ship, including the cost of (i) design, (ii) IP licences; (iii) construction, (iv) commissioning, (v) taxes, (vi) profit, (vii) contingencies? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-556.
2021-05-05 [p.898]
Q-557 — Ms. Dancho (Kildonan—St. Paul) — With regard to data breaches involving Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) and the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), including data breaches that may have involved IRCC facilities or subcontractors abroad: (a) how many data breaches have occurred at IRCC or CBSA since January 1, 2020; (b) what are the details of each breach, including the (i) description or summary of the incident and the date, (ii) number of individuals whose information was involved, (iii) whether or not individuals whose information was involved were contacted, (iv) whether or not the Privacy Commissioner was notified, (v) whether or not the RCMP was notified; (c) how many RCMP investigations related to data breaches involving IRCC or CBSA have either been initiated or are ongoing; and (d) what were the results of the investigations in (c)? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-557.
2021-05-05 [p.898]
Q-558 — Mr. Mazier (Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa) — With regard to the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA), since January 2020, broken down by month: (a) how many phone calls did the CRA receive from the general public; (b) what was the average wait time for an individual who contacted the CRA by phone before first making a direct contact with an employee; (c) what was the average wait or hold time after first being directly connected with an employee; (d) what was the average duration of total call time, including the time waiting or on hold, for an individual who contacted the CRA by phone; and (e) how many documented server, website, portal or system errors occurred on the CRA website? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-432-558.
Results: 1 - 15 of 1276 | Page: 1 of 86

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

For more data options, please see Open Data