Journals
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 76 of 76
2015-06-18 [p.2835]
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning climate change (No. 412-6142), one concerning natural gas (No. 412-6143) and one concerning euthanasia (No. 412-6144);
2015-06-17 [p.2817]
Q-1262 — Mr. Cash (Davenport) — With regard to International Experience Canada, for the year 2014: (a) with which countries did Canada have an agreement; (b) what were the reciprocal quotas; (c) how many Canadians travelled to each country under the auspices of the agreement; (d) how many youths from each country travelled to Canada under the auspices of the agreement, broken down by (i) working holiday, (ii) young professionals, (iii) international cooperative work placements; (e) how many Canadian employers employed foreign youth in the young professionals stream; (f) how many Canadian employers employed foreign youth in the international cooperative work placements stream; (g) when will the government be finished its detailed labour market assessment of the program and will the assessment be made public; (h) how many Canadian employers have been subject to investigations for compliance; (i) how many Canadian employers have been found to be in non-compliance as a result of an investigation, broken down by type of issue; (j) how many Canadian employers have had to take remedial actions in order to be considered compliant as a result of an investigation; (k) how many Canadian employers have been subject to penalties as a result of an investigation; (l) how does Citizenship and Immigration Canada define reciprocal with respect to its goal to make the program more reciprocal; and (m) what is the Department’s target for reciprocity? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-412-1262.
2015-06-17 [p.2825]
Q-1322 — Mr. McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood) — With regard to the government's Federal Sustainable Development Strategy (FSDS): (a) by what percentage of 2005 levels are federal departments and agencies currently committed to reducing their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 2020; (b) as of the most recent year on record, by what percentage have federal departments and agencies reduced their emissions compared to 2005 levels; (c) what were the total, government-wide greenhouse gas emissions for the federal government in the most recent year on record; (d) how much of the government's overall GHG emissions are actually subject to the targets set under the FSDS' Green Government Operations Initiative; (e) why has the federal government not released a FSDS progress report since 2013; and (f) when will the government release its next FSDS progress report? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-412-1322.
2015-06-16 [p.2789]
Q-1311 — Ms. Doré Lefebvre (Alfred-Pellan) — With regard to the advisory council created by the government in 2012 mandated to promote women on the boards of public and private corporations: (a) in total, how many individuals are on this advisory council, broken down by (i) gender, (ii) name, (iii) position; (b) when did the meetings take place; (c) what were the subjects discussed by this council; (d) what is the expected date for this council’s report; (e) what was discussed during this council’s meetings with respect to (i) pay equity, (ii) the representation of women on the boards of public and private corporations; and (f) can the government table the minutes of this advisory council’s meetings? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-412-1311.
2015-06-15 [p.2758]
— Nos. 412-5551, 412-5648, 412-5697, 412-5709, 412-5718 and 412-5767 concerning climate change. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-412-50-22;
2015-06-15 [p.2765]
Q-1247 — Ms. Sgro (York West) — With regard to government funding, for each program of grants, contributions, loans or other type of funding which currently exists, or which formerly existed at any time since April 1, 2007: (a) is or was the funding tracked using a database; (b) if the answer to (a) is affirmative, what is or was the name or title of that database; (c) what are or were the data fields which are kept in that database in respect of each grant, contribution, loan, or other type of funding; (d) has the database been proactively made available to the public as part of the government’s Open Data initiative or policy, or otherwise; and (e) if the database has not been made available to the public, what is the reason that it has not been? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-412-1247.
2015-06-04 [p.2631]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Hyer (Thunder Bay—Superior North), seconded by Mr. Rathgeber (Edmonton—St. Albert), Bill C-685, An Act to amend the Celebrating Canada’s Seniors Act (living situation of seniors), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
2015-06-03 [p.2624]
Pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), Mr. Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) laid upon the Table, — Answer to question Q-1158 on the Order Paper. — Sessional Paper No. 8530-412-26.
2015-05-12 [p.2518]
— by Mr. Kellway (Beaches—East York), one concerning climate change (No. 412-5648);
2015-05-01 [p.2453]
Pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), Mr. Gill (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade) laid upon the Table, — Copy of the United Nations Convention on Transparency in Treaty-Based Investor-State Arbitration, and Explanatory Memorandum, dated March 17, 2015. — Sessional Paper No. 8532-412-55.
2015-04-20 [p.2361]
— Nos. 412-5147, 412-5235 and 412-5273 concerning climate change. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-412-50-19;
2015-03-31 [p.2313]
The Speaker laid upon the Table, — Special Report of the Information Commissioner entitled "Striking the Right Balance for Transparency: Recommendations to modernize the Access to Information Act", pursuant to the Access to Information Act, R.S. 1985, c. A-1, s. 39(1). — Sessional Paper No. 8560-412-734-05. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(5), permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics)
2015-03-31 [p.2316]
— by Mr. Kellway (Beaches—East York), one concerning climate change (No. 412-5235);
2015-03-23 [p.2251]
— by Ms. Sims (Newton—North Delta), one concerning climate change (No. 412-5147) and one concerning health care services (No. 412-5148);
2015-03-20 [p.2263]
Q-1027 — Mr. Simms (Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor) — With regard to the Access to Information Act and the Open Government Initiative: what are the details of each instance since January 1, 2006, where it has come to the attention of a government institution which is now, or formerly was, listed in Schedule I of the Access to Information Act, that a data set which was released in response to an Access to Information Request, or proactively disclosed or published pursuant to any Act, regulation, policy, or initiative of government, has been improperly altered, falsified, forged, or tampered with, broken down by the (i) name of the government institution, (ii) title or description of the data set in question, (iii) authority under which the data set was disclosed, (iv) date on which it was disclosed, (v) file number of the Access to Information request, if the data set was disclosed pursuant to a request under that Act, (vi) nature of the improper alteration, falsification, forgery, or tampering, (vii) actions taken by the government institution in light of the improper alteration, falsification, forgery, or tampering? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-412-1027.
2015-02-27 [p.2197]
— by Ms. Leslie (Halifax), one concerning climate change (No. 412-5075);
2015-02-26 [p.2188]
— by Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), two concerning the issuing of visas (Nos. 412-5061 and 412-5062), one concerning climate change (No. 412-5063) and one concerning the Canada Post Corporation (No. 412-5064);
2015-02-24 [p.2169]
— by Mr. Kellway (Beaches—East York), one concerning climate change (No. 412-5014);
2015-02-23 [p.2161]
— by Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), one concerning climate change (No. 412-5000);
2015-02-23 [p.2161]
— by Mr. Kellway (Beaches—East York), one concerning climate change (No. 412-5009);
2015-02-18 [p.2142]
— by Mr. Kellway (Beaches—East York), one concerning climate change (No. 412-4965);
2015-02-18 [p.2143]
— by Mr. Scott (Toronto—Danforth), one concerning climate change (No. 412-4974).
2015-02-17 [p.2138]
— by Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), two concerning the issuing of visas (Nos. 412-4929 and 412-4930), three concerning the protection of the environment (Nos. 412-4931 to 412-4933) and one concerning climate change (No. 412-4934);
2015-01-26 [p.1973]
— Nos. 412-4481, 412-4574, 412-4622, 412-4684, 412-4693, 412-4701 and 412-4704 concerning climate change. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-412-50-17;
2015-01-26 [p.1975]
Q-770 — Mr. Dubourg (Bourassa) — With regard to the Treasury Board Secretariat: (a) does the Directive on Open Government, dated October 9, 2014, apply to tabular material prepared by departments, agencies, or crown corporations in response to written questions placed on the Order Paper by Members of the House of Commons or Senators; (b) if the response to (a) is negative, (i) why does the Directive not apply, (ii) who made this determination, (iii) when was this determination made; and (c) what are the titles and file numbers of any file, briefing note, dossier, or any other document, created or held by either the Treasury Board Secretariat or the Privy Council Office, relating to the application of the Directive on Open Government to government responses to written questions placed on the Order Paper by Members of the House of Commons or Senators? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-412-770.
2014-12-09 [p.1933]
— by Ms. Turmel (Hull—Aylmer), one concerning budget measures (No. 412-4683) and one concerning climate change (No. 412-4684);
2014-12-08 [p.1914]
— No. 412-4390 concerning climate change. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-412-50-15.
2014-11-26 [p.1841]
— by Mr. Dubé (Chambly—Borduas), one concerning climate change (No. 412-4574);
2014-11-19 [p.1793]
— by Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), one concerning climate change (No. 412-4481) and one concerning Christianity (No. 412-4482);
2014-10-29 [p.1661]
— by Mr. Chisholm (Dartmouth—Cole Harbour), one concerning climate change (No. 412-4390) and two concerning the Canada Post Corporation (Nos. 412-4391 and 412-4392);
2014-06-11 [p.1245]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Trudeau (Papineau), seconded by Mr. Andrews (Avalon), Bill C-613, An Act to amend the Parliament of Canada Act and the Access to Information Act (transparency), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
2014-06-04 [p.1143]
By unanimous consent, it was resolved, — That the House remember the violent crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrations in Tiananmen Square on its 25th anniversary, express its deepest condolences to those who lost friends and family members in the massacre, call upon China to account for those who remain missing, call for the release of those who continue to be imprisoned, and urge the Government of China to abide by international human rights standards and to engage in ongoing and open dialogue with its people about the tragic events of 25 years ago.
2014-05-12 [p.960]
Q-388 — Ms. Bennett (St. Paul's) — With regard to Canada’s Action Plan on Open Government: for each department, agency, crown corporation, or other government body or entity, (a) what is the title or description, nature, and internal reference or file number (if applicable) of each (i) data-set, (ii) Geographical Information System (GIS) file, which that department, agency, crown corporation, or other government body or entity possesses or maintains, but elected not to publish to the open data portal data.gc.ca since the data portal was created; and (b) in each case, what are the reasons for electing to not publish the data-set or GIS file? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-412-388.
2014-03-24 [p.686]
Q-252 — Ms. Leslie (Halifax) — With regard to the ongoing negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change and in accordance with decision -/CP.1 ("Further Advancing the Durban Platform") of the 19th session of the Conference of the Parties in Warsaw, “To invite all Parties to initiate or intensify domestic preparations for their intended nationally determined contributions [...] and to communicate them [...] in a manner that facilitates the clarity, transparency and understanding of the intended contributions”: (a) which steps have already been undertaken by the government to determine Canada's contribution to the global effort to address climate change under the Convention in the post-2020 period; (b) what are the government's further plans to undertake the work necessary to determine a contribution by Canada to the global effort to address climate change under the Convention and to do so with a view of being able to communicate this commitment well in advance of the 21st session of the Conference of the Parties in early 2015;
(c) which steps have already been undertaken and what are the government's further plans to establish a framework of criteria for determining (i) that the "nationally determined contribution", referred to above, constitutes a “fair contribution” by Canada in accordance with the principles of the Convention, including taking into account Canada's responsibility and capability and other countries' development and adaptation needs, (ii) that the contribution is sufficient to achieve the overall aim of limiting global warming to no more than two degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels; (d) what are the government's plans to ensure public participation and the involvement of MPs in this process and how does the government plan to consult with climate scientists, economists, First Nations, Métis and Inuit peoples, members of the business community, members of civil society, legal experts, and other Canadians on Canada's contribution;
(e) how does the government plan to involve other levels of government, including provincial, territorial, First Nations and municipal, into the overall planning process, given that a substantial part of the overall contribution will have to be implemented by other levels of government; (f) in the event that Canada fails to achieve its current national climate target for 2020, what are the government's plans for making up for any pre-2020 shortfall in the post-2020 period; and (g) is the Prime Minster going to represent Canada at the high-level summit on climate change, to be convened by the Secretary General of the United Nations on September 23, 2014 and, if so, what pledges will the Prime Minister bring with him to the summit and, if not, who will be representing the government at this event? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-412-252.
2014-02-27 [p.604]
At 6:30 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 66(2), the House resumed the adjourned debate on the motion of Mr. Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster), seconded by Ms. Turmel (Hull—Aylmer), — That the Third Report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, presented on Monday, December 2, 2013, be concurred in. (Concurrence in Committee Reports No. 1).
2014-02-27 [p.604]
The question was put on the motion and, pursuant to Standing Order 66(2), the recorded division was deferred until Wednesday, March 5, 2014, at the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders.
2014-02-26 [p.583]
By unanimous consent, it was ordered, — That, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practice of the House, during the debate tomorrow on the motion to concur in the Third Report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, the Chair shall not receive any quorum calls, dilatory motions, or requests for unanimous consent; and at the end of the time remaining for the debate, or when no Member rises to speak, all questions necessary to dispose of the motion shall be deemed put and a recorded division deemed requested.
2014-02-06 [p.516]
Mr. Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster), seconded by Ms. Turmel (Hull—Aylmer), moved, — That the Third Report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, presented on Monday, December 2, 2013, be concurred in. (Concurrence in Committee Reports No. 1)
Debate arose thereon.
2014-02-06 [p.517]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster), seconded by Ms. Turmel (Hull—Aylmer), — That the Third Report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, presented on Monday, December 2, 2013, be concurred in. (Concurrence in Committee Reports No. 1)
The debate continued.
2013-12-02 [p.258]
Mr. Preston (Elgin—Middlesex—London), from the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, presented the Third Report of the Committee (Review of the Board of Internal Economy). — Sessional Paper No. 8510-412-22.
A copy of the relevant Minutes of Proceedings (Meetings Nos. 4 to 10) was tabled.
2013-06-18 [p.3441]
By unanimous consent, it was ordered, — That, notwithstanding any Standing or Special Order or usual practice of the House:
(a) Bill C-54, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the National Defence Act (mental disorder), be deemed read a third time and passed on division;
(b) Bill S-14, An Act to amend the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act, be deemed read a third time and passed;
(c) Bill S-17, An Act to implement conventions, protocols, agreements and a supplementary convention, concluded between Canada and Namibia, Serbia, Poland, Hong Kong, Luxembourg and Switzerland, for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes, be deemed concurred in at report stage and deemed read a third time and passed;
(d) Bill S-15, An Act to amend the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001, be deemed concurred in at report stage and deemed read a third time and passed;
(e) Bill C-32, An Act to amend the Civil Marriage Act, be
(i) deemed read a second time and referred to a Committee of the Whole;
(ii) deemed considered in a Committee of the Whole and reported with the following amendment: “That Bill C-32, in Clause 4, be amended by replacing line 10 on page 3 with the following: “consent, on presentation of an order from the court or a””,
(iii) deemed concurred in at report stage, as amended, and deemed read a third time and passed;
(f) Bill C-425, An Act to amend the Citizenship Act (honouring the Canadian Armed Forces), be deemed reported back from the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration without amendment;
(g) in order to bring full transparency and accountability to House of Commons spending, the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs be instructed to:
(i) conduct open and public hearings with a view to replace the Board of Internal Economy with an independent oversight body,
(ii) invite the Auditor General, the Clerk and the Chief Financial Officer of the House of Commons to participate fully in these hearings,
(iii) study the practices of provincial and territorial legislatures, as well as other jurisdictions and Westminster-style Parliaments in order to compare and contrast their administrative oversight,
(iv) propose modifications to the Parliament of Canada Act, the Financial Administration Act, the Auditor General Act and any other acts as deemed necessary,
(v) propose any necessary modifications to the administrative policies and practices of the House of Commons,
(vi) examine the subject-matter of the motions, standing in the name of the Member for Papineau, placed on the Order Paper on June 10, 2013,
(vii) report its findings to the House no later than December 2, 2013, in order to have any proposed changes to expense disclosure and reporting in place for the beginning of the next fiscal year;
(h) when the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs meets pursuant to the order of reference set out in paragraph (g) of this Order, one Member who is not a member of a recognized party be allowed to participate in the hearings as a temporary, non-voting member of that Committee;
(i) on Tuesday, June 18, 2013, the House adjourn at 12 midnight or after each of Bills C-54, S-14, S-15, C-32 and S-17 have been read the third time, whichever comes first; and
(j) upon the adjournment of the House on Tuesday, June 18, 2013, the House stand adjourned until Monday, September 16, 2013, provided that, for the purposes of any Standing Order, the House be deemed to stand adjourned pursuant to Standing Order 28.
2013-04-23 [p.3018]
Pursuant to Order made Friday, April 19, 2013, the House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion of Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), seconded by Mr. Genest-Jourdain (Manicouagan), — That this House call on the government to: (a) abandon its confrontational approach to First Nations, Métis and Inuit in favour of a nation-to-nation dialogue; (b) make treaty implementation, as well as the settlement and implementation of land claims, a priority, including in Labrador; and (c) begin negotiations in good faith with NunatuKavut Community Council on their comprehensive land claim that has been without a response since 1991.
The question was put on the motion and it was negatived on the following division:
(Division No. 665 -- Vote no 665) - View vote details.
YEAS: 123, NAYS: 146
2013-04-19 [p.3001]
The Order was read for the consideration of the Business of Supply.
Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), seconded by Mr. Genest-Jourdain (Manicouagan), moved, — That this House call on the government to: (a) abandon its confrontational approach to First Nations, Métis and Inuit in favour of a nation-to-nation dialogue; (b) make treaty implementation, as well as the settlement and implementation of land claims, a priority, including in Labrador; and (c) begin negotiations in good faith with NunatuKavut Community Council on their comprehensive land claim that has been without a response since 1991.
Debate arose thereon.
2013-04-19 [p.3002]
By unanimous consent, it was ordered, — That, at the conclusion of today's debate on the opposition motion in the name of the Member for Nanaimo-Cowichan, all questions necessary to dispose of the motion be deemed put and a recorded division deemed requested and deferred to Tuesday, April 23, 2013, at the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders; and that the House then proceed to the consideration of Private Members' Business.
2013-04-19 [p.3003]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), seconded by Mr. Genest-Jourdain (Manicouagan), in relation to the Business of Supply.
The debate continued.
2013-04-19 [p.3003]
At 1:15 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 81(16), the Speaker interrupted the proceedings.
2013-04-19 [p.3003]
Pursuant to Order made earlier today, the question was deemed put on the motion and a recorded division was deemed requested and deferred until Tuesday, April 23, 2013, at the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders.
2012-06-07 [p.1457]
The Speaker laid upon the Table, — Report of the Commissioner of Lobbying for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2012, pursuant to the Lobbying Act, R.S. 1985, c. 44 (4th Supp.), s. 11. — Sessional Paper No. 8560-411-1017-02. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(5), permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics)
2012-05-30 [p.1346]
Pursuant to Standing Order 93(1), the House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion of Ms. Michaud (Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier), seconded by Mr. Côté (Beauport—Limoilou), — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should: (a) formally recognize the responsibility of the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces with regard to the contamination of the groundwater which is the source of drinking water for multiple homes in the residential area of Canadian Forces Base (CFB) Valcartier, residential areas of the municipality of Shannon, and numerous public institutions, due to the use of chlorinated solvents for several decades, including trichloroethylene (TCE); (b) take over the efforts of the Shannon Citizens Committee to monitor filtration systems in place for those dealing with the contamination of drinking water, and include the Committee in any environmental efforts undertaken; and (c) commit to (i) notify all persons employed at CFB Valcartier or who have lived in the residential quarters of the Base for the years during which the contamination took place, (ii) quickly clean up the affected sites, (iii) compensate victims of TCE contamination. (Private Members' Business M-273)
The question was put on the motion and it was negatived on the following division:
(Division No. 234 -- Vote no 234) - View vote details.
YEAS: 134, NAYS: 158
2012-05-17 [p.1305]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Ms. Michaud (Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier), seconded by Mr. Côté (Beauport—Limoilou), — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should: (a) formally recognize the responsibility of the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces with regard to the contamination of the groundwater which is the source of drinking water for multiple homes in the residential area of Canadian Forces Base (CFB) Valcartier, residential areas of the municipality of Shannon, and numerous public institutions, due to the use of chlorinated solvents for several decades, including trichloroethylene (TCE); (b) take over the efforts of the Shannon Citizens Committee to monitor filtration systems in place for those dealing with the contamination of drinking water, and include the Committee in any environmental efforts undertaken; and (c) commit to (i) notify all persons employed at CFB Valcartier or who have lived in the residential quarters of the Base for the years during which the contamination took place, (ii) quickly clean up the affected sites, (iii) compensate victims of TCE contamination. (Private Members' Business M-273)
The debate continued.
2012-05-17 [p.1305]
The question was put on the motion and, pursuant to Standing Order 93(1), the recorded division was deferred until Wednesday, May 30, 2012, immediately before the time provided for Private Members' Business.
2012-04-23 [p.8]
Q-472 — Ms. Bennett (St. Paul's) — With regard to Attawapiskat First Nation: (a) how many visits have been made by employees of the government to Attawapiskat First Nation since January 2010; (b) what are the names and positions of the employees who made these visits; (c) what was the purpose of these visits; and (d) did these employees issue any official reports or communications about Attawapiskat First Nation, and, if so, what were the contents of these reports or communications? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-472.
2012-04-02 [p.1055]
Ms. Michaud (Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier), seconded by Mr. Côté (Beauport—Limoilou), moved, — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should: (a) formally recognize the responsibility of the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces with regard to the contamination of the groundwater which is the source of drinking water for multiple homes in the residential area of Canadian Forces Base (CFB) Valcartier, residential areas of the municipality of Shannon, and numerous public institutions, due to the use of chlorinated solvents for several decades, including trichloroethylene (TCE); (b) take over the efforts of the Shannon Citizens Committee to monitor filtration systems in place for those dealing with the contamination of drinking water, and include the Committee in any environmental efforts undertaken; and (c) commit to (i) notify all persons employed at CFB Valcartier or who have lived in the residential quarters of the Base for the years during which the contamination took place, (ii) quickly clean up the affected sites, (iii) compensate victims of TCE contamination. (Private Members' Business M-273)
Debate arose thereon.
2012-04-02 [p.1055]
Pursuant to Standing Order 93(1), the Order was dropped to the bottom of the order of precedence on the Order Paper.
2012-01-30 [p.712]
Q-313 — Mr. Eyking (Sydney—Victoria) — What is the date, time, location, and nature of all government business conducted by the Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism from July 29 to August 9, 2011, inclusively? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-313.
2011-12-21 [p.734]
— No. 411-0222 concerning the Canada Post Corporation. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-411-13-04.
2011-12-06 [p.619]
Pursuant to Standing Order 39(7), Mr. Rickford (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, for the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency and for the Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario) presented the returns to the following questions made into Orders for Return:
Q-185 — Mr. MacAulay (Cardigan) — With regard to the Pacific North Coast Integrated Management Area (PNCIMA): (a) what are the reasons for the government’s withdrawal from the funding agreement; (b) given the Department of Fisheries and Oceans’ budget cuts, will there be any future funding allotted for PNCIMA and, if so, where will it come from; (c) what are the tangible successes from the government's higher-level approach in Large Ocean Management Areas (LOMAs) such as the Eastern Scotian Shelf Integrated Management (ESSIM) and Beaufort; (d) how have communities, economies, and the environment benefitted from LOMAs, (i) how have they been damaged; (e) what are the government’s objectives in its higher-level approach to integrated ocean management, (i) what are the indicators tracked to know whether objectives are being met; (f) what are the specific cases around the world from which the government is drawing experience and knowledge in terms of oceans management; (g) what are the specific details of the plan to wind down LOMAs pilot projects and begin applying integrated oceans management approaches as part of regular operation and what does this means for each of Canada’s LOMAs; and (h) how does the government meet its Integrated Management collaboration objective set out in the Canada’s Oceans Strategy and the Policy and Operational Framework for Integrated Management of Estuarine, Coastal and Marine Environments in Canada without any funding for the collaborative process, (i) if there is funding for the collaborative process, where will it come from, (ii) how will the government meet its obligations under the Policy and Operational Framework for Integrated Management of Estuarine, Coastal and Marine Environments in Canada, (iii) how will the government fulfill Canada’s Oceans Strategy, (iv) will Canada’s Oceans Strategy be discarded or changed? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-185.
2011-12-05 [p.608]
Pursuant to Standing Order 39(7), Ms. Hoeppner (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety) presented the returns to the following questions made into Orders for Return:
Q-179 — Ms. Savoie (Victoria) — With regard to Transport Canada, and the government’s role in the management and operation of the Victoria Harbour Airport (VHA) and the Victoria Harbour: (a) what is the process by which Transport Canada or its agents have evaluated, are evaluating, and plan to evaluate the impact on quality of life, noise and air pollution and the frequency of air traffic (including takeoffs, landings, taxiing, and other related activities) associated with operations at the VHA; (b) to date, what analysis has the government conducted with respect to the effects on the communities surrounding the airport and their residents of the impact on quality of life, noise, air pollutants and the frequency of air traffic (including takeoffs, landings, taxiing, and other related activities) associated with operations at the VHA; (c) what further analysis does the government plan to conduct with respect to the effects on the communities surrounding the airport and their residents of the impact on quality of life, noise, air pollutants and the frequency of air traffic (including takeoffs, landings, taxiing, and other related activities) associated with operations at the VHA; (d) what are the parameters of all past and planned analyses with respect to the effects on the communities surrounding the airport and their residents of the impact on quality of life, noise, air pollutants and the frequency of air traffic (including takeoffs, landings, taxiing, and other related activities) associated with operations at the VHA; (e) what steps has the government taken and what steps will it take to address problems associated with the impact on quality of life noise, air pollutants and air traffic frequency (including takeoffs, landings, taxiing, and other related activities) associated with operations at the VHA; (f) what is the timeline for completion of this process, including but not limited to (i) any evaluations, (ii) any decision to regulate or impose rules with respect to noise and air pollution and the frequency of air traffic; (g) with respect to the past and planned residents’ committees and any public consultation relating to the VHA, what will be the composition of the residents’ committee; (h) what action has the government taken on the basis of past results, information, and recommendations arising out of public consultation thus far, including the past residents’ committee; (i) what are the terms of reference for the new residents’ committee, including, but not limited to scope, powers, membership, evaluation criteria; (j) how will Transport Canada and the VHA evaluate and act upon the results, information, concerns and recommendations of the residents’ committee; (k) what policies, practices and procedures do Transport Canada and the VHA have in place to mitigate all real or perceived conflicts of interest between Transport Canada’s role as both operator of the VHA and as the government body having jurisdiction over aeronautics; (l) what are the current government policies, practices and procedures relating to its federal responsibilities with respect to noise and traffic pollution; (m) what are the details of all current draft regulations pertaining to the VHA and its operations; (n) when does the government or its agents plan to publish permanent air safety or other regulations pertaining to the VHA and its operations; (o) does the VHA have a complete Safety Management System (SMS); (p) what are the details of the process by which Transport Canada is assessing the application to build a mega yacht marina in Victoria Harbour (Marina); (q) what policies, practices and procedures do Transport Canada and the VHA have in place to mitigate all real or perceived conflicts of interest between Transport Canada’s role as both operator of the VHA and as the government body having jurisdiction to approve or deny the construction of the marina under the Navigable Waters Protection Act; (r) what are the details of the current timeline for the approval or rejection of the marina application; (s) what are the details of the timeline for the completion of the VHA’s assessment of the Marina under its SMS; (t) who is bearing the cost of the VHA’s assessment of the marina and Transport Canada’s assessment of the marina; (u) what is the estimated cost of all activities related to Transport Canada's and the VHA’s assessments of the marina; (v) what are the details of the impacts, including, but not limited to, impacts on safety, that the marina would have on marine and air traffic in Victoria harbour; and (w) how is Transport Canada including the impact of the marina on non-motorized vessels such as kayaks and canoes in its review of the marina proposal? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-179.
2011-12-02 [p.602]
— by Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), one concerning the Canada Post Corporation (No. 411-0222).
2011-11-15 [p.470]
Mr. Rajotte (Edmonton—Leduc), seconded by Mrs. Block (Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar), moved, — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should help improve financial literacy in Canada by: (a) working to implement the recommendations of the Task Force on Financial Literacy; (b) creating, promoting, and continuously upgrade a single source website for financial literacy to increase public awareness and ease access to information for Canadians; (c) requiring federally regulated financial institutions to publicly disclose their contributions to financial literacy initiatives; (d) ensuring the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada works with willing provinces and territories to promote financial literacy to youth through the educational system; and (e) designating November as “Financial Literacy Month”. (Private Members' Business M-269)
Debate arose thereon.
2011-11-03 [p.426]
Pursuant to Standing Order 39(7), Mr. Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) presented the return to the following question made into an Order for Return:
Q-142 — Ms. Duncan (Etobicoke North) — With respect to the venous system, and more particularly, chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency (CCSVI): (a) what, if any, steps is the government taking to address research questions regarding the venous system, including (i) what does the normal venous system look like, and, specifically, what does it look like in infants, children, and adults, (ii) can the veins, in particular the jugulars and the azygous, look normal, and the flow be abnormal, (iii) what is the normal range of flow through veins, in particular the jugulars and the azygous, (iv) how should normal range of flow through veins, in particular the jugulars and azygous, be defined, (v) what is the normal range of blood gases in veins, in particular the jugulars and the azygous, (vi) what causes venous pathology and when does it occur, (vii) theoretically, what is the complete range of possible vascular problems in the head, neck, chest, and spine, which ones might impact health, and specifically which ones might be linked to multiple sclerosis (MS), (viii) how does the complete range of possible vascular problems compare with those actually seen in patients, (ix) how should abnormal flow through veins, in particular the jugulars and the azygous, be defined, (x) how might abnormal blood gases in veins affect health in the short-term and long-term, (xi) what, if any, reflux is normal in veins, and, if some reflux is normal, what is the ‘tipping point’ to abnormal, (xii) can a catalogue of venous pathology (in the head, neck, chest and spine), abnormal flow, and potential health impacts be established, (xiii) what protects against abnormal venous pathology and abnormal flow, (xiv) who should receive venous protective measures, and when should protective measures be put in place; (b) what, if any, steps is the government taking to address research questions regarding the venous system and MS, including, (i) can fluid mechanics predict where physiologic changes in the brain might occur, (ii) how does the neurologist’s understanding of flow through the brain compare with that of physicists, (iii) does decreased metabolism lead to hypoxia which may lead to endothelial damage and inflammation, (iv) what occurs first, inflammatory changes in the brain or iron deposition, (v) what role does reduced perfusion have in MS, (vi) does stenosis extra-cranially cause less perfusion in the brain, (vii) does stenosis extra-cranially cause morphological changes in the brain, (viii) do cerebral veins actually disappear over time, or is it merely a lack of flow that makes them look like they disappear in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies; (ix) what, if any changes beyond lesions, occur in the spinal cord of MS patients, as a result of reduced vertebral flow, (x) do vertebral veins show a similar disappearance over time, (xi) what percentage of MS patients show evidence of venous pathology, as compared to 'normals', (xii) what other venous abnormalities might MS patients have (e.g., bladder, intestine, kidney), might these abnormalities play a role in their disease, and, if so, how should they be imaged and treated, (xiii) what percentage of MS patients show venous abnormalities below the chest (e.g., May Thurner syndrome), and does this have an impact on their disease, (xiv) how does the vascular system of someone with benign MS compare to that of someone with relapsing-remitting, primary progressive or secondary progressive MS; (c) what, if any, steps is the government taking to address research questions regarding CCSVI and MS, including, (i) what is the prevalence of CCSVI in relapsing-remitting, primary progressive or secondary progressive MS, (ii) does CCSVI worsen over time with the progression of disease, (iii) does CCSVI play a role in MS, and, if so, how, (iv) is CCSVI specific to MS, (v) what are the potential health impacts of CCSVI in the short-term, medium-term and long-term, both with and without treatment; (d) what, if any, steps is the government taking to address research questions regarding CCSVI diagnosis, including (i) how do the results of MRI compare with those of ultrasound for diagnosis of CCSVI, (ii) what is the best way to image the venous system and the best way to image venous pathology, (iii) what are the limitations of current diagnostic tools to image the venous system, (iv) should intravascular ultrasound be used, and what are the benefits and the risks, (v) what is the learning curve for the various diagnostic procedures, and what should practitioners undertake to become sufficiently accomplished, (vi) can a standardized protocol be established for diagnosing CCSVI in MS patients, and when should MS patients be tested for CCSVI, (vii) can a standardized system for describing lesions (e.g., type, location) be established, (viii) what should be the decision-making process regarding whether to treat or not to treat (e.g., anatomy, flow, etc.), (ix) should arterial, venous and CSF flow be monitored, how often, and for what purpose, (x) should lesions and iron load be monitored, how often, and for what purpose; (e) what, if any, steps is the government taking to address research questions regarding CCSVI treatment, including (i) what timescale is useful for treatment of CCSVI, (ii) what are the benefits and risks associated with treatment of CCSVI, (iii) what are best practices for treating each identified vascular problem, (iv) how should a successful CCSVI treatment be defined (e.g., valvular correction, reduction in stenosis, increased flow, improved blood gases), (v) can malformed jugulars and azygous be treated to achieve normal flow, (vi) can malformed jugulars and azygous be treated to achieve a normal range of blood gases, (vii) can jugulars and azygous be sufficiently treated to make up for poor vertebral flow, and, if not, what procedures can be developed to improve vertebral flow, (viii) should stents be used, and, if so, under what circumstances, (ix) what are the immediate complications of CCSVI treatment, and in what percentage of treatments does each occur for each identified abnormality, (x) what is the best follow-up anti-coagulant therapy, what are the potential risks, and what is the prevalence of complications, (xi) what are the best follow-up therapies, including, brain plasticity exercises, nutrition, physiotherapy, speech therapy, etc., and which therapies have the best associated outcomes, (xii) what are late complications, what follow-up is necessary to determine late complications, and in what percentage of treatments does each occur for each identified abnormality, (xiii) what treatments are available should a stent be occluded, either through hyperplasia or thrombosis, (xiv) what is the success rate of each identified treatment for an occluded stent; (f) what, if any, steps is the government taking to address research questions regarding determining the best CCSVI treatment, including, (i) is CCSVI treatment with the addition of pharmacological agents more efficacious than just the CCSVI procedure, (ii) what pharmacological agents could be used to treat venous inflammation, iron storage, and hydrocephaly, and could these agents be added to CCSVI treatment, (iii) what safe apparatuses could be developed to keep treated veins open, (iv) are vein grafts possible, and if so, on whom, and when should they be used, (v) is CCSVI treatment more efficacious with mesenchymal-derived or adipose-derived stem-cell infusion than just the CCSVI procedure alone, (vi) what methods might be added to reduce permeability of the blood-brain barrier, including pharmacological agents and stem cells, (vii) what are the effects of chelators on iron uptake and release from the brain, and might iron chelators be used as therapeutic agents; (g) what, if any, steps is the government taking to address research questions regarding possible impacts of CCSVI treatment on MS patients, including (i) what impact does CCSVI treatment have on patients immediately, (ii) what impact does CCSVI treatment have on patients at 24 hours, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years, (iii) what does the magnetic resonance venography (MRV) of a treated patient look like at 24 hours, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years, (iv) what percentage of MS patients show functional improvement at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years, (v) what are the most appropriate scales to measure any health impacts following CCSVI treatment as reported by MS patients, (vi) do new scales have to be created to measure reported changes following treatment, (vii) which patients show the greatest improvement, and does early intervention allow for a better outcome, (viii) what are the treatment outcomes associated with each of the identified venous problems, (ix) what percentage of MS patients show a reduction in MS attacks and brain lesions following the CCSVI procedure, (x) what percentage of MS patients with little or mild blockage show improvement following the CCSVI procedure, (xi) for those MS patients whose conditions do not improve or become worse, why does this occur; (h) what, if any, steps is the government taking to address research questions regarding CCSVI re-stenosis and diagnosis, including, (i) what is rate of stenosis for each identified vascular abnormality, (ii) what changes should patients be told to look for to in order to recognize whether they are possibly re-stenosing, (iii) what diagnostic methods should be used after treatment for CCSVI, (iv) what diagnostic methods should be used to look for re-stenosis, and at what timescales; (i) what, if any, steps is the government taking to address research questions regarding secondary procedures for CCSVI, including, (i) are secondary procedures safe, and if so, how many, (ii) what should be the follow-up protocol for secondary procedures, (iii) should there be a methodology established regarding whether to do a secondary procedure or not; and (j) what, if any, steps is the government taking to address research questions regarding prevention in the next generation, including, (i) do vascular issues develop in utero, during childhood, or later, and what would be the best methods to discover circulation problems at the earliest time possible to avoid health impacts at a later date, (ii) might vascular birthmarks and tumours be an indication of potential vascular problems, (iii) might skin discolouration, skin abnormalities, and even proliferation of moles be an indication of an autoimmune or neural condition, (iv) might giving vitamin D to pregnant mothers reduce the risk of children being born with, or developing, vascular problems and other conditions and, if so, what dosage is appropriate, (v) do antioxidants, vitamin D and omega 3 reduce vein inflammation, (vi) will giving children and adolescents vitamin D reduce the risk of developing vein inflammation and venous hypertension and, if so, what dosage is appropriate, and what quantity should be recommended for a child with a family history of CCSVI, vascular problems or MS, etc., (vii) what would be the optimum time to undertake CCSVI treatment to avoid health impacts at a later date? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-142.
2011-10-27 [p.388]
— by Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), one concerning the Canada Post Corporation (No. 411-0110);
2011-10-21 [p.360]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Gravelle (Nickel Belt), seconded by Mr. Bevington (Western Arctic), Bill C-334, An Act to amend the Investment Canada Act (enhanced ministerial oversight), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
2011-09-29 [p.290]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Martin (Winnipeg Centre), seconded by Mr. Gravelle (Nickel Belt), Bill C-301, An Act to amend the Access to Information Act (open government), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
Results: 1 - 76 of 76

Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data