Journals
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 60 of 1793
2013-06-18 [p.3432]
— by Mr. Hsu (Kingston and the Islands), one concerning the protection of the environment (No. 411-4270), one concerning climate change (No. 411-4271), two concerning genetic engineering (Nos. 411-4272 and 411-4273) and one concerning the criminal justice system (No. 411-4274);
2013-06-18 [p.3437]
A question of privilege having been raised by Mr. Andrews (Avalon), the Speaker ruled that there was a prima facie case of privilege;
Whereupon, Mr. LeBlanc (Beauséjour), seconded by Mr. Goodale (Wascana), moved, — That the matter of the question of privilege raised by the Member for Avalon be referred to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs.
Debate arose thereon.
2013-06-17 [p.3419]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Cotler (Mount Royal), seconded by Mr. Pacetti (Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel), Bill C-537, An Act to ensure legislative compliance with the Canadian Bill of Rights and the Constitution Acts, 1867 to 1982, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
2013-06-17 [p.3419]
— by Mr. Cotler (Mount Royal), one concerning the agricultural industry (No. 411-4247);
2013-06-17 [p.3419]
— by Ms. Duncan (Etobicoke North), three concerning crimes of violence (Nos. 411-4250 to 411-4252);
2013-06-17 [p.3420]
— by Mr. Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis), one concerning the Canada Post Corporation (No. 411-4255);
2013-06-17 [p.3420]
Q-1349 — Mr. Easter (Malpeque) — With regard to the Canadian Armed Forces, in each year since 2006 inclusive, what has been the number of : (a) harassment complaints other than that of a sexual nature; (b) sexual harassment complaints; and (c) harassment investigations, broken down by the following locations (i) Department of National Defence (DND)/Canadian Forces(CF) establishments located in the National Capital Region, including NDHQ, (ii) Canadian Forces Base (CFB) Halifax, (iii) CFB Cornwallis, (iv) CFB Gagetown, (v) CFB Valcartier, (vi) CFB Kingston (not including the Royal Military College), (vii) CFB Petawawa, (viii) CFB Borden, (ix) CFB Shilo, (x) CFB Edmonton, (xi) CFB Comox, (xii) CFB Esquimalt, (xiii) Royal Military College (Kingston), (xiv) Royal Military College (St-Jean)? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1349.
2013-06-17 [p.3421]
Q-1351 — Mr. Easter (Malpeque) — With regard to the Department of National Defence (DND), what is the detailed breakdown of : (a) Canadian Armed Forces executives by rank (General, Lieutenant-General, Major-General and Brigadier-General); and (b) DND executives by classification (DM-4, DM-3, DM-2, DM-1, EX-5, EX-4, EX-3, EX-2 and EX-1), on December 31, 2005 and December 31, 2012? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1351.
2013-06-17 [p.3421]
Q-1353 — Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North) — With regard to the Department of National Defence (DND): (a) what are the ranks of each Canadian Armed Forces member and classification of each DND employee who, on December 31, 2012, attended post-graduate training at public expense at a Canadian or international educational institution; and (b) for each, what is (i) the actual yearly salary of the student, (ii) the program of study, (iii) the number of semesters of study paid for by the government since the start of their career, (iv) all the institutions attended, (v) the total cost of tuition paid with respect to the student’s training, (vi) whether relocation costs were paid with respect to the training and the amount of those costs, (vii) any other associated costs? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1353.
2013-06-14 [p.3411]
Pursuant to Standing Order 39(7), Mr. Keddy (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade, for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency and for the Atlantic Gateway) presented the returns to the following questions made into Orders for Return:
Q-1332 — Mr. Dion (Saint-Laurent—Cartierville) — With regard to any funding dedicated to the promotion of Canada’s official languages that was not accounted for in the $1.1 billion dollars outlined in the Roadmap for Canada’s Linguistic Duality 2008-2013: (a) what departments or agencies contributed to the funding of official languages programs; (b) what are the names of the programs that delivered that funding listed by department or agency; and (c) what amount of money did each of those programs spend in fiscal years (i) 2007-2008, (ii) 2008-2009, (iii) 2009-2010, (iv) 2010-2011, (v) 2011-2012, (vi) 2012-2013? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1332.
2013-06-13 [p.3401]
— by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), one concerning the National Capital Commission (No. 411-4206);
2013-06-13 [p.3402]
Pursuant to Standing Order 39(7), Mr. Dechert (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs) presented the returns to the following questions made into Orders for Return:
Q-1335 — Mr. Casey (Charlottetown) — With regard to the presence of foreign governments in Canada, specifically the operation or presence of any security, intelligence or law enforcement agencies: (a) what are the names of all law agencies operating with the permission and consent of the government within the sovereign territory of Canada, broken down by country; (b) is the government aware of any law enforcement agency present or operating without the consent and permission of the government; (c) what are the police powers of foreign law enforcement within Canada; (d) does the government allow any foreign law enforcement agency the power to act alone without the presence of a designated Canadian police or peace office present; (e) does the government grant power on a case-by-case basis to an agent of foreign law enforcement to stop any resident of Canada for questioning; (f) does the government allow agents of foreign law enforcement the power to present identification or a badge within Canada for the purpose of investigating within Canada; (g) does the government currently allow agents of foreign law enforcement agency the power to cross a Canadian border either by air, sea or land in possession of a weapon; (h) does the government intend to allow agents of a foreign law enforcement agency the power to enter, leave and operate in Canada with the power to enforce Canadian law, including the power to detain, questions and arrest a citizen or permanent resident of Canada; (i) does the government intend to extend the power to agents of a foreign government law enforcement agency the right of pre-emptive arrest or pre-emptive detention without warrant, as provided in Bill S-7; (j) does the government currently have a cap on the number of agents from a foreign law enforcement agency assigned to Canada and, if so, what is the maximum number of agents allowed; and (k) does the government allow agents of a foreign law enforcement agency the authority to operate their own police vehicles, including police boats, airplanes, or any motor vehicle, within Canada, including the use of sirens or other identifiable police markings? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1335.
2013-06-13 [p.3403]
Q-1346 — Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North) — With regard to the Canadian Armed Forces, what was the breakdown of strength by rank for each Regular Force Unit of the Royal 22nd Regiment as of (i) January 1, 1995, (ii) January 1, 2000, (iii) January 1, 2005, (iv) January 1, 2010? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1346.
2013-06-12 [p.3389]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Goodale (Wascana), seconded by Mr. Pacetti (Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel), Bill C-533, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (protecting public transportation workers), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
2013-06-12 [p.3389]
— by Mr. McCallum (Markham—Unionville), one concerning national parks (No. 411-4162);
2013-06-12 [p.3390]
Pursuant to Standing Order 39(7), Mr. Anderson (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources and for the Canadian Wheat Board) presented the returns to the following questions made into Orders for Return:
Q-1326 — Ms. Duncan (Etobicoke North) — With regard to homicides and attempted homicides among Somali-Canadian males in Canada since 2006: (a) what are the dates of each death, listed chronologically, and for each death, what is (i) the location where the death occurred, (ii) the Canadian home location if not the location of the death, (iii) the cause of death, (iv) whether the homicide was solved or not, and if unsolved, for how many years the death has remained unsolved, and how the time period compares with the average time to resolve homicides for the Canadian population as a whole, (v) whether a reward to solve the homicide was offered or not, and if a reward was offered, how much was offered, if the reward was ever claimed, (vi) whether in any given homicide case there is any on-going investigation, (vii) if this information cannot be provided, why not; (b) what are the dates of each attempted homicide, listed chronologically, and for each, what is (i) the location where the attempt occurred, (ii) the Canadian place of origin if not the location of the attempt, (iii) whether the attempted homicide was solved or not, and if unsolved, for how many years the attempt has remained unsolved, and how the time period compares with the average time to resolve homicides for the Canadian population as a whole, (iv) whether a reward was offered or not, and if a reward was offered, how much was offered, and if the reward was ever claimed, (v) whether in any given case there is any on-going investigation, (vi) if this information cannot be provided, why not; (c) for each year, what is the number of Somali-Canadian homicides that occurred by Canadian city, (i) what percentage did Somali-Canadian homicides comprise of the total homicides in the identified city by year, (ii) what percentage of Somali-Canadian homicides by city by year went unsolved compared with that of the general Canadian population, (iii) what percentage does the Somali-Canadian population comprise for each identified city, and how does this percentage compare with the percentage of Somali-Canadian homicides for the city for each year, (iv) if this information cannot be provided, why not; (d) for each year, what is the number of Somali-Canadian attempted homicides that occurred by Canadian city, (i) what percentage did Somali-Canadian attempted homicides comprise of the total attempted homicides in the identified city by year, (ii) what percentage of Somali-Canadian attempted homicides by city went unsolved compared with that of the general Canadian population in the identified city by year, (iii) what percentage does the Somali-Canadian population comprise for each identified city, and how does this percentage compare with the percentage of Somali-Canadian attempted homicides for the city, (iv) if this information cannot be provided, why not; (e) what research and investment has the government undertaken to explore these homicides and attempted homicides, and if any, what are the studies, dates, and monetary investment, and specifically (i) the total actual number of deaths and whether or not the violence is increasing, (ii) from what Canadian cities are the victims, (iii) what are the causes of the violence, and can they be reduced, (iv) what are solutions to stem the violence; (f) what, if any, research or investment has been given to consider whether (i) a federal judicial task force should investigate why so many Somali-Canadians are killed in Canada, many without corresponding charges or arrests, (ii) the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security or a special committee should investigate these deaths, and make recommendations to reduce the violence; (g) what research or investment has been given to consider whether a provincial-federal employment and opportunity program supporting Somali-Canadians might help reduce the violence, and if any, what are the studies, dates, and actual investment; (h) what research or investment has been given to support Somali-Canadians in accessing employment opportunities with the RCMP and the Ontario Provincial Police, and if any, what are the studies, dates, and actual investment; (i) what research or investment has been given to strengthening the witness protection program to encourage more witnesses to come forward, and if any, what are the studies, dates, and actual investment; (j) what research or investment has been given to reducing homicides and attempted homicides among the Somali-Canadian population and, if any, what are the studies, dates, and actual investment, and any recommendations to reduce the violence; and (k) what, if any, research or investment has been given to estimating (i) the direct and indirect health care costs of each attempted homicide, (ii) the costs to the mental health care and social care system to support the victim and family, (iii) how these costs compare with any federal inquiry or study by the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security or a special committee to study the issue and provide preventive recommendations, and what are studies, dates, and actual investment? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1326.
2013-06-12 [p.3392]
Q-1327 — Mr. Casey (Charlottetown) — With respect to the Community Volunteer Income Tax Program (CVITP) in Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island: (a) what is the level of support the CVITP has received from Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) over the past five years, broken down by fiscal year, including (i) the nature of the support offered each year, (ii) the cost to CRA to provide this support; and (b) does CRA have plans to reduce, eliminate, increase, or restore support to the CVITP in Charlottetown? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1327.
2013-06-12 [p.3392]
Q-1328 — Mr. Casey (Charlottetown) — With respect to correspondence from Parliamentarians addressed to the Minister of National Revenue, for the period September 1, 2010 to the present: (a) what is the amount of correspondence, initiated by Parliamentarians (MPs and Senators), that has gone unanswered (i) after three months, (ii) after six months; (b) what percentage of correspondence not answered after three months was from (i) Conservative MPs and Senators, (ii) Liberal MPs and Senators, (iii) NDP MPs, (iv) other MPs and Senators; (c) what percentage of correspondence not answered after six months was from (i) Conservative MPs and Senators, (ii) Liberal MPs and Senators, (iii) NDP MPs, (iv) other MPs and Senators; and (d) what is the average response time for correspondence received from (i) Conservative MPs or Senators, (ii) Liberal MPs or Senators, (iii) NDP MPs, (iv) other MPs or Senators? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1328.
2013-06-12 [p.3393]
Q-1330 — Mr. Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis) — With regard to the impact of Pierre Elliott Trudeau International Airport on the Bouchard Stream, in the City of Dorval, Quebec, that flows into Lac Saint-Louis: (a) does the government have data, obtained either through reporting to the National Pollutant Release Inventory, or by any other means, on (i) the quantity of the de-icing agent glycol used by the airport on an annual basis, (ii) the quantity of glycol that is recycled on an annual basis, (iii) the quantity that escapes into the surrounding environment near, or at, Bouchard Stream on an annual basis; (b) if the quantities in (a) are known, what are these quantities, by year, for every year since 2000; (c) does any department or agency monitor the quality of the water in the Bouchard Stream to ascertain whether it might contain deleterious substances harmful to fish that could originate from the operations of the airport or from surrounding industries; and (d) does the government work with provincial and municipal authorities in the City of Dorval and the City of Montreal to ensure that the Bouchard Stream and Lac Saint-Louis are not being polluted by deleterious substances harmful to fish? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1330.
2013-06-12 [p.3393]
Q-1331 — Mr. Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis) — With regard to offenders admitted to the Correctional Service of Canada institutions since 2000: (a) by institution, how many offenders have been admitted each year; (b) by institution, how many offenders admitted each year had previously served a sentence in that, or another, federal institution; and (c) by institution, how many offenders admitted each year had previously served a sentence in a provincial correctional facility? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1331.
2013-06-11 [p.3366]
— by Ms. Duncan (Etobicoke North), one concerning childhood development programs (No. 411-4146);
2013-06-07 [p.3341]
— by Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), one concerning the mining industry (No. 411-4107);
2013-06-06 [p.3329]
— by Mr. McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood), one concerning national parks (No. 411-4079);
2013-06-06 [p.3329]
— by Mr. Easter (Malpeque), one concerning environmental assessment and review (No. 411-4082);
2013-06-05 [p.3301]
Pursuant to Order made Wednesday, May 22, 2013, the House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion of Mr. Pacetti (Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel), seconded by Mr. Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis), — That Bill S-209, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (prize fights), 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. 728 -- Vote no 728) - View vote details.
YEAS: 267, NAYS: 9
Accordingly, the Bill was read the third time and passed.
2013-06-05 [p.3306]
— by Mr. LeBlanc (Beauséjour), five concerning the Employment Insurance Program (Nos. 411-4057 to 411-4061);
2013-06-05 [p.3306]
— by Ms. Duncan (Etobicoke North), one concerning national parks (No. 411-4063);
2013-06-05 [p.3306]
— by Mr. MacAulay (Cardigan), one concerning the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (No. 411-4067);
2013-06-05 [p.3306]
— by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), one concerning world peace (No. 411-4068);
2013-06-05 [p.3306]
— by Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), one concerning the mining industry (No. 411-4070).
2013-06-05 [p.3307]
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-1317 — Mr. Simms (Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor) — With regard to Bill C-11 from the 1st session of the 38th Parliament, “An Act to establish a procedure for the disclosure of wrongdoings in the public sector, including the protection of persons who disclose the wrongdoings”, what are the details of all codes of conduct that have been implemented, considered, modified, or withdrawn by the government under Chapter 46, clauses 5 through 7, of the bill since it received Royal Assent on November 25, 2005, and what is the current status of each code of conduct? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1317.
2013-06-04 [p.3266]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), seconded by Mr. Garneau (Westmount—Ville-Marie), Bill C-524, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act (election advertising), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
2013-06-04 [p.3269]
The Speaker informed the House that the Clerk had received from the Chief Electoral Officer a certificate of the election of Ms. Rumbolt-Jones (Labrador).
Ms. Rumbolt-Jones (Labrador), having taken and subscribed the oath required by law, took her seat in the House.
2013-06-03 [p.3247]
The Speaker informed the House that a vacancy had occurred in the representation in the House of Commons, for the Electoral District of Bourassa, in the Province of Québec, by reason of the resignation of Mr. Denis Coderre, and that, pursuant to paragraph 25(1)(b) of the Parliament of Canada Act, he had addressed, on Monday, June 3, 2013, his warrant to the Chief Electoral Officer for the issue of a writ for the election of a member to fill the vacancy.
2013-06-03 [p.3257]
— by Mr. McGuinty (Ottawa South), one concerning world peace (No. 411-4019);
2013-06-03 [p.3257]
— by Ms. Duncan (Etobicoke North), one concerning environmental assessment and review (No. 411-4024);
2013-05-31 [p.3239]
— by Mr. Cotler (Mount Royal), one concerning Burma (No. 411-3998);
2013-05-31 [p.3239]
— by Mr. Valeriote (Guelph), two concerning genetic engineering (Nos. 411-4002 and 411-4003);
2013-05-31 [p.3240]
Q-1305 — Mr. Cotler (Mount Royal) — With regard to Bill C-10, in the year after it received royal assent: (a) broken down by offence, how many people have been charged for offences created by the bill; (b) broken down by offence, how many people have been convicted of offences created by the bill; (c) broken down by offence, what sentences have been issued to people convicted of offences created by the bill; (d) broken down by offence, how many people have been charged under the provisions of the bill; (e) broken down by offence, how many people have been convicted under the provisions of the bill; (f) broken down by offence, how many people have been sentenced under the provisions of the bill; (g) broken down by offence, what sentences have been issued to people sentenced under the provisions of the bill; (h) in how many of the cases in (d) was a constitutional argument raised by the offender (i) at trial, (ii) on appeal; (i) broken down by geographic jurisdiction and instance, how many cases in (d) are pending (i) at the trial level, (ii) on appeal; (j) how much money has the government spent on prosecutions under the provisions of the bill; (k) how much money has the government spent defending the constitutionality of the bill; (l) in what cases, if any, did the bill provide for punishment where none was provided for under previously-existing provisions of the Criminal Code; (m) broken down by offence and length of sentence, in what cases, if any, did an offender sentenced under the provisions of the bill receive a longer sentence than what was allowed for under previously-existing provisions of the Criminal Code; (n) in what ways has the bill made streets and communities safer; (o) in what ways, if any, has the government reviewed the effectiveness of the bill; (p) what were the results of any such reviews; (q) what reviews of the effectiveness of the bill, if any, are ongoing; (r) when will the results of any such reviews be made available to Parliament; (s) what factors has the government considered when evaluating the effectiveness of the bill; (t) by what standard does the government determine whether repeal of the bill for ineffectiveness is appropriate; (u) what is the prosecution rate for offences created by the bill; (v) what is the prosecution rate for offences with one or more sentencing provisions modified by the bill; (w) what was the prosecution rate for the offences in (v) prior to the coming-into-force of the bill; (x) what is the prosecution rate for offences otherwise modified by the bill; (y) what was the prosecution rate for offences in (x) prior to the coming-into-force of the bill; (z) what is the prosecution rate for all federal offences in Canada; (aa) what is the projected rate of recidivism for offenders convicted under the provisions of the bill; (bb) in what ways has the government worked with provinces and territories to inform prosecutors and police services of the provisions of the bill; (cc) broken down by province or territory, what funding has the government provided to provinces and territories to assist with the implementation of the bill; (dd) what studies, if any, have been undertaken of the impact of the bill on the number of inmates in (i) federal custody, (ii) provincial custody; (ee) what are the results of any such studies; (ff) what is the projected impact of the bill on the number of inmates in (i) federal custody, (ii) provincial custody; (gg) what evidence exists to suggest that the provisions in the bill have deterred criminal activity; (hh) broken down by province and territory, which specific communities, if any, have been made safer by the bill; (ii) in what ways have the communities in (hh) been made safer; (jj) what evidence exists to demonstrate that the communities in (hh) have been made safer; (kk) broken down by province and territory, which specific streets, if any, have been made safer by the bill; (ll) in what ways have the streets in (kk) been made safer; (mm) what evidence exists to demonstrate that the streets in (kk) have been made safer; (nn) which First Nations, Métis, and Inuit communities, if any, have been made safer by the bill; (oo) in what ways have the communities in (nn) been made safer; (pp) what evidence exists to demonstrate that the communities in (nn) have been made safer; (qq) in what ways have people traditionally marginalized by the criminal justice system, such as women, aboriginal Canadians, and low-income Canadians, been made safer by the bill; and (rr) what evidence exists to demonstrate that the people in (qq) have been made safer? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1305.
2013-05-31 [p.3241]
Q-1306 — Mr. Cotler (Mount Royal) — With regard to the crisis in Syria: (a) what criteria does the government use to determine (i) whether to intervene, (ii) when to intervene, (iii) the nature and scope of any intervention; (b) who makes the determination in (a) and how; (c) what sources does the government rely upon in determining (a); (d) what legal obligations are considered with respect to (a) and in what ways does the Responsibility to Protect doctrine factor into decision making under (a); (e) in what ways has the government evaluated its obligations under the Responsibility to Protect doctrine with respect to Syria; (f) when were such evaluations done, by whom, and with what outcome; (g) have the criteria by which the government determines its official policy towards the crisis in Syria changed since 2012; (h) when the Minister of Foreign Affairs publicly expressed his support for an indictment of Bashar al-Assad by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 2012, was this the position of the government and does it remain the position of the government that al-Assad ought to be indicted by the ICC; (j) with respect to Canada’s decision not to sign on to the request of 57 countries made in January, 2013, to ask the Security Council to refer the situation in Syria to the ICC, did Canada support this request; (k) with respect to (j), when, why, how, and by whom were the determinations made in this regard, and when was Canada approached to join in this endeavor and by what means; (l) what criteria were applied in determining whether to support this effort; (m) are there any specific policies or directives within the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade that guide decision-making with regard to Canadian intervention in situations of humanitarian crisis; (n) was the decision not to sign the Swiss-led letter asking the United Nations Security Council to refer the situation in Syria to the ICC made by the Minister of Foreign Affairs; (o) were any other officials at the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade involved in the decision-making process to determine whether to support the Swiss-led international request letter; (p) were any other cabinet officials involved in the decision-making process to determine whether to support the Swiss-led international request letter; (q) was the government made aware of this specific international initiative in advance of the official lodging of the request with the United Nations on January 14, 2013, and (i) if so, how was the government made aware of this initiative, (ii) when was the government made aware of this initiative; (r) did the decision-making process to determine whether to support the Swiss-led international request letter include (i) consultations with the Minister’s counterparts from any other countries, (ii) consultations with the Minister’s counterparts in any of the 56 countries that ultimately supported the Swiss-led initiative, (iii) consultations with any international or intergovernmental organizations; (s) did the government make submissions promoting a specific policy approach with regard to the Swiss-led initiative to (i) the governments of any other countries, (ii) the governments of any of the 50-plus countries that ultimately supported the Swiss-led initiative, (iii) any international or intergovernmental organizations; (t) what steps is the government taking to bring al-Assad before the ICC; (u) has Canada raised al-Assad’s conduct as an issue before the Security Council; (v) what legal remedies has the government invoked with respect to addressing the situation in Syria; (w) what legal remedies has the government invoked with respect to al-Assad in particular; and (x) does the government support an International Criminal Tribunal for Syria? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1306.
2013-05-31 [p.3243]
Q-1307 — Ms. Duncan (Etobicoke North) — With regard to Canada's submission under the Convention on the Law of the Sea: (a) what is the precise extent that will be included in the claim and what scientific research supports that claim; (b) does the government anticipate that Canada's submission will overlap with claims of other nations, (i) if so, has Canada begun consultation with other nations with which its submission may overlap, (ii) which countries has Canada consulted, (iii) what were the dates of those consultations, (iv) what briefings were prepared for those consultations, (v) what briefings were prepared for the Minister responsible after the consultations; (c) which department is the lead agency on Canada’s submission and which other departments are involved; (d) who are the external researchers and institutions involved in Canada’s submission; (e) how much money has been allocated for Canada’s submission and how much of that money has been spent to date; and (f) regarding any Requests for Proposals for research in support of Canada’s submission, (i) what was the process, (ii) what are the milestones, (iii) what reporting has been done so far, (iv) what oversight is in place? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1307.
2013-05-30 [p.3226]
— by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), one concerning the National Capital Commission (No. 411-3968);
2013-05-30 [p.3226]
— by Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), one concerning the mining industry (No. 411-3988);
2013-05-30 [p.3231]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Pacetti (Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel), seconded by Mr. Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis), — That Bill S-209, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (prize fights), be now read a third time and do pass.
The debate continued.
2013-05-30 [p.3231]
The question was put on the motion and, pursuant to Order made Wednesday, May 22, 2013, the recorded division was deferred until Wednesday, June 5, 2013, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.
2013-05-29 [p.3205]
Pursuant to Order made Wednesday, May 22, 2013, the House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion of Ms. Foote (Random—Burin—St. George's), seconded by Mr. Casey (Charlottetown), — That, in the opinion of the House, the Last Post Fund is currently underfunded and excludes deserving veterans causing unnecessary stress and hardship to families of veterans, and that the House call on the government to do the following: (a) accept the recommendations of successive Veteran Ombudsmens’ calling for expanded and enhanced financial access to the Last Post Fund; (b) accept the advice from the Royal Canadian Legion made in the years 2008, 2010, and 2012 calling for expanded access and financial support for the Last Post Fund; (c) accept three year old advice from departmental officials to expand and enhance financial access to the Last Post Fund; (d) review the Last Post Fund’s current burial assistance cap of $3,600 with the goal to establish a standard consistent with burial assistance provided to current members of the Canadian Forces; (e) review the “means tested” standard applied to the Last Post Fund that currently excludes many veterans with the goal to improve and lower the qualification standard to access the Fund; and (f) provide stable long term funding to the Last Post Fund with consideration given to establish a financial escalator tied to the Consumer Price Index. (Private Members' Business M-422)
The question was put on the motion and it was negatived on the following division:
(Division No. 700 -- Vote no 700) - View vote details.
YEAS: 125, NAYS: 151
2013-05-29 [p.3215]
Pursuant to Order made earlier today, the House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion of Mr. Byrne (Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte), seconded by Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), — That, in the opinion of this House, in relation to the enrollment and registration process for the Qalipu Mi’kmaq First Nation Band, the government should commit: (a) to completing the enrollment and registration process for all applicants who applied on or before November 30, 2012 by agreeing to extend the 2007 Agreement for the Recognition of the Qalipu Mi'kmaq First Nation Band beyond March 21, 2013 until all such applications are processed; (b) to ensuring that the rules of eligibility for membership are followed by all government decision makers in any continuation of the enrollment process; (c) that all previous interpretations, precedents and rulings on matters affecting enrollment that were not specifically addressed within the 2007 Agreement but were established instead through the records of decisions made by the Enrollment Committee and the Appeals Master be made known to all participants in any future enrollment process and that the decision makers in any future enrollment process be instructed to guide their decisions in a manner consistent with such previous interpretations, precedents and rulings; (d) to the same standard of evidence as well as the same thresholds for the quantity and quality of information that was previously deemed acceptable by the Enrollment Committee, for the remaining 75,000 unprocessed applications to the Band; (e) that an independent Appeals Master will continue to be employed in any future enrollment process for the assessment of the remaining 75,000 applicants and that this person will be drawn from outside of government, from outside of the Federation of Newfoundland Indians and from outside of the Qalipu Mi’kmaq First Nation Band and that this Appeal Master will be vested with the same powers and authority and be drawn from the same legal and administrative background as the previous Appeals Master to ensure consistency with the rules and standards established under the previous enrollment process; (f) to maintaining all existing memberships, except in cases where fraud can be established that is material to the application; and (g) to ensuring that no eligible applicant who submitted an application in good faith prior to the November 30, 2012 deadline is disenfranchised from enrollment. (Private Members' Business M-432)
The question was put on the motion and it was negatived on the following division:
(Division No. 705 -- Vote no 705) - View vote details.
YEAS: 124, NAYS: 152
2013-05-29 [p.3218]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Ms. Sgro (York West), seconded by Ms. Foote (Random—Burin—St. George's), Bill C-513, An Act to promote and strengthen the Canadian retirement income system, was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
2013-05-29 [p.3219]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Simms (Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor), seconded by Mr. Stoffer (Sackville—Eastern Shore), Bill C-516, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (artist’s resale right), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
2013-05-29 [p.3219]
— by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), one concerning the National Capital Commission (No. 411-3937);
2013-05-29 [p.3219]
Pursuant to Standing Order 39(7), Mr. Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) presented the returns to the following questions made into Orders for Return:
Q-1277 — Mr. Goodale (Wascana) — With regard to the government’s answers to Order Paper questions in the current session of Parliament: (a) why did Transport Canada not provide the detailed response requested in Q-898 and Q-1131; (b) why did Infrastructure Canada not provide the detailed response requested in Q-654, Q-898 and Q-1131; and (c) why did the Economic Development Agency of Canada for Quebec Regions not provide the detailed response requested in Q-654, Q-898 and Q-1131? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1277.
2013-05-29 [p.3220]
Q-1282 — Mr. Simms (Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor) — With regard to all physical assets owned by the government, since 2006, what assets have been sold, broken down by (i) date sold, (ii) market value, (iii) sale price, (iv) purchaser, (v) initial purchase price, (vi) time planned for service, (vii) time actually in service, (viii) reason for sale? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1282.
2013-05-29 [p.3220]
Q-1289 — Mr. McCallum (Markham—Unionville) — With respect to any repayable portion of contributions made under the Economic Action Plan in 2009-2010 and 2010-2011: (a) what businesses received funding; (b) when did they receive the funding; (c) how much repayable funding did they receive; (d) how much of the repayable funding has been repaid as of March 27, 2013; and (e) how much of the repayable contribution is expected to never be repaid? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1289.
2013-05-29 [p.3220]
Q-1292 — Ms. Foote (Random—Burin—St. George's) — With regard to the Joint Rescue Coordination Centre in Halifax, Nova Scotia: (a) how many employees are currently employed and how many were employed in the fiscal year 2010-2011; (b) what are the current base salaries for each individual employee and what were the base salaries for each individual employee in the fiscal year 2011-2012; (c) broken down by month, how many overtime hours and how much overtime pay did each employee receive from 2010-present; (d) broken down by month, how many hours of overtime were paid overall since 2010; (e) broken down by month, since 2010, how many days in a row does the average employee work before receiving two consecutive days off; and (f) how many days in a row does the average employee work before receiving one day off? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1292.
2013-05-29 [p.3220]
Q-1300 — Mr. McGuinty (Ottawa South) — With respect to advertising paid for by the government, broken down by fiscal year, for each fiscal year from fiscal year beginning April 1, 2006, up to and including the first half of fiscal year 2012: (a) how much was spent for each type of advertising, including, but not limited to (i) television, specifying the stations, (ii) radio, specifying the stations, (iii) print, i.e. newspapers and magazines, specifying the names of the publications, (iv) the internet, specifying the names of the websites, (v) billboards, specifying the total amount of billboards and the locations of the billboards, broken down by electoral district, (vi) bus shelters, specifying the locations, (vii) advertising in all other publically-accessible places; (b) for each individual purchase of advertising, who signed the contracts; (c) for every ad, who was involved in producing it; and (d) for every ad, what were the production costs, both direct and indirect, broken down per advertisement? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1300.
2013-05-28 [p.3194]
Pursuant to Standing Order 39(7), Mr. Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) presented the returns to the following questions made into Orders for Return:
Q-1278 — Mr. Goodale (Wascana) — With regard to infrastructure in Labrador: (a) has the federal government at any time since January 1, 2009, received from the government of Newfoundland and Labrador any proposals, requests, or other documentation in support of funding for the following projects or proposals, namely (i) Nain Airport, (ii) Port Hope Simpson Airport, (iii) other airports or airstrips in Labrador, specifying which airports or airstrips, (iv) a new ferry or ferries for the Strait of Belle Isle ferry service, (v) a feasibility study concerning the construction of a highway from central to northern Labrador; (b) when did the federal government receive any proposals, requests or documentation referred to in (a); (c) which department or departments have received any proposals, requests or documentation referred to in (a); (d) what federal funding share is the provincial government seeking on the part of the federal government in respect of the projects or proposals enumerated in (a); and (e) what has been the response of the relevant federal government department to each of the projects or proposals enumerated in (a)? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1278.
2013-05-27 [p.3179]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Ms. Foote (Random—Burin—St. George's), seconded by Mr. Casey (Charlottetown), — That, in the opinion of the House, the Last Post Fund is currently underfunded and excludes deserving veterans causing unnecessary stress and hardship to families of veterans, and that the House call on the government to do the following: (a) accept the recommendations of successive Veteran Ombudsmens’ calling for expanded and enhanced financial access to the Last Post Fund; (b) accept the advice from the Royal Canadian Legion made in the years 2008, 2010, and 2012 calling for expanded access and financial support for the Last Post Fund; (c) accept three year old advice from departmental officials to expand and enhance financial access to the Last Post Fund; (d) review the Last Post Fund’s current burial assistance cap of $3,600 with the goal to establish a standard consistent with burial assistance provided to current members of the Canadian Forces; (e) review the “means tested” standard applied to the Last Post Fund that currently excludes many veterans with the goal to improve and lower the qualification standard to access the Fund; and (f) provide stable long term funding to the Last Post Fund with consideration given to establish a financial escalator tied to the Consumer Price Index. (Private Members' Business M-422)
The debate continued.
Results: 1 - 60 of 1793 | Page: 1 of 30

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

For more data options, please see Open Data