Journals
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 41 of 41
2013-04-18 [p.2999]
The Order was read for the consideration of the Business of Supply.
Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Ms. Liu (Rivière-des-Mille-Îles), moved, — That, in the opinion of this House, the government should inform the Government of the People's Republic of China, that it will not ratify the Canada-China Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement.
Debate arose thereon.
2013-01-28 [p.2654]
Q-1054 — Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway) — With respect to any analysis by officials from Industry Canada and Health Canada on the impact of Patent Term Restoration (PTR) in Canada: (a) what options for implementing a PTR system in Canada have been evaluated by officials at Industry Canada and Health Canada; (b) what are the estimated impacts on the cost of drugs in Canada that would arise from the implementation of a PTR system based on that which exists in the European Union; (c) what are the estimated impacts on the cost of drugs in Canada that would arise from other options to implement a PTR system in Canada, as analysed by officials; (d) what was the detailed methodology employed to estimate the impacts on the cost of drugs in Canada of these various options; (e) which of these options is being proposed by the government in the Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) negotiations; (f) what is the final title of any report(s) or studies prepared by, or on behalf of, these departments concerning CETA within the last two years; (g) will the government be releasing any of these reports publicly; and (h) what were the findings of these reports regarding costs to Canadian governments or the Canadian economy of patents? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1054.
2012-11-28 [p.2376]
— by Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), one concerning foreign aid (No. 411-2588);
2012-10-23 [p.2186]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Mr. Garrison (Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca), Bill C-455, An Act to amend the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (electronic products recycling program), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
2012-10-15 [p.2132]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Mr. Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster), Bill C-450, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act (voting hours), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
2012-10-03 [p.2101]
— by Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), one concerning the Canadian Coast Guard (No. 411-2041);
2012-06-20 [p.1878]
— by Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), one concerning cruelty to animals (No. 411-1481) and one concerning the fishing industry (No. 411-1482);
2012-04-23 [p.16]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Kenney (Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism), seconded by Mr. Moore (Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages), — That Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act, be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration;
And of the amendment of Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Mrs. Sellah (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert), — That the motion be amended by deleting all of the words after the word “That” and substituting the following:
“this House decline to give second reading to Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act, because it: (a) places an unacceptable level of arbitrary power in the hands of the Minister; (b) allows for the indiscriminate designation and subsequent imprisonment of bone fide refugees for up to one year without review; (c) places the status of thousands of refugees and permanent residents in jeopardy; (d) punishes bone fide refugees, including children, by imposing penalties based on mode of entry to Canada; (e) creates a two-tiered refugee system that denies many applicants access to an appeals mechanism; and (f) violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and two international conventions to which Canada is signatory.”.
The debate continued.
2012-04-04 [p.1069]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Mrs. Sellah (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert), Bill C-415, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (appeals), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
2012-03-26 [p.1009]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Kenney (Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism), seconded by Mr. Moore (Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages), — That Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act, be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration;
And of the amendment of Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Mrs. Sellah (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert), — That the motion be amended by deleting all of the words after the word “That” and substituting the following:
“this House decline to give second reading to Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act, because it: (a) places an unacceptable level of arbitrary power in the hands of the Minister; (b) allows for the indiscriminate designation and subsequent imprisonment of bone fide refugees for up to one year without review; (c) places the status of thousands of refugees and permanent residents in jeopardy; (d) punishes bone fide refugees, including children, by imposing penalties based on mode of entry to Canada; (e) creates a two-tiered refugee system that denies many applicants access to an appeals mechanism; and (f) violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and two international conventions to which Canada is signatory.”.
The debate continued.
2012-03-26 [p.1019]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Kenney (Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism), seconded by Mr. Moore (Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages), — That Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act, be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration;
And of the amendment of Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Mrs. Sellah (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert), — That the motion be amended by deleting all of the words after the word “That” and substituting the following:
“this House decline to give second reading to Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act, because it: (a) places an unacceptable level of arbitrary power in the hands of the Minister; (b) allows for the indiscriminate designation and subsequent imprisonment of bone fide refugees for up to one year without review; (c) places the status of thousands of refugees and permanent residents in jeopardy; (d) punishes bone fide refugees, including children, by imposing penalties based on mode of entry to Canada; (e) creates a two-tiered refugee system that denies many applicants access to an appeals mechanism; and (f) violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and two international conventions to which Canada is signatory.”.
The debate continued.
2012-03-16 [p.997]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Kenney (Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism), seconded by Mr. Moore (Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages), — That Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act, be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration;
And of the amendment of Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Mrs. Sellah (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert), — That the motion be amended by deleting all of the words after the word “That” and substituting the following:
“this House decline to give second reading to Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act, because it: (a) places an unacceptable level of arbitrary power in the hands of the Minister; (b) allows for the indiscriminate designation and subsequent imprisonment of bone fide refugees for up to one year without review; (c) places the status of thousands of refugees and permanent residents in jeopardy; (d) punishes bone fide refugees, including children, by imposing penalties based on mode of entry to Canada; (e) creates a two-tiered refugee system that denies many applicants access to an appeals mechanism; and (f) violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and two international conventions to which Canada is signatory.”.
The debate continued.
2012-03-16 [p.1007]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Kenney (Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism), seconded by Mr. Moore (Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages), — That Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act, be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration;
And of the amendment of Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Mrs. Sellah (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert), — That the motion be amended by deleting all of the words after the word “That” and substituting the following:
“this House decline to give second reading to Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act, because it: (a) places an unacceptable level of arbitrary power in the hands of the Minister; (b) allows for the indiscriminate designation and subsequent imprisonment of bone fide refugees for up to one year without review; (c) places the status of thousands of refugees and permanent residents in jeopardy; (d) punishes bone fide refugees, including children, by imposing penalties based on mode of entry to Canada; (e) creates a two-tiered refugee system that denies many applicants access to an appeals mechanism; and (f) violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and two international conventions to which Canada is signatory.”.
The debate continued.
2012-03-15 [p.991]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Kenney (Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism), seconded by Mr. Moore (Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages), — That Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act, be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration;
And of the amendment of Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Mrs. Sellah (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert), — That the motion be amended by deleting all of the words after the word “That” and substituting the following:
“this House decline to give second reading to Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act, because it: (a) places an unacceptable level of arbitrary power in the hands of the Minister; (b) allows for the indiscriminate designation and subsequent imprisonment of bone fide refugees for up to one year without review; (c) places the status of thousands of refugees and permanent residents in jeopardy; (d) punishes bone fide refugees, including children, by imposing penalties based on mode of entry to Canada; (e) creates a two-tiered refugee system that denies many applicants access to an appeals mechanism; and (f) violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and two international conventions to which Canada is signatory.”.
The debate continued.
2012-03-15 [p.992]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Kenney (Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism), seconded by Mr. Moore (Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages), — That Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act, be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration;
And of the amendment of Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Mrs. Sellah (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert), — That the motion be amended by deleting all of the words after the word “That” and substituting the following:
“this House decline to give second reading to Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act, because it: (a) places an unacceptable level of arbitrary power in the hands of the Minister; (b) allows for the indiscriminate designation and subsequent imprisonment of bone fide refugees for up to one year without review; (c) places the status of thousands of refugees and permanent residents in jeopardy; (d) punishes bone fide refugees, including children, by imposing penalties based on mode of entry to Canada; (e) creates a two-tiered refugee system that denies many applicants access to an appeals mechanism; and (f) violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and two international conventions to which Canada is signatory.”.
The debate continued.
2012-03-15 [p.993]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Kenney (Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism), seconded by Mr. Moore (Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages), — That Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act, be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration;
And of the amendment of Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Mrs. Sellah (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert), — That the motion be amended by deleting all of the words after the word “That” and substituting the following:
“this House decline to give second reading to Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act, because it: (a) places an unacceptable level of arbitrary power in the hands of the Minister; (b) allows for the indiscriminate designation and subsequent imprisonment of bone fide refugees for up to one year without review; (c) places the status of thousands of refugees and permanent residents in jeopardy; (d) punishes bone fide refugees, including children, by imposing penalties based on mode of entry to Canada; (e) creates a two-tiered refugee system that denies many applicants access to an appeals mechanism; and (f) violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and two international conventions to which Canada is signatory.”.
The debate continued.
2012-03-12 [p.941]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Kenney (Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism), seconded by Mr. Moore (Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages), — That Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act, be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration;
And of the amendment of Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Mrs. Sellah (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert), — That the motion be amended by deleting all of the words after the word “That” and substituting the following:
“this House decline to give second reading to Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act, because it: (a) places an unacceptable level of arbitrary power in the hands of the Minister; (b) allows for the indiscriminate designation and subsequent imprisonment of bone fide refugees for up to one year without review; (c) places the status of thousands of refugees and permanent residents in jeopardy; (d) punishes bone fide refugees, including children, by imposing penalties based on mode of entry to Canada; (e) creates a two-tiered refugee system that denies many applicants access to an appeals mechanism; and (f) violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and two international conventions to which Canada is signatory.”.
The debate continued.
2012-03-12 [p.942]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Kenney (Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism), seconded by Mr. Moore (Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages), — That Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act, be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration;
And of the amendment of Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Mrs. Sellah (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert), — That the motion be amended by deleting all of the words after the word “That” and substituting the following:
“this House decline to give second reading to Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act, because it: (a) places an unacceptable level of arbitrary power in the hands of the Minister; (b) allows for the indiscriminate designation and subsequent imprisonment of bone fide refugees for up to one year without review; (c) places the status of thousands of refugees and permanent residents in jeopardy; (d) punishes bone fide refugees, including children, by imposing penalties based on mode of entry to Canada; (e) creates a two-tiered refugee system that denies many applicants access to an appeals mechanism; and (f) violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and two international conventions to which Canada is signatory.”.
The debate continued.
2012-03-06 [p.899]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Mrs. Groguhé (Saint-Lambert), Bill C-404, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (denial of temporary resident visa application), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
2012-03-06 [p.899]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Mrs. Groguhé (Saint-Lambert), Bill C-405, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (appeal process for temporary resident visa applicants), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
2012-03-06 [p.901]
Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Mrs. Sellah (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert), moved the following amendment, — That the motion be amended by deleting all of the words after the word “That” and substituting the following:
“this House decline to give second reading to Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act, because it: (a) places an unacceptable level of arbitrary power in the hands of the Minister; (b) allows for the indiscriminate designation and subsequent imprisonment of bone fide refugees for up to one year without review; (c) places the status of thousands of refugees and permanent residents in jeopardy; (d) punishes bone fide refugees, including children, by imposing penalties based on mode of entry to Canada; (e) creates a two-tiered refugee system that denies many applicants access to an appeals mechanism; and (f) violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and two international conventions to which Canada is signatory.”.
Debate arose thereon.
2012-03-06 [p.902]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Kenney (Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism), seconded by Mr. Moore (Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages), — That Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act, be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration;
And of the amendment of Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Mrs. Sellah (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert), — That the motion be amended by deleting all of the words after the word “That” and substituting the following:
“this House decline to give second reading to Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Act, because it: (a) places an unacceptable level of arbitrary power in the hands of the Minister; (b) allows for the indiscriminate designation and subsequent imprisonment of bone fide refugees for up to one year without review; (c) places the status of thousands of refugees and permanent residents in jeopardy; (d) punishes bone fide refugees, including children, by imposing penalties based on mode of entry to Canada; (e) creates a two-tiered refugee system that denies many applicants access to an appeals mechanism; and (f) violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and two international conventions to which Canada is signatory.”.
The debate continued.
2012-01-30 [p.682]
Q-220 — Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway) — With respect to Temporary Resident Visas (TRVs): (a) how many individuals per year, over the last ten years, who were issued a TRV have gone on to make a refugee claim; (b) over the last ten years, (i) what have been the ten most common countries of origin of the refugee claimants in (a), (ii) how many refugee claimants have come from each of the ten countries per year; (c) of the refugee claimants mentioned in (a), what is the breakdown in terms of (i) gender, (ii) age; (d) what is the total number of TRVs issued per year over the last ten years; and (e) does the Department of Citizenship and Immigration know how many TRV holders have stayed in Canada beyond the expiry date of their visas in the last ten years and, if so, how many have done so? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-220.
2012-01-30 [p.682]
Q-222 — Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway) — With respect to five-year multiple-entry visas: (a) how many visas of this type have been issued in total per year over the last ten years; (b) what is the breakdown in terms of (i) gender, (ii) age; (c) how many have been issued per year to individuals who have a pending application for permanent residence, and what is the breakdown in terms of permanent residency class applied for; and (d) over the last ten years, (i) what have been the ten most common countries of origin for individuals who have received multiple-entry visas, (ii) how many applicants have come from each of the ten countries per year? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-222.
2011-11-30 [p.559]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Mr. Cleary (St. John's South—Mount Pearl), Bill C-367, An Act to amend the Income Tax Act (tax credit for dues paid to veterans' organizations), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
2011-11-30 [p.559]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Mr. Cleary (St. John's South—Mount Pearl), Bill C-368, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act (voting age), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
2011-11-30 [p.559]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Mr. Cleary (St. John's South—Mount Pearl), Bill C-369, An Act to amend the Excise Tax Act (no GST on batteries for medical and assistive devices), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
2011-11-23 [p.517]
— by Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), two concerning Fiji (Nos. 411-0184 and 411-0185);
2011-11-21 [p.506]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), Bill C-351, An Act respecting a Canadian Autism Day, was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
2011-11-21 [p.506]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), Bill C-352, An Act to amend the Statistics Act (National Office for Fire and Emergency Response Statistics), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
2011-11-21 [p.506]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), Bill C-353, An Act to amend the Excise Tax Act and the Income Tax Act (extra-energy-efficient products), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
2011-11-01 [p.404]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), seconded by Mr. Donnelly (New Westminster—Coquitlam), Bill C-340, An Act respecting a National Strategy to Encourage the Development of Renewable Energy Sources, was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
2011-11-01 [p.404]
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-123 — Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway) — With respect to federal funding for agencies and organizations providing immigrant settlement services: (a) for each of the fiscal years from 2001-2002 to 2011-2012, what was the total amount of federal funding allocated (i) across Canada as a whole, (ii) by province and territory, (iii) by municipality, (iv) by electoral district; (b) for each of the fiscal years from 2001-2002 to 2011-2012, what is the total number of agencies and organizations that applied for federal funding (i) across Canada as a whole, (ii) broken down by province and territory, (iii) broken down by municipality, (iv) broken down by electoral district; (c) for each of the fiscal years from 2001-2002 to 2011-2012, what was the total number of agencies and organizations to which federal funding was allocated (i) across Canada as a whole, (ii) broken down by province and territory, (iii) broken down by municipality, (iv) broken down by electoral district; (d) for each of the fiscal years from 2001-2002 to 2011-2012, what was the total number of agencies and organizations whose applications for federal funding were rejected, (i) across Canada as a whole, (ii) broken down by province and territory, (iii) broken down by municipality, (iv) broken down by electoral district; (e) of those agencies receiving funding per the parameters in (c), what are all agencies that received funding in any fiscal year which was less than the total funding received by that agency in the previous fiscal year, including, for each such agency, (i) the name of the agency, (ii) the provincial, municipal and electoral disctrict location of the agency, (iii) the total amount of funding allocated to the agency in each fiscal year from 2001-2002 to 2011-2012; (f) of those agencies whose applications for funding were rejected per the parameters in (d), what are all agencies that had received funding in a previous fiscal year, including, for each such agency, (i) the name of the agency, (ii) the provincial, municipal and electoral disctrict location of the agency, (iii) the total amount of funding allocated to the agency in each fiscal year from 2001-2002 to 2011-2012; (g) what are the criteria used by the government to evaluate applications for funding by agencies and organizations providing immigrant settlement services; (h) how have the criteria listed in response to (g) changed since 2006; (i) what is the process by which applications for funding are evaluated; and (j) how has the process listed in response to (i) changed since 2006? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-123.
2011-10-21 [p.360]
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-121 — Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway) — With respect to corporate tax revenue: (a) for each fiscal year from 1990-1991 to 2010-2011, what were the annual corporate tax revenues projected to be collected by the federal government in budgetary forecasting for one, two and three years in advance, broken down by year; (b) for each fiscal year from 1990-1991 to 2010-2011, what were the annual corporate tax revenues projected to be collected by each provincial and territorial government in budgetary forecasting for one, two and three years in advance, broken down by year and by province and territory; (c) for each fiscal year from 1990-1991 to 2010-2011, what were the annual corporate tax revenues actually collected by the federal government, broken down by year; (d) for each fiscal year from 1990-1991 to 2010-2011, what were the annual corporate tax revenues actually collected by each provincial and territorial government, broken down by year; (e) for each fiscal year from 1990-1991 to 2010-2011, what was the difference between projected and collected corporate tax revenues for the federal government and for each province and territory, broken down by year, and expressed as both a dollar figure and a percentage of projected revenue; (f) for the corporate tax revenue projections for the province of British Columbia for fiscal years 2011-2012, 2012-2013, and 2013-2014, what adjustments were made to those projections between August 2010 and October 2010; and (g) what new information, new data, or new modeling was received or used that resulted in adjustments to the corporate tax revenue projections for the province of British Columbia between August 2010 and October 2010 for fiscal years 2011-2012, 2012-2013, and 2013-2014? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-121.
2011-10-21 [p.361]
Q-122 — Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway) — With respect to the federal funding for Child Advocacy Centres announced in October 2010: (a) does the funding for this initiative come from an existing fund or is it a new initiative with new funding; (b) what are the criteria by which applications to receive funding under this initiative will be evaluated; (c) how many applications for funding under this initiative have been received, broken down by month received, location of project and name of applicant; (d) how many applications for funding under this initiative have been approved, broken down by date approved, location of project and name of applicant; (e) how many applications for funding under this initiative have been rejected, broken down by date rejected, location of project and name of applicant; (f) is there a prescribed limit to the amount of funds that can be disbursed under this initiative within a single fiscal year; (g) is there a prescribed limit to the amount of funds that can be disbursed to a single applicant or project; (h) what happens to this initiative once the $5.25 million has been fully assigned; (i) what will happen to the funding once the five year commitment comes to an end; (j) what factors or circumstances changed between the time of the requests made by former Victims Ombudsman Steve Sullivan to include funding for Child Advocacy Centres in Budget 2009 and Budget 2010 and the time the government announced funding in October 2010; (k) what existing programs or initiatives may have their funding or potential funding reduced or eliminated as a result of the announced funding for Child Advocacy Centres; (l) what specific branch, department or agency is responsible for administering the funding for Child Advocacy Centres; and (m) what is the legislative basis for this funding? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-122.
2011-06-08 [p.30]
— by Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), one concerning Fiji (No. 411-0010);
Results: 1 - 41 of 41

Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data