Journals
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 15
2018-11-19 [p.4278]
Q-1936 — Mrs. Zahid (Scarborough Centre) — With regard to the National Joint Council’s Relocation Directive, which reimburses federal employees when relocating for work, for the calendar years 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015: (a) how many employees, agents, or contractors of the federal government made claims for relocation funding each year, broken down by government department or agency; (b) how many employees, agents, or contractors of the federal government were provided with reimbursement for relocation each year, broken down by government department or agency; (c) in the instances where relocation funding was provided, how many instances arose from employer-requested relocation in each year; (d) in the instances where relocation funding was provided, how many instances arose from employee-requested relocation in each year; (e) what was the annual aggregate amount in Canadian dollars spent by each government agency or department in remitting relocation funding, broken down by the benefit categories outlined in appendix B of the National Joint Council’s Relocation Directive; (f) which employees, agents, or contractors of the federal government received relocation funding in each year, itemized to include their agency or department, their job title, the amount of relocation funding remitted, broken down by the benefit categories outlined in appendix B of the National Joint Council’s Relocation Directive, and where the individual was relocated from and to; (g) what is the aggregate amount of funding, across all government departments and agencies, remitted in each year under the Relocation Directive’s benefit categories that pertain to real estate commission and realtor fees; (h) what is the aggregate amount of funding, across all government departments and agencies, remitted in each year under the Relocation Directive’s benefit categories that pertain to home equity loss; and (i) what is the aggregate amount of funding, across all government departments and agencies, remitted in each year under the Relocation Directive’s benefit categories that pertain to mortgages, mortgage default insurance, and mortgage paydown penalties? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1936.
2018-11-07 [p.4256]
Pursuant to Standing Order 39(7), Mr. Lamoureux (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-1928 — Mr. Martel (Chicoutimi—Le Fjord) — With regard to the G7 Summit in Charlevoix in June 2018: (a) which regional, municipal, or local governments have submitted bills, invoices, or other requests for reimbursement to the Canadian government for costs incurred as a result of the Summit; (b) for each government in (a), what are the details including the (i) amount requested, (ii) amount reimbursed, (iii) description of request (for example, reimbursement of policing costs); and (c) for any requests which have been rejected or unfulfilled by the Canadian government, what were the reasons they were rejected or unfulfilled? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1928.
2018-11-05 [p.4232]
Q-1894 — Mr. Kmiec (Calgary Shepard) — With regard to the National Joint Council’s Relocation Directive, which reimburses federal employees when relocating for work, for the calendar years 2016, 2017 and 2018: (a) how many employees, agents, or contractors of the federal government made claims for relocation funding each year, broken down by government department or agency; (b) how many employees, agents, or contractors of the federal government were provided with reimbursement for relocation each year, broken down by government department or agency; (c) in the instances where relocation funding was provided, how many instances arose from employer-requested relocation in each year; (d) in the instances where relocation funding was provided, how many instances arose from employee-requested relocation in each year; (e) what was the annual aggregate amount in Canadian dollars spent by each government agency or department in remitting relocation funding, broken down by the benefit categories outlined in appendix B of the National Joint Council’s Relocation Directive; (f) which employees, agents, or contractors of the federal government received relocation funding in each year, itemized to include their agency or department, their job title, the amount of relocation funding remitted, broken down by the benefit categories outlined in appendix B of the National Joint Council’s Relocation Directive, and where the individual was relocated from and to; (g) what is the aggregate amount of funding, across all government departments and agencies, remitted in each year under the Relocation Directive’s benefit categories that pertain to real estate commission and realtor fees; (h) what is the aggregate amount of funding, across all government departments and agencies, remitted in each year under the Relocation Directive’s benefit categories that pertain to home equity loss; and (i) what is the aggregate amount of funding, across all government departments and agencies, remitted in each year under the Relocation Directive’s benefit categories that pertain to mortgages, mortgage default insurance, and mortgage paydown penalties? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1894.
2018-09-17 [p.3948]
Q-1845 — Mr. Albas (Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola) — With regard to expense claims by a minister or ministerial exempt staff which were paid out, since September 1, 2016, but then later paid-back to the Receiver General: what are the details of each such payment or reimbursement, including (i) date of expense claim, (ii) date money was reimbursed to the Receiver General, (iii) amount of initial expense claim and payment, (iv) amount reimbursed to the Receiver General, (v) description of products or services for each claim, (vi) reason for reimbursement to the Receiver General? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1845.
2018-03-21 [p.2783]
Q-1476 — Mr. Albas (Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola) — With regard to the Canada child benefit, since January 1, 2016: (a) how many (i) primary caregivers, (ii) other individuals have applied for the benefit; (b) of the applications in (a)(i), how many were rejected; (c) of the applications in (a)(ii), how many were rejected; (d) what were the reasons for rejection in (b) and (c), including the number of applications rejected for each reason; (e) how many applicants who were subsequently rejected were required to reimburse the government the amounts received in relation to the benefit; (f) what is the total amount recovered as a result of the reimbursements in (e); (g) how many individuals have had their marital status changed by the Canada Revenue Agency for taxation purposes following a rejection of benefits; and (h) for the individuals in (g), what was the number of each type of status change, such as single to common-law, married to single, and any other status changes, broken down by status change? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1476.
2018-02-07 [p.2660]
Pursuant to Standing Order 45, the House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion of Mr. Scheer (Regina—Qu'Appelle), seconded by Ms. Bergen (Portage—Lisgar), — That, in the opinion of the House, when any Member violates the Conflict of Interest Act, including accepting gifts or hospitality (section 11), furthering private interests (section 21), being in a conflict of interest (section 5), and accepting travel (section 12), or violates the Conflict of Interest Code for Members of the House of Commons, and, in so doing, incurs a cost upon the taxpayer, that Member must repay those costs to the taxpayer.
The question was put on the motion and it was negatived on the following division:
(Division No. 442 -- Vote no 442) - View vote details.
YEAS: 128, NAYS: 166
2018-02-06 [p.2652]
The Order was read for the consideration of the Business of Supply.
Mr. Scheer (Regina—Qu'Appelle), seconded by Ms. Bergen (Portage—Lisgar), moved, — That, in the opinion of the House, when any Member violates the Conflict of Interest Act, including accepting gifts or hospitality (section 11), furthering private interests (section 21), being in a conflict of interest (section 5), and accepting travel (section 12), or violates the Conflict of Interest Code for Members of the House of Commons, and, in so doing, incurs a cost upon the taxpayer, that Member must repay those costs to the taxpayer.
Debate arose thereon.
2018-02-06 [p.2657]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Scheer (Regina—Qu'Appelle), seconded by Ms. Bergen (Portage—Lisgar), in relation to the Business of Supply.
The debate continued.
2018-02-06 [p.2658]
The question was put on the motion and, pursuant to Standing Order 45, the recorded division was deferred until Wednesday, February 7, 2018, at the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders.
2017-02-24 [p.1396]
Q-633 — Mr. Webber (Calgary Confederation) — With regard to credit cards issued to Ministers, Ministers of State and Parliamentary Secretaries: what expenses were charged to a government credit card, and not paid for by the government for the period of November 4, 2015, to September 23, 2016, including (i) the name of the vendor and the place of purchase, (ii) the date of the purchase, (iii) the value of the purchase, (iv) the due date of the statement, (v) the date on which the card holder provided reimbursement in full, (vi) the name of the card holder, (vii) the official job title of the card holder, (viii) the confirmation if that card holder is still an active holder of a government credit card? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-633-01.
2017-01-30 [p.1237]
Q-632 — Mr. Webber (Calgary Confederation) — With regard to credit cards issued to Ministerial staff: what expenses were charged to a government credit card, and not paid for by the government for the period of November 4, 2015, to September 23, 2016, including (i) the name of the vendor and the place of purchase, (ii) the date of the purchase, (iii) the value of the purchase, (iv) the due date of the statement, (v) the date on which the card holder provided reimbursement in full, (vi) the name of the card holder, (vii) the job title of the card holder, (viii) the department or agency of the card holder, (ix) the confirmation if that card holder is still an active holder of a government credit card? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-632.
2017-01-30 [p.1237]
Q-633 — Mr. Webber (Calgary Confederation) — With regard to credit cards issued to Ministers, Ministers of State and Parliamentary Secretaries: what expenses were charged to a government credit card, and not paid for by the government for the period of November 4, 2015, to September 23, 2016, including (i) the name of the vendor and the place of purchase, (ii) the date of the purchase, (iii) the value of the purchase, (iv) the due date of the statement, (v) the date on which the card holder provided reimbursement in full, (vi) the name of the card holder, (vii) the official job title of the card holder, (viii) the confirmation if that card holder is still an active holder of a government credit card? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-633.
2016-11-14 [p.1007]
Q-503 — Mr. Webber (Calgary Confederation) — With regard to credit cards issued to ministerial staff: what expenses were charged to a government credit card, and subsequently reimbursed by the card holder for the period of November 4, 2015, to September 23, 2016, including, (i) the name of the vendor and the place of purchase, (ii) the date of the purchase, (iii) the value of the purchase, (iv) the due date of the statement, (v) the date on which the card holder provided reimbursement in full, (vi) the name of the card holder, (vii) the job title of the card holder, (viii) the department or agency of the card holder, (ix) the confirmation if that card holder is still an active holder of a government credit card? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-503.
2016-11-14 [p.1007]
Q-504 — Mr. Webber (Calgary Confederation) — With regard to credit cards issued to Ministers, Ministers of State, and Parliamentary Secretaries: what expenses were charged to a government credit card, and subsequently reimbursed by the card holder for the period of November 4, 2015, to September 23, 2016, including, (i) the name of the vendor and the place of purchase, (ii) the date of the purchase, (iii) the value of the purchase, (iv) the due date of the statement, (v) the date on which the card holder provided reimbursement in full, (vi) the name of the card holder, (vii) the official job title of the card holder, (viii) the confirmation if that card holder is still an active holder of a government credit card? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-504.
2016-11-04 [p.978]
Q-395 — Mr. Waugh (Saskatoon—Grasswood) — With regard to expenses claims by a minister or ministerial exempt staff which were paid out, but then later paid-back to the Receiver General: what are the details of each such payment or re-imbursement, with (i) date of expense claim, (ii) date money was reimbursed to the Receiver General, (iii) amount of initial expense claim and payment, (iv) amount reimbursed to the Receiver General, (v) description of products or services for each claim, (vi) reason for reimbursement to the Receiver General? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-395.
Results: 1 - 15 of 15

Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data