Interventions in the House of Commons
 
 
 
RSS feed based on search criteria Export search results - CSV (plain text) Export search results - XML
Add search criteria
View John Barlow Profile
CPC (AB)
View John Barlow Profile
2019-06-19 15:11 [p.29393]
Mr. Speaker, right now in Cape Breton we are seeing a story as old as time. The Liberals are taking $18 million from taxpayers to fund a private airport at the elite Cabot Links golf resort for their millionaire friends to park their private jets. This Liberal decision is decimating the Allan J. MacEachen Port Hawkesbury Airport and small businesses like Celtic Air Services.
Will the Prime Minister put small businesses ahead of his millionaire Liberal golf buddies and stop any funding for a competing private airport in Inverness?
View Justin Trudeau Profile
Lib. (QC)
View Justin Trudeau Profile
2019-06-19 15:11 [p.29393]
Mr. Speaker, it is always interesting to hear the Conservatives pretend they stand up for the middle class. We know their approach has always been to give advantages and benefits to the wealthiest in the hope that it will trickle down to growth for everyone else.
The first thing we did as a government was lower taxes for the middle class and raise them on the wealthiest 1%, and the Conservatives voted against it.
Then we brought in a Canada child benefit that gives more help to nine families out of 10 by stopping the cheques being sent to the millionaire families the Conservatives kept helping.
View John Brassard Profile
CPC (ON)
View John Brassard Profile
2019-06-14 11:54 [p.29127]
Mr. Speaker, I am not sure they are going to want to hear this one.
The Liberals are reportedly giving $18 million, tax dollars, to build an exclusive airport runway near Cabot Cliffs golf course in Cape Breton even though the Port Hawkesbury airport is only an hour away. Many in the community, including the mayor, are concerned this would bankrupt the company that runs their community airport and the small businesses that depend upon it.
Instead of pandering to millionaires who, God forbid, have to drive an hour to get to the golf course after landing in their private jets, why is the Prime Minister putting this community asset at risk to accommodate his elite millionaire friends?
View Rodger Cuzner Profile
Lib. (NS)
View Rodger Cuzner Profile
2019-06-14 11:55 [p.29128]
Mr. Speaker, Cape Bretoners always appreciate when someone from Ontario who knows nothing about it sticks his nose in their business.
There is a private airport in Port Hawkesbury. There are no scheduled flights into that airport. The project in Cabot Links has put over 700 people to work specifically there. The unemployment rate was at 25% when I was first elected in 2000 and what is going on, on the west side of the island is absolutely spectacular. For the member to jump up and and let on he knows what is going on there—
View John Brassard Profile
CPC (ON)
View John Brassard Profile
2019-06-14 12:13 [p.29131]
Mr. Speaker, while I understand that things do get heated in this House of Commons, the member for Cape Breton—Canso, whom I have respect for, showed indignation that a member from Ontario would dare to ask a question about Cape Breton and stand up for those residents. I will remind the member as well that the minister for ACOA is from Ontario. Therefore, if the member would like to apologize to me, I will accept that.
View Rodger Cuzner Profile
Lib. (NS)
View Rodger Cuzner Profile
2019-06-14 12:13 [p.29131]
Mr. Speaker, I consider the member to be a friend. If his feelings were hurt, I certainly want to apologize.
He is right. The minister is from Ontario. He has done a tremendous job working with the people of Cape Breton to provide opportunities and I look forward to that relationship continuing.
View Georgina Jolibois Profile
NDP (SK)
Mr. Speaker, in February, the minister announced funding to make much needed safety improvements to the Fond du Lac Airport, but now the Liberals are telling the community that it needs to apply again for already promised funding. The Liberals are really quick to make promises to northerners, but they act more like the Conservatives, who never cared to invest in northern Saskatchewan. Northerners are tired of being betrayed by the Liberals.
Will the Prime Minister commit to his promise to Fond du Lac and release the funding today?
View Justin Trudeau Profile
Lib. (QC)
View Justin Trudeau Profile
2019-05-29 14:45 [p.28220]
Mr. Speaker, I had the tremendous pleasure of being in northern Saskatchewan just a week and a half ago to meet with folks in Meadow Lake to see the extraordinary work that is being done as we continue to invest in communities across northern Saskatchewan and, indeed, in indigenous communities right across the country.
Reconciliation happens when we work in partnership and when we invest historic amounts of money in communities, but mostly when we give communities the strength and ability to build their own futures. That is what reconciliation means and that is what we will continue with.
View Robert Aubin Profile
NDP (QC)
View Robert Aubin Profile
2019-05-09 14:44 [p.27588]
Mr. Speaker, key members of the Trois-Rivières business community are getting behind a promising project at the airport. The city just invested in the construction of a new terminal, and the federal government is also expected to contribute soon.
Meanwhile, the Liberal government snuck a measure on the privatization of security services at Canadian airports into the most recent budget.
Are the people of Trois-Rivières and its business community right in thinking that this privatization could facilitate the implementation of security measures and the designation of their airport?
View Terry Beech Profile
Lib. (BC)
View Terry Beech Profile
2019-05-09 14:44 [p.27588]
Mr. Speaker, I can assure Canadians that we are putting forward measures to improve the air passenger experience. We have provided funding to address increasing passenger volumes at our airports and to decrease passenger wait times. Our government is committed to maintaining the highest levels of security for the travelling public while improving the passenger experience. Any decision that is made on CATSA privatization will take those into account.
View Kelly Block Profile
CPC (SK)
View Kelly Block Profile
2019-04-30 17:37 [p.27211]
Madam Speaker, I am pleased today to rise to speak to the perspectives and concerns of my constituents, as well as in my role as the shadow minister for transportation, regarding Bill C-97, which is another omnibus bill proposed by the current Liberal government.
I want to begin by commending my hon. colleague, the member for Carleton, for his thoughtful and comprehensive response to the budget. As he so aptly noted, this budget is a string of broken promises and perhaps the most expensive cover-up in history. The Prime Minister and his government are attempting to change the channel on the SNC-Lavalin affair and are using billions of taxpayer dollars to make this happen.
As we all know, the Liberal Party ran on the promise of balancing the budget in 2019. It is a promise made, and it is a promise broken to the tune of $19.8 billion.
For years now, the member for Carleton has repeatedly asked a simple question of the finance minister: When will the budget be balanced? Every time, the finance minister has refused to answer. Despite the minister's refusal, we do know that there is no plan to balance the budget before 2040, if even then. By 2040, the Liberals' current plan would see $271 billion added to our debt. The government has left us with nothing in our back pocket. The Liberals have spent their paycheque, our paycheque and our children's paycheque. If we face another economic downturn, they will spend our great-grandchildren's money as well, long before they have even been born.
In just three years, this Prime Minister has added $60 billion to our national debt, and any comparison to the previous Conservative government's spending is made in bad faith. While the Conservative government faced down the worst economic crisis since the 1930s, this Prime Minister has had nothing but clear sailing. Under the Conservatives, Canada weathered the economic storm better and returned to balanced budgets faster than any other country in the G7. That is because we spent when we needed to and saved when we could.
This Prime Minister has managed to turn a balanced budget and booming world economy into giant deficits and a slowing Canadian economy. While our neighbours to the south enjoyed a 3% growth in 2018, Canada eked out a mere 1.8%. Only a few days ago, the Bank of Canada suggested that we will slow even further this year, to 1.2%.
I know it can be hard to track the numbers. In fact, that is what the Liberals count on. Therefore, let us simplify it: The tens of billions of dollars of wasted, inefficient spending from the current government have done nothing for our economy but bleed it dry. What is the government's response? It is to spend more. The Liberals spend in the good times and the bad. They always spend.
There are only two reasons for a country to have a deficit problem: Either there is a revenue problem or there is a spending problem. With tax revenues actually higher than expected, the answer is clear. The government has a spending problem. In fact, with this budget containing over $41 billion in new spending over the next five years, a seemingly ridiculous question has to be asked: Are the Liberals intentionally spending so recklessly just to stay in deficit? How else can we explain a 20% increase in spending in the first three years of the government's mandate? All of this increased spending is taking place against the backdrop of higher taxes and an increased cost of living brought on by the government.
Over 80% of middle-income Canadians are paying more in taxes now than they were three years ago. This has resulted in many Canadians finding it hard to make ends meet. Almost half of Canadians are within $200 of not being able to pay their bills at the end of the month. Any unforeseen expense would result in these families facing serious financial hardship.
If the government had handled finances better, paid down debt and built a rainy-day fund, we could be cutting taxes for these families and helping them make their payments. Instead, the Liberal government has spent beyond its means and brought in a carbon tax, forcing families to pay more to heat their homes and drive to work. What is even worse is that the Prime Minister is forcing those families to pay the GST on his carbon tax. Imagine that, Madam Speaker, a tax on a tax.
There are two very specific sections on which I would like to comment briefly in my role as the shadow minister for transport in the Conservative caucus. First, I would like to discuss division 12, the government's proposed changes to airport security screening. The Minister of Transport has once again been strong-armed by his colleagues to include drastic changes to the system in a budget implementation act. It appears the minister and the government do not care about the economic well-being of our transportation system, or in this case the air passenger system.
At committee today, we heard that over the past two years, the Liberal government has time and again assaulted the Canadian airline industry with new taxes and costs without thought to how these changes will impact air passengers. Not only that, the government is rushing legislative and regulatory changes through to meet an artificial deadline.
The proposed changes in division 12 contain another example of this. Rather than consult and facilitate negotiations between the parties on a new security screening entity and its assets, the Liberals are ramming drastic changes through Parliament and down the throats of the industry. This will hurt not only airlines but also passengers. For years, governments have paid out less than they collected in the airport security fee that air passengers were charged. This means that passengers have already paid for CATSA assets worth hundreds of millions of dollars.
In a ridiculous move, the government's changes will force Canadian travellers to pay for these assets all over again, without due consideration for their depreciation or their actual value. This will doubtless result in higher ticket prices before even accounting for the carbon tax. The out-of-touch Prime Minister does not get that most Canadians do not have a taxpayer-funded private jet at their disposal for weekend cross-country surfing trips. Most Canadians have to save in order to afford a vacation. Those average Canadians are the ones who will pay for the reckless, heavy-handed changes in this bill. From making Canadians pay a tax on a tax to forcing Canadian travellers to pay for screening equipment twice, the government is better than the sheriff of Nottingham at squeezing taxes out of Canadians.
Finally, I would like to briefly discuss division 11, which contains changes to the Pilotage Act. Based on conversations I have had with stakeholders, I do not have deep concerns with the proposed changes, but it is very disappointing that these proposed changes were once again buried in a budget implementation act. Improvements to the Pilotage Act will reinforce Canada's commitment to a safe and efficient marine transportation system supported by a legal and legislative framework.
Given that, an oil tanker moratorium in any region of the country is an insult to both marine pilots and shippers alike. An arbitrary shipping ban based on an ideological election promise is basically an admission that the government believes there is no way marine pilots or shippers can do the job they have been trained to do. This is an insult to the entire industry.
As I said earlier, this entire budget is a litany of broken promises: a broken promise to balance the budget, a broken promise to help the middle class and a broken promise by introducing an omnibus bill. Come October, Canadians will remind the government of the cost of broken promises.
View Geoff Regan Profile
Lib. (NS)

Question No. 2283--
Ms. Leona Alleslev:
With regard to government consultations in relation to the Pickering Airport: (a) what are the details of the "Pickering Lands Aviation Sector Analysis" study conducted by KPMG, including (i) when the study or report was commissioned, (ii) the value of the contract, (iii) date on which the study will be, or has been, completed, (iv) the terms of reference for the study, (v) date on which the findings will be released to the public, (vi) findings of the study, if available, (vii) who was interviewed for the study, including any current or former ministers or ministerial exempt staff, and on what dates; and (b) what is the government's official position on the Pickering Airport and, if the government is planning on allowing construction on such an airport, what is the projected start and completion date of such a project?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2284--
Mr. Tom Lukiwski:
With regard to contracts awarded by Public Services and Procurement Canada since January 1, 2016, in relation to the ongoing renovations of Centre Block: what are the details of all such contracts, including (i) date contract was awarded, (ii) duration of contract, (iii) amount, (iv) vendor, (v) description of goods or services, (vi) was the contract sole-sourced or competitively bid, (vii) file number?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2286--
Ms. Sheri Benson:
With regard to federal spending within the electoral district of Saskatoon West for each fiscal year from 2011-12 to the current: what is the list of grants, loans, contributions and contracts awarded by the government, broken down by (i) department and agency, (ii) municipality, (iii) name of recipient, (iv) amount received, (v) program under which the spending was made, (vi) date?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2287--
Mr. Luc Berthold:
With regard to funding provided through The Canadian Initiative for the Economic Diversification of Communities Reliant on Chrysotile program: (a) how much funding has been delivered through the program, broken down by year since the program came into forced in 2013; (b) what are the details of all funding recipients, including (i) date and duration of funding, (ii) name, (iii) location, (iv) amount, (v) description or project or purpose of funding; and (c) what criteria were used to determine how much funding each of the organizations in (b) would receive?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2288--
Mr. Mario Beaulieu:
With regard to federal spending in the riding of La Pointe-de-l'Île, for each fiscal year since 2010-11, inclusively: what are the details of all grants and contributions and all loans to every organization, group, business or municipality, broken down by the (i) name of the recipient, (ii) municipality of the recipient, (iii) date on which the funding was received, (iv) amount received, (v) department or agency that provided the funding, (vi) program under which the grant, contribution or loan was made, (vii) nature or purpose?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2289--
Mr. Mario Beaulieu:
With regard to federal spending in the riding of Ahuntsic-Cartierville, for each fiscal year since 2010-11, inclusively: what are the details of all grants and contributions and all loans to every organization, group, business or municipality, broken down by the (i) name of the recipient, (ii) municipality of the recipient, (iii) date on which the funding was received, (iv) amount received, (v) department or agency that provided the funding, (vi) program under which the grant, contribution or loan was made, (vii) nature or purpose?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2290--
Mrs. Marilène Gill:
With regard to federal spending in the riding of Manicouagan, for each fiscal year since 2010-11, inclusively: what are the details of all grants and contributions and all loans to every organization, group, business or municipality, broken down by the (i) name of the recipient, (ii) municipality of the recipient, (iii) date on which the funding was received, (iv) amount received, (v) department or agency that provided the funding, (vi) program under which the grant, contribution or loan was made, (vii) nature or purpose?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2291--
Mr. Harold Albrecht:
With regard to the government operating booths or displays at trade shows or similar type events, since January 1, 2016, and broken down by department, agency, Crown Corporation or other government entity: what are the details of each event including (i) date, (ii) location, (iii) title of event, (iv) amount paid by the government for space at the event, (v) amount spent by the government in relation to the displays and a breakdown of such expenses, if known?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2292--
Mr. Rhéal Éloi Fortin:
With regard to federal spending in the riding of Rivière-du-Nord, for each fiscal year since 2010-11, inclusively: what are the details of all grants and contributions and all loans to every organization, group, business or municipality, broken down by the (i) name of the recipient, (ii) municipality of the recipient, (iii) date on which the funding was received, (iv) amount received, (v) department or agency that provided the funding, (vi) program under which the grant, contribution or loan was made, (vii) nature or purpose?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2293--
Mr. Rhéal Éloi Fortin:
With regard to federal spending in the riding of Laurentides—Labelle, for each fiscal year since 2010-11, inclusively: what are the details of all grants and contributions and all loans to every organization, group, business or municipality, broken down by the (i) name of the recipient, (ii) municipality of the recipient, (iii) date on which the funding was received, (iv) amount received, (v) department or agency that provided the funding, (vi) program under which the grant, contribution or loan was made, (vii) nature or purpose?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2294--
Ms. Monique Pauzé:
With regard to federal spending in the riding of Repentigny, for each fiscal year since 2010-11, inclusively: what are the details of all grants and contributions and all loans to every organization, group, business or municipality, broken down by the (i) name of the recipient, (ii) municipality of the recipient, (iii) date on which the funding was received, (iv) amount received, (v) department or agency that provided the funding, (vi) program under which the grant, contribution or loan was made, (vii) nature or purpose?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2295--
Ms. Monique Pauzé:
With regard to federal spending in the riding of Québec, for each fiscal year since 2010-11, inclusively: what are the details of all grants and contributions and all loans to every organization, group, business or municipality, broken down by the (i) name of the recipient, (ii) municipality of the recipient, (iii) date on which the funding was received, (iv) amount received, (v) department or agency that provided the funding, (vi) program under which the grant, contribution or loan was made, (vii) nature or purpose?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2296--
Mr. Michel Boudrias:
With regard to federal spending in the riding of Terrebonne, for each fiscal year since 2010-11, inclusively: what are the details of all grants and contributions and all loans to every organization, group, business or municipality, broken down by the (i) name of the recipient, (ii) municipality of the recipient, (iii) date on which the funding was received, (iv) amount received, (v) department or agency that provided the funding, (vi) program under which the grant, contribution or loan was made, (vii) nature or purpose?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2297--
Mr. Michel Boudrias:
With regard to federal spending in the riding of Rivière-des-Mille-îles, for each fiscal year since 2010-11, inclusively: what are the details of all grants and contributions and all loans to every organization, group, business or municipality, broken down by the (i) name of the recipient, (ii) municipality of the recipient, (iii) date on which the funding was received, (iv) amount received, (v) department or agency that provided the funding, (vi) program under which the grant, contribution or loan was made, (vii) nature or purpose?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2298--
Mr. Louis Plamondon:
With regard to federal spending in the riding of Bécancour—Nicolet—Saurel, for each fiscal year since 2010-11, inclusively: what are the details of all grants and contributions and all loans to every organization, group, business or municipality, broken down by the (i) name of the recipient, (ii) municipality of the recipient, (iii) date on which the funding was received, (iv) amount received, (v) department or agency that provided the funding, (vi) program under which the grant, contribution or loan was made, (vii) nature or purpose?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2299--
Mr. Louis Plamondon:
With regard to federal spending in the riding of Papineau, for each fiscal year since 2010-11, inclusively: what are the details of all grants and contributions and all loans to every organization, group, business or municipality, broken down by the (i) name of the recipient, (ii) municipality of the recipient, (iii) date on which the funding was received, (iv) amount received, (v) department or agency that provided the funding, (vi) program under which the grant, contribution or loan was made, (vii) nature or purpose?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2300--
Mr. Simon Marcil:
With regard to federal spending in the riding of Mirabel, for each fiscal year since 2010-11, inclusively: what are the details of all grants and contributions and all loans to every organization, group, business or municipality, broken down by the (i) name of the recipient, (ii) municipality of the recipient, (iii) date on which the funding was received, (iv) amount received, (v) department or agency that provided the funding, (vi) program under which the grant, contribution or loan was made, (vii) nature or purpose?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2301--
Mr. Simon Marcil:
With regard to federal spending in the riding of Compton—Stanstead, for each fiscal year since 2010-11, inclusively: what are the details of all grants and contributions and all loans to every organization, group, business or municipality, broken down by the (i) name of the recipient, (ii) municipality of the recipient, (iii) date on which the funding was received, (iv) amount received, (v) department or agency that provided the funding, (vi) program under which the grant, contribution or loan was made, (vii) nature or purpose?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2302--
Mr. Gabriel Ste-Marie:
With regard to federal spending in the riding of Joliette, for each fiscal year since 2010-11, inclusively: what are the details of all grants and contributions and all loans to every organization, group, business or municipality, broken down by the (i) name of the recipient, (ii) municipality of the recipient, (iii) date on which the funding was received, (iv) amount received, (v) department or agency that provided the funding, (vi) program under which the grant, contribution or loan was made, (vii) nature or purpose?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2303--
Mr. Gabriel Ste-Marie:
With regard to federal spending in the riding of Honoré-Mercier, for each fiscal year since 2010-11, inclusively: what are the details of all grants and contributions and all loans to every organization, group, business or municipality, broken down by the (i) name of the recipient, (ii) municipality of the recipient, (iii) date on which the funding was received, (iv) amount received, (v) department or agency that provided the funding, (vi) program under which the grant, contribution or loan was made, (vii) nature or purpose?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2305--
Ms. Elizabeth May:
With regard to the Credit Agreement between Trans Mountain Pipeline Finance and Her Majesty in Right of Canada: (a) what was the source of funds used to secure the environmental obligation required by the National Energy Board and how will Export Development Canada (EDC) report on this transaction in the future; (b) how was the interest rate of 4.7% determined, who authorized it and were any officials outside of Export Development Corporation involved in the decision; (c) does the Trans Mountain Corporation have a legal obligation to repay the $6.5 billion borrowed from the Canada Account; (d) what will be the source or sources of revenue the Canada Development Investment Corporation (CDEV) will draw upon to satisfy repayment provisions of the Credit Agreement; (e) was any portion of the $70 million (EBITDA) in revenue reported for Trans Mountain by the Finance Ministry in its November 2018 Budget Update transmitted, and, if so, to what entities was it transmitted; (f) how will monies allocated by the TMC to give to CDEV for repayment of the debt to the Canada Account be identified in annual financial reports by the TMC and its subsidiaries; (g) does an amortization chart exist detailing how TMC operations will repay borrowed funds, and if so, what are the details of that chart; (h) if generated revenues are insufficient to cover CDEV’s debt to the Canada Account, what organization or organizations within government will be responsible for repayment; (i) how will payment for the purpose of paying down the principal and interest owed to the Canada Account be described in CDEV’s future financial disclosures; and (j) how will EDC identify the receipt of repayment funds from CDEV to the Canada Account?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2306--
Mr. François Choquette:
With regard to the official languages: (a) what official forums and conferences discussing linguistic duality or minorities were hosted by the federal government between January 2016 and February 2019; (b) what concrete actions taken by the federal government between January 2016 and February 2019 show that linguistic duality was a genuine priority; (c) what role did the Minister of Tourism, Official Languages and La Francophonie play in the forums and conferences mentioned in (a); (d) what are the details of each of the forums and conferences in (a), including (i) their specific topics, (ii) their results; (e) have public debates, public consultations or public reports regarding linguistic duality in Canada and the situation of official-language minority communities been released or made accessible and, if so, to whom, when and where; (f) what processes will be used to make them public; and (g) who has access to the final reports of the studies conducted on the status of linguistic duality?
Response
(Return tabled)
8555-421-2283 Consultations in relation ...8555-421-2284 Contracts awarded by Publi ...8555-421-2286 Federal spending within th ...8555-421-2287 The Canadian Initiative fo ...8555-421-2288 Federal spending in the ri ...8555-421-2289 Federal spending in the ri ...8555-421-2290 Federal spending in the ri ...8555-421-2291 Government operating booth ...8555-421-2292 Federal spending in the ri ...8555-421-2293 Federal spending in the ri ...8555-421-2294 Federal spending in the ri ...
...Show all topics
View Geoff Regan Profile
Lib. (NS)

Question No. 2246--
Mr. John Brassard:
With regard to the use of prescribed medical marijuana by clients of Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC): (a) how many medical marijuana users are there, broken down by year from 2015 to present; (b) how many VAC clients are prescribed, on a daily basis, (i) three grams or less, (ii) four grams, (iii) five grams, (iv) six grams, (v) seven grams, (vi) eight grams, (vii) nine grams, (viii) ten grams, (ix) any other amount; (c) for each of the prescriptions in (b), what is the form of the marijuana being dispensed, namely (i) dried, (ii) oil, (iii) cream, (iv) suppository; (d) how many VAC clients are permitted to grow their own marijuana for prescribed medical use; (e) what evidence, reports, scientific studies or other studies have been used as a frame of reference to evaluate the use, prescription or denial of the prescription of medical marijuana; and (f) have any of the studies in (e) been used as justification for the government's proposed reduction of the maximum allowed amount of medical marijuana prescribed to VAC clients to three grams per day in cases where there is no medical approval for prescribed amounts of medical marijuana of over three grams per day?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2247--
Mr. John Brassard:
With regard to the use and cost paid by the government for prescribed medical marijuana and prescribed pharmaceuticals used by members of the Canadian Armed Forces and veterans of the Canadian Armed Forces, and administered by Veterans Affairs Canada: (a) what was the total amount paid annually, broken down by year from 2015 up to the current year, 2019, for (i) medical marijuana, (ii) Diazepam, (iii) Clonazepam, (iv) Trazodone, (v) Zopièlone, (vi) Wellbutrin, (vii) Effexor, (viii) Celexa, (ix) Seroquel, (x) Ambien, (xi) Remeron, (xii) Nabilone, (xiii) Valium, (xiv) Prazosin, (xv) Oxycodone, (xvi) Demerol, (xvii) Dilaudid, (xviii) Fentanyl, (xix) Mirtazapine, (xx) Gabapentin, (xxi) Baclofen, (xxii) Propranolol, (xxiii) Targin, (xxiv) Pantoprazole, (xxv) Nortriptyline, (xxvi) Ketoconazole, (xxvii) prescribed pharmaceuticals, including opioids and other pain relief medications; and (b) what evidence, reports, scientific studies or otherwise have been used as a reference or a basis for the use, prescription or non-use or non-prescription of the pharmaceuticals or medical marijuana?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2249--
Mr. Matt Jeneroux:
With regard to the government’s Small Communities Fund first announced in 2014: what are the details of all projects under the program, including (i) recipient of funding, (ii) province, (iii) municipality, (iv) project start date, (v) projected completion date, (vi) amount of funding pledged, (vii) amount of funding actually provided to date?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2250--
Mr. Robert Kitchen:
With regard to videos produced by the government for internal usage since November 4, 2015: (a) what are the details of all such videos, including (i) date, (ii) duration, (iii) title, (iv) purpose, (v) intended audience; and (b) for each video in (a), what were the total expenditures, broken down by type of expense?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2255--
Mr. Phil McColeman:
With regard to the use of taxi chits by the government, broken down by department or agency, and by year since January 1, 2016: (a) how much has been spent on taxi chits for government employees; and (b) broken down by ministerial office, including the Office of the Prime Minister, how much has the government spent on taxi chits for ministerial exempt staff?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2256--
Mrs. Sylvie Boucher:
With regard to polls administrated by the government since October 25, 2017, and broken down by department or agency: (a) how many public opinion polls have been administered; (b) what amount has been spent on polls; and (c) what are the details of each poll administered including (i) start and end date, (ii) pollster or vendor, (iii) list of all poll questions and subjects, (iv) results of each poll?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2257--
Mrs. Cathay Wagantall:
With regard to classified or protected documents, since January 1, 2016, broken down by department or agency, and broken down by year: (a) how many instances have occurred where it was discovered that classified or protected documents were left or stored in a manner which did not meet the requirements of the security level of the documents; (b) how many of these instances occurred in the offices of ministerial exempt staff, including those of the staff of the Prime Minister, broken down by ministerial office; and (c) how many employees have lost their security clearance as a result of such infractions?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2259--
Mrs. Marilène Gill:
With regard to monitoring studies of recreational fishing areas in the federal riding of Manicouagan since 2013: what are the results of analyses concerning (i) the shellfish resource, (ii) the location of shellfish farms, (iii) the sources of pollution, (iv) the presence of toxicity, (v) the presence of marine biotoxins?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2260--
Mrs. Marilène Gill:
With regard to the $75 million in federal assistance to the Atlantic provinces to combat spruce budworm in Budget 2018, what are: (a) the briefing notes prepared for (i) the Privy Council Office, (ii) the Office of the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change, (iii) the Office of the Prime Minister, (iv) the Office of the Minister of Natural Resources, (v) any other federal department; (b) all stakeholders consulted, including (i) how they were consulted, (ii) the dates of these meetings, (iii) the briefing books for these meetings, (iv) correspondence with these stakeholders; and (c) the research used for developing this federal assistance, including but not limited to (i) analyses, (ii) studies, (iii) data, (iv) reports?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2261--
Mrs. Marilène Gill:
With regard to the airports within the federal riding of Manicouagan, since 2000, what is the amount of annual revenues related to (i) taxation, (ii) operations, (iii) leasing collected by: (a) Transport Canada; and (b) the Canada Revenue Agency?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2262--
Mr. Scott Duvall:
With regard to pensions for the Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) of federal agencies or any other federal organization, since November 2015: (a) how many CEOs are deemed not to be part of the public service for the purposes of the Public Service Superannuation Act, broken down by (i) CEO, (ii) organization; (b) how many times has the Governor in Council ordered a CEO to participate in the public service pension plan, broken down by (i) year, (ii) CEO, (iii) federal organization; and (c) for each of the CEOs deemed not to be part of the public service for the purposes of the Public Service Superannuation Act, what are the detailed justifications for their non-participation in the public service pension plan for the purposes of the Public Service Superannuation Act?
Response
(Return tabled)

Question No. 2264--
Mr. Scott Duvall:
With regard to consultation called “Consultations on enhancing retirement security” in which Employment and Social Development Canada has been involved: (a) what is the total number of stakeholders consulted, broken down by (i) provinces, (ii) electoral ridings, (iii) organizations representing pensioners, (iv) organizations representing workers, (v) organizations representing employers; (b) how many submissions were received; (c) how many analyses were carried out by those responsible for the consultation; (d) how much research has been done by those responsible for the consultation; (e) how many targeted outreach activities were carried out by those responsible for the consultation; (f) how many stakeholders raised the issue of the tight deadline for submitting documents; and (g) what was the total amount spent on the twitter hashtag #YourFutureMatters?
Response
(Return tabled)
View Robert Aubin Profile
NDP (QC)
View Robert Aubin Profile
2019-03-01 11:43 [p.26019]
Mr. Speaker, on Wednesday, 93 Aéroports de Montréal or ADM workers learned, in answer to their counter-offer, that they were simply being laid off. The Liberals claim to protect good jobs, but if the minister was aware of this matter, he just stood idly by.
Last year, ADM's top eight executives shared a $1-million bonus at the expense of workers. Meanwhile, the safety of the travelling public is being contracted out on the cheap.
What did the Minister of Transport do to protect these jobs?
View Terry Beech Profile
Lib. (BC)
View Terry Beech Profile
2019-03-01 11:44 [p.26019]
Mr. Speaker, we understand how important our airports are to our economy and we take safety at our airports incredibly seriously. Canadians can rest assured that we have one of the safest air transport systems in the world.
The member knows that the governance of airports is independent and they operate quite well, including at the airports he mentioned.
Results: 1 - 15 of 333 | Page: 1 of 23

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>
>|