Journals
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 27 of 27
2020-07-20 [p.499]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe (Lac-Saint-Jean), seconded by Mr. Therrie...
Expand
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe (Lac-Saint-Jean), seconded by Mr. Therrien (La Prairie), Bill C-243, An Act to amend the Payment Card Networks Act (credit card acceptance fees), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
Collapse
2020-07-20 [p.505]
Q-444 — Mrs. Gill (Manicouagan) — With regard to evaluating the stock status of all of Canada’s fisheries resources sinc...
Expand
Q-444 — Mrs. Gill (Manicouagan) — With regard to evaluating the stock status of all of Canada’s fisheries resources since 2000: (a) has the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) used indicators to evaluate the various stocks and, if so, what is the breakdown of indicators by (i) species, (ii) province, (iii) area, (iv) sub-area, (v) year;?(b) if the answer to (a) is negative, what does the DFO use as a basis for (i) evaluating stocks, (ii) making decisions on fisheries management; (c) has the DFO assessed the quality of its estimates for all of the various stocks and, if so, what is the breakdown of this qualitative assessment by (i) species, (ii) province, (iii) area, (iv) sub-area, (v) year; (d) if the answer to (c) is negative, (i) are there plans to carry out this assessment, (ii) why is this type of assessment not conducted; (e) has the DFO put together an action plan to increase the number of indicators used for evaluating various stocks and, if so, what are the names, measures taken or considered, and conclusions, broken down by (i) species, (ii) province, (iii) area, (iv) sub-area, (v) year; (f) if the answer to (e) is negative, (i) is this type of action plan being considered, (ii) why is there no action plan on this issue; (g) has the DFO expended funds to increase the number of indicators for evaluating the various stocks and, if so, what is the spending breakdown by (i) species, (ii) province, (iii) area, (iv) sub-area, (v) year; (h) if the answer to (g) is negative, (i) are there plans for this type of expenditure, (ii) why is there a lack of spending on this issue; (i) has the DFO begun to “rapidly develop or update the biological knowledge essential for the sustainable management” of lobsters in areas 15, 16, 17 and 18, as recommended in Science Advisory Report 2019/059, and, if so, what is the breakdown of measures taken by (i) area, (ii) sub-area, (iii) year; (j) if the answer to (i) is negative, (i) are there plans to do so, (ii) why have no measures been taken; (k) can the DFO explain why the confidence limit has increased to 95% in the past 10 years regarding the evaluation of the estimated biomass of stock in NAFO 4T and, if so, what is the explanation; and (l) if the answer to (k) is negative, why is the DFO unable to explain this increase? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-431-444.
Collapse
2020-07-20 [p.506]
Q-445 — Mrs. Gill (Manicouagan) — With regard to the peer review process coordinated by the Canadian Science Advisory Se...
Expand
Q-445 — Mrs. Gill (Manicouagan) — With regard to the peer review process coordinated by the Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat (CSAS) for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO): (a) exactly how is the peer review process carried out; (b) is participation in science advisory meetings by invitation only and, if so, (i) why is this the case, (ii) how are peers selected, (iii) who is responsible for peer selection or, if not, what is the procedure for participating in meetings; (c) in advance of a science advisory meeting, do all peers receive (i) the preliminary study and, if so, how long do they have to review it or, if not, what are the reasons for this decision, (ii) the data for this study and, if so, how long do they have to review it or, if not, what are the reasons behind this decision; (d) is it possible for an individual or a group to express their views (i) without having been invited and, if so, what is the procedure to follow or, if not, what are the reasons for this decision, (ii) without attending the science advisory meetings despite having been invited and, if so, what is the procedure to follow or, if not, what are the reasons for this decision, (iii) without attending the science advisory meetings and without having been invited and, if so, what is the procedure to follow or, if not, what are the reasons for this decision; (e) is it possible to attend meetings as an observer and, if so, (i) what is the procedure to follow, (ii) is an invitation required or, if not, what are the reasons for this decision; (f) for each of the DFO peer review processes coordinated by the CSAS, what is the breakdown for each meeting since 2010 by number of representatives affiliated with (i) DFO, (ii) the federal government excluding DFO, (iii) the Government of Quebec, (iv) the Government of British Columbia, (v) the Government of Alberta, (vi) the Government of Prince Edward Island, (vii) the Government of Manitoba, (viii) the Government of New Brunswick, (ix) the Government of Nova Scotia, (x) the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, (xi) the Government of Ontario, (xii) the Government of Saskatchewan, (xiii) the Government of Nunavut, (xiv) the Government of Yukon, (xv) the Government of Northwest Territories, (xvi) band councils, (xvii) a Quebec university, (xviii) a Canadian university, (xix) an American university, (xx) the non-Indigenous fishing industry, (xxi) the Indigenous fishing industry, (xxii) an Indigenous group not affiliated with the fishing industry, (xxiii) an environmental group, (xxiv) a wildlife protection group, (xxv) another group; (g) how is consensus defined in the DFO peer review processes coordinated by the CSAS; (h) are stakeholders selected in order to encourage a lack of opposition to the conclusions put forward by the DFO; (i) do the procedures for the peer review process encourage a lack of opposition to the conclusions put forward by the DFO; and (j) does the methodology for the peer review process encourage a lack of opposition to the conclusions put forward by the DFO? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-431-445.
Collapse
2020-07-20 [p.507]
Q-446 — Mrs. Gill (Manicouagan) — With regard to recreational fishing managed by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans ...
Expand
Q-446 — Mrs. Gill (Manicouagan) — With regard to recreational fishing managed by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) since 2000: (a) what is the total amount of revenue generated by the DFO from the sale of recreational licences, broken down by (i) year, (ii) federal entity, (iii) fishing area, (iv) sub-area, (v) species; (b) what is the total amount of spending by the DFO to support recreational fishing, broken down by (i) year, (ii) federal entity, (iii) fishing area, (iv) sub-area, (v) species; (c) what measures are being taken to ensure compliance with recreational fishing regulations, broken down by (i) year, (ii) federal entity, (iii) fishing area, (iv) sub-area, (v) species; (d) what is the average number of fishery officers dedicated specifically to overseeing recreational fishing, broken down by (i) year, (ii) federal entity, (iii) fishing area, (iv) sub-area, (v) species; (e) what technological tools are used to ensure compliance with recreational fishing regulations, broken down by (i) year, (ii) federal entity, (iii) fishing area, (iv) sub-area, (v) species; (f) what is the number of tickets issued by the DFO using technological tools, broken down by (i) year, (ii) federal entity, (iii) fishing area, (iv) sub-area, (v) technological tool; (g) what is the total amount of all tickets issued by the DFO using technological tools, broken down by (i) year, (ii) federal entity, (iii) fishing area, (iv) sub-area, (v) technological tool; and (h) what is the total amount of all recreational fishing tickets issued by the DFO, broken down by (i) year, (ii) federal entity, (iii) fishing area, (iv) sub-area, (v) species? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-431-446.
 
Collapse
2020-05-25 [p.441]
Q-389 — Ms. Bérubé (Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou) — With regard to the consultations that the Minister of Crown-Indi...
Expand
Q-389 — Ms. Bérubé (Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou) — With regard to the consultations that the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations is currently holding in order to develop an action plan to implement the 231 calls for justice of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls: (a) has the Department of Crown-Indigenous Relations established a committee to develop this action plan; (b) if so, what mechanisms have been put in place to consult the Government of Quebec about the development of this action plan, including the implementation of the 21 Quebec-specific calls for justice in the report; and (c) if a committee has been established, will the Government of Quebec participate in its work? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-431-389.
Collapse
2020-05-25 [p.441]
Q-390 — Ms. Bérubé (Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou) — With regard to the drinking water situation in Kitigan Zibi: has...
Expand
Q-390 — Ms. Bérubé (Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou) — With regard to the drinking water situation in Kitigan Zibi: has the Department of Indigenous Services (i) analyzed the plans that were submitted by the band council to connect to the Maniwaki water system, (ii) decided whether it will proceed with the connection, (iii) released the funding necessary to complete the connection work, (iv) set a timeline so that the community has access to running water within a reasonable time? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-431-390.
Collapse
2020-05-25 [p.445]
Q-401 — Mr. Savard-Tremblay (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot) — With regard to the criminal charges the government laid in Decembe...
Expand
Q-401 — Mr. Savard-Tremblay (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot) — With regard to the criminal charges the government laid in December 2019 against the Volkswagen Group concerning the approximately 120,000 diesel vehicles whose nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions exceeded the standards allowed, broken down by the German companies of the Volkswagen Group, the Canadian companies of the Volkswagen Group, the U.S. companies of the Volkswagen Group, and directors, executives and employees: (a) why did the government file charges for 58 counts of importing non-compliant vehicles instead of one count for each of the 120,000 offences; (b) why did the government file charges for two counts of misleading information instead of one count for each of the 120,000 offences; (c) why did the government not file any charges against the Canadian companies of the Volkswagen Group; (d) why did the government not file any charges against the U.S. companies of the Volkswagen Group that took part in the illegal acts that affected Canada; (e) why did the government not file any charges against the directors, executives and employees who were involved in these offences; (f) why did the government not file any charges regarding the 120,000 offences for selling, renting or distributing these non-compliant vehicles; (g) why did the government not file any charges of fraud concerning the 120,000 pieces of software that prevented the non-compliance from being detected; and (h) why did the government not file any charges regarding the illegal pollution caused by these 120,000 vehicles in Canada? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-431-401.
Collapse
2020-05-20 [p.428]
— by Mr. Barsalou-Duval (Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères), one concerning citizenship and immigration (No. 431-00...
Expand
— by Mr. Barsalou-Duval (Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères), one concerning citizenship and immigration (No. 431-00204);
Collapse
2020-04-20 [p.392]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mrs. DeBellefeuille (Salaberry—Suroît), seconded by Ms. Larouc...
Expand
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mrs. DeBellefeuille (Salaberry—Suroît), seconded by Ms. Larouche (Shefford), Bill C-242, An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act (illness, injury or quarantine), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
Collapse
2020-02-25 [p.262]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Ms. Bérubé (Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou), seconded by Mr....
Expand
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Ms. Bérubé (Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou), seconded by Mr. Beaulieu (La Pointe-de-l'Île), Bill C-223, An Act to amend the Citizenship Act (adequate knowledge of French in Quebec), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
Collapse
2020-02-25 [p.262]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Ste-Marie (Joliette), seconded by Mr. Bergeron (Montarvill...
Expand
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Ste-Marie (Joliette), seconded by Mr. Bergeron (Montarville), Bill C-224, An Act to amend An Act to authorize the making of certain fiscal payments to provinces, and to authorize the entry into tax collection agreements with provinces, was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
Collapse
2020-02-25 [p.262]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Simard (Jonquière), seconded by Mr. Ste-Marie (Joliette), ...
Expand
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Simard (Jonquière), seconded by Mr. Ste-Marie (Joliette), Bill C-225, An Act to amend the Aeronautics Act, the Fishing and Recreational Harbours Act and other Acts (application of provincial law), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
Collapse
2020-02-25 [p.262]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Thériault (Montcalm), seconded by Mr. Ste-Marie (Joliette)...
Expand
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Thériault (Montcalm), seconded by Mr. Ste-Marie (Joliette), Bill C-226, An Act to amend the Canadian Multiculturalism Act (non-application in Quebec), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
Collapse
2020-02-24 [p.256]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Ms. Michaud (Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia), seconded by M...
Expand
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Ms. Michaud (Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia), seconded by Ms. Pauzé (Repentigny), Bill C-215, An Act respecting Canada’s fulfillment of its greenhouse gas emissions reduction obligations, was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
Collapse
2020-02-24 [p.257]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Plamondon (Bécancour—Nicolet—Saurel), seconded by Mr. Perr...
Expand
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Plamondon (Bécancour—Nicolet—Saurel), seconded by Mr. Perron (Berthier—Maskinongé), Bill C-216, An Act to amend the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Act (supply management), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
Collapse
2020-02-24 [p.257]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mrs. DeBellefeuille (Salaberry—Suroît), seconded by Mr. Plamon...
Expand
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mrs. DeBellefeuille (Salaberry—Suroît), seconded by Mr. Plamondon (Bécancour—Nicolet—Saurel), Bill C-217, An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act (illness, injury or quarantine), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
Collapse
2020-02-19 [p.239]
Pursuant to order made Tuesday, February 18, 2020, the House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division o...
Expand
Pursuant to order made Tuesday, February 18, 2020, the House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion of Mr. Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly), seconded by Mr. Therrien (La Prairie), — That the House call on the government to increase the special Employment Insurance sickness benefits from 15 weeks to 50 weeks in the upcoming budget in order to support people with serious illnesses, such as cancer.
The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to on the following division:
(Division No. 14 -- Vote no 14) - View vote details.
YEAS: 169, NAYS: 149
Collapse
2020-02-19 [p.243]
— by Mr. Barsalou-Duval (Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères), one concerning the environment (No. 431-00087);...
Expand
— by Mr. Barsalou-Duval (Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères), one concerning the environment (No. 431-00087);
Collapse
2020-02-18 [p.236]
The order was read for the consideration of the business of supply.Mr. Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly), seconded by Mr. Therr...
Expand
The order was read for the consideration of the business of supply.
Mr. Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly), seconded by Mr. Therrien (La Prairie), moved, — That the House call on the government to increase the special Employment Insurance sickness benefits from 15 weeks to 50 weeks in the upcoming budget in order to support people with serious illnesses, such as cancer.
Debate arose thereon.
Collapse
2020-02-18 [p.236]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly), seconded by Mr. Therrien (La Prairie), ...
Expand
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly), seconded by Mr. Therrien (La Prairie), in relation to the business of supply.
The debate continued.
Collapse
2020-02-18 [p.236]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly), seconded by Mr. Therrien (La Prairie), ...
Expand
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly), seconded by Mr. Therrien (La Prairie), in relation to the business of supply.
The debate continued.
At 6:58 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 81(16), the Speaker interrupted the proceedings.
Collapse
2020-02-18 [p.236]
Pursuant to order made earlier today, the question was deemed put on the motion, and the recorded division was deemed re...
Expand
Pursuant to order made earlier today, the question was deemed put on the motion, and the recorded division was deemed requested and deferred until Wednesday, February 19, 2020, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.
Collapse
2019-12-10 [p.33]
Pursuant to order made Monday, December 9, 2019, the House resumed consideration of the motion of Mrs. Bessette (Brome—M...
Expand
Pursuant to order made Monday, December 9, 2019, the House resumed consideration of the motion of Mrs. Bessette (Brome—Missisquoi), seconded by Mr. Weiler (West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country), — That the following address be presented to Her Excellency the Governor General:
To Her Excellency the Right Honourable Julie Payette, Chancellor and Principal Companion of the Order of Canada, Chancellor and Commander of the Order of Military Merit, Chancellor and Commander of the Order of Merit of the Police Forces, Governor General and Commander-in-Chief of Canada.
MAY IT PLEASE YOUR EXCELLENCY:
We, Her Majesty's most loyal and dutiful subjects, the House of Commons of Canada, in Parliament assembled, beg leave to offer our humble thanks to Your Excellency for the gracious Speech which Your Excellency has addressed to both Houses of Parliament;
And of the amendment of Mr. Scheer (Regina—Qu'Appelle), seconded by Ms. Alleslev (Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill), — That the motion be amended by adding the following:
“and wish to inform Your Excellency that Canada is threatened by:
(a) declining productivity and competitiveness, a rising cost of living, and challenges to our society, which require (i) offering a plan for tax relief for Canadians with a path to a balanced budget, (ii) restoring Canada as an attractive place to invest, (iii) addressing social challenges that limit the ability of Canadians to achieve their full potential, (iv) developing a real environment plan that strengthens the competitiveness of our economic sectors and tackles global climate change;
(b) a weakening position within an increasingly uncertain world, which requires (i) confronting threats such as the regimes in Moscow and Beijing, and protecting Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic, (ii) developing a principled foreign policy that stands with traditional allies such as NATO, Ukraine, and Israel, (iii) facing the rise of protectionism and strengthening the relationship with our largest trading partners; and
(c) a national unity crisis, which requires (i) respecting provincial jurisdiction and scrapping the carbon tax, (ii) stopping the attack on the Western Canadian economy, (iii) restoring confidence in our national institutions, starting by returning ethics and accountability to the federal government”;
The House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the subamendment of Mr. Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly), seconded by Mr. Therrien (La Prairie), — That the amendment be amended by deleting all the words after the words “national unity crisis, which requires” and substituting the following:
“respecting provincial jurisdiction, in particular by not authorizing any project that does not comply with provincial and Quebec laws relating to environmental protection and land use planning;
(d) underfunding of the health care system, which requires an increase in transfers;
(e) an unprecedented crisis facing media and creators, who must be supported through the imposition of royalties on web giants; and
(f) loopholes in the supply management system that must be protected by legislation”.
The question was put on the subamendment and it was negatived on the following division:
(Division No. 6 -- Vote no 6) - View vote details.
YEAS: 55, NAYS: 266
Collapse
2019-12-09 [p.21]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mrs. Bessette (Brome—Missisquoi), seconded by Mr. Weiler (West Vancouve...
Expand
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mrs. Bessette (Brome—Missisquoi), seconded by Mr. Weiler (West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country), — That the following address be presented to Her Excellency the Governor General:
To Her Excellency the Right Honourable Julie Payette, Chancellor and Principal Companion of the Order of Canada, Chancellor and Commander of the Order of Military Merit, Chancellor and Commander of the Order of Merit of the Police Forces, Governor General and Commander-in-Chief of Canada.
MAY IT PLEASE YOUR EXCELLENCY:
We, Her Majesty's most loyal and dutiful subjects, the House of Commons of Canada, in Parliament assembled, beg leave to offer our humble thanks to Your Excellency for the gracious Speech which Your Excellency has addressed to both Houses of Parliament;
And of the amendment of Mr. Scheer (Regina—Qu'Appelle), seconded by Ms. Alleslev (Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill), — That the motion be amended by adding the following:
“and wish to inform Your Excellency that Canada is threatened by:
(a) declining productivity and competitiveness, a rising cost of living, and challenges to our society, which require (i) offering a plan for tax relief for Canadians with a path to a balanced budget, (ii) restoring Canada as an attractive place to invest, (iii) addressing social challenges that limit the ability of Canadians to achieve their full potential, (iv) developing a real environment plan that strengthens the competitiveness of our economic sectors and tackles global climate change;
(b) a weakening position within an increasingly uncertain world, which requires (i) confronting threats such as the regimes in Moscow and Beijing, and protecting Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic, (ii) developing a principled foreign policy that stands with traditional allies such as NATO, Ukraine, and Israel, (iii) facing the rise of protectionism and strengthening the relationship with our largest trading partners; and
(c) a national unity crisis, which requires (i) respecting provincial jurisdiction and scrapping the carbon tax, (ii) stopping the attack on the Western Canadian economy, (iii) restoring confidence in our national institutions, starting by returning ethics and accountability to the federal government”;
And of the subamendment of Mr. Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly), seconded by Mr. Therrien (La Prairie), — That the amendment be amended by deleting all the words after the words “national unity crisis, which requires” and substituting the following:
“respecting provincial jurisdiction, in particular by not authorizing any project that does not comply with provincial and Quebec laws relating to environmental protection and land use planning;
(d) underfunding of the health care system, which requires an increase in transfers;
(e) an unprecedented crisis facing media and creators, who must be supported through the imposition of royalties on web giants; and
(f) loopholes in the supply management system that must be protected by legislation”.
The debate continued.
Collapse
2019-12-06 [p.19]
Mr. Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly), seconded by Mr. Therrien (La Prairie), moved the following subamendment, — That the amen...
Expand
Mr. Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly), seconded by Mr. Therrien (La Prairie), moved the following subamendment, — That the amendment be amended by deleting all the words after the words “national unity crisis, which requires” and substituting the following:
“respecting provincial jurisdiction, in particular by not authorizing any project that does not comply with provincial and Quebec laws relating to environmental protection and land use planning;
(d) underfunding of the health care system, which requires an increase in transfers;
(e) an unprecedented crisis facing media and creators, who must be supported through the imposition of royalties on web giants; and
(f) loopholes in the supply management system that must be protected by legislation”.
Debate arose thereon.
Collapse
2019-12-05 [p.11]
Pursuant to Standing Order 3, Mr. Plamondon (Bécancour—Nicolet—Saurel) took the chair to preside over the election....
Expand
Pursuant to Standing Order 3, Mr. Plamondon (Bécancour—Nicolet—Saurel) took the chair to preside over the election.
Collapse
2019-12-05 [p.13]
The Speaker informed the House that the following members have been appointed members of the Board of Internal Economy f...
Expand
The Speaker informed the House that the following members have been appointed members of the Board of Internal Economy for the purposes and under the provisions of the Parliament of Canada Act, R.S. 1985, c. P-1, sbs. 50(2), namely:
— Mr. LeBlanc and Mr. Rodriguez, members of the Queen's Privy Council;
— Mr. Holland and Ms. Petitpas Taylor, representatives of the government caucus;
— Ms. Bergen and Mr. Strahl, representatives of the Conservative Party of Canada caucus;
— Mrs. DeBellefeuille, representative of the Bloc Québécois caucus; and
— Mr. Julian, representative of the New Democratic Party caucus.
Collapse
Results: 1 - 27 of 27

Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data