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 151
2020-07-21 [p.523]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Ms. Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe), seconded by Mr. Green (Hamilt...
Expand
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Ms. Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe), seconded by Mr. Green (Hamilton Centre), Bill C-244, An Act to amend the Canadian Navigable Waters Act (North Thames River, Middle Thames River and Thames River), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
Collapse
2020-07-21 [p.523]
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Ms. Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe), seconded by Ms. McPherson (Ed...
Expand
Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Ms. Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe), seconded by Ms. McPherson (Edmonton Strathcona), Bill C-245, An Act respecting the development of a national strategy in relation to fresh water, was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.
Collapse
2020-07-21 [p.523]
— by Ms. McPherson (Edmonton Strathcona), one concerning social affairs and equality (No. 431-00300)....
Expand
— by Ms. McPherson (Edmonton Strathcona), one concerning social affairs and equality (No. 431-00300).
Collapse
2020-07-20 [p.508]
Q-449 — Mr. Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby) — With regard to business support measures in response to COVID-19 and audi...
Expand
Q-449 — Mr. Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby) — With regard to business support measures in response to COVID-19 and audits by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) for tax evasion and aggressive tax avoidance, since March 11, 2020: (a) how many audits has the CRA conducted to ensure that businesses do not practise tax evasion and aggressive tax avoidance, broken down by the number of businesses; and (b) of the businesses that have been audited by the CRA in (a), how many have benefited from support measures and how many have been denied support measures because of tax evasion and aggressive tax avoidance? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-431-449.
 
Collapse
2020-07-20 [p.509]
Q-450 — Mr. Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby) — With regard to the efforts of the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) to combat t...
Expand
Q-450 — Mr. Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby) — With regard to the efforts of the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) to combat tax evasion and abusive tax planning since March 1, 2016: (a) how many businesses have been identified by the CRA’s computer systems, broken down by (i) businesses linked to tax evasion, (ii) businesses linked to fraud or fraud indicators, (iii) businesses linked to abusive tax planning; (b) of the businesses identified in (a), how many applied for the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS); and (c) of the applications for the CEWS in (b), how many were approved, and how many were denied because of tax evasion and abusive tax planning practices? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-431-450.
Collapse
2020-07-20 [p.511]
Q-460 — Mr. Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby) — With regard to the Canada Revenue Agency’s investigations into overseas t...
Expand
Q-460 — Mr. Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby) — With regard to the Canada Revenue Agency’s investigations into overseas tax evasion and the Panama Papers and Paradise Papers scandals: (a) how many of the companies currently under investigation have requested government assistance under the COVID-19 emergency measures; and (b) of the requests for assistance from the companies in (a), how many were (i) granted, (ii) denied? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-431-460.
Collapse
2020-07-20 [p.512]
Q-461 — Mr. Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby) — With regard to the efforts of the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) to fight ta...
Expand
Q-461 — Mr. Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby) — With regard to the efforts of the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) to fight tax evasion: (a) how many corporate groups, with one or more subsidiaries in one of the top 10 jurisdictions of the Financial Secrecy Index or the Corporate Tax Haven Index, has the CRA identified; (b) how many corporate groups that were implicated in financial or tax scandals or that received what would be considered illegal state aid has the CRA identified; (c) how many corporate groups have filled out a full report for each country, in keeping with the standard outlined by the Global Reporting Initiative; (d) how many corporate groups in (a), (b) and (c) have received or applied for federal government assistance; and (e) for the cases in (d), how many applications have been rejected by the government? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-431-461.
 
Collapse
2020-07-20 [p.517]
Q-477 — Mr. Green (Hamilton Centre) — With regard to the Large Employer Emergency Financing Facility (LEEFF), since the ...
Expand
Q-477 — Mr. Green (Hamilton Centre) — With regard to the Large Employer Emergency Financing Facility (LEEFF), since the creation of the program: (a) how many businesses have applied for the LEEFF; (b) how many businesses have been eligible; (c) how many applications from businesses have been denied; (d) of the applications that were denied, how many were from (i) businesses convicted of tax evasion, (ii) businesses convicted of abusive tax avoidance, (iii) companies that have subsidiaries in tax havens; (e) have applications from companies under investigation in connection with the Panama Papers and Paradise Papers been accepted; and (f) what is the current total cost of the LEEFF’s expenses, broken down by economic sector? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-431-477.
 
Collapse
2020-07-20 [p.517]
Q-478 — Ms. Blaney (North Island—Powell River) — With regard to the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) and tax havens: (a) what...
Expand
Q-478 — Ms. Blaney (North Island—Powell River) — With regard to the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) and tax havens: (a) what is the CRA's definition of tax haven; and (b) which jurisdictions have been identified as tax havens according to the CRA's definition? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-431-478.
 
Collapse
2020-07-20 [p.517]
Q-479 — Ms. Blaney (North Island—Powell River) — With regard to the activities of the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) under ...
Expand
Q-479 — Ms. Blaney (North Island—Powell River) — With regard to the activities of the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) under Part XVI of the Income Tax Act since November 2015, broken down by fiscal year and natural person, trust and corporation: (a) how many audits have been conducted; (b) how many notices of assessment have been issued by the CRA and; (c) what is the total amount recovered to date by the CRA? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-431-479.
 
Collapse
2020-07-20 [p.517]
Q-480 — Ms. Blaney (North Island—Powell River) — With regards to Veterans Affairs Canada, broken down by year for the mo...
Expand
Q-480 — Ms. Blaney (North Island—Powell River) — With regards to Veterans Affairs Canada, broken down by year for the most recent ten fiscal years for which data is available: (a) what was the number of disability benefit applications received; (b) of the applications in (a), how many were (i) rejected (ii) approved (iii) appealed (iv) rejected upon appeal (v) approved upon appeal; (c) what was the average wait time for a decision; (d) what was the median wait time for a decision; (e) what was the ratio of veteran to Case Manager at the end of each fiscal year; (f) what was the number of applications awaiting a decision at the end of each fiscal year; and (g) what was the number of veterans awaiting a decision at the end of each fiscal year? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-431-480.
 
Collapse
2020-07-20 [p.518]
Q-481 — Ms. Blaney (North Island—Powell River) — With regard to Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC): (a) during the most recen...
Expand
Q-481 — Ms. Blaney (North Island—Powell River) — With regard to Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC): (a) during the most recent fiscal year for which data is available, broken down by month and by VAC offices, including nationally, what was the total number of overtime hours worked, further broken down by job title, including National 1st Level Appeals Officer, National 2nd Level Appeals Officer, Case Manager, Veterans Service Agent and Disability Adjudicator; (b) during the most recent fiscal year for which data is available, broken down by month and by VAC offices, including nationally, what was the average number of overtime hours worked, further broken down by (i) job title, including National 1st Level Appeals Officer, National 2nd Level Appeals Officer, Case Manager, Veterans Service Agent and Disability Adjudicator, (ii) directorate; (c) during the most recent fiscal year for which data is available, broken down by month and by VAC offices, including nationally, what was the total cost of overtime, further broken down by (i) job title, including National 1st Level Appeals Officer, National 2nd Level Appeals Officer, Case Manager, Veterans Service Agent and Disability Adjudicator, (ii) directorate; (d) during the most recent fiscal year for which data is available, broken down by month and by VAC offices, including nationally, what was the total number of disability benefit claims, further broken down by (i) new claims, (ii) claims awaiting a decision, (iii) approved claims, (iv) denied claims, (v) appealed claims; (e) during the most recent fiscal year for which data is available, broken down by month and by VAC offices, including nationally, how many new disability benefit claims were transferred to a different Veterans Affairs Canada office than that which conducted the intake; (f) during the most recent fiscal year for which data is available, broken down by month and by VAC offices, including nationally, what was the number of (i) Case Managers, (ii) Veterans Service Agents; (g) during the most recent fiscal year for which data is available, broken down by month and by VAC offices, including nationally, excluding standard vacation and paid sick leave, how many Case Managers took a leave of absence, and what was the average length of a leave of absence; (h) during the most recent fiscal year for which data is available, broken down by month and by VAC offices, including nationally, accounting for all leaves of absence, excluding standard vacation and paid sick leave, how many full-time equivalent Case Managers were present and working, and what was the Case Manager to veteran ratio; (i) during the most recent fiscal year for which data is available, broken down by month and by VAC offices, including nationally, how many veterans were disengaged from their Case Manager; (j) during the most recent fiscal year for which data is available, broken down by month and by VAC offices, including nationally, what was the highest number of cases assigned to an individual Case Manager; (k) during the most recent fiscal year for which data is available, broken down by month and by VAC offices, including nationally, how many veterans were on a waitlist for a Case Manager; (l) during the most recent fiscal year for which data is available, broken down by month and by VAC offices, including nationally, for work usually done by regularly employed Case Managers and Veteran Service Agents, (i) how many contracts were awarded, (ii) what was the duration of each contract, (iii) what was the value of each contract; (m) during the most recent fiscal year for which data is available, broken down by VAC offices, what were the service standard results; (n) what is the mechanism for tracking the transfer of cases between Case Managers when a Case Manager takes a leave of absence, excluding standard vacation and paid sick leave; (o) what is the department’s current method for calculating the Case Manager to veteran ratio; (p) what are the department’s quality assurance measures for Case Managers and how do they change based on the number of cases a Case Manager has at that time; (q) during the last five fiscal year for which data is available, broken down by month, how many individuals were hired by the department; (r) how many of the individuals in (q) remained employed after their 12-month probation period came to an end; (s) of the individuals in (q) who did not remain employed beyond the probation period, how many did not have their contracts extended by the department; (t) does the department track the reasons for which employees are not kept beyond the probation period, and, if so, respecting the privacy of individual employees, what are the reasons for which employees were not kept beyond the probation period; (u) for the individuals in (q) who chose not to remain at any time throughout the 12 months, were exit interviews conducted, and, if so, respecting the privacy of individual employees, what were the reasons, broken down by VAC offices; (v) during the last five fiscal years for which data is available, broken down by month, how many Canadian Armed Forces service veterans were hired by the department; (w) of the veterans in (v), how many remained employed after their 12-month probation period came to an end; (x) of the veterans in (v) who are no longer employed by the department, (i) how many did not have their employment contracts extended by the department, (ii) how many were rejected on probation; (y) if the department track the reasons for which employees are not kept beyond the probation period, respecting the privacy of individual veteran employees, what are the reasons for which veteran employees are not kept beyond the probation period; (z) for the veterans in (v) who chose not to remain at any time throughout the 12 months, were exit interviews conducted, and, if so, respecting the privacy of individual veteran employees, what were the reasons for their leaving, broken down by VAC offices; (aa) during the last five fiscal year for which data is available, broken down by month, how many employees have quit their jobs at VAC; and (bb) for the employees in (aa) who quit their job, were exit interviews conducted, and, if so, respecting the privacy of individual employees, what were the reasons, broken down by VAC offices? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-431-481.
Collapse
2020-07-20 [p.520]
Q-482 — Mr. MacGregor (Cowichan—Malahat—Langford) — With regard to the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) and tax havens: Does ...
Expand
Q-482 — Mr. MacGregor (Cowichan—Malahat—Langford) — With regard to the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) and tax havens: Does the CRA consider the Cayman Islands and Barbados to be tax havens? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-431-482.
 
Collapse
2020-07-20 [p.520]
Q-483 — Mr. MacGregor (Cowichan—Malahat—Langford) — With regard to tax information exchange agreement signed between Can...
Expand
Q-483 — Mr. MacGregor (Cowichan—Malahat—Langford) — With regard to tax information exchange agreement signed between Canada and Cayman Islands, since entry into force of the agreement and broken down by fiscal year: (a) how many times has the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) obtained information from Cayman Islands; (b) how many times has the CRA released information to Cayman Islands; (c) how much tax examinations abroad was conducted by CRA in Cayman Islands; (d) how many CRA enquiries have been denied by the Cayman Islands; (e) how many audits have been conducted by the CRA; (f) how many notices of assessment have been issued by the CRA; and (g) what is the total amount recovered by the CRA? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-431-483.
 
Collapse
2020-07-20 [p.520]
Q-484 — Mr. MacGregor (Cowichan—Malahat—Langford) — With regard to amendments to the Canada Grain Regulations (SOR/2020-...
Expand
Q-484 — Mr. MacGregor (Cowichan—Malahat—Langford) — With regard to amendments to the Canada Grain Regulations (SOR/2020-63), enacted through the passage of Bill C-4, An Act to implement the Agreement between Canada, the United States of America and the United Mexican States, which amended the Canada Grain Act through an expedited process, bypassing the normal Canada Gazette I posting and public comment period, and were posted on Canada Gazette, Part II, Volume 154, Number 9: (a) what are the details of all meetings, round tables, teleconference calls, town halls, and other means of consultation, in regard to grain, held during CUSMA/NAFTA 2.0 negotiations, including the (i) dates, (ii) locations, (iii) agendas, (iv) minutes, (v) attendee and invitee lists, including government officials and agriculture sector stakeholders, and their organizational affiliations; (b) for the meetings referred to in (a), what are the details of (i) published notices, (ii) reports, including where and when they were published; (c) what are the details of all stakeholder views expressed during these consultations, including minority positions, which were communicated to inform the Government of Canada negotiating position, along with the names and positions of the officials to whom these stakeholder views were communicated; (d) what are the details of all engagement activities with grain sector stakeholders following the CUSMA announcement where the impacts of the agreement, potential legislative and regulatory amendments, and implementation plans were discussed, as well as the reports flowing from these engagement activities that informed the drafting of Bill C-4 amendments to the Canada Grain Act, including the (i) dates, (ii) locations, (iii) agendas, (iv) minutes, (v) attendees, including from the Canada Grain Commission and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada officials and agriculture sector stakeholders, and their organizational affiliations; (e) who made the decision to have “minimal” consultation on the regulatory changes and an explanation of their rationale for the decision when, as the regulatory analysis document says, the amendments are consequential; and (f) what is the definition of the industry referred to when “industry-led” is used in regard to integrating the Delivery Declaration Form and its implementation into the existing grain delivery structure, particularly whether farmers are included among the leadership of the industry? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-431-484.
 
Collapse
Results: 1 - 15 of 151 | Page: 1 of 11

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

For more data options, please see Open Data