Questions and responses All Sessions January 17, 1994, to present

Refine your search

No search texts entered

Historical information
The information shown below relates to a prior session.

Q-2432

42-1
December 3, 2015, to September 11, 2019

Q-2432

42nd Parliament, 1st session
Asked by
Date asked
April 25, 2019
Answered
June 12, 2019
With regard to Canada’s commitment to the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals and the Feminist International Development Policy: (a) what portion of Canada’s official development assistance in 2019-20 will be committed to water, sanitation and hygiene as a foundation for women’s health; (b) does Canada intend to increase its investment in the global water, sanitation and hygiene sector; (c) will Canada join the 72 other countries working together to stimulate political dialogue and leadership through the Sanitation and Water for All partnership; and (d) is the Feminist International Assistance Policy now being applied to projects for global water, sanitation, and hygiene, and, if so, will there be additional funding to serve the priority needs of women and girls, and for consultation with women and girls on their needs?
Historical information
The information shown below relates to a prior session.

Q-2431

42-1
December 3, 2015, to September 11, 2019

Q-2431

42nd Parliament, 1st session
Asked by
Date asked
April 25, 2019
Answered
June 12, 2019
With regard to the Global Fund’s sixth replenishment to step up the fight against AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria: (a) is the government committing $1 billion to the Global Fund’s sixth replenishment for 2020-2022; and (b) will this funding be in addition to the total official development assistance promised in the 2018 and 2019 budgets?
Historical information
The information shown below relates to a prior session.

Q-2430

42-1
December 3, 2015, to September 11, 2019

Q-2430

42nd Parliament, 1st session
Asked by
Date asked
April 25, 2019
Answered
June 12, 2019
With regard to Canada’s commitment in the Feminist International Assistance Policy to join global partnerships that promote sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) for women and girls: (a) what steps is the government taking to ensure support for this work is sustained and scaled up beyond 2020; (b) does the government intend to commit to the Future Planning Initiative’s call for $1.4 billion per year for ten years for SRHR initiatives, including $500 million per year for the neglected areas of SRHR; and (c) will this funding be in addition to the official development assistance promised in the 2018 and 2019 budgets?
Historical information
The information shown below relates to a prior session.

Q-2429

42-1
December 3, 2015, to September 11, 2019

Q-2429

42nd Parliament, 1st session
Asked by
Date asked
April 25, 2019
Answered
June 12, 2019
With regard to Canada’s Official Development Assistance (ODA): (a) what is the total ODA to gross national income (GNI) ratio arising from the 2019 budget; (b) what were Canada’s total ODA to GNI ratios for each of the last ten fiscal years; (c) what is the government’s position on delivering Canada’s outstanding commitment to deliver on the United Nations' target of 0.7% ODA to GNI; and (d) if the government is committed to delivering the 0.7% of GNI, what is the government’s timeline for delivering this commitment?
Historical information
The information shown below relates to a prior session.

Q-1893

42-1
December 3, 2015, to September 11, 2019

Q-1893

42nd Parliament, 1st session
Asked by
Date asked
September 13, 2018
Answered
October 31, 2018
With regard to Health Canada’s notice of a recall for a list of Valsartan products supplied by Chinese corporation Zhejiang Huahai Pharmaceuticals: (a) on what date did Health Canada become aware of the contamination of these drugs with N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA); (b) was the recall issued at the request of Canadian authorities; (c) what is deemed a long-term exposure to this carcinogen; (d) if there was a delay in issuing the recall after Health Canada was informed of the contamination, what were the reasons for the delay in the public notice; (e) how was Health Canada made aware of the contamination of the valsartan medicines; (f) did Health Canada directly conduct any laboratory tests on these drugs to determine their safety before approving their use in Canada; (g) has Health Canada or any federal authority undertaken any investigations of the laboratory and manufacturing facilities of Zhejiang Huahai Pharmaceuticals; (h) why did Health Canada advise patients to continue taking the Valsartan products despite the knowledge it was contaminated with a carcinogen and who made that decision; (i) are any other products manufactured by Zhejiang Huahai Pharmaceuticals currently being distributed, sold or prescribed in Canada; (j) what actions has Health Canada taken to test alternative blood pressure medicines being prescribed in Canada to determine their safety; and (k) what information has been provided to Health Canada on adverse effects reported by Canadians taking Valsartan?
Historical information
The information shown below relates to a prior session.

Q-927

42-1
December 3, 2015, to September 11, 2019

Q-927

42nd Parliament, 1st session
Asked by
Date asked
March 20, 2017
Answered
May 5, 2017
With regard to funding for post-secondary institutions, for each fiscal year since 2014-15, broken down by department: (a) what is the total amount of funds provided to the University of Alberta; and (b) for what purpose was each contribution or grant provided?
Historical information
The information shown below relates to a prior session.

Q-1076

41-2
October 16, 2013, to August 2, 2015

Q-1076

41st Parliament, 2nd session
Asked by
Date asked
February 23, 2015
Answered
May 25, 2015
With regard to Western Economic Diversification Canada (WD) activity category “Economic Growth Acceleration Opportunities for Aboriginal Peoples (First Nations, Inuit and Métis)”: (a) how does WD define this category for the purposes of a project application; (b) which sectors does WD deem to be included or excluded in this category; (c) how many applicants were successful under this category and what are the details concerning these applicants; and (d) have applicants under this category faced any particular challenges in submitting successful applications and, if so, what are the details of these challenges?
Historical information
The information shown below relates to a prior session.

Q-1075

41-2
October 16, 2013, to August 2, 2015

Q-1075

41st Parliament, 2nd session
Asked by
Date asked
February 23, 2015
Answered
May 25, 2015
With regard to the Western Diversification Program (WDP) for each fiscal year from 2012-2013 to 2014-2015, year-to-date: (a) how many companies, non-profits or other eligible organizations applied for funding; (b) what is the total amount of funding that has been awarded, broken down by (i) fiscal year, (ii) federal electoral riding, (iii) date the funding was approved, (iv) date the funding was actually provided to each approved project; (c) what outreach activities were used to acquire potential applicants and what are the details of individuals or entities invited to briefings organized by Western Economic Diversification (WD); (d) what is the success rate of funding applications, broken down by (i) fiscal year, (ii) federal electoral riding; (e) what is the average amount of funding granted, broken down by (i) fiscal year, (ii) federal electoral riding; and (f) what are the requirements imposed by WD for financial commitments by other sources in order to qualify for a WDP award?
Historical information
The information shown below relates to a prior session. The government is no longer required to respond to this question.

Q-1074

41-2
October 16, 2013, to August 2, 2015

Q-1074

41st Parliament, 2nd session
Asked by
Date asked
February 23, 2015
Awaiting response
N/A
With regard to Western Economic Diversification Canada (WD) and their grant category entitled “Clean Technology/Clean Energy”: (a) how does WD define the grant category “Clean Technology/Clean Energy” for the purposes of a successful project application; (b) which energy sectors does WD deem to be included or excluded in this category; (c) how many applicants for the program were deemed to qualify for the category “Clean Technology/Clean Energy”; and (d) which applicants have received grants or loans under the “Clean Technology/Clean Energy” category?
Historical information
The information shown below relates to a prior session.

Q-1073

41-2
October 16, 2013, to August 2, 2015

Q-1073

41st Parliament, 2nd session
Asked by
Date asked
February 23, 2015
Answered
April 2, 2015
With regard to the Western Innovation Initiative (WINN) for each fiscal year from 2012-2013 to 2014-2015, year-to-date: (a) how many applications were submitted to Western Economic Diversification Canada’s (WD) WINN initiative; (b) what is the total amount of funding awarded, broken down by (i) fiscal year, (ii) federal electoral riding, (iii) date the funding was approved, (iv) date the funding was actually provided to each successful applicant; (c) what outreach activities were used to acquire potential applicants and what are the details of individuals or entities invited to briefings organized by WD; (d) what is the success rate of funding applications, broken down by (i) fiscal year, (ii) federal electoral riding; (e) what is the average amount of funding granted, broken down by (i) fiscal year, (ii) federal electoral riding; and (f) what are the requirements imposed by WD for financial commitments by other sources in order to qualify for a WD award?
Historical information
The information shown below relates to a prior session.

Q-963

40-3
March 3, 2010, to March 26, 2011

Q-963

40th Parliament, 3rd session
Asked by
Date asked
February 7, 2011
Passed deadline
March 25, 2011
What is the total amount of government funding, since fiscal year 2005-2006 up to and including the current fiscal year, allocated within the constituency of Edmonton—Strathcona, specifying each department or agency, initiative or program, year and amount?
Historical information
The information shown below relates to a prior session.

Q-962

40-3
March 3, 2010, to March 26, 2011

Q-962

40th Parliament, 3rd session
Asked by
Date asked
February 7, 2011
Passed deadline
March 25, 2011
With regard to Environment Canada and enforcement: (a) how many full-time enforcement officers are currently employed by the government, broken down by number of (i) inspectors enforcing environmental protection or pollution laws, (ii) investigators enforcing environmental protection or pollution laws, (iii) conservation officers enforcing wildlife laws, (iv) enforcement officers in parks laws; (b) where are each of the officers in (a) based and deployed; (c) what are the budgets and actual expenditures for enforcement for the past five years; (d) what is the breakdown for full-time equivalents in enforcement for headquarters and for the regions for compliance promotion, inspection and investigation, and enforcement, respectively; (e) what increase in full-time equivalents and budget expenditures are anticipated in order to implement the promised improved monitoring regime for the oil sands sector; (f) what is the timeline for the deployment of any increased monitoring and enforcement activity for the oil sands sector; and (g) has the department instituted a specific enforcement and compliance strategy for the oil sands sector?
Historical information
The information shown below relates to a prior session.

Q-267

40-3
March 3, 2010, to March 26, 2011

Q-267

40th Parliament, 3rd session
Asked by
Date asked
May 20, 2010
Answered
September 20, 2010
With regard to the United Nations Convention on the Conservation of Biological Diversity: (a) what are the negotiating positions taken by Canada on the key actions currently being discussed by the parties under the above Convention, including (i) eliminating subsidies which undermine ecosystems, (ii) ending destructive fishing practices, (iii) reducing nutrient pollution from agriculture and industrial sources to below critical thresholds, (iv) reducing habitat destruction by half, (v) reducing natural resource exploitation to maintain ecological limits; (b) what existing or draft measures, strategies, plans, guidelines, regulations or legislation are in place or currently in discussion to implement obligations under articles 6 and 11 of the Convention to protect biodiversity, additional to the Species at Risk Act; (c) which persons or organizations has the government consulted in the past two years toward formulating the above, (i) whom does the government intend to consult in finalizing its measures and by what consultation process, (ii) has the government consulted First Nations, Inuit or Métis in these matters and, if so, what are the details of those consultations; and (d) did the government include in its delegations to the Nairobi negotiations on the global convention any representatives from First Nations, Inuit, Métis, environmental or conservation organizations, youth or scientists, (i) does the government intend to include in its delegation to the Conference of the Parties in Nagoya, Japan, this October representatives from any or all of the previously listed parties, (ii) who did the government include in its delegation to Nairobi, and who will be included in the delegation to Nagoya?
Historical information
The information shown below relates to a prior session.

Q-266

40-3
March 3, 2010, to March 26, 2011

Q-266

40th Parliament, 3rd session
Asked by
Date asked
May 20, 2010
Answered
September 20, 2010
With regard to the $1 billion over five years for the Clean Energy Fund to support research, development and demonstration of clean energy technologies, included in the Economic Action Plan: (a) for how much of the total Clean Energy Fund have contribution agreements been signed and with whom, (i) for research and development, (ii) for deployment of technology, (iii) for research; (b) which departments or agencies are administering each aspect of the fund; (c) what is the total amount allocated to date for carbon capture and sequestration projects and with whom are contribution agreements signed; (d) if the contribution agreements for the above projects do not include terms for intellectual property for any technologies developed or tested, are any separate agreements signed in that regard and what percentage is allocated to the government for any future sale of such; and (e) are there any other technologies receiving funding for development and deployment from the fund, and how much funding have they received, distributed by technology?
Historical information
The information shown below relates to a prior session.

Q-265

40-3
March 3, 2010, to March 26, 2011

Q-265

40th Parliament, 3rd session
Asked by
Date asked
May 20, 2010
Answered
September 20, 2010
With regard to the $1 billion over five years for the Green Infrastructure Fund to support green infrastructure projects on a cost-shared basis, included in the Economic Action Plan: (a) how much money has been allocated to date; (b) what, if any, specific criteria were used in determining whether or not a project received funding; (c) by project, what are the details of all applications received in each year for funding support; and (d) by project, what are the details of the projects approved each year under the fund, including (i) type of project, (ii) the proponents of the project, (iii) location of the project, (iv) the federal riding in which the project is located, (v) the proportion of federal funding and contributions by other partners, including the proponent for each approved project?
Historical information
The information shown below relates to a prior session.

Q-214

40-2
January 26, 2009, to December 30, 2009

Q-214

40th Parliament, 2nd session
Asked by
Date asked
May 8, 2009
Answered
September 14, 2009
Regarding Canada–United States discussions on energy security and climate change: (a) what specific issues have been discussed by Canadian and United States government representatives bilaterally on energy security issues since 2004; (b) what policy documents have been commissioned by or prepared for the Canadian government to support those discussions; (c) has the Canadian government begun to develop a domestic energy security plan and, if not, why not and, if so, when will it be completed; (d) has the Canadian government conducted an analysis of the effects of a disruption of oil supplies on Canada; (e) have there been discussions with the United States government or its representatives on the development of a bilateral energy security plan with the United States government or have there been discussions of a continental energy security plan to include the parties to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA); and (f) has the Canadian government done any analyses or studies on the vulnerability of Canada as the only NAFTA party without an energy security plan in the event of a disruption in oil supplies and, if not, why not, if so, (i) who conducted the studies, (ii) when were they commissioned and completed, (iii) what did they cost, (iv) what are their titles?
Historical information
The information shown below relates to a prior session.

Q-213

40-2
January 26, 2009, to December 30, 2009

Q-213

40th Parliament, 2nd session
Asked by
Date asked
May 8, 2009
Answered
September 14, 2009
Regarding the government’s “Turning the Corner” strategy released on April 26, 2007: (a) what progress has the government made on the development of regulations to cut greenhouse gas emissions; (b) what studies, analyses, polling, or modelling has the government commissioned or prepared on the development of greenhouse gas regulations, (i) who conducted the aforementioned studies, analyses, polling or modelling, (ii) what did each of these cost, and when specifically were they conducted; and (c) when, specifically, is the government going to issue its regulations on greenhouse gas emissions?
Historical information
The information shown below relates to a prior session.

Q-212

40-2
January 26, 2009, to December 30, 2009

Q-212

40th Parliament, 2nd session
Asked by
Date asked
May 8, 2009
Answered
June 19, 2009
Regarding regulations on mercury: (a) what progress has the government made on the development of new regulations to reduce mercury emissions from coal fired electric power generation; and (b) when, specifically, is the government going to issue new regulations on mercury emissions from coal fired electric power generation?
Historical information
The information shown below relates to a prior session.

Q-211

40-2
January 26, 2009, to December 30, 2009

Q-211

40th Parliament, 2nd session
Asked by
Date asked
May 8, 2009
Answered
September 14, 2009
What is the total amount of government funding since fiscal year 1998-1999 up to and including the current fiscal year, allocated within the constituencies of Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, Edmonton Centre, Edmonton East, Edmonton—Leduc, Edmonton—St. Albert, Edmonton—Sherwood Park, Edmonton—Spruce Grove, and Edmonton—Strathcona, listing each department or agency, initiative, and amount?
Historical information
The information shown below relates to a prior session.

Q-54

40-2
January 26, 2009, to December 30, 2009

Q-54

40th Parliament, 2nd session
Asked by
Date asked
February 10, 2009
Answered
March 27, 2009
With regard to government-owned buildings: (a) how many buildings does the government own by region and territory; (b) what are the annual utility costs including electricity, water, heating and cooling costs for these building by province or territory; (c) what are the overall energy costs for government-owned buildings by province or territory, including all energy uses; (d) what government initiatives exist for improving energy efficiency in government buildings; (e) how many government-owned buildings have been retrofitted in order to improve their energy efficiency in the last 25 years; (f) how many buildings have achieved Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design recognition for new construction and for existing buildings; (g) what studies and evaluations with respect to improving energy efficiency in government-owned buildings have been requested or commissioned by any department before January 27, 2009; (h) how much has the government spent on these studies, by study; and (i) what analysis has been done by the government or on its behalf regarding potential cost savings on energy costs if energy efficiency retrofits were conducted on some or all government-owned buildings?
Top of page