Thursday, May 7, 2009 (No. 53)

Questions

The complete list of questions on the Order Paper is available for consultation at the Table in the Chamber and on the Internet. Those questions not appearing in the list have been answered, withdrawn or made into orders for return.

Q-2 — January 26, 2009 — Mr. Murphy (Charlottetown) — With regard to federal spending, how much financial support, both capital and otherwise, was given to individual airports over the last three fiscal years (2005-2006, 2006-2007, 2007-2008) in each federal riding?

Q-13 — January 26, 2009 — Ms. Sgro (York West) — With respect to the Registered Disability Savings Plan (RDSP), when will the government have the necessary administrative mechanisms in place so that Canadians can benefit from the RDSP program?

Q-75 — March 4, 2009 — Ms. Sgro (York West) — With respect to investing in research and innovation, specifically regarding York University in Toronto, Ontario: (a) what is the government's plan to ensure that Canadian research and development remain an example to the rest of the world; (b) what is the government prepared to do to ensure that the best and brightest remain in Canada; (c) what research grants will the government be making available this year, both at York University and across Canada; (d) what new programs will the government undertake to assist students; (e) what will the government's response be to the issue of rising tuition; (f) what specific steps will the government take to invest in research and development, to improve the lives of Canadians, and to partner to help Canadian industries grow in these difficult economic times; and (g) what future investments is the government planning in colleges and universities?

Q-79 — March 9, 2009 — Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway) — What is the total amount of government funding since fiscal year 1998-1999 up to and including the current fiscal year, allocated within the constituency of Vancouver Kingsway, listing each department or agency, initiative, and amount?

Q-902 — March 23, 2009 — Mr. Bagnell (Yukon) — Since January 2006 to present date have Canadian aircraft responded to near border violations by foreign aircraft and, if so: (a) what was the date and location of each incident; (b) what was the response by Canadian aircraft, including the number of aircraft involved and the point of contact with the foreign aircraft; (c) was Canadian airspace actually breached and, if so, to what extent; (d) what was the country of origin of each of the implicated aircraft; (e) who ordered each of the interceptor flights and what was the rationale behind the threat risk; (f) what was the purported mission of each of the implicated foreign aircraft; (g) what was the outcome of each interception, the cost of each response mission, the damage to Canadian aircraft if any and what were the risks involved for the pilots; (h) for each incident, was a diplomatic note filed with the country in question and what was the response from the involved country; and (i) under the same criteria used above what is the response to any incursions or near incursions into Canadian territory by naval vessels or land based forces?

Q-912 — March 23, 2009 — Mr. Bagnell (Yukon) — With regard to the Federal Student Work Experience Program (FSWEP), since 2006 for all 308 constituencies: (a) what are the names, address and contact information of employers that hired FSWEP students, (i) what is the number of students hired, (ii) what is the amount of money received by each student and by each employer; (b) what criteria are followed in order to hire a student; (c) what are the number of points scored by the employers receiving the students; (d) what is the number of students that moved on to further secondary or post-secondary studies; (e) what is the number of students hired that completed the FSWEP; (f) what is the exact amount of money spent per constituency for the program as broken down to actual hiring; (g) what are the program administration costs by the department; and (h) was the program cost on budget or over budget and to what extent?

Q-962 — March 25, 2009 — Mr. Bevington (Western Arctic) — With regard to travel to the Northwest Territories (NWT) by federal officials or employees of Indian Affairs and Northern Development Canada, National Defence, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Environment Canada, the Prime Minister’s Office and the Canadian Revenue Agency, based in the provinces, for each year since 2006 to 2008: (a) on what dates did they travel between Edmonton, Alberta and (i) Hay River, NWT, (ii) Yellowknife, NWT, (iii) Norman Wells, NWT, (iv) Inuvik, NWT; (b) what was the total air fare paid for the air portion of the Edmonton to and from the location in the NWT destination listed above, per flight; (c) what is the basis for that fare, including but not limited to class of fare, taxes and surcharges, discounts or passes used; (d) in each instance where the fare paid exceeded the lowest available airfare on that date, why was the lowest fare not used; (e) were T4As or other taxable benefit advice issued to these officials or employees with respect to this air travel; (f) if such advice was issued, what were the amounts; (g) for each official or employee who travelled to the NWT what was the amount paid, per official or employee for meals and incidental expenses; (h) in each instance where an official or employee was reimbursed for meals and incidental expenses and receipts were not provided and an allowance greater than $45 for the year 2006 or $51 for the years 2007 and 2008 was given, was the official or employee issued with a T4A or other taxable benefit advice; and (i) in each instance where such advice was issued what were the individual amounts?

Q-982 — March 25, 2009 — Mr. Harris (St. John's East) — With respect to sole source contracts for goods and services issued by or on behalf of the Privy Council Office and the Prime Minister's Office only, for the last four years: (a) how many contracts have so been awarded; (b) who received the contracts, on what date and for what amount; (c) what good or service did they provide in return; (d) what was the duration of each contract; and (e) who was responsible for authorizing each contract?

Q-992 — March 25, 2009 — Mr. Harris (St. John's East) — With respect to public opinion polling undertaken by the Privy Council Office and the Prime Minister's Office only, for the last four years: (a) how many contracts have been awarded to public opinion firms; (b) which firms won contracts, on what date and in what amount; and (c) what was the general topic probed by each contract?

Q-1002 — March 25, 2009 — Mr. Harris (St. John's East) — With respect to equipment issued to personnel of Crown corporations, agencies, organizations and departments, on an annual basis over the last four years: (a) how many uniforms, firearms, explosive devices, stun grenades, tasers, and pepper spray canisters have been lost in this period; (b) to which Crown entity did the items belong; (c) when and in which locations did they go missing; (d) what is the estimated cost of these losses, by item; (e) how many vehicles were stolen during this period; (f) to which Crown entity did the vehicles belong; (g) when and in which locations did they go missing; (h) what is the estimated cost of these losses, by incident; (i) how many security passes have gone missing from locations that could pose a threat to national security or public safety; (j) to which facilities did the passes belong; (k) in which month and year were the losses reported; (l) what was the evaluated security threat posed by each loss; (m) how many laptop computers containing information sensitive to national security have gone missing; (n) to which facilities did the computers belong; (o) on which month and year were the losses reported; and (p) what was the evaluated security threat posed by each loss?

Q-101 — March 26, 2009 — Ms. Sgro (York West) — With respect to providing safe, quality, and affordable housing to the most vulnerable: (a) how much money will the government invest for the fiscal year of 2009-2010 in affordable housing; (b) how much investment will the government make in 2009-2010 in affordable housing specifically allocated for seniors; (c) will the government enter into new provincial agreements in order to work to facilitate the building and renovation of affordable housing units; and (d) will the government commit to make affordable housing a priority and expedite the building and maintenance of these critical units?

Q-1022 — March 27, 2009 — Mr. Harris (St. John's East) — With respect to the death of Canadian Forces member MCpl. Joshua Roberts: (a) what information did the government possess that informed Lt Gen. Leslie’s initial explanation to MCpl. Roberts’ family at the repatriation ceremony that MCpl. Roberts was killed by gunfire from Afghans contracted by Compass Security; (b) what information did the government uncover subsequent to Lt Gen. Leslie’s explanation which resulted in the conclusion reached by the National Investigation Service (NIS) that MCpl. Roberts was killed by insurgent gunfire; (c) what information does the government possess that is sufficient to dismiss the statements by Afghans working for Compass Security that they fired their weapons during the firefight in which MCpl. Roberts was killed; (d) what information does the government possess that is sufficient to dismiss the statements made by Canadian and U.S. soldiers present at a roadblock a short distance away from the firefight that indicated they believed it was Compass Security personnel who fired on MCpl. Roberts’ unit; (e) how can the government consider the investigation to be closed and Compass Security completely exonerated when the forensic examination from the bullet that killed MCpl. Roberts was inconclusive; (f) what information does the government possess to explain how the bullet that killed MCpl. Roberts fell out of his body during transit; (g) as the medical officer who wrote the initial report into MCpl. Roberts death concluded that the direction of the bullet that killed MCpl. Roberts could not be determined, what information does the government possess that informed the conclusion in the NIS report that the bullet was fired from an insurgent position; (h) as the NIS report notes that Canadian soldiers came under fire from friendly call signs during the firefight in which MCpl. Roberts was killed, what information does the government possess which definitively rules out any role for friendly fire in causing the death of MCpl. Roberts; (i) why was the video footage from the helmet cameras of soldiers present during the death of MCpl. Roberts ordered erased before it could be analyzed as part of an investigation; (j) why was the family of MCpl. Roberts repeatedly told that they had to realize that an election was going on in response to their repeated requests for the release of information related to the death of MCpl. Roberts; and (k) is it the policy of the government to require families of Canadian soldiers killed in action to go through access to information mechanisms to obtain the official documentation, such as NIS reports or autopsy reports, into the death of their relative?

Q-1032 — March 30, 2009 — Mr. Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley) — With regard to the Mountain Pine Beetle infestation: (a) what is the financial commitment for the current fiscal year to combat the spread of the Mountain Pine Beetle, and what department is responsible for the expenditure; and (b) from the $200 million invested by the government in the Mountain Pine Beetle Program, what is the breakdown of the money spent by (i) the Department of Natural Resources, (ii) the Department of Transport, (iii) the Department of Western Economic Diversification?

Q-1042 — March 31, 2009 — Mr. Gravelle (Nickel Belt) — What was the total amount of government funding since fiscal year 2005-2006 up to and including the current fiscal year, allocated within the constituency of Nickel Belt, listing each department or agency, initiative, and amount by fiscal year?

Q-1052 — April 1, 2009 — Ms. Leslie (Halifax) — With regards to the disposal of surplus federal property in the Greater Halifax Area: (a) how many federal properties have been designated as surplus properties since 1999; (b) for what reasons were the properties determined as surplus; (c) which properties have been designated as routine; (d) which properties have been designated as strategic; (e) when were those designations declared; (f) were any properties changed from a routine designation to a strategic designation and, if so, what was the reason for the change in designation, and when did the change in designation occur; (g) what was the market value for each of the surplus properties; (h) what was the purchase price of each disposal property that was successfully transferred; (i) who conducted the independent third party appraisals of each property; (j) which properties, if any, were transferred under the Surplus Federal Real Property for Homelessness Initiative (SFRPHI); (k) which properties, if any, are currently in the process of transfer through SFRPHI; and (l) how many homelessness related community service providers have tendered bids on disposal properties?

Q-106 — April 1, 2009 — Mr. D'Amours (Madawaska—Restigouche) — With regard to funding applications submitted to the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, for each fiscal year from 2006-2007 to 2008-2009: (a) which projects were submitted under each Agency program; (b) which project were approved; (c) what amount was allocated to each of these projects; and (d) which projects were not processed?

Q-107 — April 1, 2009 — Mr. D'Amours (Madawaska—Restigouche) — With respect to funding applications made to each of the regional offices of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, for each fiscal year from 2004-2005 to 2008-2009: (a) how many applications were received under each of the Agency’s programs; and (b) of this number, how many were approved?

Q-108 — April 1, 2009 — Mr. D'Amours (Madawaska—Restigouche) — With regard to the transitional measures for Employment Insurance economic regions: (a) will the economic regions change after April 10, 2010; and (b) will the transitional measures for the economic regions be completely eliminated after April 10, 2010?

Q-1092 — April 1, 2009 — Ms. Faille (Vaudreuil-Soulanges) — With respect to performance pay for the Chief Executives of Crown corporations in 2008, for each individual, without identifying him or her by name: (a) what is his or her level in the salary scale; (b) what is his or her performance appraisal rating; (c) what is the maximum bonus, in percentage terms, which he or she could be entitled to receive; (d) what was the amount of the bonus paid, as a percentage of salary; and (e) what was the amount of the bonus paid, in dollars?

Q-1112 — April 1, 2009 — Mr. Savage (Dartmouth—Cole Harbour) — With regard to Employment Insurance: (a) how many part-time staff have been hired since June 2008, by month; (b) how many full-time staff have been hired since June 2008, by month; (c) how many part-time and full-time staff have been hired in each region since June 2008, by month; and (d) how many service telephone lines are working in each region and how many of these telephone lines are staffed at one time?

Q-112 — April 1, 2009 — Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway) — What is the total amount of government funding since fiscal year 1998-1999 up to and including the current fiscal year, allocated within the constituency of Vancouver Quadra, listing each department or agency, initiative, and amount?

Q-113 — April 1, 2009 — Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway) — What is the total amount of government funding since fiscal year 1998-1999 up to and including the current fiscal year, allocated within the constituency of Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, listing each department or agency, initiative, and amount?

Q-1142 — April 2, 2009 — Mr. Pearson (London North Centre) — With respect to the money provided by the government in 2008 to the International Organization on Migration (IOM) for assistance to Darfur refugees in the Aweil State in Sudan: (a) did the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) or any other government department or agency contribute funds to help the Darfur refugees and, if so, what was the exact dollar amount contributed, on what date or dates, and to whom were these funds contributed; (b) was a budget proposed or requested by any government agency, department, non-governmental organization or international organization relating to these particular relief funds; (c) what information was provided to CIDA, and by whom, from which the government’s contribution amount was assessed for this particular crisis; (d) did the government provide any on-ground support or monitoring of relief work for this particular circumstance and, if so, in what capacity, and for how long; (e) have CIDA officials or any other government agency or department requested updates on the Darfur refugees and, if so, were any provided and by whom and what has been done with that information; and (f) what current measures is the government providing to ensure continued monitoring of mass migration and relief aid for refugees migrating into other ill-equipped areas of Southern Sudan?

Q-1151-2 — April 2, 2009 — Mr. Pearson (London North Centre) — With regard to the regional development agency for Southern Ontario mentioned in the 2009 budget: (a) what economic studies were conducted by the government with respect to the creation of a separate regional development agency for Southern Ontario, (i) when did these studies begin, (ii) which stakeholders, organizations, municipal governments were consulted, (iii) how much money has been earmarked for this new agency by the government, (iv) were any of the Community Futures Development Corporations (CFDC’s) consulted and, if so, which ones; (b) which federal electoral ridings will be under the jurisdiction of this new agency; (c) have any Aboriginal communities been consulted, especially on the Six Nations and New Credit reserves and, if so, which ones; (d) will the new agency be modeled after any of the existing regional development agencies; (e) will the new agency have a dedicated Minister, Assistant Deputy Minister and, if not, under which department will the new agency be governed; (f) what is the government’s planned date for this new agency to be fully operational; (g) have any rural groups, organizations, stakeholders been consulted in terms of the scope or mandate of this new agency and, if so, which ones; (h) what will be the mandate of this new agency; (i) what, if any, are the specific programs this agency has already committed to support and in which town or cities are these programs based; (j) what specific programs will this agency invest that will help workers, communities and businesses in Southern Ontario position themselves to take advantage of opportunities, as economic growth recovers in Canada and around the world; and (k) will the $20 million earmarked for the Eastern Ontario Development Program as stated in the 2009 Budget be in addition to the promised $1 billion for the new Southern Ontario agency, or will this $20 million come out of the $1 billion budget?

Q-1161-2 — April 2, 2009 — Mr. Pearson (London North Centre) — With regards to the announcement that the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) will steer its foreign aid toward a smaller pool of 20 countries, down from 25 announced under the previous government in 2005: (a) what were the criteria established by the department by which countries were (i) removed from the 2005 list, (ii) added to the new list of recipients; (b) when did consultation begin to discuss removing or adding countries from focus list; (c) who took part in these discussions; (d) were any non-governmental organizations, multilateral organizations, church organizations or any other third party stakeholders consulted about the proposed changes to CIDA’s focus list and, if so, which ones specifically; (e) how specifically were the obligations of the Official Development Assistance Accountability Act taken into consideration by the Agency when establishing criteria for adding or removing countries and how were the perspectives of the poor taken into account during the decision making process; (f) when, how and by whom were countries removed from the list informed of CIDA’s decision; (g) what are the projected funds to be delivered to each specific country on the new focus list; (h) what are the specific programs to be funded in each country on the new focus list; (i) does CIDA have on-the-ground field workers in each of the countries on the new focus list and, if so, how many; and (j) what accountability measures are being put in place in each of the new countries of focus to ensure that the provisions of the Act are being adhered to?

Q-1172 — April 2, 2009 — Ms. Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe) — With respect to Measurement Canada, what changes have been or will be made to the agency from January 2006 to January 2010, including: (a) changes to services that the agency provides; (b) changes to who is accredited to test and inspect devices; and (c) who pays the salaries of those accredited to test and inspect devices?

Q-1192 — April 16, 2009 — Mrs. Hughes (Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing) — What is the total amount of government funding since fiscal year 1998-1999 up to and including the current fiscal year, allocated within the constituency of Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, listing each department or agency, initiative, and amount?

Q-1202 — April 16, 2009 — Mr. Bachand (Saint-Jean) — With respect to the contract for private motor vehicle (PMV) relocation services and the Department of Defence and the Department of Public Works and Government Services: (a) why did the departments terminate the contract with Colley Motorships Ltd.; (b) when do the departments intend to re-tender the contract for PMVs; (c) when do the departments expect to award the PMV contract; (d) in the meantime, do the departments intend to tender a number of contracts containing a single shipment request so as to remain under the $25,000 limit, in accordance with Government Contracts Regulations and, if so, will this method be used as a temporary solution until the final call for tenders; and (e) how many complaints about Autorail Forwarder did the departments receive during the contract period?

Q-1212 — April 20, 2009 — Mr. McTeague (Pickering—Scarborough East) — With regard to projects funded in whole or in part by Treasury Board Vote 35 in the Main Estimates 2009-2010: (a) what appropriations have been created or supplemented with funds from Vote 35; (b) what is the name of each project which has received funding from Vote 35; (c) what is the amount of total federal funding, including funds other than money from Vote 35, for each project; (d) how much of the federal funding was provided directly by Vote 35 for each project; (e) which federal department and program is the funding being provided to; and (f) what was the rationale for using Vote 35 to fund this project as opposed to other funds available to the government under other authorities?

Q-1222 — April 20, 2009 — Mr. McTeague (Pickering—Scarborough East) — With regard to departmental programming: (a) what was the total funding allocated to each program in each department in the 2008-2009 fiscal year; (b) what was the total funding spent in each program in each department during the 2008-2009 fiscal year; and (c) where were the funds spent under each program in each department, allocated by (i) town or city, (ii) project name, if applicable, (iii) dollar value?

Q-1232 — April 20, 2009 — Mr. McTeague (Pickering—Scarborough East) — With regard to two government contracts or retainers awarded to Mike McCurry and Ari Fleischer: (a) what criteria did the government use in awarding these contracts or retainers; (b) what are the terms of each contract or retainer; (c) what is the value of each contract or retainer; (d) where will Mr. McCurry and Mr. Fleischer be travelling to; (e) what are the travel expenses and per diem rates for Mr. McCurry and Mr. Fleischer; and (f) was any document or record provided to a minister or MP regarding these two contracts and, if so, what are the details?

Q-1242 — April 20, 2009 — Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek) — With regards to the New Horizons for Seniors program: (a) to which projects and to which organizations has funding been allocated from this program; (b) what is the amount pledged for each project; (c) on which dates were the funding decisions made for each project funded by the program; (d) what are the names of each federal riding that received funding from the program; and (e) what is the total for each project?

Q-1252 — April 20, 2009 — Mr. Bevington (Western Arctic) — With respect to the Building Canada Plan (2007-2014): (a) under the Building Canada Fund, (i) what projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what are each partner's contribution, (vi) has the funding flowed; (b) under the Public-Private Partnerships Fund, (i) what projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what are each partner's contribution, (vi) has the funding flowed; (c) under the Gateways and Border Crossings Fund, (i) what projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what are each partner's contribution, (vi) has the funding flowed; (d) under the Asia-Pacific Gateway and Corridor Initiative, (i) what projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what are each partner's contribution, (vi) has the funding flowed; and (e) under the Provincial-Territorial Base Funding, (i) what projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what are each partner's contribution, (vi) has the funding flowed?

Q-1262 — April 20, 2009 — Mrs. Mendes (Brossard—La Prairie) — With regards to requests for financial assistance made to the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec for the 2005-2006 and 2008-2009 fiscal years, and by regional office: (a) for requests submitted for the authorization of the Regional Director, how many did he approve, and how many did he reject; (b) for requests submitted for the authorization of the General Director for Regional Coordination, how many did he approve, and how many did he reject; (c) for requests submitted for the authorization of the Vice-President for Operations, how many did he approve, and how many did he reject; (d) for requests submitted for the authorization of the President, how many did he approve, and how many did he reject; and (e) for requests submitted for the authorization of the Minister, how many did he approve, and how many did he reject?

Q-1272 — April 20, 2009 — Mrs. Mendes (Brossard—La Prairie) — With regards to projects for which a contribution was authorized by the Economic Development Agency of Canada for Quebec Regions in the Capital Fund for Business Succession and Venture: (a) what is the name of the beneficiary; (b) in what region is located the beneficiary; (c) what is the description of the project; (d) what is the maximum authorized contribution; (e) how much of the authorized maximum contribution has been paid out; (f) how many jobs were maintained by the project; (g) how many jobs were created by the project; (h) what is the value of total investments in the project; and (i) what Agency partner forwarded the request for funding to the Agency?

Q-1282 — April 20, 2009 — Mrs. Mendes (Brossard—La Prairie) — With respect to projects for which a contribution was authorized by the Economic Development Agency of Canada for Quebec Regions in the Capital Fund for Business Startups in the Regions: (a) what is the name of the beneficiary; (b) in what region is located the beneficiary; (c) what is the description of the project; (d) what is the maximum authorized contribution; (e) how much of the authorized maximum contribution has been paid out; (f) how many jobs were maintained by the project; (g) how many jobs were created by the project; (h) what is the value of total investments in the project; and (i) what Agency partner forwarded the request for funding to the Agency?

Q-1292 — April 20, 2009 — Ms. Hall Findlay (Willowdale) — With regard to all government advertising which promote Canada’s Economic Action Plan or its website: (a) what companies were used to produce each ad; (b) what media outlets were used to air or publish each ad; (c) what criteria were used to select the ad placements; (d) how much did it cost to produce and air or publish each ad; (e) how often are the ads aired or published; (f) how much commercial broadcast time, air time, newspaper space and other communication venues available was ordered per outlet; and (g) how much was spent per outlet?

Q-1302 — April 20, 2009 — Mr. Gravelle (Nickel Belt) — With respect to the Minister of Industry’s and the government's activities prior to Xstrata’s February 9, 2009 announcement regarding the layoff of 686 employees in their Sudbury Operations: (a) was the Minister contacted by representatives from Xstrata prior to February 9, 2009 and, if so, (i) when did Xstrata contact the Minister, (ii) by what method was the Minister contacted by Xstrata, (iii) who from Xstrata contacted the Minister, (iv) were there emails sent or received by the Minister or Industry Canada from or to representatives from Xstrata concerning the layoff announcement, (v) was there any other forms of written correspondence to the Minister or Industry Canada from Xstrata; (b) did the Minister or anyone from Industry Canada meet with any representatives from Xstrata, either in person, by phone or in any other form and, if so, (i) who were the representatives from Xstrata that the Minister or his representative met with, (ii) was there more than one meeting, (iii) when did the meetings take place, (iv) who participated or observed the meetings, (v) was there an agenda for the meetings, (vi) who developed the agenda for the meetings, (vii) did anyone from Industry Canada take notes during these meetings, (viii) who specifically took notes, (ix) where are these notes currently being stored; (c) was Xstrata’s acquisition agreement over Falconbridge reviewed by the Minister or a representative from Industry Canada between February 5 and February 16, 2009 and, if so, (i) who reviewed the agreement, (ii) what date was the agreement reviewed (iii) were any documents created based on the review and, if so, (iv) what are they, (v) where are the documents being stored currently; (d) was the clause concerning no layoffs for three years discussed with representatives from Xstrata; (e) was the clause concerning no layoffs for three years discussed with any other federal or provincial ministry; (f) why did Industry Canada decide not to bring in consequences against Xstrata for laying off workers prior to the conclusion of the three year agreement; (g) how did the government make the decision not to enforce the agreement and who was consulted in this decision; (h) was the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) ever contacted concerning the Xstrata layoffs by representatives from Xstrata, the Minister or Industry Canada or one of his representatives and, if so, (i) when was the PMO contacted, (ii) by whom; and (i) did the Minister or anyone from Industry Canada make contact or attempt to make contact with representatives from Mine Mill 598 CAW and, if not, (i) why not, (ii) how was the decision made, (iii) who made that decision?

Q-1312 — April 21, 2009 — Ms. Ratansi (Don Valley East) — With regard to the Home Renovation Tax Credit: (a) what kind of analysis of this tax credit has been provided to the Ministers of Environment, Finance and Revenue; and (b) how many income tax audits does the government anticipate conducting to verify the use of this tax credit?

Q-1322 — April 23, 2009 — Mr. Oliphant (Don Valley West) — With respect to the new United States Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service’s (APHIS) user fee requirements for Canada: (a) what did the government do, if anything, to negotiate this fee change with the United States; (b) what communications occurred between Canada and the United States in preparation for this fee change; (c) what notice, if any, was provided to Canadian railway companies by the United States government of the August 25, 2007 interim rule authorizing APHIS to collect fees to cover costs for agricultural quarantine, inspection as well as planned increases to the program’s inspection capacity related to ports of entry in Canada; (d) does the Government of Canada know why the exemption removal was issued by the United States government, as an interim rule, as opposed to publishing a proposed rule for comments; (e) why was the targeted risk management model for customs reforms in North America not followed; (f) what overall purpose did the additional inspection under the APHIS proposal demonstrate; and (g) why is this fee being imposed on railway companies seeing as railways do not engage in the shipping of any substantial quantities of agricultural products across the border?

Q-1332 — April 23, 2009 — Mr. Bagnell (Yukon) — With respect to the April 9, 2009 release of the Environment Canada Scientific Review for the Identification of Critical Habitat for Woodland Caribou, Boreal Population in Canada: (a) who wrote the preface for the review; (b) under who’s direction was this preface inserted; (c) what is the author’s background; (d) what additional studies were conducted to supplement the information for the preface; (e) when will the report for the western science studies, referenced in the preface, be released; (f) what are (i) the plans for the regional workshops associated with these studies, (ii) their timeframes, (iii) their budgets, (iv) their participants, (v) their goals; (g) what is the actual recovery planning and implementation for the herds; (h) what consultations, if any, are anticipated with other key stakeholders such as land management regimes, industry, provinces, territories, wildlife management boards, environmental non-government organizations, industry associations and the public; and (i) why was this report released ten months after its completion by the research team?

Q-1342 — April 23, 2009 — Mr. Bagnell (Yukon) — With respect to the Alaska-Yukon boundary dispute, since 2006: (a) what steps have been taken to resolve the Alaska-Yukon boundary dispute; (b) what discussions have been held involving the governments of Canada and the United States; (c) where were these discussions held; (d) who was involved in these discussions; (e) what departments or agencies from both governments were represented at these discussions; (f) what were the outcomes of the discussions; (g) who has been involved and who has been consulted in the efforts to develop Canada’s position in these negotiations; (h) what is Canada’s position; (i) when does the government anticipate a resolution in this dispute; and (j) has the government placed a high level of importance to this issue in its relations with the United States?

Q-1352 — April 23, 2009 — Mr. McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood) — With respect to access and compensation for medically necessary drugs and treatments that are not covered by provincial drug programs due to the fact that they are not approved by Health Canada: (a) what action has Health Canada taken to ensure that any drugs or medication that have been approved for treatment of a specific illness in one province are then approved for treatment in the rest of the provinces; (b) what steps has Health Canada taken to ensure that those who had to independently pay for their own medically necessary medication as a result of the drug being used off label, or the result of the drug not having been approved by Health Canada for use in general or in a particular illness, or are used in an unconventional manner and are therefore not qualifying for conventional insurance regulations, are then compensated for these costs, or have the treatment subsidized in some manner; (c) for Canadians suffering from rare medical conditions, what steps is Health Canada taking to ensure that (i) research in treatment for these conditions is being pursued, (ii) orphan drugs that have been developed and proven to be effective are being actively manufactured, (iii) drugs that have been developed are being actively approved by Health Canada, (iv) legislation is being introduced to guarantee the continuation of these practices; and (d) has Health Canada or the government investigated the creation of a National Drug Program or plan which would allow equal access to medications for all Canadians, regardless of the province that they reside in?

Q-1362 — April 23, 2009 — Mr. McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood) — What is the total loss to government revenue due to Tax Free Savings Account?

Q-1372 — April 23, 2009 — Mr. McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood) — With respect to family and spousal sponsorship, how many people have been disqualified for sponsorship based on default of financial obligations and how many have been reinstated for sponsorship eligibility upon curing of the default?

Q-1382 — April 23, 2009 — Mr. McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood) — With respect to Canadians with diabetes who suffer severe and life-threatening adverse reactions to synthetic insulin and are unable to obtain domestically, an alternative animal-based insulin: (a) what actions has Health Canada taken or will take to ensure that Canadians who require such medication will continue to have access to it; (b) is the government (i) investigating methods of producing the medication via public funds or public-private partnership, (ii) initiating a process seeking approval of the drug for domestic production and distribution, (iii) initiating a consultation process with the manufacturers of animal insulin seeking domestic production and distribution, (iv) providing incentives to manufacturers to produce animal insulin domestically, (v) securing a guarantee from the manufacturer that the drug will be permanently available, (vi) stockpiling the medication to ensure near-term supply; (c) what has Health Canada done or what will it do to ensure that these Canadians receive financial assistance due to high costs as a result of provincial health insurance plans not covering certain medications or treatments; (d) what action has Health Canada taken or will take to ensure (i) that people who suffer negative effects from synthetic insulin are aware of and have access to proper treatment as well as expanded choice in treatment options, (ii) that medical professionals who are responsible for treating Canadians with diabetes are aware of the availability of alternative forms of medication such as beef and pork based insulin; (e) what action has Health Canada taken or will take to ascertain how many Canadians suffer adverse reactions from synthetic insulin; (f) has Health Canada investigated or will be investigating the implementation of a protocol to address this issue, if not, why have steps not been taken to address this issue; and (g) does the lack of the availability of this type of medically necessary treatment represent a barrier to equal access to healthcare services and, if so, what steps has Health Canada taken or will take towards addressing this situation?

Q-1392 — April 24, 2009 — Ms. Bennett (St. Paul's) — With respect to science and research, what is the government's strategy: (a) for funding health research to prevent a brain drain of qualified researchers to the United States; (b) to ensure there is increased funding for Canada’s granting councils; and (c) to ensure scientific integrity in federal policy making?

Q-1402 — April 24, 2009 — Ms. Bennett (St. Paul's) — With respect to rare diseases and disorders: (a) what has the government done to work with the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health to carry out the recommendations in the 2007 Common Drug Review and work with its provincial and territorial Common Drug Review counterparts to establish a specifically designed approach for the review of drugs for rare disorders and for first-in-class drugs; (b) what is the government doing to follow up on the commitment to a national program for drugs and patients with rare disorders resulting from the 2005 pledge by the Minister of Health to consider the creation of an Expensive Drugs for Rare Disorders Program, and after the Health Council of Canada called for the government to re-engage on a national program for expensive drugs with rare diseases; and (c) what has the government done with regards to the recommendations contained in motion M-426 (rare diseases and disorders), which was passed during the 2nd Session of the 39th Parliament?

Q-1412 — April 24, 2009 — Ms. Bennett (St. Paul's) — With respect to tobacco: (a) what is the government’s strategy to combat the illegal cigarette trade and ensure tobacco control; and (b) what has the government done to follow through on the September 17, 2008 commitment to ban flavoured tobacco products that appeal to children and ban tobacco advertising in print and electronic media that can be seen and read by our youth?

Q-1422 — April 24, 2009 — Ms. Bennett (St. Paul's) — What is the government’s strategy to protect Canada’s drug supply in face of the United States’ increasing demand for discount drugs?

Q-1432 — April 24, 2009 — Mr. Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis) — With regard to aquifers in Canada: (a) what percentage of Canada’s groundwater has been mapped by the government; (b) what percentage of Canada’s groundwater has been mapped by the provincial and territorial governments; (c) how much has the Canadian government spent, directly or indirectly, on groundwater mapping in each of the last ten years; (d) how much have each of the provinces and territories spent on groundwater in each of the last ten years; (e) is all federal groundwater mapping done by the Canadian Geological Survey, if not, to whom is third-party groundwater mapping contracted out; and (f) do provinces and territories share the data they collect on groundwater mapping with the federal government?

Q-144 — April 27, 2009 — Mr. Murphy (Charlottetown) — With regard to the 16th Annual Report to the Prime Minister on the Public Service of Canada, which reported that a total of 4,200 individuals were recruited from Canadian universities by the various departments and agencies of the government during the fiscal year 2008-2009, what is the detailed breakdown as to which universities each of the 4,200 students came from?

Q-1452 — April 27, 2009 — Mr. Atamanenko (British Columbia Southern Interior) — With respect to the Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization (CAIS) program and the AgriStability program in each of the participating provinces and in each of the program years from 2003 to 2007: (a) what were the number of applications received; (b) what were the number of payment files; (c) what was the average of all benefit payments below $500,000; (d) how many payment files were greater than $500,000; (e) what percentage of applicants received actual payments; (f) what was the farm type associated with each recipient of a payment of $500,000 or greater; (g) what was the average reference year margin of all participants by farm type; (h) what were the contributing reasons for the reduced payment percentage in 2007; (i) what were the contributing reasons for the reduced average reference year margins in 2007; and (j) what was the rationale or intended purpose of implementing the mandatory accrual reference year margin?

Q-1462 — April 27, 2009 — Mr. Rae (Toronto Centre) — With regard to Passport Canada, since January 2008, by month and region: (a) how many part-time service agents have been hired; and (b) how many full-time service agents have been hired?

Q-1472 — April 27, 2009 — Mr. Rae (Toronto Centre) — With respect to the Canadian foreign aid committed to the ongoing conflict in Sri Lanka: (a) how is aid being delivered to the conflict zone, by which international channels and organizations; (b) where is the money going and toward which specific initiatives; (c) how are decisions about funding allocations made and based on what recommendations; and (d) what, if any, accountability measures are in place to assure that the funds are reaching identified recipients?

Q-1482 — April 27, 2009 — Mr. Rae (Toronto Centre) — With regard to Canadian citizens held in foreign countries: (a) how many Canadian citizens are being held abroad; (b) what are their names; (c) where are they being held; and (d) what steps are being taken to retrieve them and assess their respective legal situations?

Q-1492 — April 29, 2009 — Mr. Gravelle (Nickel Belt) — With respect to funds allocated to the Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario (FedNor): (a) what is the global budget of FedNor and its programs from 2006 to the present; (b) how much of FedNor's economic development funding and other funding it administers has gone to projects and initiatives in Northern Ontario from 2006 to the present; (c) how does FedNor define “Northern Ontario” in terms of boundaries, and when and how has that definition changed since 1993; (d) what is the number of jobs directly created in Northern Ontario as well as other regions from FedNor programs and other programs it administers from 2006 to the present; (e) listed by location, what is the number of full time employees and equivalents that have worked for FedNor, on an annual basis since 2006; (f) what are the ten electoral ridings which received the most FedNor funding from 2006 to the present, broken down by year; and (g) listed by electoral riding, who were the recipients of FedNor funding, broken down by year from 2006 to the present?

Q-1502 — April 29, 2009 — Mr. Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster) — With respect to Canada’s humanitarian, reconstruction and foreign aid to the Palestinian people living in the occupied Palestinian territories: (a) what is the current status of the $300 million in foreign aid originally pledged in 2006 and re-pledged March 3, 2009 in Sharm el Sheikh, Egypt; (b) what progress was made on delivering these funds in the interim period between its original pledge and its re-pledge; (c) what are the delivery mechanisms for this aid and what department is responsible for the file; (d) what are the terms of reference for this file, and what are the timelines for delivery; (e) what proportion of these funds have been earmarked for Gaza and what are the proportions for each (i) reconstruction, (ii) humanitarian aid; (f) given the lack of construction materials within Gaza and the constrained flow of material into Gaza, what provisions have been made to ensure reconstruction; (g) what discussions, if any, have taken place with the Government of Israel to ensure protection of Canada’s investment in Gazan infrastructure; (h) what proportion of the $300 million has been earmarked for the operational budget of the Fatah-led Palestinian National Authority (PA), based in Ramallah, West Bank and what aspects of the PA’s budget will benefit from these funds; (i) given the PA’s inability to operate in Gaza, what operational caveats were placed on those portions of the $300 million earmarked for Gaza to ensure delivery; (j) what is the current status of the $4 million announced by the Government of Canada on January 7, 2009 for humanitarian aid at the height of Israel’s military operation on Gaza, to be divided between the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinians in the Near East and the International Committee of the Red Cross and the Red Crescent; (k) what commitments, if any, were made to deliver these funds in a timely manner to the people for whom they were allocated and how did they help alleviate the suffering of civilians under duress as a result of Israel’s bombardment; (l) were these funds delivered (i) if not, why, and what is the current status of the funds, (ii) if so, how, and what were the delivery mechanisms for this aid, the Canadian federal department responsible for the file and the terms of reference for the file; (m) what were, or are expected to be, the concrete outcomes of the funds in terms of medicines, foodstuffs, shelter, water or other material; (n) was the aid delivered, or will it be delivered, through Egypt or Israel; (o) was the aid at any point inhibited by Israel’s restrictions on aid flow during the military operation and, if so, what plans, if any, does the government have to hold public debate on this matter and how will this affect future Canadian aid flow to Gaza; and (p) what other funds have been allocated by the government for Gaza?

Q-1512 — April 29, 2009 — Mr. Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster) — With respect to the government's hospitality spending: (a) how much did the government spend on the purchase of alcoholic drinks for hospitality purposes including wine, beer and hard liquor, during receptions and other similar events, such as lunches, dinners, meetings, and all such similar gatherings, hosted in the Parliamentary precinct, for the fiscal year 2007-2008; and (b) what departmental measures are in place to monitor expenditures on alcohol at public expense?

Q-1522 — April 29, 2009 — Mr. Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster) — With regards to the $33 billion Building Canada plan announced in Budget 2007: (a) what are the total federal funds committed for expenditure, as well as the amount effectively spent, to Canadian municipalities, through the Building Canada plan, per year, since its inception; (b) who are the recipients of these funds, what is the breakdown for every province and territory, as well as the criteria used for allocating these funds; and (c) what are the changes to the allocation criteria in Budget 2009?

Q-1532 — April 30, 2009 — Mr. Maloway (Elmwood—Transcona) — What is the government doing to ensure that MTS Allstream and other similar enterprises are treated fairly by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission and not diminished in favour of telecommunication giants?

Q-1542 — April 30, 2009 — Mr. Andrews (Avalon) — With regard to funding from the government, through the Department of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, for an extension of Conception Bay South By-Pass Road, from Legion Road to Seal Cove, in Newfoundland and Labrador: (a) was there an official approval of this project by the government on or before December 17, 2007 and, if so, (i) what amount of funding was approved, (ii) what date was it approved, (iii) why was it not included in a news release issued by the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities on December 17, 2007; (b) if no formal approval was given for this project by the government prior to December 17, 2007, has there been any formal project approval given for an extension to the Conception Bay South By-Pass Road since December 17, 2007 and, if so, on what date; and (c) is the project to extend the Conception Bay South By-Pass Road, from Legion to Seal Cove, currently being reviewed or recommended for approval within the Department of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities?

Q-155 — April 30, 2009 — Mrs. Jennings (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine) — With regards to the government’s animal welfare policies: (a) to which projects, programs and to which organizations has funding been allocated; (b) what is the amount pledged for each project, program and organization; (c) what total amounts have been allocated towards animal welfare in the last 4 fiscal years, and what proportion was directed to regulatory enforcement or to other kinds of programs; (d) what relevant government regulations have existed and currently exist now; (e) has the government (or its agencies and departments) conducted consultations on animal welfare issues since January 23, 2006 and, if so, which groups have been consulted; (f) what mechanisms does Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency use to obtain input from valid animal welfare groups on animal welfare issues; (g) what amount has the government allocated to the National Farm Animal Care Council for this fiscal year and the last 4 fiscal years; (h) what amount has the government allocated to the Canadian Council on Animal Care for this fiscal year and the last 4 fiscal years; (i) what amount of the $1.3 billion allocated to the government’s Growing Forward program is dedicated exclusively to animal care and animal welfare; (j) what sections of the Growing Forward framework will allow for ongoing funding of animal welfare programs and enforcement in Canada; and (k) within Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, what departments address animal welfare issues?

Q-156 — April 30, 2009 — Mrs. Jennings (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine) — With regards to the Canadian airports and night flights: (a) how many Canadian airports are designated as international airports, and what are their names; (b) by month, over the last 5 years, what is the number of flights that, between 11:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. and between midnight and 6:00 a.m., (i) take off, (ii) land, (iii) weigh more than 45,000 kilograms, (iv) weigh less, (v) are regularly scheduled flights, (vi) are charter flights, (vii) are caused by weather delays, (viii) are for emergency medical reasons, (ix) are for military operations, (x) are for delays beyond a carrier’s control; (c) for each of Canada’s international airports, what is the specific legal or regulatory requirement for public consultation concerning the creation of new flight corridors or the modification of existing ones; (d) which organizations are the relevant airport governing bodies required to consult with before the creation of a new flight corridor or the modification of an existing one; and (e) what legal or regulatory requirements exist, if any, that oblige Canada’s international airports’ governing bodies to take into account public health factors when modifying or establishing flight corridors or increasing the number of night flights?

Q-157 — April 30, 2009 — Mrs. Jennings (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine) — What is the total amount of government funding since fiscal year 1998-1999 up to and including the current fiscal year, allocated within the constituency of Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, listing each department or agency, initiative, and amount?

Q-1582 — April 30, 2009 — Ms. Chow (Trinity—Spadina) — With regard to spousal sponsorship, what are: (a) the number, overall percentage and the countries of origin of spousal sponsorship through family class applications rejected by visa offices but (i) approved by the Immigration Appeal Board, (ii) approved by the Federal Court; and (b) the wait times on average for spousal sponsorship in visa offices from India, China, the Middle East and African countries compared with wait times from European countries, and the reasons for the difference?

Q-1592 — April 30, 2009 — Ms. Chow (Trinity—Spadina) — What is the number and countries of origin of refugee claimants, based on sexual orientation, who were rejected by each Immigration Refugee Board member since 2006, the approval and rejection rates of each of these Board members, and the cost each year to defend refugees' appeals at the Federal Court?

Q-160 — May 4, 2009 — Mr. Reid (Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington) — With regard to the public reports which are issued by or on behalf of the RCMP, in which information is made public as to what took place each time a taser is fired or otherwise used to control a member of the public, both in the case of the incident of Adam Dormer, who was tasered on July 21 2007, and in all other cases since January 1, 2001: (a) what changes have been made, from time to time, with regard to the types of information being released, both in terms of types of information being withheld, which had previously been made public, and types of information being made public, which had previously been withheld; (b) what instructions were given to the individuals who prepared these reports, regarding the types of information which ought to be withheld or made public; (c) who issued any such instructions, and with whom did the instructions originate; and (d) has additional information been collected, which is not being released, on any of the following topics, (i) related injuries which took place during the tasering incident, (ii) the duration of the shocks, (iii) whether the individual who was tasered had been armed, (iv) whether the individual who was tasered was violent, combative or posed a risk of death or grievous bodily harm, (v) what alternative measures the police tried before resorting to a taser, (vi) whether the individual who was tasered was first given a verbal warning, (vii) whether the individual who was tasered had already been handcuffed or otherwise restrained?

Q-1612 — May 4, 2009 — Mr. Dewar (Ottawa Centre) — With regard to the Shi’ite personal status law: (a) when did Canadian officials in Afghanistan first become aware of the proposed legislation; (b) when was knowledge of the proposed law communicated to the government; (c) to which branches, in which departments, was this information sent; (d) what action did the government take upon knowledge of the proposed legislation; (e) on what dates did the Ministers of Foreign Affairs, International Trade, and International Cooperation first become aware of these proposals; and (f) on what date did Canadian representatives in Afghanistan receive a copy of the proposed law and with whom have they shared this information outside of government?

Q-1622 — May 4, 2009 — Mr. Dewar (Ottawa Centre) — With regards to the Canada’s operations in Afghanistan: (a) what is the total amount of money spent on translation of documents from Dari and Pashto to English and French in the past five years on a yearly basis and in total; (b) what is the number of staff in the Afghanistan Task Force who can speak, read and write in Dari in Kabul, in Kandahar and in Ottawa in the past five years on a yearly basis and in total; (c) what is the number of staff in the Afghanistan Task Force who can speak, read and write in Pashto, in Kabul, in Kandahar and in Ottawa in the past five years on a yearly basis and in total; (d) what is the total budget of Afghanistan Task Force for translation in the past five years on a yearly basis and in total; (e) what is the total budget of Afghanistan Task Force for communications in the past five years on a yearly basis and in total; (f) what is the number of staff on the Afghanistan Task Force responsible for communications in the past five years on a yearly basis and in total; and (g) what form of protection is offered to local Afghans working for Canada’s operations in Afghanistan who are citizens of Afghanistan at the end of their service with the Canadian government?

Q-1632 — May 4, 2009 — Mr. Dewar (Ottawa Centre) — With respect to Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) over the past five fiscal years: (a) what is the total amount of PILT paid per federally-owned building on a yearly basis and in total and which municipalities received the payment for every building; (b) which municipalities receive PILT, on a yearly basis and in total; (c) which of the federally-owned buildings is slated to be sold; and (d) which of the federally-owned buildings is under corporate asset review?

Q-1642 — May 4, 2009 — Mr. Dewar (Ottawa Centre) — With respect to temperature control in government buildings and facilities over the last five years: (a) what are the total government expenditures for heating on (i) an annual basis, (ii) on an annual basis for each federal building; and (b) what are the total government expenditures for air conditioning (i) on an annual basis, (ii) on an annual basis for each federal building?

Q-1652 — May 4, 2009 — Mr. Martin (Winnipeg Centre) — What is the total amount of government funding, since fiscal year 2004-2005 up to and including the current fiscal year, allocated within the constituency of Winnipeg Centre, listing each department or agency, initiative, and amount?

Q-1662 — May 5, 2009 — Mr. Mulcair (Outremont) — With regards to the operations of the Canada Desk of the Union Bank of Switzerland (UBS) and the Government of Canada's response: (a) when was the government first made aware of possible improper activity of the desk; (b) what were the immediate steps taken by the Canada Revenue Agency to allegations about the desk; (c) what is the estimated value of money that the desk held for each year from Canadian clients beginning in 2004 and ending this year; (d) what role has the government played in the Justice Department's investigations; (e) what is the estimated amount of tax leakage from this operation; (f) what were government departments able to determine about the locations in Canada that were used; and (g) what potential fines or penalties is the government considering at this time?

Q-1672 — May 5, 2009 — Ms. Chow (Trinity—Spadina) — What is the number of live-in caregivers who have not been able to successfully become landed immigrants in Canada due to: (a) mistreatment and exploitation by their employers; (b) cases of reported involvement of unscrupulous consultants, lawyers and recruiters; (c) the loss of employment due to reported cruel, unfair, and unjust employment demands and conditions set by the employer; and (d) an inability to obtain alternate employment opportunities within the time frame stipulated by the Immigration and Refugees Protection Act?

Q-1682 — May 5, 2009 — Ms. Savoie (Victoria) — What is the total amount of government funding, since fiscal year 2004-2005 up to and including the current fiscal year, allocated within the constituency of Victoria, listing each department or agency, initiative, and amount?

Q-1692 — May 5, 2009 — Mrs. Lavallée (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert) — Are there Canadian Heritage or Canada Council grant programs under which Les Grands Ballets Canadiens could receive more than $51,000 to stage a production outside the country and, if so, what are the programs?

Q-1702 — May 5, 2009 — Mrs. Lavallée (Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert) — Are there Canadian Heritage or Canada Council grant programs under which a dance or theatre company or a performing arts organization could receive more than $51,000 to stage a production outside the country and, if so, what are the programs?

Q-171 — May 5, 2009 — Mr. Christopherson (Hamilton Centre) — What is the total amount of government funding, since fiscal year 2004-2005 up to and including the current fiscal year, allocated within the constituency of Hamilton Centre, listing each department or agency, initiative, and amount?

Q-1722 — May 5, 2009 — Mr. Andrews (Avalon) — With regard to the Extension of Employment Insurance Benefits, under the Pilot Project 10 and funding for skills and development and training, within the Department of Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC): (a) broken down by provincial and territorial jurisdictions, how many clients of HRSDC were receiving EI benefits on February 28, 2009 and out of that number, (i) how many were receiving the benefit of the additional five weeks under Project Pilot 10, in each provincial and territorial jurisdiction, (ii) what were the same statistics by provincial and territorial jurisdiction for March 31, 2009; and (b) broken down by provincial and territorial jurisdiction, (i) how many clients applied and how many clients were approved for training and skills development benefits while receiving regular Employment Insurance benefits from January 1, 2008 to April 30, 2008, (ii) how many clients applied and how many clients were approved for training and skills development benefits while receiving regular Employment Insurance benefits from January 1, 2009 to April 30, 2009?

1 Requires Oral Answer 2 Response requested within 45 days