House Publications
The Debates are the report—transcribed, edited, and corrected—of what is said in the House. The Journals are the official record of the decisions and other transactions of the House. The Order Paper and Notice Paper contains the listing of all items that may be brought forward on a particular sitting day, and notices for upcoming items.
For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
|
|
|
Notice PaperNo. 10 Tuesday, March 16, 2010 10:00 a.m. |
|
|
|
|
Introduction of Government Bills |
|
Introduction of Private Members' Bills |
|
Notices of Motions (Routine Proceedings) |
|
Questions |
|
| Q-1382 — March 15, 2010 — Mr. Silva (Davenport) — With regard to government’s budgets: (a) what programs in the 2006 budget used less than 50% of their allocated funding and for each of these, (i) what is the total amount of funding they were allocated and how much did they use, (ii) which programs were cancelled or not reintroduced in the 2007 budget, (iii) which programs were continued in the 2007 budget, how much funding did they receive in the 2007 budget and how much did they use; (b) what programs in the 2007 budget used less than 50% of their allocated funding and for each of these, (i) what is the total amount of funding they were allocated and how much did they use, (ii) which programs were cancelled or not reintroduced in the 2008 budget, (iii) which programs were continued in the 2008 budget, how much funding did they receive in the 2008 budget and how much did they use; and (c) what programs in the 2008 budget used less than 50% of their allocated funding and for each of these, (i) what is the total amount of funding they were allocated and how much did they use, (ii) which programs were cancelled or not reintroduced in the 2009 budget, (iii) which programs were continued in the 2009 budget, and how much funding are they to receive? |
| Q-1392 — March 15, 2010 — Mr. Silva (Davenport) — With regard to non-governmental employers that hired FSWEP (Federal Student Work Experience Program) students, since 2006 for all 308 constituencies: (a) what are the names of the employers and their companies; (b) what is the number of students hired in each case; and (c) what is the amount of money received by each student and by each employer in each case? |
| Q-1402 — March 15, 2010 — Mr. Silva (Davenport) — With regard to proposed stimulus spending for infrastructure and construction projects outlined in the government’s 2009 budget: (a) how much funding has been allocated for these projects; (b) what projects are currently known to be funded or have been proposed to receive funding; (c) where are these projects occurring; (d) how is the funding for these projects distributed; (e) how are the locations for these projects selected; and (f) what system determines the priority of these locations and projects? |
| Q-1412 — March 15, 2010 — Mr. Silva (Davenport) — With regard to government funding for museums, for each of the last four fiscal years, broken down by province and territory: (a) how much has been spent by the Canada Cultural Spaces Fund; (b) what was the funding for (i) exhibits for museums, (ii) for arts, (iii) for other forms of exhibits, displays, etc.; and (c) how much has been spent by the Museums Assistance Program? |
| Q-1422 — March 15, 2010 — Ms. Neville (Winnipeg South Centre) — With regard to the Treasury Board and the Department of Finance: (a) what process is in place for gender-based analysis on departmental policies in each department; (b) what measures are put in place to ensure gender-based analysis is done on legislation in each department; (c) if a policy or legislation does not achieve gender parity through a gender-based analysis, what measures, if any, are taken to ensure the policy or legislation is gender appropriate in each department; (d) what measures are taken to ensure gender parity in policies or legislation in each department; (e) are gender-based analyses on any policy or legislation conducted in each department and, if so, what is the content of those analyses; (f) how many staff are dedicated to do gender-based analysis in each department; (g) to whom do staff in (f) report to in each department; and (h) what direction does each department give to staff on gender-based analysis? |
| Q-1432 — March 15, 2010 — Ms. Neville (Winnipeg South Centre) — With regard to violence against women and the Office of the Coordinator of the Status of Women: (a) how many programs have been approved by the Department of Justice and the Office of the Coordinator of the Status of Women to address this issue since 2006; (b) how much has been allocated to those projects since 2006; (c) what are the priorities of each project approved; (d) how many programs have been denied funding since 2006; (e) what is the total funding that would have gone to denied programs; (f) what were the parameters of each project that had been denied since 2006; (g) what were the reasons given for each project's denial since 2006; (h) what initiatives have been introduced government-wide addressing violence against women since 2006; (i) what specific bills have been introduced since 2006 that address violence against women; (j) what departmental initiatives have been introduced by the Office of the Coordinator of the Status of Women to combat violence against women since 2006; (k) what specific bills have been introduced by the department since 2006; (l) what gender-based analysis has been done on all government initiatives addressing violence against women; (m) what gender-based analysis has been done on all government bills concerning violence against women since 2006; and (n) what gender-based analysis has been done on all bills put forward by the Department of Justice since 2006? |
| Q-1442 — March 15, 2010 — Ms. Neville (Winnipeg South Centre) — With regard to the New Horizons Program: (a) how many applications have been received from Manitoba in the last three proposal calls; (b) what organizations have received funding from the New Horizons Program in Manitoba from the last three proposal calls; (c) how many weeks was the call for proposals available for all organizations; (d) what is the criteria for funding in each of the last three proposal calls; and (e) what is the rationale for any changes that have been made in the program criteria over the last three proposal calls? |
Notices of Motions for the Production of Papers |
|
Business of Supply |
|
| Opposition Motions |
| March 15, 2010 — Mrs. Hughes (Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing) — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should extend the current freeze on Employment Insurance premium hikes until such time as the historical debt owed to Canadian employers and workers is paid. |
|
|
| March 15, 2010 — Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek) — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should take immediate action to address the pension crisis by: (a) calling a National Pension Summit in 2010; (b) improving the Guaranteed Income Supplement to lift all Canadian seniors out of poverty; (c) initiating consultations with the provinces and territories with the goal of phasing in a doubling of the Canada Pension Plan; and (d) amending bankruptcy laws so that pensions are placed in the front of all other creditors in the event of insolvency. |
|
|
| March 15, 2010 — Mr. Christopherson (Hamilton Centre) — That this House call on the government to hold a referendum seeking a mandate to propose a constitutional amendment to abolish the Senate. |
|
|
| March 15, 2010 — Mr. Martin (Winnipeg Centre) — That the House express its belief that supply management of agricultural commodities, such as beef, milk, poultry, eggs, barley and wheat, is an integral part of a strong, sustainable rural economy, and reconfirm its continued support for the Canadian Wheat Board as the single desk marketer for wheat and barley. |
|
|
| March 15, 2010 — Mr. Martin (Winnipeg Centre) — That, in the opinion of this House: (a) attempts by the government to balance the books through the sale of valuable public assets are regrettable as they cannot address the existing structural deficit; and (b) sale of public assets by the government should be considered only when it is demonstrated that such sale of assets would be of net long-term benefit to the Canadian public. |
|
|
| March 15, 2010 — Mr. Layton (Toronto—Danforth) — That, in the opinion of the House, the Prime Minister shall not advise the Governor General to prorogue any session of any Parliament for longer than seven calendar days without a specific resolution of this House of Commons to support such a prorogation. |
|
|
| March 15, 2010 — Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas) — That this House affirm its support for the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons by a renewed commitment to nuclear non-proliferation and a global ban on all nuclear weapons negotiated through a Nuclear Weapons Convention. |
|
|
| March 15, 2010 — Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas) — That the House calls on the government to recognize Canadians’ right to know and the principle of open government, rather than placing further restrictions on the release of information and opting for increased secrecy, and therefore this House urges the government to introduce within 30 days legislation based on former Information Commissioner John Reid’s draft bill to revise the Access to Information Act, in consultation with the Information Commissioner. |
|
|
| March 15, 2010 — Mr. Atamanenko (British Columbia Southern Interior) — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should take the following actions in order to avert another crisis similar to the one of 2009 which severely impacted Canadian flax farmers whereby their 2009 flax exports were found to be widely contaminated with a genetically engineered (GE) flax called CDC Triffid, which was not approved in our major export markets and which led to the wholesale rejection of all Canadian flax shipments to the European Union: (a) review the current regulatory process to include consideration of market harm in the approval of unconfined release and confined release of plants with novel traits (genetically engineered plants); (b) institute an immediate moratorium on the confined release and unconfined release of genetically engineered alfalfa pending the outcome of the regulatory review; and (c) report back to Parliament, through the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, the results of the government’s review of the regulatory process within twelve calendar months or at the earliest opportunity following the twelve months if Parliament is not in session. |
Government Business |
|
Private Members' Notices of Motions |
|
| M-505 — March 15, 2010 — Mr. Karygiannis (Scarborough—Agincourt) — That the House acknowledge the actions of Saddam Hussein against the Kurdish people in Iraq, including the poison gas attack against Halabja on March 16, 1988, the destruction of Iraqi Kurdish villages and the systematic persecution of Kurds in Iraq, and condemn these acts as crimes against humanity. |
| M-506 — March 15, 2010 — Mr. Angus (Timmins—James Bay) — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should amend section 29 of the Copyright Act in such a way as to expand the Fair Dealing provisions of the act, specifically by deleting section 29 and inserting the following: “29. Fair dealing of a copyrighted work for purposes such as research, private study, criticism, news reporting or review, is not an infringement of copyright. 29.1 In determining whether the dealing made of a work in any particular case is fair dealing, the factors to be considered shall include: (a) the purpose of the dealing; (b) the character of the dealing; (c) the amount of the dealing; (d) alternatives to the dealing; (e) the nature of the work; and (f) the effect of the dealing on the work.”. |
Private Members' Business |
| C-384 — March 3, 2010 — Ms. Lalonde (La Pointe-de-l'Île) — Second reading and reference to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights of Bill C-384, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (right to die with dignity). |
|
|
|
| 2 Response requested within 45 days |
|