Site Map | A to Z Index | Contact Us | Français

Parliament of Canada

Home | Parliamentary Business | Senators and Members | About Parliament | Visitor Information | Employment


Section Home | Print format

Publications - March 25, 2011 (Previous)
Debates | Order Paper and Notice Paper | Journals | Projected Order of Business

Options
Back to calendar | Hide Hyperlinks | Two Columns View

HOUSE OF COMMONS OF CANADA
40th PARLIAMENT, 3rd SESSION

Journals

No. 149

Friday, March 25, 2011

10:00 a.m.



Prayers
Royal Assent

A message was received informing the Commons that on March 25, 2011, at 7:55 a.m., His Excellency the Governor General signified Royal Assent by written declaration to the following Bills:

Bill C-442, An Act to establish a National Holocaust Monument — Chapter No. 13;

Bill C-475, An Act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (methamphetamine and ecstasy) — Chapter No. 14.

Business of Supply

The Order was read for the consideration of the Business of Supply.

Mr. Ignatieff (Etobicoke—Lakeshore), seconded by Mr. Goodale (Wascana), moved, — That the House agree with the finding of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs that the government is in contempt of Parliament, which is unprecedented in Canadian parliamentary history, and consequently, the House has lost confidence in the government.

Debate arose thereon.

Mr. Baird (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons), seconded by Mr. Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons), moved, — That this question be now put.

Debate arose thereon.

Statements By Members

Pursuant to Standing Order 31, Members made statements.

Oral Questions

Pursuant to Standing Order 30(5), the House proceeded to Oral Questions.

Motions

By unanimous consent, it was ordered, — That, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practice of the House, following Oral Questions today, a Member from each recognized party and the Deputy Speaker may make a brief statement and the time taken for these statements shall be added to the time provided for Government Orders.

Daily Routine Of Business

Tabling of Documents

The Speaker laid upon the Table, — Report of the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada following the federal by-elections held in the electoral districts of Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, Vaughan and Winnipeg North on November 29, 2010, pursuant to the Canada Elections Act, S.C. 2000, c. 9, s. 536. — Sessional Paper No. 8560-403-4-03. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(5), permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs)


Pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), Mr. Cannon (Minister of Foreign Affairs) laid upon the Table, — Copy of the Freezing Assets of Corrupt Foreign Officials (Tunisia and Egypt) Regulations (P.C. 2011-427 and JUS-81000-2-870), pursuant to the Freezing Assets of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act, S.C. 2011, c. 10, s. 7. — Sessional Paper No. 8560-403-1047-01. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(5), permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development)


Pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), Mr. Rickford (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development) laid upon the Table, — Document entitled "Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement" for the period of April 1, 2008, to March 31, 2009. — Sessional Paper No. 8525-403-36.


Pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), Mr. Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) laid upon the Table, — Government responses, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), to the following petitions:

— No. 403-1367 concerning Canada's railways. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-403-84-07;

— Nos. 403-1370 and 403-1371 concerning the protection of the environment. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-403-78-06;

— No. 403-1459 concerning Afghanistan. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-403-55-09.


Presenting Reports from Committees

Mr. Sorenson (Crowfoot), from the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, presented the Ninth Report of the Committee, "Issues Surrounding Security at the G8 and G20 Summits". — Sessional Paper No. 8510-403-236.

Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the Committee requested that the government table a comprehensive response.

A copy of the relevant Minutes of Proceedings (Meetings Nos. 32, 35, 36, 38, 44, 45 and 60 to 62) was tabled.


Ms. Fry (Vancouver Centre), from the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, presented the 14th Report of the Committee, "Interim Report - Call Into the Night: An Overview of Violence Against Aboriginal Women". — Sessional Paper No. 8510-403-237.

A copy of the relevant Minutes of Proceedings (Meetings Nos. 12 to 14, 21, 24, 25, 32, 44 to 51, 53, 54, 56 to 58, 60 and 61) was tabled.


Mr. Richardson (Calgary Centre), from the Standing Committee on International Trade, presented the Sixth Report of the Committee, "Mission to Washington, D.C. on the State of Canada-United States Trade Relations". — Sessional Paper No. 8510-403-238.

A copy of the relevant Minutes of Proceedings (Meetings Nos. 44 and 50) was tabled.


Mr. Stanton (Simcoe North), from the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, presented the Sixth Report of the Committee (Bill C-530, An Act to amend the Northwest Territories Act (borrowing limits), without amendment). — Sessional Paper No. 8510-403-239.

A copy of the relevant Minutes of Proceedings (Meetings Nos. 52 and 55) was tabled.


Mr. McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood), from the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates, presented the 11th Report of the Committee, "Effectiveness, Management and Operation of the Expenses Incurred for the G8/G20 Summits". — Sessional Paper No. 8510-403-240.

Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the Committee requested that the government table a comprehensive response.

A copy of the relevant Minutes of Proceedings (Meetings Nos. 30, 33, 35, 37, 43 and 56) was tabled.


Mrs. Smith (Kildonan—St. Paul), from the Standing Committee on Health, presented the 16th Report of the Committee (Main Estimates, 2011-12 — Votes 1, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45 and 50 under HEALTH). — Sessional Paper No. 8510-403-241.

A copy of the relevant Minutes of Proceedings (Meeting No. 56) was tabled.


Mr. Volpe (Eglinton—Lawrence), from the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, presented the 27th Report of the Committee, "Chapter 3, Service Delivery, of the Fall 2010 Report of the Auditor General of Canada". — Sessional Paper No. 8510-403-242.

Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the Committee requested that the government table a comprehensive response.

A copy of the relevant Minutes of Proceedings (Meetings Nos. 34, 42 and 51) was tabled.


Introduction of Private Members' Bills

Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Simms (Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor), seconded by Ms. Foote (Random—Burin—St. George's), Bill C-644, An Act to amend the Excise Tax Act (funeral arrangements), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.


Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Ms. Leslie (Halifax), seconded by Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan), Bill C-645, An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act (gratuities), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.


Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Ms. Leslie (Halifax), seconded by Ms. Ashton (Churchill), Bill C-646, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (victims of trafficking in persons), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.


Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mrs. Jennings (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine), seconded by Mr. Dhaliwal (Newton—North Delta), Bill C-647, An Act to amend the Civil Air Navigation Services Commercialization Act (environmental impacts), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.


Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Gravelle (Nickel Belt), seconded by Mr. Masse (Windsor West), Bill C-648, An Act to amend the Investment Canada Act (enhanced ministerial oversight), was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.


Presenting Petitions

Pursuant to Standing Order 36, petitions certified correct by the Clerk of Petitions were presented as follows:

— by Mr. Coderre (Bourassa), two concerning the Employment Insurance Program (Nos. 403-1625 and 403-1626);

— by Mr. Bouchard (Chicoutimi—Le Fjord), one concerning Old Age Security benefits (No. 403-1627);

— by Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), three concerning the protection of the environment (Nos. 403-1628 to 403-1630), three concerning foreign aid (Nos. 403-1631 to 403-1633) and one concerning natural health products (No. 403-1634);

— by Mr. Weston (West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country), one concerning cruelty to animals (No. 403-1635), one concerning the parole system (No. 403-1636) and one concerning appointments (No. 403-1637);

— by Mr. Tonks (York South—Weston), one concerning health care services (No. 403-1638);

— by Mr. Lévesque (Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou), one concerning funding aid (No. 403-1639);

— by Mr. Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley), one concerning the Canadian Coast Guard (No. 403-1640), four concerning the protection of the environment (Nos. 403-1641 to 403-1644) and one concerning asbestos (No. 403-1645);

— by Mr. Payne (Medicine Hat), one concerning border crossings (No. 403-1646);

— by Ms. Neville (Winnipeg South Centre), six concerning fur trade (Nos. 403-1647 to 403-1652);

— by Mr. Asselin (Manicouagan), one concerning Old Age Security benefits (No. 403-1653);

— by Ms. Ashton (Churchill), thirty-six concerning funding aid (Nos. 403-1654 to 403-1689) and two concerning the mining industry (Nos. 403-1690 and 403-1691);

— by Mr. Boughen (Palliser), one concerning poverty (No. 403-1692);

— by Mr. Regan (Halifax West), one concerning poverty (No. 403-1693);

— by Mr. Dufour (Repentigny), one concerning funding aid (No. 403-1694);

— by Mrs. Hughes (Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing), one concerning health care services (No. 403-1695) and one concerning the income tax system (No. 403-1696);

— by Mr. Simms (Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor), six concerning the Employment Insurance Program (Nos. 403-1697 to 403-1702);

— by Ms. Demers (Laval), one concerning Old Age Security benefits (No. 403-1703);

— by Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway), one concerning the income tax system (No. 403-1704) and one concerning China (No. 403-1705);

— by Mr. Cotler (Mount Royal), one concerning health care services (No. 403-1706);

— by Mr. Carrier (Alfred-Pellan), one concerning funding aid (No. 403-1707);

— by Mr. Allen (Welland), one concerning the income tax system (No. 403-1708) and one concerning international trade (No. 403-1709);

— by Mr. Oliphant (Don Valley West), one concerning poverty (No. 403-1710);

— by Ms. Bourgeois (Terrebonne—Blainville), one concerning the Copyright Act (No. 403-1711);

— by Mr. Martin (Winnipeg Centre), one concerning asbestos (No. 403-1712);

— by Mr. Brison (Kings—Hants), one concerning poverty (No. 403-1713).


Questions on the Order Paper

Mr. Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) presented the answers to questions Q-924 to Q-928 and Q-933 on the Order Paper.


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(7), Mr. Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) presented the returns to the following questions made into Orders for Return:

Q-922 — Ms. Duncan (Etobicoke North) — With respect to Canadian Forces (CF) members, reservists, and veterans and Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD), multiple sclerosis (MS), Parkinson's disease (PD), and acquired brain injury (ABI): (a) what, if any, research examines a possible relationship between military service and (i) ADRD, (ii) MS, (iii) PD, (iv) ABI and, if so, (v) what is the summary of research findings related to each of (i), (ii), (iii), (iv) and any of their recommendations and, if not, (vi) why not; (b) what, if any, research examines a possible relationship between operational stress injuries (OSIs), particularly post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and ADRD and, if so, what are the findings; c) what, if any, research examines a possible relationship between OSIs, particularly PTSD, and initiation of MS or exacerbation of MS and, if so, what are the findings; (d) what, if any, research examines a possible relationship between military environmental exposures and (i) ADRD, (ii) PD; (e) what, if any, research examines a possible relationship between ABI and PTSD and between ABI and ADRD; (f) what are the Department of National Defence’s (DND) policies with respect to a CF member's or reservist's diagnosis for each of the four identified conditions, specifically what a diagnosis means in terms of (i) current employment, (ii) opportunity for advancement, (iii) honourable discharge, (iv) presumptive illness, (v) pension, (vi) benefits; (g) what happens when someone in the CF or the reserves is diagnosed with each of the four conditions; (h) what are Veterans Affairs Canada’s (VAC) policies with respect to a veteran's diagnosis for each of the four identified conditions, specifically what a diagnosis means in terms of (i) any employment, (ii) opportunity for advancement, (iii) presumptive illness, (iv) pension, (v) benefits; (i) what are the benefits for which a CF member and reservist with (i) ADRD, (ii) MS, (iii) PD, (iv) ABI is eligible; (j) how are benefits in (i) calculated and for what services and therapies, including but not limited to, aids and maintenance of the aids, disease modifying therapies, medical equipment, medical exams, occupational therapy, physical therapy, etc., are members and reservists eligible; (k) how do benefits for ADRD, MS, and PD differ from those available to members of the CF and reservists who suffer from a physical injury or an OSI; (l) what are the benefits for which a veteran with (i) ADRD, (ii) MS, (iii) PD, (iv) ABI is eligible; (m) how are benefits in (l) calculated and for what services and therapies, including but not limited to, aids and maintenance of aids, disease modifying therapies, medical equipment, medical exams, occupational therapy, physical therapy, etc., are veterans eligible; (n) what, if any, studies of international efforts have been undertaken by DND and VAC regarding military service and each of ADRD, MS, PD, and ABI and, (i) if so, specify what studies, the chief findings, and any recommendations and, (ii) if not, why not; (o) how many members currently serving in the CF and reserves have received a diagnosis of ADRD, MS, PD, or ABI and how many veterans suffer from each of the identified conditions; (p) of the cases identified in (o), (i) how many have been awarded a service-related disability, (ii) what specific criteria were required to award a service-related disability, (iii) how was “benefit of the doubt” ensured and what was the framework followed to ensure reliability and validity, (iv) how many were denied a service-related disability, (v) how many people are appealing a decision; (q) how many CF members and reservists with (i) ADRD, (ii) MS, (iii) PD, (iv) ABI were required to leave the military during the last 5 years, 10 years and 20 years; (r) of those CF members and reservists in (q), what was the average time from diagnosis to honourable discharge, what opportunities might have existed for members and reservists to keep working but in an altered capacity, were opportunities explored, why or why not, and what was the average impact on pension and benefits; (s) what, if any, tracking was undertaken of the member's or reservist's (i) disease progression, (ii) work status, (iii) family life, (iv) mental health, etc., (v) what recommendations, if any, have been made or could be made to improve the quality of life of former military personnel; (t) how are each of ADRD, MS, PD, and ABI tracked among (i) CF members, (ii) reservists, (iii) veterans; and (u) what long-term care is available, if necessary, for modern-day veterans suffering from each of the four identified conditions? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-403-922.


Q-923 — Mr. Murphy (Charlottetown) — With regard to Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC): (a) how many persons were employed by VAC in Prince Edward Island for each of the fiscal years 2005-2006, 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009 and 2009-2010, broken down by (i) full-time employees, (ii) part-time employees, (iii) term contract employees, (iv) student contract employees; and (b) what was the total remuneration for VAC employees in Prince Edward Island for the same periods in (a)? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-403-923.


Q-929 — Mr. Gravelle (Nickel Belt) — With respect to federal regional economic development agencies: (a) what new programs and initiatives does each agency plan to introduce after Canada's Economic Action Plan (EAP) initiatives sunset on March 31, 2011; (b) what are the expected cuts for each federal agency once the EAP's initiatives sunset; and (c) how many jobs are created by each agency as a result of implementation of EAP initiatives. — Sessional Paper No. 8555-403-929.


Q-930 — Mr. Russell (Labrador) — With regard to the operation of 5 Wing Goose Bay: (a) what steps have been taken since January 2006 towards the establishment at the base of (i) a rapid reaction battalion, (ii) an unmanned aerial vehicle squadron; (b) as of January 1, 2009, January 1, 2010, and January 1, 2011, how many Department of National Defence civilian employees and members of the Canadian Forces were employed or stationed at (i) 444 Squadron, (ii) 5 Wing Goose Bay, but not otherwise included in the total for 444 Squadron; (c) what steps has the government taken to market 5 Wing Goose Bay for (i) foreign military flight training, (ii) any other purpose; (d) what efforts have taken place on environmental remediation at Goose Bay and what efforts are planned; (e) what are the details of any local benefits policy contained in any contract for environmental remediation projects at Goose Bay; and (f) what activity has the Department of National Defence undertaken since January 1, 2006, concerning any possible closure of the Combat Support Squadron at Goose Bay? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-403-930.


Q-931 — Mr. Russell (Labrador) — With regard to government television advertising during January and February 2011, for each of the following advertising campaigns, namely advertising for Canada’s Economic Action Plan, advertising by the Canada Revenue Agency and advertising by the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation: (a) what are the total costs associated with each campaign, including (i) production costs, (ii) advertising air-time purchases, (iii) other costs, specifying what those costs are; (b) what are the total insertions of each advertisement which constitutes each advertising campaign; (c) on what dates, times, and on which television channel or station has each advertisement aired or will each advertisement air; (d) which office or official is responsible for each advertising campaign; (e) which advertising agency or firm was contracted in respect of each advertising campaign; (f) which creative or production agency was contracted to produce each advertisement which forms part of each advertising campaign; (g) when was each advertisement filmed; (h) what were the specific instructions, directions or other communications from each department or corporation to the production or advertising team in respect of the content, tone, format, script, visual elements or all other creative elements of each ad; (i) what are the file numbers associated with each of these advertising campaigns; and (j) what are the contract numbers associated with each of these advertising campaigns? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-403-931.


Q-932 — Mr. McCallum (Markham—Unionville) — With regard to the backdrops used by the government for the announcements from December 10, 2010, to February 1, 2011, inclusive, and for October 15, 2008, to March 31, 2009, inclusive, for each backdrop purchased, what were: (a) the dates (i) the tender was issued for the backdrop, (ii) the contract was signed, (iii) the backdrop was delivered; (b) the cost of the backdrop; (c) the announcement for which the backdrop was used; (d) the department that paid for the backdrop; and (e) the date or dates the backdrop was used? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-403-932.


Q-934 — Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway) — With regard to Pre-Removal Risk Assessments (PRRAs) filed by individuals subject to removal from Canada for each year from 2005: (a) how many PRRAs were submitted; (b) how many were approved; (c) how many were denied; (d) of those denied, how many were on the grounds of (i) posing a danger to the public of Canada, (ii) posing a danger to the security of Canada, (iii) administrative reasons, (iv) other reasons; (e) what were the countries of return of the persons applying for PRRAs, both approved and denied; (f) how many PRRA applicants (i) were subject to an extradition order, (ii) were advancing a refugee claim, (iii) had a PRRA rejected and did not leave Canada; and (g) who are the individuals at Citizenship and Immigration Canada responsible for deciding the outcomes of PRRAs? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-403-934.


Q-935 — Mr. Allen (Welland) — With regard to the G8 Legacy Infrastructure Fund: (a) what was the total amount of funding allocated to the fund during fiscal year 2009-2010; (b) which departments contributed to the fund and how much money was contributed by each department; (c) what projects were supported by the G8 Legacy Infrastructure Fund and what is the total cost of each project; (d) which companies were awarded contracts and was a procurement process in place; (e) which facilities used by the G8 leaders were sponsored by the G8 Legacy Infrastructure Fund; and (f) which municipalities were awarded contracts or received funding from the G8 Legacy Infrastructure Fund and how much did they receive? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-403-935.


Q-936 — Mr. Allen (Welland) — With regard to the Canada Summer Jobs programs: (a) what was the total amount of funding allocated for the program on an annual basis from 2006 to date (i) overall in Canada, (ii) by province and territory, (iii) by riding; (b) what was the total number of student summer jobs created on an annual basis from 2006 to date (i) overall in Canada, (ii) by province and territory, (iii) by riding; (c) what was the total number of contracts awarded on an annual basis from 2006 to date (i) overall in Canada, (ii) by province and territory, (iii) by riding; (d) what was the average wage paid per year from 2006 to date (i) across Canada, (ii) by province and territory; (e) what was the average length of the contracts from 2006 to date (i) across Canada, (ii) by province and territory; and (f) what was the total number of hours of work per year from 2006 to 2011 (i) overall in Canada, (ii) by province and territory, (iii) by riding? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-403-936.


Q-937 — Ms. Dhalla (Brampton—Springdale) — With regard to programs and services of the Foreign Credentials Referral Office in the Department of Citizenship and Immigration since 2008: (a) what is the budget of each program or service including (i) each expenditure, including contracts under $10,000, (ii) the value of the expenditure, (iii) the goods or services consumed, (iv) the department under which the expenditure is accounted for, (v) whether or not the contract was tendered through an open bidding process if the goods or services were purchased from an outside source, (vi) the name of the outside source, (vii) the contract's reference number, (viii) dates of contracts, (ix) descriptions of the services provided, (x) delivery dates, (xi) original contracts' values, (xii) final contracts' values if different from the original contract's value, (xiii) how much remains unspent for each program and service; (b) what is the breakdown of costs for each meeting, townhall, roundtable and conference related to programs or services provided by the Foreign Credentials Referral Office including, but not limited to, (i) travel, (ii) accommodations, (iii) food, (iv) refreshments, (v) drafting of reports, (vi) drafting of speeches, (vii) drafting of press releases, (viii) drafting of talking points, (ix) drafting of media communications; and (c) what is the total amount spent by the Foreign Credentials Referral Office on advertising since 2008 and identify, in alphabetical order by supplier, (i) how much was spent per print advertisement, (ii) how much was spent per radio advertisement, (iii) how much was spent per Internet advertisement, (iv) how much was spent per television advertisement? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-403-937.


Q-938 — Ms. Dhalla (Brampton—Springdale) — With regard to the Foreign Credentials Referral Office in the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, since January 2008: (a) what are the monthly statistics, by labour market code, of individuals seeking information from any program or service provided by phone, in person or overseas; (b) for each labour market code, what is the breakdown of the programs, services, processes, support or agreements currently in place to assist individuals from those occupations and, if programs or services are not currently available for those labour market codes, the date the department intends to institute programs or services for those occupations; (c) for each labour market code, what is the status of negotiations with provinces, countries and professional organizations for resolving issues relating to foreign credentials; and (d) for each labour market code, what are the monthly statistics of the number of foreign credential problems of individuals successfully resolved by the programs and services of the Foreign Credentials Referral Office? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-403-938.

Business of Supply

The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Ignatieff (Etobicoke—Lakeshore), seconded by Mr. Goodale (Wascana), in relation to the Business of Supply;

And of the motion of Mr. Baird (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons), seconded by Mr. Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons).

The debate continued.

At 1:48 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 81(17), the Speaker interrupted the proceedings.

By unanimous consent, the motion "That this question be now put" was withdrawn.

Pursuant to Standing Order 81(17), the House proceeded to the putting of the question on the motion of Mr. Ignatieff (Etobicoke—Lakeshore), seconded by Mr. Goodale (Wascana), — That the House agree with the finding of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs that the government is in contempt of Parliament, which is unprecedented in Canadian parliamentary history, and consequently, the House has lost confidence in the government.

The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to on the following division:

(Division No. 204 -- Vote no 204)
YEAS: 156, NAYS: 145

YEAS -- POUR

Allen (Welland)
André
Andrews
Angus
Ashton
Asselin
Atamanenko
Bachand
Bagnell
Bains
Beaudin
Bélanger
Bellavance
Bennett
Bevington
Bigras
Blais
Bonsant
Bouchard
Bourgeois
Brison
Brunelle
Byrne
Cannis
Cardin
Carrier
Charlton
Chow
Christopherson
Coady
Coderre
Comartin
Cotler
Crombie
Crowder
Cullen
Cuzner
D'Amours
Davies (Vancouver Kingsway)
Davies (Vancouver East)
DeBellefeuille
Demers
Desnoyers
Dewar
Dhaliwal
Dhalla
Dion
Donnelly
Dorion
Dosanjh
Dryden
Duceppe
Dufour
Duncan (Etobicoke North)
Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona)
Easter
Eyking
Faille
Folco
Foote
Freeman
Fry
Gagnon
Garneau
Gaudet
Godin
Goodale
Gravelle
Guarnieri
Guay
Guimond (Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques)
Hall Findlay
Harris (St. John's East)
Holland
Hughes
Hyer
Ignatieff
Jennings
Julian
Kania
Karygiannis
Kennedy
Laforest
Laframboise
Lalonde
Lamoureux
Lavallée
Layton
LeBlanc
Lee
Lemay
Leslie
Lessard
Lévesque
MacAulay
Malhi
Malo
Maloway
Marston
Martin (Winnipeg Centre)
Martin (Sault Ste. Marie)
Masse
Mathyssen
McCallum
McGuinty
McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood)
McTeague
Ménard
Mendes
Minna
Mourani
Mulcair
Murphy (Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe)
Murphy (Charlottetown)
Murray
Nadeau
Neville
Oliphant
Ouellet
Pacetti
Paillé (Hochelaga)
Paillé (Louis-Hébert)
Paquette
Patry
Pearson
Plamondon
Pomerleau
Proulx
Rae
Rafferty
Ratansi
Regan
Rodriguez
Rota
Russell
Savage
Savoie
Scarpaleggia
Sgro
Siksay
Silva
Simms
Simson
St-Cyr
Stoffer
Szabo
Thi Lac
Thibeault
Tonks
Trudeau
Valeriote
Vincent
Volpe
Wilfert
Wrzesnewskyj
Zarac
Total: -- 156

NAYS -- CONTRE

Abbott
Ablonczy
Aglukkaq
Albrecht
Allen (Tobique—Mactaquac)
Allison
Ambrose
Anders
Anderson
Armstrong
Arthur
Ashfield
Baird
Benoit
Bernier
Bezan
Blackburn
Blaney
Block
Boucher
Boughen
Braid
Breitkreuz
Brown (Leeds—Grenville)
Brown (Newmarket—Aurora)
Brown (Barrie)
Bruinooge
Cadman
Calandra
Calkins
Cannan (Kelowna—Lake Country)
Cannon (Pontiac)
Carrie
Casson
Chong
Clarke
Clement
Cummins
Davidson
Day
Dechert
Del Mastro
Devolin
Dreeshen
Duncan (Vancouver Island North)
Dykstra
Fantino
Fast
Finley
Flaherty
Fletcher
Galipeau
Gallant
Généreux
Glover
Goldring
Goodyear
Gourde
Grewal
Guergis
Harper
Harris (Cariboo—Prince George)
Hawn
Hiebert
Hoback
Hoeppner
Holder
Jean
Kamp (Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission)
Keddy (South Shore—St. Margaret's)
Kenney (Calgary Southeast)
Kent
Kerr
Komarnicki
Kramp (Prince Edward—Hastings)
Lake
Lauzon
Lebel
Lemieux
Lobb
Lukiwski
Lunn
Lunney
MacKay (Central Nova)
MacKenzie
Mayes
McColeman
McLeod
Menzies
Merrifield
Miller
Moore (Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam)
Moore (Fundy Royal)
Nicholson
Norlock
O'Connor
O'Neill-Gordon
Obhrai
Oda
Paradis
Payne
Petit
Poilievre
Preston
Raitt
Rajotte
Rathgeber
Reid
Richards
Richardson
Rickford
Ritz
Saxton
Scheer
Schellenberger
Shea
Shipley
Shory
Smith
Sopuck
Sorenson
Stanton
Storseth
Strahl
Sweet
Thompson
Tilson
Toews
Trost
Tweed
Uppal
Van Kesteren
Van Loan
Vellacott
Verner
Wallace
Warawa
Warkentin
Watson
Weston (West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country)
Weston (Saint John)
Wong
Woodworth
Yelich
Young
Total: -- 145

PAIRED -- PAIRÉS

Nil -- Aucun
Motions

Mr. Harper (Prime Minister), seconded by Mr. Baird (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons), moved, — That this House do now adjourn.

The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to.

Returns and Reports Deposited with the Clerk of the House

Pursuant to Standing Order 32(1), papers deposited with the Clerk of the House were laid upon the Table as follows:

— by Mr. Baird (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) — Orders in Council approving certain appointments made by the Governor General in Council, pursuant to Standing Order 110(1), as follows:

— P.C. 2011-325 to P.C. 2011-327, P.C. 2011-381 and P.C. 2011-382. — Sessional Paper No. 8540-403-1-11. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(6), referred to the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development)

— P.C. 2011-363 and P.C. 2011-364. — Sessional Paper No. 8540-403-2-07. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(6), referred to the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food)

— P.C. 2011-356 and P.C. 2011-357. — Sessional Paper No. 8540-403-3-12. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(6), referred to the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage)

— P.C. 2011-348 to P.C. 2011-355. — Sessional Paper No. 8540-403-14-10. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(6), referred to the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration)

— P.C. 2011-340, P.C. 2011-341 and P.C. 2011-347. — Sessional Paper No. 8540-403-9-11. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(6), referred to the Standing Committee on Finance)

— P.C. 2011-302 to P.C. 2011-313. — Sessional Paper No. 8540-403-8-12. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(6), referred to the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development)

— P.C. 2011-255, P.C. 2011-298, P.C. 2011-322, P.C. 2011-360 and P.C. 2011-361. — Sessional Paper No. 8540-403-4-13. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(6), referred to the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates)

— P.C. 2011-294 to P.C. 2011-297. — Sessional Paper No. 8540-403-18-07. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(6), referred to the Standing Committee on Health)

— P.C. 2011-328 to P.C. 2011-331 and P.C. 2011-334 to P.C. 2011-339. — Sessional Paper No. 8540-403-16-11. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(6), referred to the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities)

— P.C. 2011-314 to P.C. 2011-317, P.C. 2011-319 to P.C. 2011-321 and P.C. 2011-383. — Sessional Paper No. 8540-403-22-10. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(6), referred to the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology)

— P.C. 2011-333. — Sessional Paper No. 8540-403-28-06. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(6), referred to the Standing Committee on International Trade)

— P.C. 2011-362. — Sessional Paper No. 8540-403-13-07. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(6), referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights)

— P.C. 2011-373 to P.C. 2011-380. — Sessional Paper No. 8540-403-30-10. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(6), referred to the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security)

— P.C. 2011-365 to P.C. 2011-372. — Sessional Paper No. 8540-403-24-13. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(6), referred to the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities)

— P.C. 2011-300 and P.C. 2011-301. — Sessional Paper No. 8540-403-32-08. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(6), referred to the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs)

— by Mr. Duncan (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians and Minister of the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency) — Response of the government, pursuant to Standing Order 109, to the Second Report of the Standing Joint Committee on Scrutiny of Regulations (review of statutory instruments) (Sessional Paper No. 8510-403-167), presented to the House on Friday, December 10, 2010. — Sessional Paper No. 8512-403-167.

— by Mr. Flaherty (Minister of Finance) — Report on operations under the Bretton Woods and Related Agreements Act for the year 2010, pursuant to the Bretton Woods and Related Agreements Act, R.S. 1985, c. B-7, s. 13. — Sessional Paper No. 8560-403-74-02. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(5), permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Finance)

— by Mr. Flaherty (Minister of Finance) — Report on operations under the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development Agreement Act for the year 2010, pursuant to the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development Agreement Act, S.C. 1991, c. 12, s. 7. — Sessional Paper No. 8560-403-485-02. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(5), permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Finance)

— by Mr. Nicholson (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada) — Copy of Rules amending the Rules of the Supreme Court of Canada (JUS-81000-2-669), pursuant to the Supreme Court Act, R.S. 1985, c. S-26, sbs. 97(4). — Sessional Paper No. 8560-403-784-01. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(5), permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights)

— by Mr. Toews (Minister of Public Safety) — Notice of opinion concerning Regulations Amending the Gun Show Regulations (SOR/2010-275), pursuant to the Firearms Act, S.C. 1995, c. 39, sbs. 119(4). — Sessional Paper No. 8560-403-779-03. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(5), permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security)

Petitions Filed with the Clerk of the House

Pursuant to Standing Order 36, petitions certified correct by the Clerk of Petitions were filed as follows:

— by Ms. Savoie (Victoria), one concerning the protection of the environment (No. 403-1714), two concerning chemical products (Nos. 403-1715 and 403-1716), one concerning housing policy (No. 403-1717) and one concerning poverty (No. 403-1718);

— by Mr. Miller (Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound), one concerning poverty (No. 403-1719);

— by Mr. Kerr (West Nova), one concerning poverty (No. 403-1720);

— by Mr. LeBlanc (Beauséjour), one concerning poverty (No. 403-1721);

— by Mr. Comartin (Windsor—Tecumseh), one concerning climate change (No. 403-1722) and one concerning cruelty to animals (No. 403-1723);

— by Mr. Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster), six concerning health care services (Nos. 403-1724 to 403-1729), one concerning the situation in Colombia (No. 403-1730), six concerning the income tax system (Nos. 403-1731 to 403-1736), one concerning the situation in Rwanda (No. 403-1737), one concerning transportation (No. 403-1738), two concerning immigration (Nos. 403-1739 and 403-1740), one concerning genetic engineering (No. 403-1741), one concerning the issuing of visas (No. 403-1742), one concerning Canada's railways (No. 403-1743) and one concerning passports (No. 403-1744);

— by Mr. Lunn (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning cruelty to animals (No. 403-1745).

Questions on the Order Paper

Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Finance:

Q-939 — Mr. Atamanenko (British Columbia Southern Interior) — With regard to federal funding under the Canada Economic Action Plan in the riding of British Columbia Southern Interior, for fiscal year 2008-2009 to date: (a) how many and what projects received funding from a department or agency over this period; and (b) what was the value of the projects that received funding from a department or agency over this period?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs:

Q-940 — Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — With regard to federal funding under the Canada Economic Action Plan in the city of Hamilton, Ontario, for fiscal year 2008-2009 to date: (a) how many projects received funding from a department or agency over this period; (b) what projects received funding from a department or agency over this period; and (c) what was the value of the projects that received funding from a department or agency over this period?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs:

Q-941 — Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — What is the total amount of government funding since April 2009 up to and including the current fiscal year allocated within the city of Hamilton, Ontario, by (i) department or agency, (ii) initiative, (iii) amount?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology:

Q-942 — Mr. Gravelle (Nickel Belt) — What is the total amount of government funding, since fiscal year 2006-2007 up to and including the current fiscal year, allocated within the constituency of Nickel Belt, specifying each (i) department or agency, (ii) initiative, (iii) amount?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology:

Q-943 — Mr. Gravelle (Nickel Belt) — With regard to federal funding under the Canada Economic Action Plan in the riding of Nickel Belt for fiscal year 2008-2009 to date: (a) how many and what projects received funding from a department or agency over this period; and (b) what was the value of the projects that received funding from a department or agency over this period?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Finance:

Q-944 — Mr. Thibeault (Sudbury) — What is the total amount of government funding, broken down by fiscal year, since fiscal year 1988-1989 up to fiscal year 2008-2009, allocated within the constituency of Sudbury, specifying each department or agency, initiative and amount?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage:

Q-945 — Mr. Thibeault (Sudbury) — With regard to the federal support of Canadian athletes: (a) how much money did the government provide to each sport federation or association since fiscal year 2006-2007 to date; (b) how much money is committed to each national sport federation or association for fiscal years 2011-2012 and 2012-2013; and (c) how much money was spent by the government on (i) athlete's education, (ii) coaching, (iii) training, (iv) scholarships, (v) injury prevention, (vi) travel, (vii) accommodation?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Finance:

Q-946 — Mr. Thibeault (Sudbury) — With respect to the Children's Fitness Tax Credit program: (a) how many families received payments under this program from 2006 to date (i) in total, (ii) by province; (b) how much money was paid to program recipients on an annual basis from 2006 to date (i) in total, (ii) by province; and (c) how many applications for the program were declined on an annual basis from 2006 to date (i) by province, (ii) in total?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Finance:

Q-947 — Mr. Thibeault (Sudbury) — With respect to programs for young families: (a) how many new programs were introduced and how much money was spent by the government since fiscal year 2006-2007 to date (i) across Canada, (ii) by province; (b) which departments were responsible for program administration; (c) how much money was allocated to programs addressing the needs of young families (i) by department, (ii) by province; (d) how many programs for young families were finished and were not renewed since 2006 to date; and (e) how much money was spent for initiatives to support young families under the Canada Economic Action Plan each fiscal year since 2007-2008 to date (i) in total amount by year, (ii) by province?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development:

Q-948 — Mr. Angus (Timmins—James Bay) — With regard to bonuses granted by the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development: (a) how many bonuses were dispersed, broken down by (i) fiscal years 2005-2006, 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009 and 2009-2010, (ii) individual personnel, (iii) region, (iv) departmental division; and (b) what was the amount of the bonuses broken down by (i) fiscal years 2005-2006, 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009 and 2009-2010, (ii) individual personnel, (iii) region, (iv) departmental division?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Finance:

Q-949 — Mr. Angus (Timmins—James Bay) — What is the total amount of government funding, since fiscal year 2006-2007 up to and including the current fiscal year, allocated within the constituency of Timmins—James Bay, specifying each department or agency, initiative and amount?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Finance:

Q-950 — Mr. Angus (Timmins—James Bay) — With regard to federal funding under the Canada Economic Action Plan in the riding of Timmins—James Bay for fiscal year 2008-2009 to date: (a) how many and what projects received funding from a department or agency over this period; and (b) what was the value of the projects that received funding from a department or agency over this period?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Health:

Q-951 — Ms. Duncan (Etobicoke North) — With respect to chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency (CCSVI), the liberation treatment, and multiple sclerosis (MS): (a) what consensus documents have been published regarding the diagnosis and treatment of CCSVI, (i) by whom, (ii) on what dates, (iii) what were the recommendations, (iv) were they reviewed by the August 26, 2010, meeting of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) in collaboration with the Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada (MSSC); (b) why were Canadian members of the International Union of Phlebology (IUP), who were part of the Consensus process regarding the diagnosis and treatment of CCSVI, not consulted during the August 26 meeting of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR); (c) what are the details of any plan the government has or is developing to collect evidence regarding the diagnosis and treatment of CCSVI, for example, through clinical trials or the creation of a registry; (d) what percentage of surgical procedures in Canada have been double-blind tested over the last 40 years and, for this percentage, (i) what is the risk of complication, (ii) what is considered an acceptable risk of complication, (iii) how do physicians judge acceptable risk and convey this risk to their patients, (iv) what actions do physicians take to reduce risk if the patient chooses to undertake the procedure; (e) when a medical treatment appears to be potentially effective, is its approval ever fast-tracked by the relevant Canadian authorities and, if so, (i) what are any examples of this in Canada over the last five years, (ii) has this ever happened with respect to MS, (iii) if so, who advocated for a fast-tracking and when, (iv) what process was followed to allow the treatment, (v) who made the decision to proceed, (vi) why was fast-tracking deemed necessary, (vii) what were the known risks at the time of the request, (viii) what, if any, negative impacts resulted; (f) what are the reasons for the length of time it has taken the relevant Canadian authorities to implement clinical trials or to develop a registry; (g) why did no member of the August 26 group declare any conflicts of interest, either real or perceived; (h) how many liberation procedures did the August 26 group estimate have been undertaken, (i) which countries were undertaking the procedure, (ii) to which countries were Canadians travelling, (iii) were the practitioners considered to be sufficiently trained, (iv) were the procedures in these countries found to be safe; (i) which people, labs and operating theatres had undertaken the diagnosis or treatment of CCSVI in Canada prior to the August 26 meeting; (j) why did the August 26 meeting not include Canadian experts in the imaging or treatment of CCSVI and for what reasons was Dr. Sandy McDonald not included as a participant; (k) why did the August 26 meeting not include international experts in diagnosis and treatment of CCSVI, data presented at international scientific conferences or site visits to labs and operating theatres, which were or had been undertaking diagnosis or treatment; (l) what is a comprehensive explanation of why the inclusion of CCSVI and liberation experts might have biased the sample of the August 26 group and whether such selection is an established practice at all CIHR meetings; (m) what are all the names of the group members who had spoken out against diagnosis or treatment of CCSVI or the liberation procedure prior to the August 26 meeting, what were the details of their positions, and what are their publically-available comments on the matter; (n) who were all the members of the August 26 group and, for each member, what were his or her stated or declared conflicts of interest or perceived conflicts of interest; (o) what was the August 26 group’s assessment of and comments concerning all reviewed published papers, including both positive and negative observations; (p) did the August 26 group find it unusual that two of the reviewed papers had been accepted for publication in only six weeks, (i) did the group review whether this is a common practice in medicine, (ii) did the group consider how and why this might happen, (iii) did the group explore the expertise of those writing the papers, their experience, how their results compared with those of Dr.Zamboni and, if so, (iv) what were the group's findings for questions posed in (iii); (q) which neurologists, present at the August 26 meeting, had followed MS patients who were diagnosed with CCSVI and who had been treated for the condition, (i) how had neurologists followed them (e.g., appointment, EDSS score/another scale, MRI, neurological exam, etc.), (ii) what, if any, evidence did they present of patients' progress following the liberation procedure; (r) did the August 26 group find the reversal in the MSSC's position, who was part of the greater group, unusual, (i) did the group investigate or consider the reasons for this change in position and, if so, (ii) what observations did it make or conclusions did it come to regarding the reversal; (s) did the August 26 group estimate how its decision might impact Canadian MS patients, including (i) impacts on their mental health and how this might impact their disease, (ii) the number of Canadian MS patients who might feel forced to seek help outside Canada, (iii) how air travel, a compromised vascular system, recent surgery, and lack of follow-up in Canada might impact their disease and, if so, (iv) what are the results of those estimations; (t) what consensus documents are forthcoming, (i) by whom, (ii) when will they be published; (u) what is the work plan for the new expert working group which met for the first time on November 23, 2010, (i) who are the panellists, what are their qualifications and what is their expertise in diagnosis and treatment of CCSVI, (ii) how were the panellists chosen and by whom, (iii) what is the group’s mandate and how was it derived, (iv) what is the schedule of meetings, (v) what is the timeline for the group’s work, (vi) what evidence will be reviewed to reach any decision about possible clinical trials, registry, diagnosis, treatment, follow-up care, etc.; (v) what was the agenda for the November 23 meeting of the expert working group, (i) what abstracts, documents, and presentations were reviewed, (ii) which Canadian and international experts, with experience in diagnosis and treatment of CCSVI, were consulted, (iii) what Canadian and international unpublished data were explored, (iv) what Canadian and international labs or operating theatres were reviewed and visited; (w) for what reasons is the new group going to analyze interim and final results from seven studies funded by the Canadian and US MS Societies and why are these studies considered more worthwhile cases for analysis than other studies already completed; (x) when will the November 23 expert panel declare and post any conflicts of interest, following the European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis (ECTRIMS) guide, on the CIHR website to eliminate the possibility of real or perceived conflicts; (y) further to assurances made by the President of CIHR, Dr. Alain Beaudet, to the Subcommittee on Neurological Diseases on December 7, 2010, that MS patients who have had the liberation procedure would have follow-up, what are the details of how that follow-up will occur, specifically, (i) how will “a message be sent”, by whom, to whom, by when and what will the message be, (ii) specifically, will all patients who travel or travelled outside Canada be assured that their doctors will see them, that appointments will not be cancelled, that tests will not be cancelled, that they will have access to recommended prescriptions, that they will not lose their long-term care and that they will not be berated for making the decision to have liberation, (iii) how will this be enforced, (iv) what action should MS patients take if they are denied care, (v) to whom should they report a denial of care, (vi) what are the consequences for a physician or health practitioner or organization who delivers care but fails to provide follow-up care, (vii) will follow-up include ultrasound or MRI to image the veins of MS patients and, if so, how often will these imaging procedures occur and who will pay for them?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development:

Q-952 — Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan) — With respect to the Universal Child Care Benefit program: (a) how many families received payments under this program from 2006 to date (i) in total, (ii) by province; (b) how many single parents applied and received payments under this program (i) by province, (ii) in total; (c) how much money was paid to program recipients on an annual basis from 2006 to date (i) in total, (ii) by province; and (d) how many applications for the program were declined on annual basis from 2006 to date (i) by province, (ii) in total?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology:

Q-953 — Mrs. Hughes (Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing) — With respect to the appointment of the Vice-Chair of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC): (a) what criteria did Mr. Athanasios Pentefountas meet in order to qualify for this position; and (b) what criteria were used to select the best candidate for the position?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food:

Q-954 — Mr. Allen (Welland) — With regard to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA): (a) how many full-time equivalents (FTEs) are expended by the CFIA on work related to food safety, as opposed to plant and animal health, on an annual basis in (i) the United States, (ii) Mexico, (iii) China, (iv) France, (v) Italy, (vi) Brazil, (vii) Chile, (viii) Thailand, (ix) Australia, (x) the United Kingdom; and (b) during 2011, will CFIA conduct any foreign country equivalency audits on the scale of the audits of Canada’s food safety system done by the United States Food Safety and Inspection Service, involving detailed and extensive review of policies, procedures and site visits to food production facilities and, if it will, which countries will it audit?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development:

Q-955 — Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan) — With respect to the First-Time Home Buyers' Tax Credit program: (a) how many first-time home buyers received benefits under this program from 2006 to date (i) in total, (ii) by province; (b) how much money was paid to program recipients on an annual basis from 2006 to date (i) in total, (ii) by province; (c) how many applications were received and how many were declined on an annual basis from 2006 to date (i) by province, (ii) in total?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development:

Q-956 — Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan) — With regard to the British Columbia Treaty Process: (a) what substantive actions has the government taken to study the issue of accumulation of interest from treaty loans; (b) how does the debt from this interest affect the treaty negotiations; (c) when will the government outline its new approach to funding for First Nations self-government as announced in the March 2010 budget; (d) how has the federal mandate on negotiation changed since 2006; (e) how many treaty loans will come due in 2011; (f) what is the total value of those treaty loans coming due in 2011; (g) what is the total value of interest on those loans; (h) what steps has the government taken to extend the deadline on treaty loans; (i) when will the government report to the House of Commons on the treaty loan deadline; and (j) what is the government's communications plan as concerns the treaty loan deadline and First Nations, including those First Nations involved in treaty negotiations, those that have dropped out of the process and those First Nations that are not involved in treaty negotiations?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development:

Q-957 — Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan) — With reference to the study by Doctor Masazumi Harada entitled "Long-term study on the effects of mercury contamination on two indigenous communities in Canada (1975-2004)": (a) does Health Canada’s blood guidance value account for long-term low-level exposure to mercury; (b) what steps has Health Canada taken to study births in Grassy Narrows where the children exhibited symptoms of congenital Minamata disease; (c) what actions has Health Canada taken to inform Grassy Narrows residents about the potential for congenital Minamata disease; (d) since Health Canada stopped monitoring mercury in Grassy Narrows in the 1990s, has there been any follow-up study to ensure mercury levels have not changed; (e) how many people have applied to the Mercury Compensation Board since its beginning; (f) how many of those people were denied compensation; (g) for what reasons was compensation denied; (h) how many people appealed the denial of compensation and, of those people who appealed, how many were successful; (i) what investigation has been done into the long-term health of workers at chloralkali plants in Canada; (j) have chloralkali plant workers received any compensation for adverse health effects from mercury; (k) are there any plans to add the residents of Wabauskang (formerly Quibell) on the Wabigoon River to the list of possible beneficiaries of the Mercury Compensation Board; (l) what has been done to identify and remediate all mercury hot spots across Canada; and (m) how is the government upholding the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement in relation to persistent mercury pollution hotspots including, but not limited to, Thunder Bay, Sarnia and Cornwall?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs:

Q-958 — Mr. Cuzner (Cape Breton—Canso) — With respect to Agent Orange and Canadian veterans trying to obtain fair compensation for their exposure to Agent Orange spraying at Canadian Forces Base Gagetown: (a) what is the total amount of money spent by all federal departments and agencies, excluding the Department of Justice, for the time period of July 1, 2005, to January 31, 2011, on the defence against the Canadian veterans’ Agent Orange class action lawsuit; (b) what is the total amount of money identified in (a) spent between March 5, 2010, and January 31, 2011; (c) what is the total amount of money the government has spent to hire outside legal counsel for the time period of July 1, 2005, to January 31, 2011, in its defence against the Canadian veterans’ Agent Orange class action lawsuit; (d) what is the total amount of money identified in (c) spent between March 5, 2010, and January 31, 2011; (e) what is the total amount of money spent, including all costs associated with the work of Department of Justice officials, for the time period of January 1, 2009, to January 31, 2011, in its defence against the Canadian veterans’ Agent Orange class action lawsuit; and (f) what is the total amount of money identified in (e) spent between March 5, 2010, and January 31, 2011?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Finance:

Q-959 — Mr. Martin (Winnipeg Centre) — With regard to federal funding under the Canada Economic Action Plan in the riding of Winnipeg Centre for fiscal year 2008-2009 to date: (a) how many and what projects received funding from a department or an agency over this period; and (b) what was the value of the projects that received funding from a department or an agency over this period?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Finance:

Q-960 — Mr. Martin (Winnipeg Centre) — What is the total amount of government funding, since fiscal year 2006-2007 up to and including the current fiscal year, allocated within the constituency of Winnipeg Centre, specifying each department or agency, initiative and amount?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs:

Q-961 — Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — With regard to programs aimed at increasing youth participation in the election process and democratic governance in Canada: (a) what initiatives were undertaken by all departments from fiscal year 2006-2007 to date; (b) what Canadian not-for-profit organizations received funding and were engaged in this process; (c) what was the total funding allocation for these initiatives from fiscal year 2006-2007 to date; and (d) are any new programs planned to be launched in fiscal years 2011-2012 and 2012-2013?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development:

Q-962 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona) — 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?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates:

Q-963 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona) — 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?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Finance:

Q-964 — Ms. Leslie (Halifax) — With respect to the Medical Establishment licensing fee: (a) what is the rationale for the fee increase of 340 percent from $2100 to $7200 effective April 1, 2011; (b) if the rationale is improvements to the program, what will those improvements be; (c) are all dealers selling medical equipment in Canada licensed; and (d) are dealers selling medical equipment in the canadian market via mail orders licensed?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Finance:

Q-965 — Ms. Leslie (Halifax) — With respect to Canada's Economic Action Plan: (a) under the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund in the riding of Skeena—Bulkley Valley, (i) what applications for projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) who are the partners involved, (iii) what is the federal contribution, (iv) what is each partner's contribution, (v) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vi) what were the criteria used to determine which projects were approved; (b) under the Building Canada Fund – Communities Component in the riding of Skeena—Bulkley Valley, (i) what applications for projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) who are the partners involved, (iii) what is the federal contribution, (iv) what is each partner's contribution, (v) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vi) what were the criteria used to determine which projects were approved; (c) under the Building Canada Fund — Communities Component top-up in the riding of Skeena—Bulkley Valley, (i) what applications for projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) who are the partners involved, (iii) what is the federal contribution, (iv) what is each partner's contribution, (v) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vi) what were the criteria used to determine which projects were approved; (d) under the Building Canada Fund — Major Infrastructure Component in the riding of Skeena—Bulkley Valley, (i) what applications for projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) who are the partners involved, (iii) what is the federal contribution, (iv) what is each partner's contribution, (v) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vi) what were the criteria used to determine which projects were approved; (e) under the Recreational Infrastructure program in the riding of Skeena—Bulkley Valley, (i) what applications for projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) who are the partners involved, (iii) what is the federal contribution, (iv) what is each partner's contribution, (v) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vi) what were the criteria used to determine which projects were approved; and (f) under the Green Infrastructure Fund in the riding of Skeena—Bulkley Valley, (i) what applications for projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) who are the partners involved, (iii) what is the federal contribution, (iv) what is each partner's contribution, (v) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vi) what were the criteria used to determine which projects were approved?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Finance:

Q-966 — Ms. Leslie (Halifax) — With regard to government support of Canadian small and medium-sized businesses: (a) how much money was spent on federal programs to increase the productivity and competitiveness of Canadian businesses on an annual basis since fiscal year 2006-2007 to date; and (b) what new programs and initiatives will be introduced by the government in fiscal years 2011-2012 and 2012-2013?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Finance:

Q-967 — Mr. Hyer (Thunder Bay—Superior North) — With regard to corporate taxation: (a) how many corporations in Canada paid no tax in each of the last ten years; and (b) what were their combined revenues and profits, in each of the last ten years?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Finance:

Q-968 — Mr. Hyer (Thunder Bay—Superior North) — What is the total amount of deferred corporate taxes for the tax years 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights:

Q-969 — Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway) — With respect to federal funding for Child Advocacy Centres announced in October 2010: (a) does the funding for this initiative come from an existing fund, or is it a new initiative with new funding; (b) what are the criteria by which applications for funding under this initiative will be evaluated; (c) how many applications for funding under this initiative have been received, broken down by month received, location of project and name of applicant; (d) how many applications for funding under this initiative have been approved, broken down by date approved, location of project and name of applicant; (e) how many applications for funding under this initiative have been rejected, broken down by date rejected, location of project and name of applicant; (f) is there a prescribed limit to the amount of funds that can be disbursed under this initiative within a single fiscal year; (g) is there a prescribed limit to the amount of funds that can be disbursed to a single applicant or project; (h) what happens to this initiative once the $5.25 million has been fully assigned; (i) what will happen to the funding once the five year commitment comes to an end; (j) what factors or circumstances changed between the time of the requests made by former Victims Ombudsman, Steve Sullivan, to include funding for Child Advocacy Centres in Budget 2009 and Budget 2010 and the time the government decided to announce funding in October 2010; (k) what existing programs or initiatives may have their funding or potential funding reduced or eliminated as a result of the announced funding for Child Advocacy Centres; (l) what specific branch, department or agency is responsible for administering the funding for Child Advocacy Centres; and (m) what is the legislative basis for this funding?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Natural Resources:

Q-970 — Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway) — With regard to the refurbishment of the Point Lepreau Nuclear Generating Station in New Brunswick by Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL): (a) what is the most recent estimate of the total cost of the completed refurbishment; (b) what is the expected completion date; (c) what is the total funding transferred to AECL by the government to pay for cost overruns in each fiscal year; (d) what is the expected total amount that will be transferred to AECL by the completion date; (e) what amount has the government of New Brunswick requested from the government as compensation for replacement power costs; and (f) what commitments has the government made to the government of New Brunswick with regards to compensation for replacement power costs?


Pursuant to Standing Order 39(5), the failure of the Ministry to respond to the following question was deemed referred to the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates:

Q-971 — Mr. Davies (Vancouver Kingsway) — With regard to all federal funding in the riding of Skeena—Bulkley Valley for fiscal years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010 and 2010-2011: (a) how many projects received funding from a department or an agency over this period; (b) what projects received funding from a department or an agency over this period; and (c) what was the value of the projects which received funding from a department or an agency over this period?

Adjournment

Accordingly, at 2:21 p.m., the Speaker adjourned the House until Monday at 11:00 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

ParlVU

Top of document

Home | Important Notices