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.
|
|
Friday, November 28, 2008 (No. 9)
|
|
|
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 Those questions not appearing in the list have been answered, withdrawn or made into orders for return.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-12 — November 19, 2008 — Ms. Wasylycia-Leis (Winnipeg North) — With respect to United Nations conventions and treaties to which Canada is a signatory: (a) what is the federal government’s criteria for assessing individual provincial and territorial endorsement for ratifying a treaty or convention; (b) as of November 1, 2008, which provinces and territories have, according to this criteria, endorsed ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (the Convention); (c) what steps will be undertaken by the government to secure endorsement by the remaining provinces and territories; (d) when is the next federal-provincial-territorial ministerial meeting on human rights scheduled and will Convention ratification be on the agenda of that meeting; (e) has the Convention been added to the list of international human rights treaties and conventions that are standing items on meeting agendas of the Continuing Committee of Officials on Human Rights (CCOHR); (f) has progress on the ratification process for the Convention been discussed at CCOHR meetings and what is the status of that progress as of November 1, 2008 according to the minutes of those meetings; (g) is the target date for the completion of consultations with the provinces and territories on the ratification of the Convention within the required timeframe to permit Canada to participate fully in the first meeting of States party to the Convention, expected in November 2008, to chart the oversight committee’s future course and, if not, why not; (h) what is the federal government’s criteria for assessing individual provincial and territorial endorsement for signing the Optional Protocol of an international treaty; (i) as of November 1, 2008, which provinces and territories have, according to this criteria, endorsed Canada signing the Optional Protocol of the Convention; and (j) has progress on signing the Optional Protocol for the Convention been discussed at CCOHR meetings and what is the status of that progress as of November 1, 2008, according to the minutes of those meetings? |
Q-2 — November 19, 2008 — Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — With respect to federal spending in the riding of Hamilton Mountain, what has been the total federal spending during fiscal years 2006-2007 and 2007-2008, itemized according to: (a) the date the money was received in the riding; (b) the dollar amount of the expenditure; (c) the federal program from which the funding came; (d) the ministry responsible; and (e) the designated recipient? |
Q-3 — November 19, 2008 — Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — With respect to federal spending in the city of Hamilton, what has been the total federal spending during fiscal years 2006-2007 and 2007-2008, itemized according to: (a) the date the money was received in the city; (b) the dollar amount of the expenditure; (c) the federal program from which the funding came; (d) the ministry responsible; and (e) the designated recipient? |
Q-4 — November 19, 2008 — Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — With respect to federal spending in the riding of Hamilton Mountain, what total federal spending has been announced for fiscal year 2008-2009 and beyond, itemized according to: (a) the date the money is to be, or has been received in the riding; (b) the dollar amount of the expenditure; (c) the federal program from which the funding came or will come; (d) the ministry responsible; and (e) the designated recipient? |
Q-5 — November 19, 2008 — Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — With respect to federal spending in the city of Hamilton, what total federal spending has been announced for fiscal year 2008-2009 and beyond, itemized according to: (a) the date the money is to be, or has been received in the city; (b) the dollar amount of the expenditure; (c) the federal program from which the funding came or will come; (d) the ministry responsible; and (e) the designated recipient? |
Q-62 — November 19, 2008 — Ms. Wasylycia-Leis (Winnipeg North) — With respect to the government’s cessation of funding for the First Nations and Inuit Tobacco Control Strategy announced on September 25, 2006: (a) as the evaluation of this strategy was not completed until March 2007, on what evidence of not providing “value for money” was the decision to cut funding based; (b) as the Minister of Health, who has acknowledged the need to address the serious health implications of higher-than-average smoking rates in First Nations and Inuit populations, has given public reassurances – to the Standing Committee on Health on November 23, 2006 – that funding will be revived once a revised strategy has been developed, (i) what steps has the government taken since September 2006 to develop a revised strategy, (ii) what is the target date for the initiation of the revised strategy and its full funding; and (c) as the strategy’s evaluation document cited the absence of statistical data as an impediment in evaluation, will the collection of baseline and ongoing national tobacco use statistical data specific to First Nations and Inuit be included in the revised strategy and its funding? |
Q-72 — November 19, 2008 — Ms. Wasylycia-Leis (Winnipeg North) — With respect to the government’s actions to detect, prevent and treat Lyme disease in Canada: (a) by what standard is the accuracy of Lyme disease testing conducted at the National Microbiological Laboratories evaluated; (b) when was the most recent independent evaluation of the proficiency of this testing conducted, by whom and what were the results; (c) what are the current criteria for determining whether a geographical area is deemed to be endemic for Lyme-infected ticks; (d) what is the projected schedule of field study with regard to such endemic areas; (e) with respect to the recommendations of the National Conference on Lyme Disease hosted by the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) in March 2006, (i) have the committees to develop new guidelines on surveillance, clinical and laboratory criteria been formed and, if so, when have they met, (ii) what stakeholder groups have participated in the development of new guidelines, what form has that participation taken, and when did it occur; (f) what is the government's strategy to protect canadians from the increase in incidents of Lyme disease anticipated by PHAC; (g) what is PHAC's strategy to increase (i) physicians' and other health professionals' awareness of the symptoms of Lyme disease, (ii) the canadian public's awareness of the symptoms of Lyme disease; (h) what measures has the PHAC taken in conjunction with provincial health authorities to increase professional and public awareness; (i) what are PHAC's measurable targets for the future increase of awareness and diagnostic accuracy of Lyme disease; (j) does Health Canada recommend the screening of blood for Lyme disease or co-infections such as babesiosis, as done in the United States and, if not, why not; and (k) what research projects into lyme borelia and tick-borne co-infections, their epidemiology, their possible role in the occurence of other diseases, and their treatment are currently being funded by the government and have been government funded during the past five years? |
Q-82 — November 19, 2008 — Ms. Neville (Winnipeg South Centre) — With regard to the Indian Residential Schools Settlement: (a) what steps have been taken by the government to ensure that survivors of the Île-à-la-Crosse Residential School in Saskatchewan receive compensation that is set out in the Indian Residential Schools settlement; (b) does the government have records of survivors from the Île-à-la-Crosse Residential School and, if so, how many does the department have record of; and (c) what are the unresolved issues of which the Prime Minister spoke about in the House of Commons on June 12, 2008 that is preventing the government to compensate the survivors of the Île-à-la-Crosse Residential School in Saskatchewan? |
Q-92 — November 19, 2008 — Ms. Neville (Winnipeg South Centre) — With regard to the National Parole Board and the Department of Public Safety: (a) what mechanisms are put in place to ensure a fair and culturally responsive approach to the parole boards administration; (b) are there specific considerations taken into account when Aboriginals appear before the parole board; (c) what mechanisms are put in place to ensure that there is suitable Aboriginal representation on the parole board; and (d) currently, what percentage of parole board members are Aboriginal? |
Q-102 — November 19, 2008 — Mr. Proulx (Hull—Aylmer) — With respect to the distribution of jobs in the government and all federal organizations in the National Capital Region: (a) how many jobs have there been on the Quebec side of the National Capital Region each year since March 31, 2004; and (b) how many jobs have there been on the Ontario side of the National Capital Region each year since March 31, 2004? |
Q-112 — November 19, 2008 — Mr. Proulx (Hull—Aylmer) — With respect to the square meters occupied by the federal government and all federal organizations in the National Capital Region: (a) how many square meters have been used on the Quebec side of the National Capital Region each year since March 31, 2004 and; (b) how many square meters have been used on the Ontario side of the National Capital Region each year since March 31, 2004? |
Q-122 — November 19, 2008 — Mr. Bevington (Western Arctic) — With regard to section 5.2 of the Canada Oil and Gas Operations Act and the issuance of oil and gas licenses to Paramount Resources in the Cameron Hills region of the Northwest Territories: (a) what rationale has the Minister used to determine that a benefits agreement with local Aboriginal people is not required; (b) why has the government refused to discuss a benefits agreement with the local Aboriginal people; and (c) why has the government insisted that such discussions be carried out through the Deh Cho Land Claims negotiations? |
Q-132 — November 19, 2008 — Ms. Bonsant (Compton—Stanstead) — With respect to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police detachments that were closed in Quebec in 2004: (a) four years later, what are the government’s plans for these nine detachments, specifically with respect to their possible reopening and to an increase in border staff; and (b) if an analysis of the positive and negative impacts of closing these detachments was done, what were the findings? |
Q-172 — November 20, 2008 — Mr. Dewar (Ottawa Centre) — With respect to Canada's mission in Afghanistan and the use of cluster munitions by Canadian Forces: (a) does Canada use cluster munitions in its military operations; (b) do any of Canada's allies use cluster munitions in areas where the Canadian military is operating; (c) have cluster munitions been used by Canada or its allies in Afghanistan and, if so, when, and does this practice continue; (d) what assurances exist to ensure that cluster munitions are not used by Canada or its allies in Afghanistan; (e) are there any agreements between Canada and its allies explicitly prohibiting the use of cluster munitions in joint operations; (f) are there any agreements between Canada and its allies explicitly prohibiting the use of cluster munitions in Afghanistan; (g) are there any agreements between Canada and its allies prohibiting the use of certain military tactics or weapons; (h) have cluster munitions ever been deployed by Canada or its allies in past joint military operations; (i) has Canada ever negotiated guidelines for the prohibition of certain weapons in joint operations; (j) what is the government's definition of what constitutes an acceptable success rate for self-destruction mechanisms and precision guidance systems for cluster munitions; (k) how was this acceptable rate of success arrived at; (l) has the Canadian Forces destroyed all existing stockpiles of cluster munitions in its arsenal and, if not, why not; and (m) does Canada intend to procure munitions in the future? |
Q-182 — November 20, 2008 — Mr. Dewar (Ottawa Centre) — With respect to the case JOHN GUENETTE and JOANNA GUALTIERI v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA, FRANK TOWNSON, et al. and also the case JOANNA GUALTIERI v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA, FRANK TOWNSON, et al.: (a) what are the total expenditures of the government with regard to these cases including, but not limited to, all legal fees, monitoring the progress and impact on public opinion of the case, in preparing communications strategies, and in preparing briefing packages for officials and ministers, on an annual basis, broken down by expenditure item; and (b) with respect to the figures in (a), how much was spent annually, on a departmental or agency basis? |
Q-192 — November 20, 2008 — Mr. Dewar (Ottawa Centre) — With respect to Canada's military imports and exports: (a) did Canada import any products from the United Kingdom between October and December 2007 containing depleted uranium and, if so, what were these products and what were their end uses; and (b) has Canada imported any products containing depleted uranium from 2007 to 2008 from other countries and, if so, what products and from which countries? |
Q-202 — November 21, 2008 — Ms. Fry (Vancouver Centre) — With regard to the forestry industry in British Columbia (BC): (a) what specific steps has the government done to reduce the dependency of the BC industry on the United States construction business and to facilitate and expand the sale of BC lumber to Asia; (b) for the years 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 what is the specific breakdown of the $400 million promised in the 2006 budget to deal with the mountain pine beetle, and to stimulate new economic opportunities for lumbering-dependent communities and job retraining for forest industry workers in (i) terms of exact funds to communities for economic re-adjustsments together with the names of the communities, (ii) what are the projects and funds spent on pine beetle research and alleviation, (iii) what are the specific projects and funds spent on job retraining initiatives; (c) what money was transferred to the BC government for fire prevention initiatives for the years 2006-2007 and 2007-2008, and to pine beetle ravaged communities which are at prime risk for summer forest fires; and (d) what specific initiatives and funds has the government allocated over 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 to the at “risk for fire” aboriginal communities in BC's interior? |
Q-212 — November 21, 2008 — Ms. Fry (Vancouver Centre) — With respect to grants and federal funding allocated or transferred by the Department of Canadian Heritage to Arts and Culture festivals in the province of British Columbia: (a) what was the total spending given to the province, broken down by festivals for the years 2006-2007 and 2007-2008; (b) what is the projected allocation of grants and federal funding for the years 2008-2009 and 2009-2010; and (c) specifically to the Vancouver Organizing Committee for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games, what amount was given or is projected to fund, broken down program by program, all cultural Olympiad programs, all bilingual initiatives and the francophone village and cultural events, for the fiscal years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010? |
Q-222 — November 21, 2008 — Ms. Fry (Vancouver Centre) — With respect to the British Columbia salmon fisheries industry: (a) what concrete steps has the government undertaken to the development and implementation of an ocean's management strategy given that the 10 year Ocean Management Plan sunsets this year and what particular steps have been taken with regard to conservation, including a precautionary approach to management of the salmon fisheries; (b) what steps have been taken to allocate the First Nations of British Columbia a 50% share of all fisheries, and to increase treaty settlement funds to enable purchase or buy-back licenses and allow for relocation; (c) considering the devastation the mountain pine beetle has caused to the salmon industry through erosion of watersheds, what actions has the government taken to mitigate the damage to salmon spawning beds; and (d) how much money has the government given to revitalize the salmon industry, in particular the sport fishing industry in British Columbia, which contribute a large part to the salmon industry? |
Q-23 — November 21, 2008 — Mr. Cotler (Mount Royal) — With regard to the issue of Canadian Omar Khadr's continued detention at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, by the United States: (a) has the government ever responded to the question posed by the agents of the Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Trade on June 3, 2008, as reported in La Presse on November 20, 2008, of why it was not doing more for this Canadian; (b) if so, what was the content of said response; (c) does the government have any reason to believe, whether expressed in a response to the June 3 question or not, that Omar Khadr would not be subject to a fair trial in Canada were he to be returned to his country of citizenship; (d) does the government have any reason to believe that the laws of Canada do not provide adequate methods of dealing preventively with any security risk that Omar Khadr may be found to pose in this country; (e) has the government ever articulated in any documents, communications or memoranda, why Canada should remain the only western country not to call upon the American government for the return of its citizen being held at Guantanamo Bay; (f) if so, what is the content of said documents, communications or memoranda; (g) has the government ever analyzed whether Omar Khadr's conditions of detention at Guantanamo Bay would pass scrutiny under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms; (h) if so, what was the content and conclusion of this analysis; (i) if not, why was this analysis not undertaken; (j) has the government ever analyzed whether Omar Khadr can expect to receive a fair trial consistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms from the United States; (k) if so, what was the content and conclusion of this analysis; (l) if not, why was this analysis not undertaken; (m) in the aftermath of the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in Canada (Justice) v. Khadr, has the government analyzed whether there were any breaches of international law or Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms rights in its or the American government's handling of Omar Khadr; and (n) if so, what was the content and conclusion of this analysis? |
Q-242 — November 21, 2008 — Mr. Casey (Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley) — With regard to the federal emergency preparedness funding to the provinces and territories over the last five years for firefighting equipment: (a) how much funding has the government contributed to those specific projects which involved the purchase of firefighting equipment through the Joint Emergency Preparedness Program (JEPP); (b) what is the specific breakdown of the government's emergency preparedness contributions, by province and territory; and (c) other than the JEPP program, what other funding has been made available to the provinces, territories and municipalities to specifically support the purchase of firefighting equipment? |
Q-252 — November 24, 2008 — Mr. Martin (Winnipeg Centre) — With respect to the government appointment of chairpersons at the Employment Insurance Board of Referees: (a) how many chairperson positions are there in Canada; (b) how many of those positions are currently vacant, why are they vacant, and what is the length of time of each vacancy; (c) what cities are the vacant positions located in; (d) what is the average waiting time for an appeal hearing before a board of referees when there is an appointed chairperson, and what is the waiting time for an appeal hearing when there is no chairperson and someone has to fill the vacant chair position from another district; (e) what is the government's current policy on filling vacancies on the board of referees; (f) when does the government plan on filling vacant board of referee chairperson positions across Canada; (g) what is the renumeration package afforded each chairperson; (h) who pays the travel and expenses for a chairperson to travel from another district; and (i) how much has the government spent in the past year on travel for chairpersons from one district to another, and how much did they pay the year before last? |
Q-272 — November 25, 2008 — Mr. Russell (Labrador) — With respect to tax treatments offered to the fishermen from Atlantic Canada and Quebec: (a) were the fishermen who accepted the Atlantic Fisheries Groundfish Retirement Package and who permanently gave up their fishing licences in the years 1999 and 2000 advised in writing by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans to report, at the time of filing their income tax, that the retirement lump-sum payment was to be counted as revenue from a capital gain and, if so, (i) why, (ii) why did the Department of Fisheries and Oceans issue this advice, (iii) how many fishermen did the Department of Fisheries and Oceans give that advice to; (b) why did Revenue Canada or the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency agree to give certain other fishermen a different tax treatment than the one outlined above, for the same retirement years; (c) how many fishermen received that different tax treatment; (d) why did the Minister of National Revenue and the Federal Minister of Fisheries advise these former fishermen (or their survivors in the case of deceased former fishermen) to appeal to the Regional Director of Taxation in St. John’s for a review; (e) has the Regional Director of Taxation informed the affected individuals that he will not accept their appeals and, if so, why; and (f) did Revenue Canada or the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency reach an out-of-court settlement in 2007 with a certain number of fishermen who had appealed their tax treatment and, if so, (i) why, (ii) why were the fishermen involved in that out-of-court settlement required to sign a secrecy or non-disclosure document, (iii) how many fishermen were involved in that out-of-court settlement? |
Q-282 — November 25, 2008 — Mr. Russell (Labrador) — With regard to the Building Canada Fund (BCF): (a) what projects have been awarded funding; (b) for each of these projects, what was (i) the dollar share of project costs funded by the government, (ii) the percentage share of project costs funded by the government, (iii) the content and specifications of the project, (iv) the location of the project; (c) what are the government's plans to accelerate infrastructure spending under the BCF; (d) how much funding has been or will be allocated for each province and territory; and (e) what is the cost-sharing formula for cost-shared projects with other orders of government? |
Q-292 — November 25, 2008 — Mr. Russell (Labrador) — With regard to 5 Wing Goose Bay, for each of the fiscal years 2004-2005 through 2008-2009 inclusive: (a) what was the total amount spent, or for the current year budgeted to be spent, by the Department of National Defence (DND) or the Canadian Armed Forces in respect of 5 Wing Goose Bay, indicating for each fiscal year the operational budget, capital budget, payroll, and other expenses; (b) what specific measures, if any, have been taken towards the establishment of a rapid reaction battalion and unmanned aerial vehicle squadron at 5 Wing Goose Bay; (c) what is the “operational requirement” for 5 Wing Goose Bay referred to by the former Minister of National Defence and when was it instituted; and (d) what specific marketing initiatives has DND undertaken with regards to attracting clients to 5 Wing Goose Bay, stating (i) who has undertaken this marketing for or on behalf of DND, (ii) what are the budgeted or actual expenditures for these marketing initiatives? |
Q-302 — November 25, 2008 — Mr. Mulcair (Outremont) — With respect to Canada’s fiscal framework: (a) with respect to the tax cuts announced in Budget 2008, which sectors benefited the most and the least from such a measure; (b) when drafting Budget 2008, what investments on social or infrastructure projects were proposed; (c) at the government’s current rate of tax cuts and program expenditure, how many years would it take until Canada is in a deficit situation, or the government is forced to curb program spending, (i) if the latter, by how much would the government need to do to afford it’s promised tax regime, (ii) if the former, how large a deficit would accrue, on an annual basis, over the next five year; (d) what is considered the largest source of tax “leakage” by the government on an annual basis for the last five years, (i) what are these losses worth on an annual basis, (ii) from which provinces are most of these losses incurred, (iii) which countries, in terms of size of Canadian assets, are considered the largest foreign tax havens, (iv) what plans, if any, does the government have to tighten restrictions on the use of such tax havens; (e) with respect to a comparison between a 0.5% cut to the lowest marginal tax rate and lowering the goods and services tax (GST) by 1%, which would benefit Canadians more, in dollars, according to income level, (i) with respect to a comparison between a $500 increase in the basic personal exemption and lowering the GST by 1%, which would benefit Canadians more, in dollars, according to income level; (f) with respect to the public transit tax credit, what was the anticipated cost of this measure prior to its implementation, (i) how many Canadian transit users, by urban centre, were expected to file for this credit, (ii) since its inception, on an annual basis, what has been the cost of implementing this tax credit, (iii) how many Canadian transit users, by urban centre, have filed for this credit, (iv) how many transit users were expected to file for it, (v) what would be the costs of extending this credit to users who pay for their transit on a basis other than with a monthly travel pass (i.e. on a daily or weekly basis, or by buying blocks of transit chits), (vi) by what margin was transit ridership expected to increase with the implementation of this tax credit, by urban area and on an annual basis, (vii) since the inception of this credit, how much has ridership increased or decreased, by urban area and on an annual basis; and (g) with respect to the tax credit to promote physical fitness among children, what was the anticipated cost of this measure prior to its implementation, (i) how many Canadian families, by urban centre, were expected to file for this credit, (ii) since its inception, on an annual basis, what has been the cost of implementing this tax credit, (iii) how many Canadian families, by urban centre, have filed for this credit, (iv) under existing regulations what length of time must a sports program be in operation for a family to be eligible for the tax credit, (v) what would be the costs of extending this credit to families who enrol children in sports programs whose duration is for two weeks or longer, (vi) since its implementation, what sports, by category (i.e. hockey, soccer, etc.), have most and least been utilized under this tax credit? |
Q-312 — November 25, 2008 — Mr. Mulcair (Outremont) — With respect to contracting between the government and Hugh MacPhie and Associates since January 2006: (a) how many contracts have been awarded, (i) what was the date, value and duration of each contract, (ii) which departments or agencies awarded the contracts; (b) how many of these contracts were sole sourced at the discretion of Ministers of the Crown or their political exempt staff and how many were put to tender, (i) what were the terms and expected deliverables of each contract, (ii) what was the justification given for each sole sourced contract, (iii) who personally authorized each contract; (c) are there consequences for breaking Treasury Board guidelines and, if so, what are they, (i) what sanctions are available to the government to reprimand those that break Treasury Board guidelines, (ii) specifically, which consequences were available in the circumstance of a $122,000 contract awarded to MacPhie and Associates in which, according to the Minister of Finance, “administrative functions were not followed”, (iii) have these sanctions ever been used, in this or in other circumstances and, if so, in what instances; and (d) other than Budget 2007, how many times in the preceding 10 years has the Ministry of Finance hired private sector firms to develop “all budget communications” including the Budget Plan and Budget Speech, (i) who was so hired, at what cost, and when, (ii) were such contracts sole sourced or put to tender, (iii) if the former, who authorized them? |
Q-322 — November 25, 2008 — Mr. Mulcair (Outremont) — With respect to the fall 2008 purchase by the government of $75 billion in mortgage securities from Canadian financial institutions through Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC): (a) what are the government's stated transaction objectives; (b) what were the terms and conditions of the transaction and what terms and conditions were sought by the government but rejected by the banks; (c) did the government seek assurances of interest rate cuts or greater credit access by consumers and companies in return for the credit swap and, if not, why not; (d) were any conditionalities placed on executive compensation packages in return for accessing the credit swap and, if so, what were they; if not, why not; (e) what oversight measures are in place to monitor how the banks use the credit; (f) will the Treasury Board Secretariat monitor the compliance with terms and conditions of the transaction and provide quarterly reporting to Parliament on the performance of the agreed upon benefits to Canadians; (g) how was the $75 billion disbursed; (h) which banks or financial institutions have accessed funds, on what dates and in what amounts; (i) what is the presumed economic stimulus of this bailout, (i) what is the anticipated economic return for the government from this credit swap, (ii) what are the financial and non financial benefits of this deal; (j) how long does the government anticipate holding these mortgages; (k) what is the underlying value of the mortgages held by the government and who valued them; (l) how many mortgages did the CMHC take possession of with the bailout; (m) in the event of a default on a mortgage loan, what are the financial liabilities and responsibilities borne by the government; (n) how many default mortgages does the government anticipate in fiscal years 2008, 2009 and 2010, on a residential and commercial basis; and (o) what was the total transaction fee incurred by the government? |
Q-332 — November 25, 2008 — Ms. Black (New Westminster—Coquitlam) — With regards to the use of Claymore munitions by the Canadian Forces (CF) in Afghanistan: (a) does the CF have special doctrine for the use of the Claymore in Afghanistan; (b) does the CF chain of command give instructions with regard to the use to the Claymore and obligations under the Ottawa Protocol; (c) is the chain of command aware of uses of the Claymore that have not followed standard procedures in Afghanistan; (d) is the Minister of National Defence aware of any use of the Claymore that violated the Ottawa Protocol; and (e) is the Minister or chain of command aware of any use of the Claymore in which the intended target of the weapon was responsible for its detonation? |
Q-34 — November 26, 2008 — 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-352 — November 26, 2008 — Mr. Bagnell (Yukon) — With respect to the Building Canada Fund (BCF): (a) in order of economic priority projects approved to date, (i) where are they located, (ii) who are the partners involved, (iii) what is the federal contribution, (iv) what is the partners' contribution, (v) what is the total estimated cost, (vi) what were the criteria used in ranking the importance of the project, (vii) what is the benefit to Canadians, (viii) what is the number of jobs created during the construction period and number of permanent jobs created after completion of the project, (ix) what are the results of any environmental assessments and impact studies of the project; (b) what are the environmental projects approved in order of priority to date, (i) where are they located, (ii) who are the partners involved, (iii) what is the federal contribution, (iv) what is the partners’ contribution, (v) what is the total estimated cost, (vi) what are the criteria used in ranking the importance of the project, (vii) what is the benefit to Canadians, (viii) what is the number of jobs created during the construction period and permanent jobs created after completion of the project, (ix) what are the results of any environmental assessments and impact studies of the project; (c) from the Public Private Partnership Fund which is a component of the BFC, (i) what are the number of projects approved, (ii) what are the locations of the projects, (iii) what is the cost per project, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what is the private partner contribution, (vi) what is the benefit of the project, (vii) what is the demonstrated need for the project, (viii) what is the number of jobs created during construction, (ix) what is the number of permanent jobs to be created after completion; (d) under the Gateways and Border Crossing Fund, another component of the BCF, (i) what are the approvals to date of funding expenditures under this program, (ii) what are the criteria for the approval and anticipated outcomes, (iii) what is the priority ranking of the expenditure approval, (iv) what are the results of any environmental assessment, (v) what is its policy, (vi) what is its governance, (vii) what were the technology and marketing assessments used in determining the funding approval; and (e) under the Provincial-Territorial Base Funding component in the BCF, (i) what are the amounts given to each province and territory since the creation of this funding, (ii) what is the amount of funding used for safety-related rehabilitation of infrastructure in each province and territory, (iii) what are the projects where the improvements were made, (iv) what are the expenditures involved and the projected outcome of each improvement, (v) what is the amount of funding that has been used on non-core national highway system infrastructure and where, (vi) what is the amount of each provinces’ and territories’ matching contribution compared to the federal contribution for a total project cost? |
Q-362 — November 26, 2008 — Ms. Murray (Vancouver Quadra) — With respect to the Mountain Pine Beetle infestation: (a) how much money has been designated by the government to address this issue; (b) when, where and which government official announced these allocations of funds; (c) to date, how much has been spent; (d) in which provinces and municipalities have these funds been spent; (e) how have these funds been spent; (f) which companies or front-line government agencies have received payment for related services; (g) what is the timeline for the spending of any remaining funds; and (h) how will these remaining funds be allocated? |
Q-372 — November 26, 2008 — Ms. Murray (Vancouver Quadra) — 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 Vancouver Quadra, listing each department or agency, initiative, and amount? |
Q-382 — November 26, 2008 — Ms. Black (New Westminster—Coquitlam) — With respect to Canada's mission in Afghanistan and the transfer of detainees by the Canadian Forces (CF): (a) what is the total number of detainees transferred by the CF to other entities since the beginning of Canada’s mission in Afghanistan, (i) on an annual basis, (ii) over the total length of the mission; (b) of the number in (a), what is the breakdown by (i) citizenship, (ii) sex, (iii) age; (c) to which entities have the detainees been transferred; (d) to which locations have the detainees been transferred; (e) what is the total number of detainees currently held by the CF; (f) of the number in (e), what is the breakdown by (i) citizenship, (ii) sex, (iii) age; (g) what is the total number of reports and allegations of abuse of prisoners captured by the CF filed by (i) the CF, (ii) Corrections Canada, (iii) RCMP since February 1, 2008; and (h) what are the titles of each report on Afghan detainees produced by Canadian officials and their publication date? |
|
|
2 Response requested within 45 days |