House Publications
The Debates are the report—transcribed, edited, and corrected—of what is said in the House. The Journals are the official record of the decisions and other transactions of the House. The Order Paper and Notice Paper contains the listing of all items that may be brought forward on a particular sitting day, and notices for upcoming items.
For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
|
|
|
Notice PaperNo. 121 Thursday, May 10, 2012 10:00 a.m. |
|
|
|
|
Introduction of Government Bills |
|
Introduction of Private Members' Bills |
|
Notices of Motions (Routine Proceedings) |
|
| May 9, 2012 — Mr. MacAulay (Cardigan) — That the Second Report of the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans, presented on Thursday, March 1, 2012, be concurred in. |
| Debate — limited to 3 hours, pursuant to Standing Order 66(2). |
| Voting — not later than the expiry of the time provided for debate. |
Questions |
|
| Q-6672 — May 9, 2012 — Mr. Dewar (Ottawa Centre) — With regard to the procurement of temporary personnel services by the government over the last five years: (a) what are the total government expenditures for such services, for the five year period and also broken down by year; (b) what amount is spent by each department, broken down by year; (c) how much was spent annually, broken down by department or agency, in the National Capital Region alone; (d) what is the breakdown by province for such services; (e) which companies received contracts to provide temporary personnel services; (f) what is the annual combined total of all contracts awarded to each company; (g) how many people were hired by temporary employment agencies to work for the government, nationally as well as in the National Capital Region, for the five year period and also broken down by year; and (h) how many employees were hired on a temorary basis, nationally as well as in the National Capital Region, broken down by year and by department or agency? |
| Q-6682 — May 9, 2012 — Mr. Dewar (Ottawa Centre) — With regard to Canada's Action Plan for the Implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolutions on Women, Peace and Security (NAP): (a) what progress has been made on each indicator, from 1-1 to 21-2, of the NAP, broken down by department; (b) how many meetings of the interdepartmental working group on the NAP have been convened between October 5, 2010, and April 30, 2012, broken down by date; (c) for each of the fiscal years 2009-2010, 2010-2011 and 2011-2012, how much funding has been allocated to the implementation of the NAP, broken down by department; (d) what unit within each department is responsible for the implementation of the NAP; (e) for each of the fiscal years 2009-2010, 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 how many full-time employees' job descriptions include the implementation of the NAP, broken down by department; (f) for each of the fiscal years 2009-2010, 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 how many full-time employees worked part-time on the implementation of the NAP, broken down by department; (g) what information is publicly available with regard to progress of implementation of the NAP, and where can this information be found; (h) with regard to the interim review of the NAP, including consultations, and broken down by department, (i) when will the review take place, (ii) what is the timeline, (iii) what is the process; (i) will the results of the review be made public; (j) when is the annual reporting period; (k) has an annual report been produced and, if so, where will it be made publicly available; and (l) will the annual report be tabled in Parliament? |
| Q-6692 — May 9, 2012 — Mr. Pacetti (Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel) — With regard to funding for CRC Sogema and its projects by the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA): for how many and for what projects has CIDA directly and indirectly funded CRC Sogema for the fiscal years from March 2009 to March 2012, broken down by project name, country involved, description, year, client and any other relevant details? |
Notices of Motions for the Production of Papers |
|
Business of Supply |
|
Government Business |
|
Private Members' Notices of Motions |
|
| M-369 — May 9, 2012 — Ms. Duncan (Etobicoke North) — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should recognize that: (a) Canadian patients who suffer from rare disorders lack access to clinical trials and new drugs that are available in other countries; (b) it is essential to ensure that all patients have equal and timely access to therapies for life-threatening and debilitating diseases; (c) continuing research investment by Canadians in genomics, proteomics, cell therapy and regenerative medicine will lead to the development of new therapies for rare disorders; (d) it is reasonable to assume that many new therapies for rare disorders will not be brought to market due to the low number of patients relative to the high cost of development; (e) Canada is one of few developed countries to lack a definition for rare disorders; (f) policies enacted in other countries to encourage the development of treatment of rare disorders have enabled the development of new treatments for patients; (g) Parliament has previously called for a national drug policy to be implemented in regard to the treatment of rare disorders; and (h) Canadians would enjoy enhanced health and economic benefits if incentives were provided to assist Canadian innovators in developing and marketing drugs for use in the treatment of rare disorders. |
| M-370 — May 9, 2012 — Ms. Duncan (Etobicoke North) — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should define a “rare disorder” as a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition or disease with a prevalence in Canada of fewer than one in 2,000 people. |
| M-371 — May 9, 2012 — Ms. Duncan (Etobicoke North) — That in the opinion of this House, the government should recognize that : (a) evidence shows that physical inactivity is a major public health issue in Canada; (b) children and youth are getting an average of 6 hours per day of screen time outside of school hours, and over 7 hours on weekend days; (c) only 9 percent of boys and 4 percent of girls meet the Canadian Physical Activity Guidelines; (d) Canada remains without a national physical activity strategy; (e) in 2005 Canada’s federal/provincial/territorial ministers of health agreed to the Integrated Pan-Canadian Healthy Living Strategy; (f) in 2010, Canada’s ministers responsible for health declared that the promotion of health and the prevention of disease, disability and injury are priorities, necessary to the sustainability of the health system, and that there has been little follow-through on this declaration from the government; and (g) there is a disconnect between the government’s articulation of the importance of the childhood inactivity crisis, and its demonstrable leadership and investment. |
| M-372 — May 9, 2012 — Ms. Duncan (Etobicoke North) — That, in the opinion of this House, the government should immediately resume discussions with the provincial and territorial ministers responsible for health to develop a comprehensive pan-Canadian strategy to promote physical activity, commit to the resulting strategy, and make the necessary investments. |
Private Members' Business |
| M-307 — March 26, 2012 — Resuming consideration of the motion of Mr. Casey (Charlottetown), seconded by Mr. Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis), — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should: (a) recognize the contributions that the baby boom generation has made in building Canada; (b) affirm its support for the Old Age Security program; (c) commit to maintaining the sixty-five year qualifying age contained in section 3 of the Old Age Security Act; and (d) recognize that Old Age Security and the Guaranteed Income Supplement, a program designed to help low income seniors, are inextricably linked and ensure that they continue to have identical ages of eligibility. |
| Debate — 1 hour remaining, pursuant to Standing Order 93(1). |
| Voting — at the expiry of the time provided for debate, pursuant to Standing Order 93(1). |
|
|
|
| 2 Response requested within 45 days |
|