;

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.

Previous day publication Next day publication

Bilingual view PDF

41st PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION

Journals No. 134 Tuesday, June 5, 2012 10:00 a.m.

Prayers

Daily Routine Of Business

Tabling of Documents

laid upon the Table, — Report of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada on the application of the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act for the year 2011, pursuant to the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, S.C. 2000, c. 5, sbs. 25(1). — Sessional Paper No. 8560-411-789-02. (Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(h), permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics)

First Reading of Senate Public Bills

Pursuant to Standing Order 69(2), on motion of Mr. O'Connor (Minister of State) for Mr. Nicholson (Minister of Justice), seconded by Mr. Goodyear (Minister of State (Science and Technology) (Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario)), Bill S-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Canada Evidence Act and the Security of Information Act, was read the first time 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 , one concerning foreign ownership (No. 411-1250) and one concerning climate change (No. 411-1251);

— by , one concerning human trafficking (No. 411-1252);

— by , one concerning transportation (No. 411-1253);

— by , one concerning alcoholic beverages (No. 411-1254);

— by , one concerning Old Age Security benefits (No. 411-1255);

— by , one concerning abortion (No. 411-1256);

— by , one concerning the fishing industry (No. 411-1257) and one concerning budget measures (No. 411-1258).

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-601 and Q-605 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-589 — — For each year from 2000 up to and including 2011, and for each country from which Canada has received claims for refugee protection from 2000 up to and including 2011: (a) how many claims for refugee protection from each country were made each year indicated; (b) how many claims for refugee protection from each country received a final decision from the Refugee Protection Division for each year indicated; (c) for each country, what is the rate, expressed as a percentage, that is obtained by dividing the total number of claims made by nationals of the country in question that, in a final determination by the Division for each year indicated, were rejected, determined to be withdrawn or abandoned by the total number of claims made by nationals of the country in question; and (d) for each country, what is the rate, expressed as a percentage, that is obtained by dividing the total number of claims made by nationals of the country in question that, in a final determination by the Division, for each indicated year, are determined to be withdrawn or abandoned by the total number of claims made by nationals of the country in question? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-589.

Q-590 — — With respect to Federal Skilled Worker applicants who applied before February 27, 2008, and for whom an immigration officer has not made a decision based on selection criteria by March 29, 2012: (a) how many total such applicants are there; (b) how many such persons indicated (i) French as their first language, (ii) French as their language of preference for communications with Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC), (iii) English as their first language, (iv) English as their language of preference for communications with CIC; (c) how many such persons have completed a post-secondary education; (d) how many such persons reside in (i) the province of Quebec, (ii) the province of Ontario, (iii) the province of Nova Scotia, (iv) the province of New Brunswick, (v) the province of Prince Edward Island, (vi) the province of Newfoundland and Labrador, (vii) the province of Manitoba, (viii) the province of Alberta, (ix) the province of Saskatchewan, (x) the province of British Columbia, (xi) Nunavut, (xii) Yukon, (xiii) the Northwest Territories; (e) how many such persons indicated an intent to reside in (i) the province of Quebec, (ii) the province of Ontario, (iii) the province of Nova Scotia, (iv) the province of New Brunswick, (v) the province of Prince Edward Island, (vi) the province of Newfoundland and Labrador, (vii) the province of Manitoba, (viii) the province of Alberta, (ix) the province of Saskatchewan, (x) the province of British Columbia, (xi) Nunavut, (xii) Yukon, (xiii) the Northwest Territories; (f) how many such persons reside in Montreal; (g) how many such persons indicated an intent to reside in Montreal; (h) how many such persons reside in the riding of Mount Royal; (i) how many such persons indicated an intent to reside in the riding of Mount Royal; (j) with respect to the persons in (d)(i) and (e)(i), (i) how many indicated French as their first language or language of preference for communications with CIC, (ii) how many possess a post-secondary degree; (k) with respect to the persons in (h) and (i), (i) how many indicated French as their first language or language of preference for communications with CIC, (ii) how many possess a post-secondary degree; (l) with respect to the persons in (f) and (g), (i) how many indicated French as their first language or language of preference for communications with CIC, (ii) how many possess a post-secondary degree; (m) with respect to the persons in (h) and (i), what are the countries of origin of the applicants, broken down by the number of applicants per country; (n) with respect to the persons in (f) and (g), what are the countries of origin of the applicants, broken down by the number of applicants per country; (o) with respect to the persons in (f) and (g), what occupations were indicated by applicants, broken down by the number of applicants for each identified occupation; and (p) with respect to the persons in (h) and (i), what occupations were indicated by applicants, broken down by the number of applicants for each identified occupation? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-590.

Q-591 — — With regard to the current Canadian policy on providing information to foreign agencies and using information from foreign agencies for the combating of terrorism and the protection of public safety: (a) what is the current policy on providing information to foreign agencies when there is a substantial risk this may lead to acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; (b) which departments contributed to the formation of the policy referred to in (a); (c) how long has the policy referred to in (a) been in place; (d) which external experts, including academics, representatives of non-governmental organizations (NGO), private sector representatives, were consulted in the formation of the policy referred to in (a); (e) what was the role of the Minister of Public Safety in the formation of the policy referred to in (a); (f) what was the role of the Minister of Foreign Affairs in the formation of the policy referred to in (a); (g) which official is ultimately responsible for determining whether “substantial risk” exists, in reference to (a); (h) who is responsible for deciding to which foreign agencies Canada will provide information, and what are the substantive criteria behind such a decision; (i) when deliberating the decision referred to in (h), are the “concluding observations” of United Nations Committee Against Torture reports consulted; (j) what sources are used by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), the RCMP or government officials in considering the human rights records of foreign agencies concerning domestic and international activities, including the treatment and interrogation of detainees; (k) what follow-up procedures are used to verify that information transferred from Canada to foreign agencies does not lead to the commission of acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; (l) what is the current policy on the use of information obtained by CSIS from foreign agencies when there are suspicions such information was obtained using acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; (m) which departments contributed to the formation of the current policy referred to in (l); (n) how long has the policy referred to in (l) been in place; (o) which external experts, including academics, NGO representatives, private sector representatives, were consulted in the formation of the policy referred to in (l); and (p) what was the role of the Minister of Public Safety in the formation of the policy referred to in (l)? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-591.

Q-594 — — With regard to Budget 2012: (a) what is the breakdown of each portfolio’s review base in Table 5.1 by department, agency and organization; (b) where the full budget of the department, agency, or organization is not included in the calculation of a portfolio’s review base in Table 5.1, (i) which components of that department, agency, or organization are included in that review base and which are not, (ii) for those components included in the review base, what is the breakdown of their funding by vote or statutory authority; (c) what is the breakdown of expected savings in Table 6.7 under Budget 2012 reductions in departmental spending, for each department, agency and organization in each of the fiscal years 2011-2012, 2012-2013, 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016, 2016-2017, and ongoing; and (d) how does the answer to (c) for each department, agency and organization reconcile with the annual breakdowns included in Annex 1 of Budget 2012? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-594.

Q-597 — — With regard to Old Age Security (OAS): (a) has Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC) or any other department undertaken new estimates since 2009 of the number of people over the age of 65 who are not receiving their OAS pension despite being eligible for it, and, if so, what are those estimates; (b) has HRSDC or any other department undertaken new estimates of the number of people aged 60-64 who are not receiving their OAS Spouse's Allowance despite being eligible for it, and, if so, what are those estimates; (c) has HRSDC or any other department undertaken new estimates of the number of people aged 60-64 who are not receiving their OAS Survivor's Allowance despite being eligible for it, and, if so, what are those estimates; (d) how many of the people included in the estimates referred to in (a), (b) or (c) are currently in receipt of benefits under the Canada Pension Plan; (e) what outreach activities or initiatives has HRSDC, Service Canada or any other department undertaken to notify eligible seniors who are not currently in receipt of OAS pension, Spouse's Allowance or Survivor's Allowance; (f) has HRSDC, Service Canada or any other department undertaken any notifications by mail to eligible seniors who are not currently in receipt of OAS pension, Spouse's Allowance or Survivor's Allowance; and (g) if the answer to (f) is affirmative, (i) in what years were letters mailed, (ii) how many were sent in each of those years, (iii) what was the response rate in each of those years? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-597.

Q-598 — — With respect to Treasury Board numbers for public sector employees as of March 31, 2012: (a) what is the number of public sector employees broken down by the following regions for the fiscal years ending March 31, 2009, March 31, 2010, March 31, 2011, and March 31, 2012, namely: (i) Newfoundland and Labrador, (ii) Prince Edward Island, (iii) Nova Scotia, (iv) New Brunswick, (v) Quebec, exclusive of the National Capital Region, (vi) National Capital Region, Quebec portion, (vii) National Capital Region, Ontario portion, (viii) Ontario, exclusive of the National Capital Region, (ix) Manitoba, (x) Saskatchewan, (xi) Alberta, (xii) British Columbia, (xiii) Yukon, (xiv) Northwest Territories, (xv) Nunavut, (xiv) outside Canada; and (b) for the answers in (a), what are the numbers in each region broken down by (i) indeterminate employees, (ii) specified term employees, (iii) casual employees, (iv) student employees? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-598.

Q-600 — — With regard to government offices, how many offices have been newly opened or relocated since January 1, 2006, specifying: (a) the department or agency; (b) the division, unit, or other like descriptor; (c) in the case of relocated offices, the former location, including full address; (d) the location of the newly-opened or relocated office, including full address; and (e) in the case of leased space, the name of the firm or person leasing the space to the government? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-600.

Q-602 — — With regard to the Canada Pension Plan (CPP): (a) in the past five years, have officials at the CPP, Finance Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat or Human Resources and Skills Development Canada performed any assessment or estimate of the cost of making changes to the limitation on benefits paid retroactive from the date of application; (b) if the answer to (a) is affirmative, (i) what were the resulting assessments or estimates, (ii) what are the file or reference numbers of these assessments; (c) has any assessment or estimate been made of the cost of matching the Quebec Pension Plan's policy of making retroactive payments for up to 60 months; (d) if the answer to (c) is affirmative, (i) what were the resulting assessments or estimates, (ii) what are the file or reference numbers of these assessments; (e) has any assessment or estimate been made of the cost of removing the limitation altogether, and allowing applicants to receive payment for all retroactive benefits; (f) if the answer to (e) is affirmative, (i) what were the resulting assessments or estimates, (ii) what are the file or reference numbers of these assessments; and (g) was any evaluation made about the impact of each option examined as per (a), (c), and (e) on the actuarial soundness of the CPP? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-602.

Q-604 — — With regard to the Canada Pension Plan (CPP): (a) Has Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC) undertaken new estimates since 2005 of the number of people over the age of 70 who paid into the CPP, who might still be alive, but who were not in receipt of their CPP retirement benefits; (b) how many people over the age of 70 years and believed still alive are estimated to be currently missing out on their CPP retirement benefits; (c) how many of the people in (b) are currently in receipt of (i) survivor benefits, (ii) Old Age Pension, (iii) the Guaranteed Income Supplement; (d) since February 2006, (i) what outreach activities or initiatives has HRSDC or Service Canada undertaken to notify eligible seniors over the age of 70 who are not currently in receipt of their CPP retirement benefits, (ii) what are the costs of those activities; (e) since February 2006, has HRSDC or Service Canada undertaken any notifications by mail to eligible seniors over the age of 70 who are not currently in receipt of their CPP retirement benefits; and (f) if the answer to (e) is affirmative, (i) in what years were letters mailed, (ii) how many were sent in each of those years, (iii) what was the response rate in each of those years? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-604.

Business of Supply

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

Mr. Stewart (Burnaby—Douglas), seconded by Ms. LeBlanc (LaSalle—Émard), moved, — That, in the opinion of the House, Canadian scientific and social science expertise is of great value and, therefore, the House calls on the government to end its muzzling of scientists; to reverse the cuts to research programs at Environment Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Library and Archives Canada, National Research Council Canada, Statistics Canada, and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada; and to cancel the closures of the National Council of Welfare and the First Nations Statistical Institute.

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 resolved, — That the House continue to support measures which: (a) condemn the brutal massacre of Syrian civilians by government forces in clear violation of earlier commitments; (b) call for an immediate end to the violence, especially the attacks on civilians; (c) support the Joint Special Envoy of the United Nations and Arab League efforts to establish a ceasefire and implement the six-point peace plan; (d) call for unrestricted access to the country for international media; (e) support the government's decision to expel Syrian diplomats in protest to the latest atrocities in Syria; (f) call on the international community to speak with one voice clearly and categorically condemning the violence and working to bring about a complete cessation of hostilities; (g) urge the leadership of China and Russia to play an active and decisive role in achieving an effective ceasefire that saves the lives of innocent civilians as well as negotiating a roadmap to reforms that respond to the democratic aspirations of the Syrian people; (h) continue Canada's humanitarian aid to refugees and to internally displaced persons fleeing violence in Syria, as needed; and (i) stand in solidarity with those who aspire for peace, democratic governance and the protection of human rights.

By unanimous consent, it was ordered, — That, at the conclusion of today's debate on the opposition motion in the name of the Member for Burnaby—Douglas, all questions necessary to dispose of the motion be deemed put and a recorded division deemed requested and deferred to Wednesday, June 6, 2012, immediately before the disposal of the Main Estimates.

Business of Supply

The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Stewart (Burnaby—Douglas), seconded by Ms. LeBlanc (LaSalle—Émard), in relation to the Business of Supply.

The debate continued.

At 5:15 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 81(16), the Speaker interrupted the proceedings.

Pursuant to Order made earlier today, the question was deemed put on the motion and the recorded division was deemed requested and deferred until Wednesday, June 6, 2012, immediately before the disposal of the Main Estimates.

Private Members' Business

At 5:16 p.m., by unanimous consent, the House proceeded to the consideration of Private Members' Business.

The House resumed consideration of the motion of Ms. Fry (Vancouver Centre), seconded by Mr. Cotler (Mount Royal), — That Bill C-273, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (cyberbullying), be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.

The debate continued.

At 6:16 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 93, the Speaker interrupted the proceedings.

The question was put on the motion and, pursuant to Order made Wednesday, May 30, 2012, the recorded division was deferred until Wednesday, June 6, 2012, at the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders.

At 6:17 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 30(7), the House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Plamondon (Bas-Richelieu—Nicolet—Bécancour), seconded by Mrs. Mourani (Ahuntsic), — That, in the opinion of the House, the governor general should exercise the same financial discipline that the government is asking of the public, and that the government should make the governor general’s salary subject to the general tax regime. (Private Members' Business M-313)

The debate continued.

Mr. Bellavance (Richmond—Arthabaska), seconded by Mr. Fortin (Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia), moved the following amendment, — That the motion be amended by adding the following:

“without increasing his salary”.

Debate arose thereon.

The question was put on the amendment and it was negatived.

The question was put on the main motion and, pursuant to Order made Wednesday, May 30, 2012, the recorded division was deferred until Wednesday, June 6, 2012, at the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders.

Government Orders

Take-note Debates

At 7:15 p.m., pursuant to Order made Friday, June 1, 2012, the House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole under the provisions of Standing Order 53.1 for the consideration of the following motion, — That this Committee take note of the ongoing violence in Syria. (Government Business No. 14)

At 11:15 p.m., the Committee rose.

Returns and Reports Deposited with the Clerk of the House

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

— by — Response of the government, pursuant to Standing Order 109, to the Second Report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, "Chapter 4, Programs for First Nations on Reserves, of the 2011 Status Report of the Auditor General of Canada" (Sessional Paper No. 8510-411-35), presented to the House on Monday, February 6, 2012. — Sessional Paper No. 8512-411-35.

Adjournment

At 11:15 p.m., the Speaker adjourned the House until tomorrow at 2:00 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).