Skip to main content

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
41st PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION

Journals

No. 250

Thursday, May 9, 2013

10:00 a.m.



Prayers
Daily Routine Of Business

Tabling of Documents

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 response, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), to the following petition:

— No. 411-3502 concerning China. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-411-18-19.

Presenting Reports from Committees

Mr. Shory (Calgary Northeast), from the Standing Committee on International Trade, presented the Seventh Report of the Committee, "Report on a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement between Canada and India". — Sessional Paper No. 8510-411-231.

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. 16, 55 to 59, 63 to 66, 70, 73 and 74) was tabled.


Mr. Wallace (Burlington), from the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, presented the 24th Report of the Committee (Bill C-452, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons), with amendments). — Sessional Paper No. 8510-411-232.

A copy of the relevant Minutes of Proceedings (Meetings Nos. 70 to 73) was tabled.


Mr. Dusseault (Sherbrooke), from the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics, presented the Sixth Report of the Committee (Main Estimates 2013-14 — Votes 40 and 45 under JUSTICE, Votes 15 and 20 under PARLIAMENT and Vote 45 under TREASURY BOARD). — Sessional Paper No. 8510-411-233.

A copy of the relevant Minutes of Proceedings (Meetings Nos. 74, 76, 78 and 79) was tabled.


Mr. Braid (Kitchener—Waterloo), from the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates, presented the 11th Report of the Committee (Main Estimates 2013-14 — Votes 95, 100, 105 and 110 under CANADIAN HERITAGE, Vote 1 under GOVERNOR GENERAL, Vote 1 under PARLIAMENT, Votes 1, 5 and 10 under PRIVY COUNCIL, Votes 1, 5, 10, 15 and 20 under PUBLIC WORKS AND GOVERNMENT SERVICES and Votes 1, 5, 10, 20, 25, 30, 33, 40 and 50 under TREASURY BOARD). — Sessional Paper No. 8510-411-234.

A copy of the relevant Minutes of Proceedings (Meetings Nos. 82 to 86) was tabled.


First Reading of Senate Public Bills

Pursuant to Standing Order 69(2), on motion of Mr. Gosal (Minister of State (Sport)) for Mr. Flaherty (Minister of Finance), seconded by Mr. O'Connor (Minister of State), Bill S-17, An Act to implement conventions, protocols, agreements and a supplementary convention, concluded between Canada and Namibia, Serbia, Poland, Hong Kong, Luxembourg and Switzerland, for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes, 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 Mr. Wallace (Burlington), one concerning the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (No. 411-3787) and three concerning sex selection (Nos. 411-3788 to 411-3790);
— by Mr. McGuinty (Ottawa South), one concerning genetic engineering (No. 411-3791);
— by Mr. Garneau (Westmount—Ville-Marie), one concerning the Canada Post Corporation (No. 411-3792);
— by Ms. Duncan (Etobicoke North), two concerning health care services (Nos. 411-3793 and 411-3794);
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning international agreements (No. 411-3795) and one concerning the fishing industry (No. 411-3796).

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-1258, Q-1259, Q-1261 and Q-1262 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-1254 — Ms. Duncan (Etobicoke North) — With regard to access to information requests ATI 2012-005 and 2012-006 submitted by Ms. Kirsty Duncan, M.P., for which a response was sent on February 22, 2013: (a) on what date were the two submissions made and what was the timeframe for completing the response; (b) why were the two requests returned together, some parts featuring page numbers and others not; (c) how many updates have been received from the Canadian Chronic Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency (CCSVI) Systematic Review Group to date, (i) how many studies in total have met the criteria for inclusion in the review, (ii) why does the group not identify, for each complication, the number of cases per number of people treated, (iii) why does the government not provide, for each serious complication listed, the number of cases per population treated; (d) on what date was the request for proposals for the CCSVI trials first drafted, (i) how may drafts were undertaken and on what dates, (ii) how many people worked on these drafts, for how many hours, and at what average cost to taxpayers, (iii) on what date did the provincial and territorial Ministers of Health review the draft, (iv) what was the feedback provided; (e) why, on November 22, 2012, was the amount available for the CCSVI trials in the range of $3-5 million, (i) what is the significance of the expression "should we just fudge a number"; (f) how was the decision made to earmark $3 million for the CCSVI trials and on what date was the decision made; (g) on what date and at what time was the Request for Applications (RFA) announcement for clinical trials published on the Canadian Institute for Health Research (CIHR)'s website, (i) on what date and at what time was Bill C-280, An Act to establish a National Strategy for Chronic Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency (CCSVI), scheduled to be debated; (h) why was there a change by the President's office at CIHR that the commitment from the CIHR be $2 million with the balance to come from partners, i.e. the Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada (MSSC) and ''relevant provinces and territories'', and what were the relevant provinces and territories referred to; (i) how many versions of the Multiple Sclerosis (MS) research update deck were produced and on what dates, (i) how many people worked on these drafts, for how many hours, and at what average cost to taxpayers, (ii) when was the final draft presented, and for what purpose; (j) how many government MPs has the Health Minister met with on the issue of CCSVI/MS since May 2010, and how many government MPs have the Minister's officials met with on the issue of CCSVI/MS since May 2010; (k) how many draft speeches were prepared for government MPs for Motion M-274, (i) how many versions of each speech were produced and on what dates, (ii) how many people worked on these drafts, for how many hours, and at what average cost to taxpayers, (iii) how many government MPs read these prepared speeches; (l) regarding the briefing note for Dr. Alain Beaudet`s meeting with Dr. Jeffrey Turnbull, President of the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) on December 21, 2010, why did a recommendation in the briefing note state "The possibility of the CMA producing a position statement regarding patient access to physicians for patients who have received the Zamboni procedure", and "The fact that CIHR would be willing to provide the CMA with any necessary support in order to produce this statement", when the Scientific Expert Working Group (SEWG) stated that, "media reports that have stated that Multiple Sclerosis (MS) patients who experience complications after Chronic Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency (CCSVI) treatment are not being seen by Canadian doctors are not justified"; (m) regarding the briefing note for Dr. Alain Beaudet's meeting with Paul Emile Cloutier, CEO of the CMA on January 31, 2012, which shows CMA President Haggie testified before a Senate committee on Dec 2, 2011, and a House committee on October 17, 2011, (i) did President Haggie bring up at either committee meeting CMA's lack of support for either bills C-280 or S-204, (ii) why was President Haggie unaware of the lack of follow-up care for MS patients treated for CCSVI when President Turnbull was made aware, (iii) why was there a hiatus in correspondence with the CMA, (iv) for how long was the hiatus, (v) when did the hiatus end; (n) regarding the MS-Societies' seven funded studies regarding CCSVI, why was there, at the 18-month mark, an inquiry into the training of the teams, (i) which of the teams were trained by Dr. Zamboni and which individual members of each team were trained by Dr. Zamboni, (ii) which of the teams were trained by Dr. Zivadinov and which individual members of each team were trained by Dr. Zivadinov, (iii) which teams were trained by neither or by another team; (o) how many people worked on drafts of prepared speeches for bill C-280, An Act to establish a National Strategy for Chronic Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency (CCSVI), for how many hours, and at what average cost to taxpayers and how many government MPs read these prepared speeches; (p) how many people worked on drafts of prepared speeches for bill S-204, An Act to establish a National Strategy for Chronic Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency (CCSVI), for how many hours, and at what average cost to taxpayers, (i) how many government Senators read these prepared speeches; (q) on what dates was the Canadian MS Monitoring System to be ready to receive data and when did the system start collecting data; (r) is the government's position regarding MS patients’ input into the Scientific Expert Working Group (SEWG) in accordance with the statement "CIHR's Scientific Expert Working Group includes researchers with expertise in different disciplines such as neurology, vascular surgery and vascular imaging who are treating MS patients and who will be bringing their patients' concerns to the table" (ATIP); (s) is it still the government's position that "Benoit's motion speaks far more to PHAC's monitoring system than anything we are doing on the trials front" (ATIP); (t) how many draft MS slide decks were prepared for Senatorial Caucus, (i) how many versions of each deck were produced and on what dates, (ii) how many people worked on these drafts, for how many hours, and at what average cost to taxpayers, (iii) who presented the deck to the Senatorial Caucus; (u) is the government's position as per the information sheet provided when Dr. Alain Beaudet wrote to the Colleges of Physicians on February 29, 2012 which says, "MS patients who have received a venous procedure abroad should be reassured that they will be continued to be cared for by their physicians and/or regular MS specialists as any other patients?” or is it that follow-up care is primarily the responsibility of provincial and territorial governments to ensure that no Canadian is denied post-treatment and follow-up care (ATIP) and what role does the federal government have if patients are being denied follow-up care by a province or territory; (v) why did the government ask the Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada (MSSC) on February 7, 2012 about approved venous angioplasty; (w) is it still the government's position that the MS documentary that aired on the Nature of Things on February 9, 2012, was "balanced and fair"; (x) why does a February 16, 2012 e-mail list MS patients who are also CCSVI advocates; (y) is the government's position regarding imaging for CCSVI in accordance with the International Society for NeuroVascular Disease (ISNVD) venography statement and consensus document and, if not, why not; and (z) does the government know how many Canadians are actually impacted by MS, (i) if so, what is the number, (ii) if not, why not; and (aa) when Dr. Alain Beaudet wrote to the Colleges of Physicians on February 29, 2012, (i) why was the list of 11 recent peer-reviewed publications provided not a comprehensive list, (i) why did the list not specify what were positive and negative studies, and what imaging techniques were used, (ii) for MS patients who are denied follow-up care, what recourse and resources do they have, (iii) what is the position of the Scientific Expert Working Group concerning MS patients who have been denied follow-up care, such as Roxanne Garland? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1254.

Q-1255 — Ms. Brosseau (Berthier—Maskinongé) — With regard to the repeal of regulations related to container standards announced in Budget 2011: (a) when exactly will these changes be made; (b) what is the consultation process for making these changes; (c) how much time is scheduled for each step of the process; (d) in his testimony before the AGRI committee on February 28, 2013, the Minister of Agriculture said that some industries can choose not to adopt the regulatory changes, what does this mean for foreign products that do not meet Canadian sizes; (e) are there plans to set aside funds to upgrade equipment (for example, to package the previously non-standard new containers) so that manufacturing companies can remain competitive; (f) what industries were consulted to determine whether the regulations should be repealed; (g) what are the reasons for repealing regulations related to container standards; (h) what industries, groups, stakeholders or companies called for the repeal of regulations related to container standards; (i) are there studies or reports on the economic impact of repealing these regulations and, if so, what are they; (j) will there be changes for requesting and administering ministerial exemptions and, if so, what are they; (k) were analyses done to determine how repealing regulations related to container standards could improve inter-provincial trade; (l) are there expected to be savings or extra costs for Canadian food processors following the repeal of regulations related to container standards and, if so, what kind; (m) are there expected to be savings or extra costs for consumers following the repeal of regulations related to container standards and, if so, what kind; and (n) are there expected to be savings or extra costs for farmers following the repeal of regulations related to container standards and, if so, what kind? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1255.

Q-1256 — Mr. Regan (Halifax West) — With respect to offences related to money and other assets held offshore, for the period from April 1, 2006, to March 31, 2012: (a) how many convictions were there during this period; (b) what are the details of each conviction in (a) including (i) the name of the individual(s) convicted, (ii) the name and type (i.e. civil or criminal) of offense, (iii) the amount of money or the type of asset and the value of the asset involved, (iv) the location of the money or asset involved, (v) the possible range of penalties/sentences upon conviction, (vi) the actual penalty and/or sentence received, (vii) whether the conviction was achieved through sentencing, plea bargain, settlement, or another means, (viii) the amount of time that passed between the commencement of an audit, investigation, or some other form of compliance action in respect of the offence and the date of conviction; (c) how many offences related to money and other assets held offshore were considered or referred for civil prosecution during this period but never pursued; (d) how many offences related to money and other assets held offshore were considered or referred for criminal prosecution during this period but never pursued; (e) how many offences related to money and other assets held offshore were prosecuted civilly during this period but were thrown out of court or lost in court; and (f) how many offences related to money and other assets held offshore were prosecuted criminally during this period but were thrown out of court or lost in court? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1256.

Q-1257 — Mr. Andrews (Avalon) — With regard to the March 18, 2013, announcement by the Minister of Natural Resources and the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in Vancouver, British Columbia: (a) what flights took place in Atlantic Canada as part of the National Aerial Surveillance Program in 2011-2012 specifying (i) number of flights, (ii) date of each flight, (iii) geographic area covered, (iv) what, if any, pollution occurrences were detected; (b) how many flights are proposed for Atlantic Canada in 2013, 2014 and 2015; and (c) pertaining to Tanker Safety, and more specifically, public port designation, what is the plan for designating more ports in Newfoundland and Labrador and what are the names of these ports? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-411-1257.
Business of Supply

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

Mr. Ravignat (Pontiac), seconded by Ms. Blanchette-Lamothe (Pierrefonds—Dollard), moved, — That, in light of $3.1 billion of missing funds outlined in Chapter Eight of the 2013 Spring Report of the Auditor General of Canada, an order of the House do issue for the following documents from 2001 to the present, allowing for redaction based on national security: (a) all Public Security and Anti-Terrorism annual reports submitted to the Treasury Board Secretariat; (b) all Treasury Board submissions made as part of the Initiative; (c) all departmental evaluations of the Initiative; (d) the Treasury Board corporate database established to monitor funding; that these records be provided to the House in both official languages by June 17, 2013; that the Speaker make arrangements for these records to be made available online; and that the Auditor-General be given all necessary resources to perform an in-depth forensic audit until the missing $3.1 billion is found and accounted for.

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.

Business of Supply

The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Ravignat (Pontiac), seconded by Ms. Blanchette-Lamothe (Pierrefonds—Dollard), in relation to the Business of Supply.

The debate continued.

Ms. Laverdière (Laurier-Sainte-Marie), seconded by Mr. Rafferty (Thunder Bay—Rainy River), moved the following amendment, — That the motion be amended by adding the following:

“and that in order to avoid losing funds in the future, the House request that the government take all actions necessary to transition to program activity based appropriations according to the timeline provided to the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates in response to their seventh report, tabled on June 20, 2012.”.

Debate arose thereon.

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

The question was put on the amendment and, pursuant to Standing Order 45, the recorded division was deferred until Tuesday, May 21, 2013, at the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders.

Private Members' Business

At 5:15 p.m., by unanimous consent, the House proceeded to the consideration of Private Members' Business.

The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Pacetti (Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel), seconded by Ms. Foote (Random—Burin—St. George's), — That Bill C-463, An Act to amend the Income Tax Act (travel expenses), be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage.

The debate continued.

The question was put on the motion and, pursuant to Standing Order 93(1), the recorded division was deferred until Wednesday, May 22, 2013, immediately before the time provided for Private Members' Business.

Government Orders

At 5:47 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 81(4)(a), the House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole for the consideration of all Votes under INDIAN AFFAIRS AND NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT in the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2014.

At 9:47 p.m., the Committee rose.

Pursuant to Standing Order 81(4)(a), the considered Votes were deemed reported.

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 Mrs. McLeod (Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo), two concerning sex selection (Nos. 411-3797 and 411-3798);
— by Mr. Lemieux (Glengarry—Prescott—Russell), seventeen concerning sex selection (Nos. 411-3799 to 411-3815).
Adjournment

At 9:48 p.m., the Speaker adjourned the House until tomorrow at 10:00 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).