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. 67 Wednesday, December 14, 2011 2:00 p.m. |
|
|
|
|
Introduction of Government Bills |
|
Introduction of Private Members' Bills |
|
| December 13, 2011 — Mr. Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley) — Bill entitled “An Act regarding the inclusion of Haida Gwaii as a prescribed northern zone under the Income Tax Act”. |
Notices of Motions (Routine Proceedings) |
|
| December 13, 2011 — Ms. Boivin (Gatineau) — That the First Report of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, presented on Monday, December 12, 2011, 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-393 — December 13, 2011 — Ms. Liu (Rivière-des-Mille-Îles) — With regard to the Guaranteed Income Supplement, how many beneficiaries were there in each federal electoral riding in the most recent month with data available? |
| Q-394 — December 13, 2011 — Ms. Liu (Rivière-des-Mille-Îles) — What is the total amount of government funding allocated to the constituency of Rivière-des-Mille-Îles between fiscal year 2007–2008 and the last fiscal year, broken down by (i) department or agency, (ii) initiative or program, (iii) year, (iv) amount, and (v) recipient? |
| Q-395 — December 13, 2011 — Ms. Liu (Rivière-des-Mille-Îles) — With regard to hydraulic fracking: (a) what chemicals have been approved for use as hydraulic fracking fluids; (b) what chemicals are being used as hydraulic fracking fluids in Canadian projects; (c) what are the titles of the studies or reports done or in progress, by or on behalf of the government, that cover, in whole or in part, the subject of (i) the environmental impacts of hydraulic fracking, (ii) the long term impacts of hydraulic fracking on aquifers and fresh water supplies, (iii) the health impacts of hydraulic fracking; (d) what sites in Canada are being monitored for contamination or excessive pollution as a result of fracking; (e) what is the total number of cubic meters of water that have been permitted to be used in hydraulic fracking, (i) per day, (ii) by project; (f) how many instances of contaminated water have been linked to fracking since 2000, broken down by (i) year, (ii) project; (g) what impacts do working in hydraulic fracking projects have on the health of citizens living within close proximity to hydraulic fracking projects (i) what are the cancer rates for citizens living in communities that are in close proximity to hydraulic fracking projects; (h) what events linked to hydraulic fracking have caused (i) property damage, (ii) illness, (iii) death to humans and animals; (i) what companies have been registered in Canada to conduct hydraulic fracking; (j) what is the complete list of federal regulations to which hydraulic fracking operations are subject, and is the government planning new regulation for hydraulic fracking operations; and (k) what consultations has the government undertaken, formally or informally, on the subject of hydraulic fracking? |
| Q-3962 — December 13, 2011 — Ms. Crowder (Nanaimo—Cowichan) — With regard to employment policy and programs overseen by HRSDC or delivered by Service Canada: (a) what research went into the design of each policy and program by (i) Aboriginal Labour Market Programs, (ii) Employment Insurance, (iii) Employment Measures, (iv) Labour Market Agreements; (b) how is each policy and program monitored for outcomes by (i) Aboriginal Labour Market Programs, (ii) Employment Insurance, (iii) Employment Measures, (iv) Labour Market Agreements; (c) what studies were conducted to ensure each policy and program was performing as planned by (i) Aboriginal Labour Market Programs, (ii) Employment Insurance, (iii) Employment Measures, (iv) Labour Market Agreements; (d) what summative evaluations have been done by (i) Aboriginal Labour Market Programs, (ii) Employment Insurance, (iii) Employment Measures, (iv) Labour Market Agreements; (e) who are the target clients for each policy and program by (i) Aboriginal Labour Market Programs, (ii) Employment Insurance, (iii) Employment Measures, (iv) Labour Market Agreements; and (f) what were the reviews or audits done annually since 2000 of (i) Aboriginal Labour Market Programs, (ii) Employment Insurance, (iii) Employment Measures, (iv) Labour Market Agreements? |
| Q-3972 — December 13, 2011 — Mr. Boulerice (Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie) — With regard to all gifts and benefits accepted, directly or indirectly, by the Prime Minister, all Cabinet Ministers, and their families since 2006, by first and last name of the member in chronological order: (a) for each gift or benefit received, (i) what was the date of receipt, (ii) what is the description of the occasion, (iii) what was the content, (iv) what was the estimated monetary value; (b) what are all gifts or benefits that were not forfeited to Her Majesty by the date of December 7, 2011, and, for each such gift or benefit, (i) what was the date of receipt, (ii) what was the content, (iii) what was the monetary value; (c) what are all gifts and benefits forfeited to Her Majesty by the date of December 7, 2011, and, for each such gift or benefit, (i) what was the date of receipt, (ii) what was the date of forfeiture, (iii) what is its current location, (iv) what was the content, (v) what was the monetary value; and (d) what is the policy for recipients regarding which gifts are kept and which are forfeited? |
| Q-3982 — December 13, 2011 — Mr. Boulerice (Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie) — With regard to the costs incurred by the government in settling lawsuits or claims, as identified in the 2011 Public Accounts totaling $654 million, divided by department, what are the: (a) identities of the claimants or organizations; (b) details of the grievance including the (i) times, (ii) location(s), (iii) type(s), (iv) nature of dispute; (c) monetary amounts and any other terms requested in the claimant's initial claim or lawsuit; (d) subsequent government responses including (i) monetary offers, (ii) any other terms; (e) dates of settlement agreements; (f) types of settlements; (g) amounts of the settlements, and all other terms agreed to in the settlements; (h) the amounts that have been paid by the date of December 7, 2011; (i) estimated costs of not settling and using judicial channels; (j) names of government employees involved in the settlements and their role; (k) Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) hours spent on each claim's settlement; (l) legal fees incurred by the government (including those, if applicable, of the claimant) in each claim's settlement; and (m) steps taken to ensure the events leading to the lawsuit or claim are not repeated and any further lawsuits or claims are mitigated? |
| Q-3992 — December 13, 2011 — Mr. Cash (Davenport) — With regard to applications made under the Toronto G20 Summit compensation fund: (a) what is the total number of applications made under the Toronto G20 Summit compensation fund by (i) individuals, (ii) businesses, (iii) non-profit organizations, (iv) other groups; (b) what is the total number of applications in (a) that were deemed eligible for compensation; (c) what is the total number of applications in (a) that were deemed ineligible for compensation; (d) what are the names and addresses of all applicants in (a); (e) for each individual application in (a), (i) what were the claim amounts submitted, (ii) what were the revised claim amounts, (iii) what were the amounts offered by Audit Service Canada as payment, (iv) what are the reasons for any variations in the amounts in (e)(i), (e)(ii) and (e)(iii); (f) what type of appeal process was or is in place for applicants who were not satisfied with the result of their application; and (g) what was done with the remaining money that was set aside for compensation but not awarded to applicants? |
| Q-4002 — December 13, 2011 — Ms. Borg (Terrebonne—Blainville) — With respect to the conditions inside federal penitentiaries for correctional officers and inmates: (a) will the government implement any of the 71 recommendations produced in the 2010 Report of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security entitled “Mental Health and Drug and Alcohol Addiction in the Federal Correctional System” and, if so, which ones; (b) will the government implement any of the 71 recommendations produced by the Office of the Correctional Investigator (OCI) in its 36th Annual Report to Parliament (2008-2009) and, if so, which ones; (c) what is the government’s plan to address current and future levels of prison overcrowding; (d) does the government anticipate an increase in prison population by 2015 resulting from the enactment of Bill C-10, An Act to enact the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act and to amend the State Immunity Act, the Criminal Code, the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, the Youth Criminal Justice Act, the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and other Acts, and how will this factor into the aforementioned plan to address current levels of prison overcrowding; (e) does the Correctional Service of Canada have a plan to address the double-bunking crisis in Regional Treatment Centres and Regional Reception Centres, which treat volatile inmates, often with serious mental health conditions and addictions; (f) what is the government’s response to reports regarding the practice of double-bunking in segregation; (g) does prison overcrowding have a role to play in the increasing rates of violence in federal prisons; (h) what have been the measurable results of the two-year, $21.5 million investment initiated in 2007 and the continued yearly $16.6 million investment into Institutional Mental Health Initiative (IMHI) intended to improve mental health programs in prisons, (i) have the investments measurably improved mental health treatment and intervention services, (ii) to what extent have the Primary Mental Health Care teams addressed the mental health needs of inmates, (iii) will any of the IMHI investment be directed towards the Intermediate Care Units to treat offenders with mental illnesses not admitted to Regional Treatment Centres, (iv) will an accountability framework and needs and gaps analysis be applied to the IMHI investment, (v) has an evaluation been conducted on the effectiveness of the two-day mental health training package delivered to correctional officers, (vi) will the IMHI investment meet the growing mental health services demands based on projected growth in the incarcerated population; (i) will the government increase CSC correctional programming funding above the current level of 2.7 percent of the total CSC budget and increase the percentage of health professionals on the CSC staff above the current level of 3.7 percent; and (j) to address the current overrepresentation of the mentally ill and the addicted in the correctional system and the security concerns this creates for correctional officers, will the government commit to, in collaboration with the provinces, investing in upstream interventions in order to stem the flow of people suffering from mental illnesses and addictions into the correctional system? |
| Q-4012 — December 13, 2011 — Ms. Fry (Vancouver Centre) — What is the estimated cost of the government's response to question 385 on the Order Paper? |
| Q-4022 — December 13, 2011 — Ms. Fry (Vancouver Centre) — With respect to Aboriginal Canadians, for each year since 2006: (a) how many Aboriginal Canadians have been hired by each government department, agency and crown corporation as full-time employees and how many of them were women; and (b) how many Aboriginal Canadians have been promoted by each government department, agency and crown corporation to a management position and how many of them were women? |
| Q-4032 — December 13, 2011 — Mr. Karygiannis (Scarborough—Agincourt) — With regard to termination of employment agreements of exempt staff in Ministers' offices since 2008: (a) how many employees in each Minister's office have been terminated for misconduct or incompetence; (b) in aggregate, what was the total sum of severance paid out to these employees; (c) what was the average, median and highest amount of severance paid to a single terminated employee; (d) how many employees resigned but still received severance pay; and (e) out the subset of employees who resigned but still received severance pay, what was the average, median and maximum termination settlement? |
| Q-4042 — December 13, 2011 — Mr. Karygiannis (Scarborough—Agincourt) — With regard to the purchase of cosmetics by Minister's offices since 2008: (a) how much money has each Ministers’ office spent on (i) cosmetics, (ii) hair products, (iii) beauty supplies; (b) what were the dates of each purchase; and (c) what were the brands and names of the individual products purchased? |
| Q-4052 — December 13, 2011 — Mr. Karygiannis (Scarborough—Agincourt) — With regard to Ministers' office budgets since 2008: (a) how many expense claims were submitted by the Minister or his or her exempt staff, but rejected by the relevant financial officer; (b) what was each rejected claim for and for what amount; and (c) what was the reason for each expense claim rejection? |
| Q-4062 — December 13, 2011 — Mr. Karygiannis (Scarborough—Agincourt) — With respect to the three programs supported by the Global Peace and Security Fund: (a) concerning Global Peace and Security Program, (i) what projects have been approved in the last fiscal year and this year, (ii) what has the budget been for the last fiscal year and this year, (iii) what is the proposed budget for next year; (b) concerning Global Peace Operation Program, (i) what projects have been approved in the last fiscal year and this year, (ii) what has the budget been for the last fiscal year and this year, (iii) what is the proposed budget for next year; and (c) concerning Glyn Berry Program, (i) what projects have been approved in the last fiscal year and this year, (ii) what has the budget been for the last fiscal year and this year, (iii) what is the proposed budget for next year? |
Notices of Motions for the Production of Papers |
|
Business of Supply |
|
Government Business |
|
Private Members' Notices of Motions |
|
| M-301 — December 13, 2011 — Ms. Morin (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot) — That, in the opinion of the House: (a) funding alloted to the Homelessness Partnering Strategy (HPS) should be indexed annually to the rising cost of living; (b) the indexing should be retroactive for all years in which it did not take place; (c) a quantitative assessment of actual homelessness needs in Canada should be done in partnership with community organizations offering services to homeless people or people with no permanent address; (d) an assessment should be done each time a program ends in order to reassess needs and avoid cuts in services to homeless people or people with no permanent address; (e) HPS funding should be significantly increased, taking into account the real needs reported in such an assessment; and (f) funds should be made available early in the next fiscal year to avoid unnecessary delays for organizations in need or an interruption in services for homeless people or people with no permanent address. |
Private Members' Business |
| M-270 — October 27, 2011 — Resuming consideration of the motion of Ms. LeBlanc (LaSalle—Émard), seconded by Mr. Nicholls (Vaudreuil—Soulanges), — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should: (a) recognize that the construction and maintenance of public infrastructure plays a vital role in the creation and protection of jobs, and that infrastructure is a strategic asset that supports vibrant, prosperous and sustainable communities; (b) act immediately to counter the crisis of crumbling infrastructure and the very real risks it poses to the economy, security, and the quality of life of Canadians; (c) develop a legislative framework, with clear targets, to provide sustainable, predictable and long term infrastructure funding agreements with provinces, territories, municipalities, First Nations, Inuit and Métis communities; (d) cooperate with stakeholders to encourage the use of sustainable and innovative infrastructure design models, and to develop sustainable building codes that favour energy and water conservation and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, and take into account changing demographics and evolving rural-urban linkages; (e) index the Gas Tax Fund to economic and population growth and increase the existing gas tax transfer by one cent per litre, and consider other alternative funding mechanisms to ensure municipalities, large and small, have the long-term capacity to build and maintain public infrastructure; and (f) acknowledge its exclusive financial responsibility for, and immediately announce its intention to replace, the Champlain Bridge. |
| 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 |
|