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.
41st PARLIAMENT, 2nd SESSION | |
|
|
JournalsNo. 137 Monday, November 3, 2014 2:00 p.m. |
|
|
|
Prayers |
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. |
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 responses, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), to the following petitions: |
— No. 412-3945 concerning international agreements. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-412-21-09;
|
— No. 412-3950 concerning pesticides. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-412-100-04;
|
— No. 412-3952 concerning world peace. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-412-20-03;
|
— No. 412-3953 concerning climate change. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-412-50-11;
|
— Nos. 412-4106 to 412-4108 concerning genetic engineering. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-412-4-20;
|
— No. 412-4134 concerning navigable waters. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-412-24-21;
|
— No. 412-4144 concerning the Canada Post Corporation. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-412-1-18;
|
— Nos. 412-4326 and 412-4328 to 412-4330 concerning the grain industry. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-412-82-17.
|
Motions |
Mrs. Day (Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles), seconded by Ms. Morin (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine), moved, — That the Fifth Report of the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates, presented on Monday, June 16, 2014, be concurred in. (Concurrence in Committee Reports No. 22) |
Debate arose thereon. |
Tabling of Documents |
Pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), Mr. Fantino (Minister of Veterans Affairs) laid upon the Table, — Annual Report 2013-2014 of the Office of the Veterans Ombudsman. — Sessional Paper No. 8525-412-40.
|
Motions |
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mrs. Day (Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles), seconded by Ms. Morin (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine), — That the Fifth Report of the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates, presented on Monday, June 16, 2014, be concurred in. (Concurrence in Committee Reports No. 22) |
The debate continued. |
The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to on division. |
Presenting Petitions |
Pursuant to Standing Order 36, petitions certified correct by the Clerk of Petitions were presented as follows: |
— by Mr. Wilks (Kootenay—Columbia), one concerning health care services (No. 412-4434);
|
— by Mr. Martin (Winnipeg Centre), one concerning asbestos (No. 412-4435).
|
Questions 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-660 — Ms. Sims (Newton—North Delta) — With regard to Service Canada Old Age Security and Canada Pension Plan call centres for fiscal years 2012-2013 through 2014-2015 (year-to-date): (a) what was the volume of calls broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (b) what was the number of calls that received a high volume message, broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (c) what were the national service level standards for calls answered by an agent, broken down by year; (d) what were the actual service level standards achieved for calls answered by an agent, broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (e) what were the service standards for call backs, broken down by year; (f) what were the service standards achieved for call backs broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (g) what was the average number of days for a call back by an agent, broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (h) what was the number and percentage of term employees, and the number and percentage of indeterminate employees, broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (i) what is the rate of sick leave use among call centre employees, broken down by year; (j) what is the number of call centre employees on long-term disability; and (k) what is the rate of overtime and the number of overtime hours worked by call centre employees, broken down by year? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-412-660.
|
|
Q-661 — Ms. Sims (Newton—North Delta) — With regard to the Advisory Panel on Labour Market Information: (a) which recommendations of the Advisory Panel on Labour Market Information Report have been implemented and what was the date they were put into place; (b) which of the recommendations of the Report are in the process of being implemented and what is the timeline for completion; and (c) which recommendations of the Report have not been implemented? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-412-661.
|
|
Q-662 — Ms. Sims (Newton—North Delta) — With regard to Employment Insurance (EI) for fiscal years 2012-2013 through 2014-2015 (year-to-date): (a) what was the volume of EI applications, broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province where claim originated, (iii) region/province where the claim was processed, (iv) the number of claims accepted and the number of claims rejected, (v) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (b) what was the average EI application processing time, broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province where claim originated, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (c) how many applications waited more than 28 days for a decision and, for these applications, what was the average wait time for a decision, broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province where claim originated, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (d) what was the volume of calls to EI call centres broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (e) what was the number of calls to EI call centres that received a high volume message, broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (f) what were the national service level standards for calls answered by an agent at EI call centres, broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (g) what were the actual service level standards achieved by EI call centres for calls answered by an agent, broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (h) what were the service standards for call backs at EI call centres broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (i) what were the service standards achieved by EI call centre agents for call backs, broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (j) what was the average number of days for a call back by an EI call centre agent, broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (k) what was the number and percentage of term employees, and the number and percentage of indeterminate employees, working at EI call centres and processing centres, broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (l) what is the rate of sick leave use among EI call centre and processing centre employees, broken down by year; (m) what is the number of EI call centre and processing centre employees on long term disability; (n) what is the rate of overtime and the number of overtime hours worked by call centre employees, broken down by year; (o) how many complaints did the Office of Client Satisfaction receive, broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province where the complaint originated, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 by month; (p) how long on average did a complaint take to investigate and resolve, broken down by (i) year, (ii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 by month; and (q) what were the major themes of the complaints received, broken down by year? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-412-662.
|
|
Q-663 — Ms. Sims (Newton—North Delta) — With regard to the Social Security Tribunal: (a) how many appeals are currently waiting to be heard at the Income Security Section; (b) how many appeals currently waiting to be heard pertain to (i) Canada Pension Plan retirement pensions, (ii) Canada Pension Plan Disability benefits, (iii) Old Age Security; (c) how many appeals have been heard by the Income Security Section; (d) how many appeals were heard by the Income Security Section in (i) 2013, (ii) 2014; (e) how many appeals were heard by the Income Security Section relating to (i) Canada Pension Plan retirement pensions, (ii) Canada Pension Plan Disability benefits, (iii) Old Age Security; (f) how many appeals heard by the Income Security Section were allowed; (g) how many appeals heard by the Income Security Section were dismissed; (h) how many appeals to the Income Security Section were summarily dismissed; (i) how many appeals allowed by the Income Security Section pertained to (i) Canada Pension Plan retirement pensions, (ii) Canada Pension Plan Disability benefits, (iii) Old Age Security; (j) how many appeals at the Income Security Section have been heard (i) in person, (ii) by teleconference, (iii) by videoconference, (iv) in writing; (k) how many appeals at the Income Security Section heard in person have been (i) allowed, (ii) dismissed; (l) how many appeals at the Income Security Section heard by teleconference have been (i) allowed, (ii) dismissed; (m) how many appeals at the Income Security Section heard by videoconference have been (i) allowed, (ii) dismissed; (n) how many appeals at the Income Security Section heard in writing have been (i) allowed, (ii) dismissed; (o) how many members assigned Canada Pension Plan Disability Benefit cases have (i) a degree from a recognized post-secondary institution, or a provincial or territorial licence in medicine, nursing, occupational therapy, pharmacy, physiotherapy, or psychology, and how many have (ii) experience working on issues affecting seniors or people with disabilities; (p) what is the Tribunal’s protocol with regard to urgent hearing requests for Canada Pension Plan Disability cases; (q) how many income security appeals are currently waiting to be heard by the Appeal Division; (r) how many income security appeals currently waiting to be heard by the Appeal Division pertain to (i) Canada Pension Plan retirement pensions, (ii) Canada Pension Plan Disability benefits, (iii) Old Age Security; (s) how many income security appeals have been heard by the Appeal Division; (t) how many income security appeals were heard by the Appeal Division in (i) 2013, (ii) 2014; (u) how many income security appeals were heard by the Appeal Division relating to (i) Canada Pension Plan retirement pensions, (ii) Canada Pension Plan Disability benefits, (iii) Old Age Security; (v) how many income security appeals heard by the Appeal Division were allowed; (w) how many income security appeals heard by the Appeal Division were dismissed; (x) how many income security appeals to the Appeal Division were summarily dismissed; (y) how many income security appeals allowed by the Appeal Division pertained to (i) Canada Pension Plan retirement pensions, (ii) Canada Pension Plan Disability benefits, (iii) Old Age Security; (z) how many income security appeals at the Appeal Division have been heard (i) in person, (ii) by teleconference, (iii) by videoconference, (iv) in writing; (aa) how many income security appeals at the Appeal Division heard in person have been (i) allowed, (ii) dismissed; (bb) how many income security appeals at the Appeal Division heard by teleconference have been (i) allowed, (ii) dismissed; (cc) how many income security appeals at the Appeal Division heard by videoconference have been (i) allowed, (ii) dismissed; (dd) how many income security appeals at the Appeal Division heard in writing have been (i) allowed, (ii) dismissed; (ee) how many appeals are currently waiting to be heard at the Employment Insurance Section; (ff) how many appeals have been heard by the Employment Insurance Section; (gg) how many appeals were heard by the Employment Insurance Section in (i) 2013, (ii) 2014; (hh) how many appeals heard by the Employment Insurance Section were allowed; (ii) how many appeals heard by the Employment Insurance Section were dismissed; (jj) how many appeals to the Employment Insurance Section were summarily dismissed; (kk) how many appeals at the Employment Insurance Section have been heard (i) in person, (ii) by teleconference, (iii) by videoconference, (iv) in writing; (ll) how many appeals at the Employment Insurance Section heard in person have been (i) allowed, (ii) dismissed; (mm) how many appeals at the Employment Insurance Section heard by teleconference have been (i) allowed, (ii) dismissed; (nn) how many appeals at the Employment Insurance Section heard by videoconference have been (i) allowed and (ii) dismissed; (oo) how many appeals at the Employment Insurance Section heard in writing have been (i) allowed and (ii) dismissed; (pp) how many Employment Insurance appeals are currently waiting to be heard by the Appeal Division; (qq) how many Employment Insurance appeals have been heard by the Appeal Division; (rr) how many Employment Insurance appeals were heard by the Appeal Division in (i) 2013, (ii) 2014; (ss) how many Employment Insurance appeals heard by the Appeal Division were allowed; (tt) how many Employment Insurance appeals heard by the Appeal Division were dismissed; (uu) how many Employment Insurance appeals to the Appeal Division were summarily dismissed; (vv) how many Employment Insurance appeals at the Appeal Division have been heard (i) in person, (ii) by teleconference, (iii) by videoconference, (iv) in writing; (ww) how many Employment Insurance appeals at the Appeal Division heard in person have been (i) allowed, (ii) dismissed; (xx) how many Employment Insurance appeals at the Appeal Division heard by teleconference have been (i) allowed, (ii) dismissed; (yy) how many Employment Insurance appeals at the Appeal Division heard by videoconference have been (i) allowed, (ii) dismissed; (zz) how many Employment Insurance appeals at the Appeal Division heard in writing have been (i) allowed, (ii) dismissed; (aaa) how many legacy appeals are currently waiting to be heard at the Income Security Section; (bbb) how many legacy appeals are currently waiting to be heard at the Employment Insurance Section; (ccc) how many legacy income security appeals are currently waiting to be heard at the Appeal Division; (ddd) how many legacy Employment Insurance appeals are currently waiting to be heard at the Appeal Division; (eee) of new Appeal Division members hired since May 2014, how many are (i) English speakers, (ii) French speakers, (iii) bilingual; (fff) of new Income Security Section members hired since May 2014, how many are (i) English speakers, (ii) French speakers, (iii) bilingual; (ggg) of new Employment Insurance Section members hired since May 2014, how many are (i) English speakers, (ii) French speakers, (iii) bilingual; and (hhh) what is the Tribunal’s protocol with regard to requests for urgent hearings due to financial hardship? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-412-663.
|
|
Q-664 — Mr. Chisholm (Dartmouth—Cole Harbour) — With regard to Employment Insurance (EI) for fiscal years 2012-2013 through 2014-2015 (year-to-date): (a) what was the volume of EI applications broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province where claim originated, (iii) region/province where the claim was processed, (iv) the number of claims accepted and the number of claims rejected, (v) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (b) what was the average EI applications processing time broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province where claim originated, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (c) how many applications waited more than 28 days for a decision and, for these applications, what was the average wait time for a decision, broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province where claim originated, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (d) what was the volume of calls to EI call centres, broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (e) what was the number of calls to EI call centres that received a high volume message broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (f) what were the national service level standards for calls answered by an agent at EI call centres, broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (g) what were the actual service level standards achieved by EI call centres for calls answered by an agent, broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (h) what were the service standards for call backs at EI call centres broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (i) what were the service standards achieved by EI call centre agents for call backs, broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (j) what was the average number of days for a call back by an EI call centre agent, broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (k) what was the number and percentage of term employees, and the number and percentage of indeterminate employees, working at EI call centres and processing centres, broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, by month; (l) what is the rate of sick leave use among EI call centre and processing centre employees, broken down by year; (m) what is the number of EI call centre and processing centre employees on long term disability; (n) what is the rate of overtime and the number of overtime hours worked by call centre employees, broken down by year; (o) how many complaints did the Office of Client Satisfaction receive, broken down by (i) year, (ii) region/province where the complaint originated, (iii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 by month; (p) how long on average did a complaint take to investigate and resolve, broken down by (i) year, (ii) for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 by month; and (q) what were the major themes of the complaints received, broken down by year? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-412-664.
|
|
Q-665 — Mr. Thibeault (Sudbury) — With regard to funding applications submitted to the government, broken down by department and fiscal year, since 2003-2004, up to and including the current fiscal year: (a) what is the total number of funding applications submitted to the government from the constituency of Sudbury; and (b) what is the total number of successful funding applications submitted to the government in which money was allocated to an individual, business, or non-governmental organization in the constituency of Sudbury? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-412-665.
|
|
Q-666 — Mr. Goodale (Wascana) — With regard to public private partnerships financed by the government: (a) what are all the projects so financed; (b) how long did it take to design the bidding process; (c) what was the length of the bidding process from initial expression of interest to close; and (d) what was the cost of a bid for proponents? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-412-666.
|
|
Q-667 — Mr. Goodale (Wascana) — With regard to the former Environment Minister's intention stated on January 20, 2012, to "invest an additional $78.7 million over the next five years to further enhance weather and warning services across the country" and his intention stated on May 27, 2013, to invest "an additional $248 million over five years to further strengthen Canada's meteorological services": (a) in what manner have these commitments been fulfilled to date; (b) what plans exist to implement these commitments in the future; and (c) what are the details, in (a) and (b), of each project related to the commitments including (i) its title, (ii) a summary of the project, (iii) its location, (iv) its estimated cost, (v) its targeted start date, (vi) its estimated completion date? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-412-667.
|
|
Q-669 — Mr. Eyking (Sydney—Victoria) — With regard to the Cape Breton Regional Municipality and Victoria County: (a) what were the numbers of employees, broken down by all departments, working in that region in 2005; (b) what are the numbers of employees, broken down by all departments, working in that region currently (in 2013, if current data is not available); (c) how much will be spent, broken down by all departments, on infrastructure in that region in 2014 (in 2013, if current data is not available); and (d) how much was spent, broken down by all departments, on infrastructure in that region in 2005? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-412-669.
|
Tabling of Documents |
Pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), Mr. Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) laid upon the Table, — Copy of a news release concerning a decision of the Ontario Court of Justice. — Sessional Paper No. 8530-412-10.
|
Government Orders |
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Oliver (Minister of Finance), seconded by Mr. Duncan (Minister of State), — That Bill C-43, A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 11, 2014 and other measures, be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Finance; |
And of the amendment of Mr. Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley), seconded by Mr. Nunez-Melo (Laval), — That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the word “That” and substituting the following:
|
“this House decline to give second reading to Bill C-43, A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 11, 2014 and other measures, because it:
|
(a) amends dozens of unrelated Acts without adequate parliamentary debate and oversight;
|
(b) fails to address persistent unemployment and sluggish economic growth;
|
(c) aims to strip refugee claimants of access to social assistance to meet their basic needs;
|
(d) imposes a poorly designed job credit that will create few, if any, jobs while depleting Employment Insurance Funds; and
|
(e) breaks the government’s promises to protect small businesses from merchant fees and to ban banks from charging pay-to-pay fees.”.
|
The debate continued. |
At 5:15 p.m., pursuant to Order made Thursday, October 30, 2014, under the provisions of Standing Order 78(3), the Speaker interrupted the proceedings. |
The question was put on the amendment and it was negatived on the following division: |
|
(Division No. 267 -- Vote no 267) | |
YEAS: 114, NAYS: 149 |
|
YEAS -- POUR Allen (Welland) Cullen Julian Pacetti Total: -- 114 |
|
NAYS -- CONTRE Ablonczy Clarke Kent Richards Total: -- 149 |
|
PAIRED -- PAIRÉS Nil--Aucun |
Pursuant to Order made Thursday, October 30, 2014, under the provisions of Standing Order 78(3), the House proceeded to the putting of the question on the main motion and it was agreed to on the following division: |
|
(Division No. 268 -- Vote no 268) | |
YEAS: 149, NAYS: 114 |
|
YEAS — POUR Ablonczy Clarke Kent Richards Total: -- 149 |
|
NAYS — CONTRE Allen (Welland) Cullen Julian Pacetti Total: -- 114 |
|
PAIRED — PAIRÉS Nil — Aucun |
|
Accordingly, Bill C-43, A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 11, 2014 and other measures, was read the second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Finance. |
Private Members' Business |
At 6:05 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 30(7), the House proceeded to the consideration of Private Members' Business. |
The Order was read for the second reading and reference to the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage of Bill C-597, An Act to amend the Holidays Act (Remembrance Day). |
Mr. Harris (Scarborough Southwest), seconded by Mr. Chicoine (Châteauguay—Saint-Constant), moved, — That the Bill be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage. |
Debate arose thereon. |
The question was put on the motion and, pursuant to Standing Order 93(1), the recorded division was deferred until Wednesday, November 5, 2014, immediately before the time provided for Private Members' Business. |
Adjournment Proceedings |
At 6:45 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 38(1), the question “That this House do now adjourn” was deemed to have been proposed. |
After debate, the question was deemed to have been adopted. |
Accordingly, at 7:14 p.m., the Speaker adjourned the House until tomorrow at 10:00 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1). |