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. 174 Wednesday, February 18, 2015 2:00 p.m. |
|
|
|
|
Introduction of Government Bills |
|
Introduction of Private Members' Bills |
|
| February 17, 2015 — Mr. Stoffer (Sackville—Eastern Shore) — Bill entitled “An Act to amend the Parliament of Canada Act (omnibus bills)”. |
Notices of Motions (Routine Proceedings) |
|
Questions |
|
| Q-10562 — February 17, 2015 — Mr. Donnelly (New Westminster—Coquitlam) — With respect to government grants and contributions allocated within the constituency of New Westminster—Coquitlam from fiscal year 2011-2012 to the present: what is the total amount allocated, broken down by (i) amount, (ii) individual recipient? |
| Q-10572 — February 17, 2015 — Mr. Ravignat (Pontiac) — With regard to a procurement certification agreement between the Treasury Board and the Standards Council of Canada: (a) does such an agreement exist; (b) if the answer in (a) is affirmative, since when; (c) what are the details of the agreement; (d) has the agreement been modified since the date identified in (b), and if so, (i) what are the details of the changes, (ii) when did the changes take effect; and (e) does the text of the agreement refer to training developed and offered by the Canada School of Public Service, and if so, what are the details of this training? |
| Q-10582 — February 17, 2015 — Mr. Eyking (Sydney—Victoria) — With regard to federal departments operating within Nova Scotia: what was the number of employees for each department, broken down by fiscal year from 2005-2006 to 2013-2014? |
| Q-10592 — February 17, 2015 — Mr. Eyking (Sydney—Victoria) — With regard to government investments, excluding those in relation to the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency: what are the details of all investments made in Nova Scotia from 2005-2006 to 2013-2014, broken down by (i) project, (ii) fiscal year? |
| Q-10602 — February 17, 2015 — Mr. Hsu (Kingston and the Islands) — With regard to Employment and Social Development Canada's January 2015 advertisement entitled “Canada's Apprentice Loans,” available on the Employment and Social Development Canada's Youtube page at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_3dpdC_Rr4: (a) what labour market data, reports, studies, economic analyses or statistical analyses support the assertion in the advertisement that the Canadian economy will need "one million skilled tradesmen and women" over the next decade, broken down by (i) title, (ii) source, (iii) author, (iv) date; and (b) what was the total cost of this advertisement to (i) produce, (ii) place on the air? |
| Q-10612 — February 17, 2015 — Mr. Garneau (Westmount—Ville-Marie) — With regard to exceptions granted under the Policy on Tabling of Treaties in Parliament (the Policy): (a) broken down by year, since the Policy became effective, how many and which specific instruments were granted exemptions; (b) on what basis was each exemption granted in (a); (c) if the exemption in (b) was based on urgency, (i) how was the treaty determined to be urgent, (ii) who made this determination, (iii) when; (d) if the exemption in (b) was for a reason other than urgency, (i) what was the reason, (ii) how was this determined; (e) who determines what constitutes an acceptable reason, other than urgency, to exempt a treaty from the normal tabling requirements under the Policy; (f) have any requested exceptions to the Policy not been granted; (g) broken down by treaties exempted, (i) on what date did Canada sign the instrument, (ii) when did Canada ratify the agreement, (iii) when was the treaty tabled in Parliament; (h) broken down by treaty exempted, was a joint letter drafted "that clearly articulates the rationale to proceed with the ratification, without tabling in the House of Commons"; (i) for each letter described in (h), (i) what is the date of the letter, (ii) to whom is it addressed, (iii) who signed it; (j) broken down by year, what treaties have been exempted from the Policy without a joint letter; (k) broken down by treaty in (j), why was no draft letter created; (l) with respect to the response of the government to part (gg) of Q-816, stating that no joint letter was created with respect to the exemption granted to the Agreement Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of Canada to Improve International Tax Compliance through Enhanced Exchange of Information under the Convention Between the United States of America and Canada with Respect to Taxes on Income and on Capital, is the lack of such a letter typical; (m) in each case where an exception to the Policy was granted, was the approval of the Prime Minister sought; (n) in each case where approval for an exception to the Policy was sought from the Prime Minister, was the approval granted; (o) if there were any cases where an exception was granted without approval being sought from the Prime Minister or being granted by the Prime Minister, (i) what treaty was at issue, (ii) what happened, (iii) what justified the course of action; (p) has any study or analysis been undertaken with respect to exceptions granted under the Policy; (q) when was the last time the Policy was reviewed and what were the conclusions of this review with respect to exemptions; (r) what is the policy justification for allowing an exception to the tabling policy; (s) is the granting of an exception always indicated in the explanatory memorandum; (t) if the answer to (s) is no, in what cases was a treaty granted an exception to the Policy but this information not included in the explanatory memorandum; (u) when an exception is granted and this is indicated in the explanatory memorandum, is the reason for the exception indicated in all cases; (v) in what cases has an exception been granted but the treaty still tabled for twenty-one sitting days prior to any Parliamentary action to bring it into force, where applicable; (w) may an exception be granted to the Policy without the Prime Minister's approval being sought; (x) may an exception to the Policy be granted without the Prime Minister's approval; (y) what statistics are kept and by whom regarding exceptions to the Policy; (z) by what means, and when in the process, is the public informed that an exception to the Policy has been granted; and (aa) by what means, and when in the process, is Parliament informed that an exception to the Policy has been granted? |
Notices of Motions for the Production of Papers |
|
| P-19 — February 17, 2015 — Mr. Scott (Toronto—Danforth) — That an Order of the House do issue for a copy of the May 4, 2010, report of the National Defence Board of Inquiry into the Afghanistan Detainees Incident, dated June 14, 2006. |
| P-20 — February 17, 2015 — Mr. Scott (Toronto—Danforth) — That an Order of the House do issue for a copy of the February 6, 2009, report of the National Defence Board of Inquiry into the In-theatre Handling of Detainees Incident, dated April 6-7, 2006. |
Business of Supply |
|
Government Business |
|
Private Members' Notices of Motions |
|
Private Members' Business |
| C-586 — February 3, 2015 — Resuming consideration of the motion of Mr. Chong (Wellington—Halton Hills), seconded by Mr. Williamson (New Brunswick Southwest), — That Bill C-586, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act and the Parliament of Canada Act (candidacy and caucus reforms), be now read a third time and do pass. |
| Pursuant to Standing Order 86(3), jointly seconded by: |
| Mr. Stewart (Burnaby—Douglas) — April 8, 2014 |
| Debate — 1 hour remaining, pursuant to Standing Order 98(2). |
| Voting — not later than the expiry of the time provided for debate, pursuant to Standing Order 98(4). |
|
|
|
| 2 Response requested within 45 days |
|