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

Notice Paper

No. 197

Tuesday, April 21, 2015

10:00 a.m.


Introduction of Government Bills

Introduction of Private Members' Bills

Notices of Motions (Routine Proceedings)

Questions

Q-11592 — April 20, 2015 — Mr. Dewar (Ottawa Centre) — With regard to Canadian policy concerning nuclear weapons: (a) has the government of Canada communicated or consulted with any other governments about the so-called Austrian Pledge on nuclear disarmament, that was issued following the 2014 Vienna Conference on the Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons, and, if so, which governments; (b) for each such communication or consultations, was it done by the Canadian government alone or in collaboration with other states, and, if the latter, which other states; (c) has the government encouraged other states to join the Austrian Pledge, and, if so, which states; (d) have other states encouraged Canada to join the Austrian Pledge, and, if so, which states; (e) what preparation has the government undertaken for the 2015 Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) Review Conference; (f) what steps has the government taken to implement the parliamentary motion adopted by unanimous consent on December 7, 2010, which “encourage[d] the Government of Canada to engage in negotiations for a nuclear weapons convention”; (g) does official Canadian policy concerning nuclear weapons refer explicitly to the motion cited in (f); (h) has the government explicitly referenced the motion cited in (f) in any formal démarches to other countries regarding its policy on nuclear weapons; (i) as a NATO member state who has attended all three international meetings on the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons, has the government shared the findings of these meetings with other NATO members; (j) how has the government contributed to NATO efforts to reach its stated goal of a world without nuclear weapons; (k) for what reasons did the government refuse to endorse the Joint Statement on the Humanitarian Consequences of Nuclear Weapons, as delivered by New Zealand at the United Nations General Assembly on October 20, 2014; (l) does the government agree with the statement that “[i]t is in the interest of the very survival of humanity that nuclear weapons are never used again, under any circumstances”; (m) under what circumstances does the government consider that the use of nuclear weapons would be appropriate; (n) how does the government reconcile the role of nuclear weapons in Canada’s security policy with Canada’s commitments under international humanitarian law and the NPT; (o) what is the government assessment of the sustainability of deterrence as a pillar of Canada's security policy; and (p) what steps has the government taken to implement the agreement of all states party to the NPT at the 2010 Review Conference, under action 5e of the Outcome Document, to reduce reliance on nuclear weapons for security?
Q-11602 — April 20, 2015 — Mr. Hsu (Kingston and the Islands) — With regard to the sale of the government's stake in General Motors (GM) common stock, announced in April 2015: (a) which counter-parties were contacted and asked to submit bids, broken down by (i) name of counter-party, (ii) date that they were contacted by the government or its designate, (iii) date of submission of firm, tradable bids to the government; (b) how was the sales price, as reported publicly, determined and calculated; (c) what observed prices, such as close prices or Volume Weighted Average Prices, in the market, were used to calculate the sales price; (d) were any other fees or commissions charged; (e) what conditions were imposed on the winning counter-party, Goldman Sachs; (f) when was Goldman Sachs made aware of the government's intention to sell GM stock; (g) when was Goldman Sachs made aware of the number of shares available for sale; (h) what conditions were imposed on Goldman Sachs’ ability to hedge its purchase of GM stock; (i) was Goldman Sachs permitted to sell GM stock or other auto sector stocks as a hedge of its trade with the government on (i) Wednesday, April 1, 2015, (ii) Thursday, April 2, 2015, (iii) Monday, April 6, 2015; (j) what limits on internal communications within Goldman Sachs were promised by Goldman Sachs to the government or its designate; and (k) what other measures were taken to minimize the transaction costs and market impact of the government’s sale of GM shares?

Notices of Motions for the Production of Papers

Business of Supply

Government Business

Private Members' Notices of Motions

M-597 — April 20, 2015 — Mr. Larose (Repentigny) — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should take the steps necessary to integrate a natural capital accounting system, such as the one outlined in the World Bank’s Wealth Accounting and the Valuation of Ecosystem Services, into the GDP calculation by: (a) recognizing the essential economic importance of Canada’s natural resources, such as its forests, water, land, air, minerals and alternative energy sources, as well as the fragile relationship between economic progress, environmental health and population well-being; (b) recognizing that GDP is not an appropriate indicator for making responsible decisions; (c) re-evaluating how the public good and economic progress are measured in Canada; and (d) committing to studying the implementation of a natural capital accounting system in Canada and investigating how integrating such a system in the GDP calculation would encourage green economic growth and contribute to wealth and the public good over the long term.
M-598 — April 20, 2015 — Mr. Rafferty (Thunder Bay—Rainy River) — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should not introduce legislation that would allow employers to reduce the accrued pension benefits of present and future retirees by retroactively changing the type of pension plan to which they belong.

Subject to the provisions of Standing Order 94(2)(c)

2 Response requested within 45 days