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. 252 Monday, January 29, 2018 11:00 a.m. |
|
|
|
|
Introduction of Government Bills |
|
Introduction of Private Members' Bills |
|
| January 25, 2018 — Ms. Kwan (Vancouver East) — Bill entitled “An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (medical inadmissibility — excessive demand)”. |
Notices of Motions (Routine Proceedings) |
|
Questions |
|
| Q-14312 — January 25, 2018 — Ms. Quach (Salaberry—Suroît) — With regard to the Kathryn Spirit: (a) did Groupe St-Pierre seek rent for the land, the barge, or anything else, from the Mexican company that it sold the wreck to and, if so, how much was the rent for each; (b) did Groupe St-Pierre warn the government, when it bid with Englobe, that it had been fined for violating Quebec environmental legislation; (c) was the government aware that Groupe St-Pierre, either René St-Pierre Excavation or its affiliates, did not comply with Quebec environmental legislation and had a class action suit brought against it during discussions on the dismantling contract; (d) if the answer to (c) is affirmative, what action was taken in light of this information to the selection process during the call for tenders, particularly in terms of the points awarded to the Kathryn Spirit DJV consortium (the consortium); (e) what are the environmental and safety standards and rules that the consortium must abide by under the wreck dismantling contract; (f) what are the actions, reports, analyses, etc., that the Groupe St-Pierre must undertake for each department concerned in order to abide by the environmental and safety standards set out in the contract; (g) what are all the actions, reports, analyses, etc., that the departments must undertake to ensure public safety and compliance with environmental standards and to check that the consortium abides by them; and (h) since the contract was awarded, has the consortium violated any rules or standards of the contract and, if so, on which occasions, broken down by (i) date, (ii) rule or standard that was violated, (iii) description of the infraction encountered, (iv) end date of infraction, (v) the departments' actions to ensure it does not reoccur? |
| Q-14322 — January 25, 2018 — Ms. Quach (Salaberry—Suroît) — With regard to federal spending in the constituency of Salaberry—Suroît, for each fiscal year since 2010–2011, inclusively: what are the details of all grants and contributions and all loans to every organization, group, business or municipality, broken down by the (i) name of the recipient, (ii) municipality of the recipient, (iii) date on which the funding was received, (iv) amount received, (v) department or agency that provided the funding, (vi) program under which the grant, contribution or loan was made, (vii) nature or purpose? |
| Q-14332 — January 25, 2018 — Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands) — With regard to government expenditures: what were (a) the costs associated with the National Energy Board Modernization Expert Panel; and (b) the costs associated with the Expert Panel to review the federal environmental assessment processes? |
| Q-14342 — January 25, 2018 — Mr. Falk (Provencher) — With regard to Health Canada's decisions taken with respect to Mifegymiso : (a) what were the conditions imposed by Health Canada during the initial review and approval of the drug on the (i) manufacturer, (ii) distributor, (iii) retailers, (iv) prescribers, doctors and medical professionals, (v) consumers; and (b) for each of the conditions listed in (a), (i) what rationale was given by Health Canada, (ii) what studies did Health Canada cite to justify the conditions, (iii) which stakeholders were consulted by Health Canada? |
Notices of Motions for the Production of Papers |
|
Business of Supply |
|
Government Business |
|
Private Members' Notices of Motions |
|
| M-161 — January 25, 2018 — Mr. Long (Saint John—Rothesay) — That the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security be instructed to undertake a study of the Record Suspension Program to: (a) examine the impact of a record suspension to help those with a criminal record reintegrate into society; (b) examine the impact of criminal record suspension fees and additional costs associated with the application process on low-income applicants; (c) identify appropriate changes to fees and service standards for record suspensions; (d) identify improvements to better support applicants for a criminal record suspension; and that the Committee present its final report and recommendations to the House within nine months of the adoption of this motion. |
Private Members' Business |
| M-124 — November 9, 2017 — Resuming consideration of the motion of Mr. Rayes (Richmond—Arthabaska), seconded by Mr. Reid (Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston), — That, in the opinion of the House, within twelve months of the adoption of this motion: (a) the government should follow the example of other Canadian police services and act to save hundreds of lives each year by equipping all RCMP vehicles with automated external defibrillators (AEDs); and (b) the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security should undertake a study to determine the availability of AEDs in first responder vehicles across Canada and make recommendations to the House in that regard while respecting the jurisdiction of other levels of government. |
| Pursuant to Standing Order 86(3), jointly seconded by: |
| Mr. Reid (Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston) — March 8, 2017 |
| Mr. Eglinski (Yellowhead) and Mr. Motz (Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner) — April 4, 2017 |
| Mrs. McLeod (Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo) — April 20, 2017 |
| 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 |
|