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.
| 42nd PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION | |
|
|
|
JournalsNo. 312 Monday, June 11, 2018 11:00 a.m. |
|
|
|
|
| Prayer |
| Private Members' Business |
|
At 11:00 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 30(6), the House proceeded to the consideration of Private Members' Business. |
|
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Harvey (Tobique—Mactaquac), seconded by Mr. Sidhu (Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon), — That the House recognize the importance that Visitability can have for Canadians of all ages and abilities, and particularly persons with a physical disability, aging individuals, seniors and their families, in Canada, by: (a) emphasizing the efforts of companies, contractors and builders who are already applying the principles of Visitability in their new constructions; (b) encouraging the Minister of Sport and Persons with Disabilities to address the topic of Visitability in the accessibility legislation to be introduced in the House; and (c) inviting the federal government to address the subject of Visitability with its provincial and territorial partners in upcoming Federal, Provincial and Territorial discussions. (Private Members' Business M-157) |
|
The debate continued. |
|
The question was put on the motion and, pursuant to Order made Tuesday, May 29, 2018, the recorded division was deferred until Wednesday, June 13, 2018, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions. |
| Business of Supply |
|
The Order was read for the consideration of the Business of Supply. |
|
Mr. Genuis (Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan), seconded by Mrs. Stubbs (Lakeland), moved, — That the House: (a) strongly condemn the current regime in Iran for its ongoing sponsorship of terrorism around the world, including instigating violent attacks on the Gaza border; (b) condemn the recent statements made by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei calling for genocide against the Jewish people; (c) call on the government to (i) abandon its current plan and immediately cease any and all negotiations or discussions with the Islamic Republic of Iran to restore diplomatic relations, (ii) demand that the Iranian Regime immediately release all Canadians and Canadian permanent residents who are currently detained in Iran, including Maryam Mombeini, the widow of Professor Kavous Sayed-Emami, and Saeed Malekpour, who has been imprisoned since 2008, (iii) immediately designate the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a listed terrorist entity under the Criminal Code of Canada; and (d) stand with the people of Iran and recognize that they, like all people, have a fundamental right to freedom of conscience and religion, freedom of thought, belief, opinion, and expression, including freedom of the press and other forms of communication, freedom of peaceful assembly, and freedom of association. |
|
Debate arose thereon. |
| 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. |
| Motions |
| Deferred Recorded Divisions |
Government Orders |
|
Pursuant to Order made Tuesday, May 29, 2018, the House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded divisions at report stage of Bill C-69, An Act to enact the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, to amend the Navigation Protection Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, as reported by the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development with amendments. |
| Group No. 1 | |
|
The House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division on Motion No. 1 of Mrs. Stubbs (Lakeland), seconded by Mr. Warawa (Langley—Aldergrove), — That Bill C-69 be amended by deleting Clause 1. |
|
|
The question was put on Motion No. 1 and it was negatived on the following division: |
|
| (Division No. 739 -- Vote no 739) | |
| YEAS: 80, NAYS: 211 |
|
|
YEAS -- POUR Aboultaif Diotte Lake Saroya Total: -- 80 |
|
|
NAYS -- CONTRE Aldag Duncan (Etobicoke North) Lapointe Poissant Total: -- 211 |
|
|
PAIRED -- PAIRÉS Duclos Gill Total: -- 2 |
|
|
Accordingly, Motions Nos. 15 to 23, 28 to 61, 100 to 103, 105 to 147, 149 to 205, 208 to 214 and 216 were also negatived on the same division. |
|
|
Motion No. 1 having been negatived, the House proceeded to the putting of the question on Motion No. 3 of Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), seconded by Mr. Plamondon (Bécancour—Nicolet—Saurel), — That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing line 20 on page 28 with the following:
|
|
|
The question was put on Motion No. 3 and it was negatived on the following division: |
|
| (Division No. 740 -- Vote no 740) | |
| YEAS: 44, NAYS: 247 |
|
|
YEAS -- POUR Angus Christopherson Johns Nantel Total: -- 44 |
|
|
NAYS -- CONTRE Aboultaif Dzerowicz Lauzon (Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation) Rioux Total: -- 247 |
|
|
PAIRED -- PAIRÉS Duclos Gill Total: -- 2 |
|
|
Accordingly, Motion No. 25 was also negatived on the same division. |
|
|
Motion No. 1 having been negatived, the House proceeded to the putting of the question on Motion No. 4 of Ms. Duncan (Edmonton Strathcona), seconded by Ms. Brosseau (Berthier—Maskinongé), — That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing line 22 on page 28 with the following:
|
|
|
The question was put on Motion No. 4 and it was negatived on the following division: |
|
| (Division No. 741 -- Vote no 741) | |
| YEAS: 44, NAYS: 247 |
|
|
YEAS -- POUR Angus Christopherson Johns Nantel Total: -- 44 |
|
|
NAYS -- CONTRE Aboultaif Dzerowicz Lauzon (Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation) Rioux Total: -- 247 |
|
|
PAIRED -- PAIRÉS Duclos Gill Total: -- 2 |
|
|
Accordingly, Motions Nos. 9, 10, 12 and 13 were also negatived on the same division. |
|
|
Motion No. 1 having been negatived, the House proceeded to the putting of the question on Motion No. 5 of Ms. Duncan (Edmonton Strathcona), seconded by Ms. Brosseau (Berthier—Maskinongé), — That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing lines 32 and 33 on page 34 with the following:
|
|
|
The question was put on Motion No. 5 and it was negatived on the following division: |
|
| (Division No. 742 -- Vote no 742) | |
| YEAS: 44, NAYS: 247 |
|
|
YEAS -- POUR Angus Christopherson Johns Nantel Total: -- 44 |
|
|
NAYS -- CONTRE Aboultaif Dzerowicz Lauzon (Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation) Rioux Total: -- 247 |
|
|
PAIRED -- PAIRÉS Duclos Gill Total: -- 2 |
|
|
Accordingly, Motions Nos. 8 and 148 were also negatived on the same division. |
|
|
Motion No. 1 having been negatived, the House proceeded to the putting of the question on Motion No. 11 of Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), seconded by Mr. Plamondon (Bécancour—Nicolet—Saurel), — That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing line 28 on page 55 with the following:
|
|
|
The question was put on Motion No. 11 and it was negatived on the following division: |
|
| (Division No. 743 -- Vote no 743) | |
| YEAS: 44, NAYS: 247 |
|
|
YEAS -- POUR Angus Christopherson Johns Nantel Total: -- 44 |
|
|
NAYS -- CONTRE Aboultaif Dzerowicz Lauzon (Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation) Rioux Total: -- 247 |
|
|
PAIRED -- PAIRÉS Duclos Gill Total: -- 2 |
|
|
Accordingly, Motions Nos. 26 and 27 were also negatived on the same division. |
|
|
The House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division on Motion No. 62 of Mrs. Stubbs (Lakeland), seconded by Mr. Warawa (Langley—Aldergrove), — That Bill C-69 be amended by deleting Clause 45. |
|
|
The question was put on Motion No. 62 and it was negatived on the following division: |
|
| (Division No. 744 -- Vote no 744) | |
| YEAS: 80, NAYS: 211 |
|
|
YEAS -- POUR Aboultaif Diotte Lake Saroya Total: -- 80 |
|
|
NAYS -- CONTRE Aldag Duncan (Etobicoke North) Lapointe Poissant Total: -- 211 |
|
|
PAIRED -- PAIRÉS Duclos Gill Total: -- 2 |
|
|
Accordingly, Motions Nos. 63, 64, 66 to 79, 81 to 99, 104, 206, 207 and 215 were also negatived on the same division. |
|
|
Pursuant to Standing Order 76.1(9), Ms. McKenna (Minister of Environment and Climate Change), seconded by Mr. Carr (Minister of Natural Resources), moved, — That the Bill, as amended, be concurred in at report stage. |
|
The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to on the following division: |
|
| (Division No. 745 -- Vote no 745) | |
| YEAS: 166, NAYS: 125 |
|
|
YEAS -- POUR Aldag Ellis Lefebvre Robillard Total: -- 166 |
|
|
NAYS -- CONTRE Aboultaif Cooper Kent Poilievre Total: -- 125 |
|
|
PAIRED -- PAIRÉS Duclos Gill Total: -- 2 |
|
|
Accordingly, the Bill, as amended, was concurred in at report stage and ordered for a third reading at the next sitting of the House. |
|
|
|
|
Pursuant to Order made Tuesday, May 29, 2018, the House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division at report stage of Bill C-59, An Act respecting national security matters, as reported by the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security with amendments. |
| Group No. 1 | |
|
The House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division on Motion No. 1 of Mr. Dubé (Beloeil—Chambly), seconded by Ms. Brosseau (Berthier—Maskinongé), — That Bill C-59 be amended by deleting the short title. |
|
|
The question was put on Motion No. 1 and it was negatived on the following division: |
|
| (Division No. 746 -- Vote no 746) | |
| YEAS: 41, NAYS: 251 |
|
|
YEAS -- POUR Angus Cullen Johns Nantel Total: -- 41 |
|
|
NAYS -- CONTRE Aboultaif Duguid Lauzon (Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry) Rempel Total: -- 251 |
|
|
PAIRED -- PAIRÉS Duclos Gill Total: -- 2 |
|
|
Accordingly, Motion No. 2 was also negatived on the same division. |
|
|
Pursuant to Standing Order 76(9), Mr. Goodale (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), seconded by Ms. Chagger (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons), moved, — That the Bill, as amended, be concurred in at report stage and read a second time. |
|
The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to on the following division: |
|
| (Division No. 747 -- Vote no 747) | |
| YEAS: 168, NAYS: 125 |
|
|
YEAS -- POUR Aldag El-Khoury Lebouthillier Ratansi Total: -- 168 |
|
|
NAYS -- CONTRE Aboultaif Cooper Kent Quach Total: -- 125 |
|
|
PAIRED -- PAIRÉS Duclos Gill Total: -- 2 |
|
|
Accordingly, the Bill, as amended, was concurred in at report stage and read the second time and ordered for a third reading at the next sitting of the House. |
|
|
|
|
|
Pursuant to Order made Tuesday, May 29, 2018, the House resumed consideration of the motion of Ms. Wilson-Raybould (Minister of Justice), seconded by Mr. Carr (Minister of Natural Resources), — That Bill C-75, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Youth Criminal Justice Act and other Acts and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights; |
|
And of the amendment of Mr. Nicholson (Niagara Falls), seconded by Mr. Blaney (Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis), — That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the word "That" and substituting the following:
|
|
“the House decline to give second reading to Bill C-75, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Youth Criminal Justice Act and other Acts and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, since the Bill fails to support victims of crime by, among other things: (a) changing the victim surcharge; (b) removing the requirement of the Attorney General to determine whether to seek an adult sentence in certain circumstances; (c) removing the power of a youth justice court to make an order to lift the ban on publication in the case of a young person who receives a youth sentence for a violent offence; and (d) delaying consecutive sentencing for human traffickers.”;
|
|
The House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the subamendment of Mr. Cooper (St. Albert—Edmonton), seconded by Mr. Calkins (Red Deer—Lacombe), — That the amendment be amended by adding the following:
|
|
“; and (e) potentially reducing penalties for very serious crimes by proposing to make them hybrid offences, including the abduction of a child under 14, material benefit from trafficking, breach of prison, participation in activity of terrorist group or criminal organization, advocating genocide, amongst many others.”.
|
|
|
The question was put on the subamendment and it was negatived on the following division: |
|
| (Division No. 748 -- Vote no 748) | |
| YEAS: 85, NAYS: 208 |
|
|
YEAS -- POUR Aboultaif Cooper Kusie Rempel Total: -- 85 |
|
|
NAYS -- CONTRE Aldag Duncan (Edmonton Strathcona) Lapointe Poissant Total: -- 208 |
|
|
PAIRED -- PAIRÉS Duclos Gill Total: -- 2 |
|
|
Pursuant to Order made Tuesday, May 29, 2018, under the provisions of Standing Order 78(3), the question was put on the amendment and it was negatived on the following division: |
|
| (Division No. 749 -- Vote no 749) | |
| YEAS: 81, NAYS: 212 |
|
|
YEAS -- POUR Aboultaif Diotte Lake Saroya Total: -- 81 |
|
|
NAYS -- CONTRE Aldag Duguid Lamoureux Plamondon Total: -- 212 |
|
|
PAIRED -- PAIRÉS Duclos Gill Total: -- 2 |
|
|
Pursuant to Order made Tuesday, May 29, 2018, under the provisions of Standing Order 78(3), the question was put on the main motion and it was agreed to on the following division: |
|
| (Division No. 750 -- Vote no 750) | |
| YEAS: 173, NAYS: 120 |
|
|
YEAS -- POUR Aldag Ellis Lefebvre Ratansi Total: -- 173 |
|
|
NAYS -- CONTRE Aboultaif Clement Jolibois Quach Total: -- 120 |
|
|
PAIRED -- PAIRÉS Duclos Gill Total: -- 2 |
|
|
Accordingly, Bill C-75, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Youth Criminal Justice Act and other Acts and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, was read the second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. |
|
|
|
|
|
Pursuant to Order made Tuesday, May 29, 2018, the House resumed consideration of the motion of Ms. Freeland (Minister of Foreign Affairs), seconded by Ms. Gould (Minister of Democratic Institutions), — That Bill C-47, An Act to amend the Export and Import Permits Act and the Criminal Code (amendments permitting the accession to the Arms Trade Treaty and other amendments), be now read a third time and do pass. |
|
The House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the amendment of Ms. Laverdière (Laurier—Sainte-Marie), seconded by Mr. Rankin (Victoria), — That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the word "That" and substituting the following:
|
|
“the House decline to give third reading to Bill C-47, An Act to amend the Export and Import Permits Act and the Criminal Code (amendments permitting the accession to the Arms Trade Treaty and other amendments), because it:
|
|
(a) doesn't require the Minister of Foreign Affairs to reassess existing export permits should new information about human rights abuses be revealed post-export;
|
|
(b) does not allow for exports of military goods to the United States to be licensed, tracked, or reported back to Canadians in any way; and
|
|
(c) goes against the spirit and the letter of the Arms Trade Treaty.”.
|
|
|
The question was put on the amendment and it was negatived on the following division: |
|
| (Division No. 751 -- Vote no 751) | |
| YEAS: 45, NAYS: 248 |
|
|
YEAS -- POUR Angus Choquette Hardcastle Moore Total: -- 45 |
|
|
NAYS -- CONTRE Aboultaif Dzerowicz Lauzon (Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation) Rioux Total: -- 248 |
|
|
PAIRED -- PAIRÉS Duclos Gill Total: -- 2 |
|
|
Pursuant to Order made Wednesday, May 30, 2018, under the provisions of Standing Order 78(3), the question was put on the main motion and it was agreed to on the following division: |
|
| (Division No. 752 -- Vote no 752) | |
| YEAS: 167, NAYS: 126 |
|
|
YEAS -- POUR Aldag El-Khoury Lebouthillier Rioux Total: -- 167 |
|
|
NAYS -- CONTRE Aboultaif Cullen Kusie Rankin Total: -- 126 |
|
|
PAIRED -- PAIRÉS Duclos Gill Total: -- 2 |
|
|
Accordingly, the Bill was read the third time and passed. |
|
| Daily Routine Of Business |
Tabling of Documents |
|
Pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), Mr. Lamoureux (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. 421-02272 concerning the issuance of visas. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-421-16-08;
|
— No. 421-02273 concerning the Philippines. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-421-197-03;
|
— No. 421-02274 concerning medical devices. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-421-210-01;
|
— No. 421-02275 concerning food policy. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-421-113-06;
|
— No. 421-02276 concerning military medals and decorations. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-421-45-06;
|
— No. 421-02277 concerning the Canada Post Corporation. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-421-36-11;
|
— Nos. 421-02278 and 421-02279 concerning the protection of the environment. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-421-3-51.
|
Presenting Reports from Interparliamentary Delegations |
Pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), Mr. Bagnell (Yukon) presented the report of the Canadian delegation of the Canada-Europe Parliamentary Association concerning its participation at the Meeting of the Standing Committee of Parliamentarians of the Artic Region, held in Kiruna, Sweden, from May 13 to 14, 2018. — Sessional Paper No. 8565-421-61-12.
|
|
|
Pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), Mr. Baylis (Pierrefonds—Dollard) presented the report of the Canadian delegation of the Canada-United Kingdom Inter-Parliamentary Association respecting its participation at the Bilateral Visit to London, England, and Belfast, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom and Dublin, Ireland, from March 5 to 9, 2018. — Sessional Paper No. 8565-421-69-03.
|
Presenting Reports from Committees |
|
Mr. May (Cambridge), from the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, presented the Tenth Report of the Committee, "Main Estimates 2018-19: Vote 1 under Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, Vote 1 under Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety and Votes 1 and 5 under Department of Employment and Social Development". — Sessional Paper No. 8510-421-420. |
|
A copy of the relevant Minutes of Proceedings (Meetings Nos. 104 and 107) was tabled. |
|
|
|
Mr. May (Cambridge), from the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, presented the 11th Report of the Committee (Bill C-62, An Act to amend the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act and other Acts, without amendment). — Sessional Paper No. 8510-421-421. |
|
A copy of the relevant Minutes of Proceedings (Meetings Nos. 99 to 101, 105 and 107) was tabled. |
|
|
|
Mr. Hardie (Fleetwood—Port Kells), from the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans, presented the 14th Report of the Committee, "Healthy Oceans, Vibrant Coastal Communities: Strengthening The Oceans Act’s Marine Protected Areas Establishment Process". — Sessional Paper No. 8510-421-422. |
|
Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the Committee requested that the government table a comprehensive response. |
|
A copy of the relevant Minutes of Proceedings (Meetings Nos. 54, 56 to 58, 60 to 67, 69 to 71, 82 to 85, 88, 92, 94, 101 and 103) was tabled. |
|
|
|
Mr. Hardie (Fleetwood—Port Kells), from the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans, presented the 15th Report of the Committee, "Main Estimates 2018-19: Votes 1, 5 and 10 under Department of Fisheries and Oceans". — Sessional Paper No. 8510-421-423. |
|
A copy of the relevant Minutes of Proceedings (Meeting No. 106) was tabled. |
Presenting Petitions |
|
Pursuant to Standing Order 36, petitions certified by the Clerk of Petitions were presented as follows: |
— by Mr. MacKenzie (Oxford), one concerning discrimination (No. 421-02433);
|
— by Mr. Cannings (South Okanagan—West Kootenay), six concerning aboriginal affairs (Nos. 421-02434 to 421-02439);
|
— by Mr. Baylis (Pierrefonds—Dollard), one concerning the Philippines (No. 421-02440);
|
— by Mr. Shipley (Lambton—Kent—Middlesex), one concerning discrimination (No. 421-02441);
|
— by Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), one concerning the protection of the environment (No. 421-02442);
|
— by Ms. Kwan (Vancouver East), one concerning the issuance of visas (No. 421-02443);
|
— by Mr. Paradis (Brome—Missisquoi), one concerning national parks (No. 421-02444);
|
— by Mr. Chong (Wellington—Halton Hills), one concerning discrimination (No. 421-02445);
|
— by Mr. Stetski (Kootenay—Columbia), one concerning the Parliament of Canada (No. 421-02446) and one concerning international development and aid (No. 421-02447);
|
— by Ms. Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe), one concerning the economy (No. 421-02448) and one concerning the Canada Post Corporation (No. 421-02449);
|
— by Mr. Johns (Courtenay—Alberni), one concerning the protection of the environment (No. 421-02450);
|
— by Mr. Ouellette (Winnipeg Centre), one concerning China (No. 421-02451);
|
— by Ms. Malcolmson (Nanaimo—Ladysmith), one concerning marine transportation (No. 421-02452).
|
Questions on the Order Paper |
|
Mr. Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) presented the answers to questions Q-1703 and Q-1715 on the Order Paper. |
|
|
|
Pursuant to Standing Order 39(7), Mr. Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) presented the revised return to the following question made into Order for Return: |
Q-1666 — Ms. Sansoucy (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot) — With regard to federal spending in the constituency of Saint-Hyacinthe-Bagot in the fiscal year 2017-18: what grants, loans, contributions and contracts were awarded by the government, broken down by (i) department and agency, (ii) municipality, (iii) name of recipient, (iv) amount received, (v) program under which expenditure was allocated, (vi) date? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1666-02.
|
|
|
|
Pursuant to Standing Order 39(7), Mr. Lamoureux (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-1691 — Mr. Albas (Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola) — With regard to the effect of the carbon tax on low-income Canadians: (a) has the government conducted any studies regarding the impact of a $50 per tonne carbon tax on low income Canadians and specifically on the impact of increased food prices resulting from higher transportation costs; and (b) if the answer to (a) is affirmative, what are the details of all such studies, including (i) individuals who or entities which conducted the study, (ii) description of parameters and methodology, (iii) findings, (iv) start and end dates of study, (v) website location where findings were published? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1691.
|
|
|
Q-1692 — Mrs. Vecchio (Elgin—Middlesex—London) — With regard to spending to assist veterans in the last and current fiscal year, broken down by year: (a) what is the total government spending on programming and transfers specifically related to this issue, broken down by each specific funding envelope and each program funded; and (b) what portion of this funding is committed to (i) front-line services, (ii) medical services, (iii) psychological and mental health services, (iv) commemoration events, (v) public awareness and education campaigns, (vi) direct payments to veterans, (vii) other commitments, broken down by type of commitment? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1692.
|
|
|
Q-1693 — Mrs. Vecchio (Elgin—Middlesex—London) — With regard to spending aimed at providing services to Canadians with disabilities for the last and current fiscal year, broken down by year: (a) what is the total government spending on programming and transfers specifically related to this issue, broken down by each specific funding envelope and each program funded; and (b) what portion of this funding is committed to (i) improving accessibility, (ii) research and studies, (iii) grants and contributions to non-governmental organizations, (iv) transfers to other levels of governments, (v) educational services for individuals with disabilities, (vi) public education efforts, (vii) other services for individuals with disabilities, (viii) other commitments, broken down by type of commitment? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1693.
|
|
|
Q-1694 — Mr. Boulerice (Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie) — With regard to all types of subsidies and all types of loans to the gas, oil and coal industry: (a) what was the dollar value of the grants provided to natural gas, oil and coal industry companies, in Canada and abroad, between 2015 and 2018 inclusive, broken down by (i) year, (ii) type of industry (oil, gas, coal), (iii) company name, (iv) amount provided; (b) what was the dollar value of the loans provided to natural gas, oil and coal industry companies, in Canada and abroad, between 2015 and 2018 inclusive, broken down by (i) year, (ii) type of industry (oil, gas, coal), (iii) company name, (iv) amount provided; (c) what was the dollar value of the tax relief provided to natural gas, oil and coal industry companies, in Canada and abroad, between 2011 and 2018 inclusive, broken down by (i) year, (ii) type of tax relief used, (iii) type of industry (oil, gas, coal), (iv) dollar value of the tax relief; and (d) according to the government’s estimates, when does it expect to completely eliminate subsidies for fossil fuels such as natural gas, oil and coal, in Canada and abroad? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1694.
|
|
|
Q-1695 — Mr. Aubin (Trois-Rivières) — With regard to Employment Insurance (EI) between 2015 and 2017 in the EI economic region of Trois-Rivières, in total and broken down by year and by month: (a) what was the number of EI claims; (b) what was the number of claims accepted and the number of claims rejected; (c) what was the average EI claim processing time; (d) how many claims waited more than 28 days for a decision; (e) what was the average wait time for a decision in (d); (f) what was the volume of calls to EI call centres; (g) what was the number of calls to EI call centres that received a high volume message; (h) what were the national service level standards for calls answered by an agent at EI call centres; (i) what were the actual service level standards achieved by EI call centres for calls answered by an agent; (j) what were the service standards for call-backs from EI processing staff; (k) what were the service standards achieved by EI processing staff for call-backs; (l) what was the average number of days for a call-back by EI processing staff; (m) 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; (n) what was the rate of sick-leave use among EI call centre and processing centre employees; (o) what was the number of EI call centre and processing centre employees on long-term disability; (p) what was the number of overtime hours worked by call centre employees; (q) how many complaints did the Office of Client Satisfaction receive, broken down by region and province where the complaint originated; (r) how long on average did a complaint take to be investigated and resolved; and (s) what were the major themes of the complaints received? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1695.
|
|
|
Q-1696 — Mr. Aubin (Trois-Rivières) — With regard to the investment of $3.3 million announced in Budget 2016 to support an in-depth assessment of VIA Rail’s high-frequency rail proposal and the additional investment of $8 million announced in Budget 2018 to support the continued in-depth assessment of VIA Rail’s high-frequency rail (HFR) proposal for the Quebec City-Windsor corridor: (a) how much of the $3.3 million and $8 million have been spent to date, broken down by (i) feasibility studies, (ii) contractors; (b) how many employees are assigned to the assessment; (c) has VIA Rail provided the government with studies on the high-frequency rail proposal; (d) if the answer in (c) is affirmative, will Transport Canada publish the entirety of these studies and their findings on its website; (e) how many studies and assessments have been conducted on this subject by Transport Canada to date and, if applicable, (i) what were the findings of each of these studies, (ii) will the entirety of these studies and their findings be published on Transport Canada’s website, (iii) what was the cost of each of these studies, (iv) when did Transport Canada conduct each of these studies; (f) why were the findings of the $3.3 million first phase of the assessment insufficient to approve funding for HFR; and (g) what data were missing from the $3.3 million first phase of the assessment that were required in order to fund HFR? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1696.
|
|
|
Q-1697 — Mr. Aubin (Trois-Rivières) — With regard to federal spending in the riding of Trois-Rivières, for each fiscal year since 2015-16, 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? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1697.
|
|
|
Q-1698 — Mr. Aubin (Trois-Rivières) — With regard to the monitoring of the safety management systems of federally regulated railway companies and rail safety between 2006 and 2017, broken down by year: (a) what is the total number of audits completed; (b) what is the target number of audits required by the Transport Canada policy; (c) how many non-federally-regulated railway companies were targeted by the audits; (d) what is the number of inspectors qualified to conduct the audits; (e) what is the number of managers and inspectors who have completed the course on the audit approach; (f) what was the deficiency rate across the federally regulated rail industry; (g) how many times did inspectors encourage voluntary compliance; (h) how many letters of safety concern, letters of non-compliance, notices or notices and orders as interim measures to reduce threats or immediate threats to safe railway operations were issued by inspectors; (i) how many prosecutions for serious violations have inspectors participated in; (j) how many letters of warning were issued by inspectors; (k) how many notices or notices and orders were issued by inspectors to local railway companies; (l) how many notices or notices and orders were issued to federally regulated railway companies; (m) how many local railway companies failed to comply with a notice; (n) how many federally regulated railway companies failed to comply with a notice; (o) how many exemptions from the application of regulations were accepted by Transport Canada for local railway companies; (p) how many threats under the Rail Safety Act were identified by inspectors; (q) how many serious threats under the Rail Safety Act were identified by inspectors; (r) how many in-service rail failures were identified by inspectors; (s) how many in-service joint pull aparts were identified by inspectors; (t) how many broken or cracked wheels found on a train in a yard or in a repair facility were identified by inspectors; (u) how many deviations from the defective rail standards in the Rules Respecting Track Safety were identified using rail flaw testing activities; and (v) what is the average number of inspectors assigned to the monitoring and inspection of each tank car? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1698.
|
|
|
Q-1699 — Mr. Richards (Banff—Airdrie) — With regard to registered charities that indirectly fund Canadian political activity or campaigns through foreign or third party entities: what specific action to stop such funding is being taken by (i) the Canada Revenue Agency, (ii) Elections Canada? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1699.
|
|
|
Q-1700 — Mr. Lukiwski (Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan) — With regard to the invitation extended to Vikram Vij to travel to India in relation to the Prime Minister’s trip in February 2018: (a) on what date did the government invite Mr. Vij to travel to India as part of the Prime Minister’s trip; (b) what were the start and end dates of Mr. Vij’s term on the Independent Advisory Board for Senate Appointments; and (c) was Mr. Vij a member of the Independent Advisory Board for Senate Appointments when the government invited him to be a part of the Prime Minister’s trip to India? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1700.
|
|
|
Q-1701 — Mr. Lukiwski (Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan) — With regard to interactions between the government and Canada 2020, since November 4, 2015: (a) has anyone from the government advised or recommended that any individual or corporation attend a Canada 2020 event; and (b) if the answer to (a) is affirmative, what are the details of all such interactions, including (i) individual providing advice or recommendation, (ii) recipient, (iii) date and title of related Canada 2020 event? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1701.
|
|
|
Q-1702 — Mr. Blaikie (Elmwood—Transcona) — With regard to the Main Estimates 2018-19: of the $82.29 billion for operating and capital expenditures (including the Treasury Board Budget Implementation vote), how much comes from statutory authorities and how much is dependent upon voted authorities? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1702.
|
|
|
Q-1704 — Mr. Bezan (Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman) — With regard to the government’s decision to deploy Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) equipment and personnel to the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali: (a) how many CAF personnel will be deployed to the mission, (i) what unit do these personnel belong to, (ii) what trade do these personnel belong to in the CAF; (b) what CAF assets will be deployed to the mission; (c) what is the estimated cost of the mission; (d) what is the duration of Canada’s military commitment to the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali; (e) will CAF personnel or assets be assisting in G5 Sahel operations within Mali; (f) will CAF personnel or equipment assist in counter-terrorism operations while in Mali; and (g) will Canadian personnel deployed to the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali ever be in the position to receive orders from individuals outside the CAF chain of command? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1704.
|
|
|
Q-1705 — Mr. Cannings (South Okanagan—West Kootenay) — With regard to the approval of the Trans Mountain Pipeline Project and the work of the Ministerial Review Panel appointed by the government in this matter: (a) can construction of a new Trans Mountain Pipeline be reconciled with Canada’s climate change commitments; (b) in the absence of a comprehensive national energy strategy, how can policy-makers effectively assess projects such as the Trans Mountain Pipeline; (c) how might Cabinet square approval of the Trans Mountain Pipeline with its commitment to reconciliation with First Nations and to the UNDRIP principles of “free, prior, and informed consent”; (d) given the changed economic and political circumstances, the perceived flaws in the National Energy Board process, and also the criticism of the Ministerial Panel’s own review, how can Canada be confident in its assessment of the project’s economic rewards and risks; (e) if approved, what route would best serve aquifer, municipal, aquatic and marine safety; and (f) how does federal policy define the terms “social licence” and “Canadian public interest” and their inter-relationships? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1705.
|
|
|
Q-1706 — Mr. Maguire (Brandon—Souris) — With regard to authorizations to transport firearms issued in each province and territory by Chief Firearms Officers, for the last ten years, broken down by year: (a) how many authorizations to transport were (i) issued, (ii) refused, (iii) revoked, (iv) resulted in criminal charges, (v) resulted in firearms licenses being revoked, (vi) resulted in firearms being seized; and (b) how many full time equivalents were involved in the processing, administration and enforcement? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1706.
|
|
|
Q-1707 — Mr. Maguire (Brandon—Souris) — With regard to statistics on firearms seized by police for the last five years, broken down by province or territory: (a) what was the total number of firearms seized, broken down by classification (non-restricted, restricted, prohibited); (b) of the firearms in (a), how many were identified as used in the commission of an indictable offence, broken down by classification; (c) for the firearms in (a) and (b), how many were (i) registered, (ii) unregistered, (iii) domestically sourced, (iv) smuggled into Canada, (v) located and identified using the Canadian Firearms Information System (CFIS), (vi) traced to their source by the Canadian National Firearms Tracing Centre (CNFTC); (d) of the number of firearms identified in (a), how many were seized from a licenced firearms owner; and (e) of the number of licenced firearms owners identified in (b), how many were (i) charged with the indictable offence for which the firearm was used, (ii) charged with providing a firearm to the persons charged with the indictable offence for which the firearm was used, (iii) charged with ‘careless storage’ of their firearm after having their firearm stolen from them? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1707.
|
|
|
Q-1708 — Mr. Maguire (Brandon—Souris) — With regard to firearms licences issued in each province and territory for the last ten years, broken down by year: (a) how many Possession and Acquisition Licences (PAL) were (i) issued, (ii) revoked, broken down by reason for revocation; (b) how many Restricted Possession and Acquisition Licences (RPAL) were (i) issued, (ii) revoked, broken down by reason for revocation; (c) what is the average time for government or police to confiscate revoked firearms licences for (i) PAL, (ii) RPAL; and (d) what is the average time for government or police to confiscate the firearms possessed by revoked firearms licence holders for (i) PAL, (ii) RPAL? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1708.
|
|
|
Q-1709 — Mr. Kelly (Calgary Rocky Ridge) — With regard to the Canada Revenue Agency’s (CRA) practice of withholding transfer or benefit payments from the Government of Canada or provincial or territorial governments to taxpayers who owe taxes payable (tax debts), and instead applying the balances of such payments to such tax debts: (a) for 2016, 2017, and 2018, broken down by year, how many federal transfer or benefit payments were applied to tax debts; (b) for each year in (a), how many provincial or territorial transfer or benefit payments were applied to tax debts; (c) which federal transfer or benefit payments may CRA withhold and apply to tax debts; (d) which provincial or territorial transfer or benefit payments may CRA withhold and apply to tax debts; (e) which, if any, federal or provincial or territorial transfer or benefit payments are exempt from withholding and application to tax debt; (f) for each year in (a) what total amount of overall transfer or benefit payments did CRA withhold and apply to tax debts; (g) for each year in (a), how many transfer or benefit payments did CRA withhold and apply to tax debts before the deadline for paying taxes owing; (h) is the practice in (g) of withholding and applying transfer or benefit payments to tax debts before the deadline for paying taxes owing legal; (i) if the practice in (g) of withholding and applying transfer or benefit payments to tax debts before the deadline for paying taxes owing is legal, which section of which statute permits it; (j) for each year in (a) in which CRA withheld and applied transfer or benefit payments to tax debts before the deadline for paying taxes owing, how many tax debts to which such payments were applied did taxpayers pay in full by or on the deadline, such that an overpayment resulted; (k) for each year in (a), how many overpayments in (j) did CRA refund to the applicable taxpayers; and (l) for each year in (a), how many transfer or benefit payments which CRA withheld and applied to a tax debt which resulted in an overpayment in (j) did CRA retain to apply to taxes owing in the future? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1709.
|
|
|
Q-1710 — Mr. Kelly (Calgary Rocky Ridge) — With regard to the testimony at the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance on March 1, 2018, by the Assistant Commissioner, International, Large Business and Investigations Branch of the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA), regarding monetary incentives and debt collection at the CRA: (a) what percentage and what absolute value of assessed taxes, including personal, corporate, and excise taxes, did CRA not collect between 2007 and 2017 inclusively, broken down by year; (b) of the taxes owing but not collected in (a), what percentage of debts (i) were collected in the following year, (ii) were collected within two years, (iii) were collected within five years, (iv) were collected after five years, (v) have not been collected to date; (c) what options or authorized measures can CRA deploy to recover tax debts; (d) of the debts in (a) which were eventually collected, what percentage were recovered by each of the measures in (c), broken down by year; (e) by what criteria are CRA employees evaluated with respect to success or failure to collect debts owing; (f) for auditors, assessors, and collectors at CRA, what performance metrics are considered for employee evaluations and how are they ranked or weighted; (g) on what evidence is the audit change rate of 75% based; (h) what is the acceptable error rate for audits and assessments respectively; (i) what measures exist at CRA to reduce the error rate of individual auditors and assessors; and (j) what protocols exist at CRA to correct errors made by auditors or assessors before objections or appeals are filed by affected taxpayers? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1710.
|
|
|
Q-1711 — Mrs. Wagantall (Yorkton—Melville) — With regard to materials prepared for Associate Deputy Ministers and Assistant Deputy Ministers from December 1, 2017, to present: for every briefing document prepared, what is the (i) date on the document, (ii) title or subject matter of the document, (iii) department’s internal tracking number, (iv) title of individual for whom the material was prepared, (v) sender? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1711.
|
|
|
Q-1712 — Mrs. Wagantall (Yorkton—Melville) — With regard to materials prepared for Deputy Ministers from December 1, 2017, to present: for every briefing document prepared, what is the (i) date on the document, (ii) title or subject matter of the document, (iii) department’s internal tracking number, (iv) sender? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1712.
|
|
|
Q-1713 — Mrs. Wagantall (Yorkton—Melville) — With regard to all expenditures on hospitality (Treasury Board Object Code 0822), since December 6, 2017, and broken down by department or agency: what are the details of all expenditures, including (i) vendor, (ii) amount, (iii) date of expenditure, (iv) start and end date of contract, (v) description of goods or services provided, (vi) file number, (vii) number of government employees in attendance, (viii) number of other attendees? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1713.
|
|
|
Q-1714 — Mrs. Wagantall (Yorkton—Melville) — With regard to materials prepared for Ministers from December 6, 2017, to present: for every briefing document prepared, what is the (i) date on the document, (ii) title or subject matter of the document, (iii) department’s internal tracking number, (iv) sender? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1714.
|
|
|
Q-1716 — Mr. Lloyd (Sturgeon River—Parkland) — With regard to overtime pay for departmental communications staff since January 1, 2016, broken down by year: what is the total cost of this overtime, broken down by (i) department, agency, or other government entity, (ii) individual communication staff title? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-421-1716.
|
| Business of Supply |
|
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Genuis (Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan), seconded by Mrs. Stubbs (Lakeland), in relation to the Business of Supply. |
|
The debate continued. |
|
At 6:30 p.m., pursuant to Order made Tuesday, May 29, 2018, and Standing Order 81(16), the Speaker interrupted the proceedings. |
|
The question was put on the motion and, pursuant to Standing Order 45, the recorded division was deferred until Tuesday, June 12, 2018, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions. |
| Government Orders |
|
Notice having been given at a previous sitting under the provisions of Standing Order 78(3), Ms. Chagger (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons), seconded by Mr. LeBlanc (Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard), moved, — That, in relation to Bill C-68, An Act to amend the Fisheries Act and other Acts in consequence, not more than five further hours shall be allotted to the consideration at report stage of the Bill and one sitting day shall be allotted to the consideration at third reading stage of the said Bill; and |
|
That, at the expiry of the five hours provided for the consideration at report stage and 15 minutes before the end of Government Orders on the day allotted to the consideration at third reading stage of the said Bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this Order, and in turn every question necessary for the disposal of the stage of the Bill then under consideration shall be put forthwith and successively without further debate or amendment. |
|
Pursuant to Standing Order 67.1, the House proceeded to the question period regarding the moving of the time allocation motion. |
|
The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to on the following division: |
|
| (Division No. 753 -- Vote no 753) | |
| YEAS: 169, NAYS: 80 |
|
|
YEAS -- POUR Aldag Ehsassi LeBlanc Poissant Total: -- 169 |
|
|
NAYS -- CONTRE Albas Doherty Kmiec Ramsey Total: -- 80 |
|
|
PAIRED -- PAIRÉS Duclos Gill Total: -- 2 |
|
|
The House resumed consideration at report stage of Bill C-68, An Act to amend the Fisheries Act and other Acts in consequence, as reported by the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans with amendments; |
|
And of the motions in Group No. 1 (Motions Nos. 1 to 59). |
| Group No. 1 |
|
Motion No. 1 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 1. |
|
Motion No. 2 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 2. |
|
Motion No. 3 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 3. |
|
Motion No. 4 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 4. |
|
Motion No. 5 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 5. |
|
Motion No. 6 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 6. |
|
Motion No. 7 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 7. |
|
Motion No. 8 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 8. |
|
Motion No. 9 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 9. |
|
Motion No. 10 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 10. |
|
Motion No. 11 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 11. |
|
Motion No. 12 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 12. |
|
Motion No. 13 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 13. |
|
Motion No. 14 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 14. |
|
Motion No. 15 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 15. |
|
Motion No. 16 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 16. |
|
Motion No. 17 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 17. |
|
Motion No. 18 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 18. |
|
Motion No. 19 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 19. |
|
Motion No. 20 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 20. |
|
Motion No. 21 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 21. |
|
Motion No. 22 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 22. |
|
Motion No. 23 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 23. |
|
Motion No. 24 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 24. |
|
Motion No. 25 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 25. |
|
Motion No. 26 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 26. |
|
Motion No. 27 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 27. |
|
Motion No. 28 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 28. |
|
Motion No. 29 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 29. |
|
Motion No. 30 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 30. |
|
Motion No. 31 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 31. |
|
Motion No. 32 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 32. |
|
Motion No. 33 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 33. |
|
Motion No. 34 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 34. |
|
Motion No. 35 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 35. |
|
Motion No. 36 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 36. |
|
Motion No. 37 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 37. |
|
Motion No. 38 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 38. |
|
Motion No. 39 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 39. |
|
Motion No. 40 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 40. |
|
Motion No. 41 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 41. |
|
Motion No. 42 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 42. |
|
Motion No. 43 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 43. |
|
Motion No. 44 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 44. |
|
Motion No. 45 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 45. |
|
Motion No. 46 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 46. |
|
Motion No. 47 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 47. |
|
Motion No. 48 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 48. |
|
Motion No. 49 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 49. |
|
Motion No. 50 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 50. |
|
Motion No. 51 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 51. |
|
Motion No. 52 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 52. |
|
Motion No. 53 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 53. |
|
Motion No. 54 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 54. |
|
Motion No. 55 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 55. |
|
Motion No. 56 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 56. |
|
Motion No. 57 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 57. |
|
Motion No. 58 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 58. |
|
Motion No. 59 of Mr. Doherty (Cariboo—Prince George), seconded by Mr. Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil), — That Bill C-68 be amended by deleting Clause 59. |
|
The debate continued on the motions in Group No. 1. |
| Messages from the Senate |
| Returns and Reports Deposited with the Clerk of the House |
|
Pursuant to Standing Order 32(1), a paper deposited with the Clerk of the House was laid upon the Table as follows: |
— by Mr. Brison (President of the Treasury Board) — Report of the Public Sector Pension Investment Board, together with the Auditor General's Report, for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2018, pursuant to the Public Sector Pension Investment Board Act, S.C. 1999, c. 34, sbs. 48(3). — Sessional Paper No. 8560-421-768-03. (Pursuant to Standing Order 32(5), permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates)
|
| Petitions Filed with the Clerk of the House |
|
Pursuant to Standing Order 36, a petition certified by the Clerk of Petitions was filed as follows: |
— by Mr. Spengemann (Mississauga—Lakeshore), one concerning international development and aid (No. 421-02453).
|
| Midnight |
| Adjournment Proceedings |
|
At midnight, 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 12:28 a.m., the Speaker adjourned the House until later today, at 10:00 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1). |