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. 341 Wednesday, October 24, 2018 2:00 p.m. |
|
|
|
|
Introduction of Government Bills |
|
Introduction of Private Members' Bills |
|
Notices of Motions (Routine Proceedings) |
|
Questions |
|
| Q-20112 — October 23, 2018 — Mr. Albas (Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola) — With regard to the government’s Scientific Research and Experimental Development (SR&ED) tax incentive program, broken down by each of the last three fiscal years: (a) what is the number of businesses which applied for tax incentives under the program; (b) what is the average time between the receipt of an application and a decision; (c) what is the average time between the receipt of an application and the funding actually being delivered to the business; (d) what is the number of applicants who have received notice of an audit under the program; (e) what is the average length of time between the notice of an audit and the applicant being audited actually receiving funding under the program; and (f) does the government pay the applicant interest in the case that an audit delays payment or does the government simply put the interest towards general revenue? |
| Q-20122 — October 23, 2018 — Mr. Kent (Thornhill) — With regard to meetings between the RCMP and ministers, exempt staff members, or other government employees in relation to leaks of Cabinet confidences: what are the details of all such meetings, including (i) name and title of minister, exempt staff member or other government employee, (ii) location, (iii) date, (iv) subject matter discussed? |
| Q-20132 — October 23, 2018 — Mr. Kent (Thornhill) — With regard to the government’s response to Q-1503 where it indicated that it was aware of six incidents of leaked information, but that only one individual had been under investigation for leaking information: broken down by each of the five instances where information was leaked but an investigation did not take place or no one was placed under investigation, what is the rationale for not pursuing an investigation into each of the instances? |
| Q-20142 — October 23, 2018 — Mr. Kent (Thornhill) — With regard to instructions or directives provided by the Office of the Prime Minister to the Privy Council Office (PCO) since November 4, 2015: what instructions or directives were given to PCO in relation to the release of documents as requested by lawyers in the Mark Norman case, or in relation to the alleged leak of information from a November 2015 Cabinet committee meeting, and on what date was each instruction or directive given? |
| Q-20152 — October 23, 2018 — Mr. Clement (Parry Sound—Muskoka) — With regard to the number of individuals placed under a lifetime non-disclosure or gag order since November 4, 2015, and broken down by department and agency: (a) what is the total number of (i) government employees, (ii) contractors, vendors or their employees, (iii) others, who are under such an order; and (b) what is the number of individuals who have been found to violate such an order since November 4, 2015? |
| Q-20162 — October 23, 2018 — Mr. Clement (Parry Sound—Muskoka) — With regard to requests made to government ministers: (a) did any minister, including the Prime Minister, ever receive a request, including via email, text message, written, or oral communication, from members of the Irving family, or representatives of the Irving Group of Companies, that an investigation take place, or that charges be laid, in relation to the November 2015 alleged leak of information from a Cabinet committee meeting; and (b) if the answer to (a) is affirmative, what are the details of all such requests, including (i) sender, (ii) recipient, (iii) date, (iv) form (email, text, etc.), (v) summary or nature of request? |
| Q-20172 — October 23, 2018 — Mr. Clement (Parry Sound—Muskoka) — With regard to the meetings which took place at the Halifax Security Forum, in November 2015, involving ministers and representatives from the Irving Group of Companies: what are the details of all such meetings, including (i) date, (ii) attendees, (iii) whether attendees were in person, or connected via teleconference, (iv) topics discussed? |
| Q-20182 — October 23, 2018 — Mr. Obhrai (Calgary Forest Lawn) — With regard to government expenditures on sporting event tickets since December 1, 2017: what was the (i) date, (ii) location, (iii) ticket cost, (iv) title of persons using the tickets, (v) name or title of event for tickets purchased by, or billed to, any department, agency, Crown corporation, or other government entity? |
| Q-20192 — October 23, 2018 — Mr. Lukiwski (Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan) — With regard to the terms used in Bill C-83, An Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and another Act: (a) what is the government’s definition of “meaningful human contact” and what are examples of contacts that would or would not satisfy the Bill's requirements related to that term; and (b) what is the government’s definition of “leisure time” and what would be examples of activities that would or would not satisfy the Bill's requirements related to that term? |
| Q-20202 — October 23, 2018 — Mr. Berthold (Mégantic—L'Érable) — With regard to changes or concessions made by the government to supply management in the United States—Mexico—Canada Agreement (USMCA): (a) what are the details of any studies the government has conducted on the impact of the changes to supply management in the USMCA, including the findings to any such studies; and (b) what projections does the government have on the impact of the supply management changes in the USMCA to each of the supply managed industries? |
Notices of Motions for the Production of Papers |
|
Business of Supply |
|
Government Business |
|
Private Members' Notices of Motions |
|
| M-202 — October 23, 2018 — Ms. Sansoucy (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot) — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should implement an environmental program recognizing the contribution of its beneficiaries to society in addressing river pollution that would include providing financial compensation to farmers or waterfront property owners who set up buffer zones along the shoreline to protect the environment that go above and beyond the current regulations and that would cover at least the set-up costs, maintenance costs and the loss of arable land within at least three metres of the top of the embankment, but that could exceed three metres based on the protection needs identified by recognized professionals. |
Private Members' Business |
| M-161 — May 7, 2018 — Resuming consideration of the motion of Mr. Long (Saint John—Rothesay), seconded by Ms. Dabrusin (Toronto—Danforth), — 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. |
| Pursuant to Standing Order 86(3), jointly seconded by: |
| Ms. Dabrusin (Toronto—Danforth) — April 25, 2018 |
| Mr. Picard (Montarville) — April 30, 2018 |
| Mr. Erskine-Smith (Beaches—East York) — May 7, 2018 |
| 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 |
|