House Publications

    With regard to the 2 Billion Trees Program mentioned in the Minister of Energy and Natural Resource’s announcement of August 2, 2023: how many of the trees were planted under (i) the Disaster Mitigation and Adaption Fund, (ii) the Low Carbon Economy Fund, (iii) neither the Disaster Mitigation and Adaption Fund or the Low Carbon Economy Fund?

    Mr. Speaker, in 2021-22 and 2022-23, over 110 million trees have been planted towards the federal government’s commitment to plant two billion incremental trees over 10 years.

    With regard to (i), no trees planted under the Disaster Mitigation and Adaptation Fund have been counted towards this total.

    With regard to (ii), 54 million trees planted by provinces and territories via Environment and Climate Change Canada’s Low Carbon Economy Fund in 2021-22 and in 2022-23. The 2 Billion Trees program was designed to ensure that existing climate change programs that support tree planting are counted towards the Government’s commitment to plant two billion trees, which includes the Low Carbon Economy Fund.

    With regard to (iii), over 56 million trees planted via Natural Resources Canada’s 2 Billion Trees program. No other trees planted under other government programs have been counted toward this total to date. In order to be included, trees planted must be incremental to business as usual, and must be reported by proponents with sufficient detail to support verification.

    With regard to the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC): (a) what are the specific job performance benchmarks or criteria for an employee of the CMHC to receive a bonus or salary increase; (b) how does the number of new housing units constructed, or the creation of new housing starts, in Canada affect whether an employee of the CMHC receives a bonus or salary increase; (c) how does the performance of a CMHC program affect whether an employee of the CMHC receives a bonus or salary increase; and (d) how does the progress of meeting CMHC’s planned results, as laid out in the CMHC 2023-2027 Corporate Plan, affect whether an employee of the CMHC receives a bonus or salary increase?

    Mr. Speaker, with regard to the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, or CMHC, with regard to (a), employees set SMART, namely specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound, objectives tied to the responsibilities of their individual positions. Each year managers assess the performance of the employee and assign a performance rating on a 5-point scale, namely does not meet expectations, meets most expectations, meets all expectations, exceeds most expectations, exceeds all expectations. Employees who meet or exceed their objectives are eligible for an annual individual incentive payment and salary increase.

    With regard to (b) to (d), the Guidelines of the Performance Management Program for Chief Executive Officers of Crown Corporations, which can be found at https://www.canada.ca/en/privy-council/programs/appointments/governor-council-appointments/performance-management/crown-appointees.html, from the Privy Council Office, Senior Personnel Secretariat outlines the process for determining whether and at what level a performance-based compensation is payable.

    With regard to the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) and the National Housing Strategy: (a) how many new homes have been completed with the assistance of any type of funding from the National Housing Strategy, since 2017, in total and broken down by province or territory; (b) how many new homes does the CMHC expect will have been completed in 2023 with the assistance of any type of funding from the National Housing Strategy; (c) what is the breakdown of (a) and (b) by program or initiative; and (d) will the National Housing Strategy help to construct enough homes by 2030 to meet the CMHC’s projection that Canada needs 5.8 million new homes to restore affordability?

    Mr. Speaker, with regard to the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, or CMHC, and the National Housing Strategy, and with regard to (a), (b) and (c), please refer to the information available on the National Housing Strategy results website, which can be found at https://www.placetocallhome.ca. More precisely, the detailed breakdown requested can found by downloading the file made available on the Housing Funding Initiative Map section of the website, which can be found at https://www.placetocallhome.ca/housing-funding-initiatives-map.

    With regards to the Housing Accelerator Fund, as of October 27, 2023, the committed permits to be facilitated for this program is 14,509 units. HAF is still undergoing the assessment of applications, hence, any further information cannot be provided.

    With regard to (d), to restore affordability, CMHC estimates that Canada will need 3.5 million more units on top of what is already projected to be built based on current rates of new construction.

    The National Housing Strategy is contributing to increasing housing supply across Canada and aims to create 160,000 new units but the federal government cannot achieve affordability for everyone in Canada on its own. The government needs partners, all orders of government, the private and non-profit sectors, and others who share our goal of creating a new generation of housing in Canada. Collaboration, partnership and innovation will be critical in addressing this supply shortfall.

    With regard to heavy body armour acquisition and usage by the RCMP, since 2016: (a) how many sets of heavy body armour have been purchased for the RCMP, broken down by year; (b) what is the yearly breakdown of the total costs associated with the purchases in (a); (c) how many requests for proposals (RFP) have been issued for heavy body armour; (d) what are the details of each RFP, including, for each, (i) the date, (ii) how many sets of heavy body armour were desired, (iii) the RFP number; (e) how many and what percentage of RCMP vehicles have two sets of heavy body armour; (f) how many sets are currently in inventory or storage, but have not yet been issued to RCMP officers; (g) of the sets currently in use by the RCMP, how many are expired; and (h) what is the total number of sets currently owned by the RCMP, and, of those, how many are in use?

    Mr. Speaker, with regard to (a) to (d), the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, or RCMP, undertook an extensive preliminary search in order to determine the amount of information that would fall within the scope of the question and the amount of time that would be required to prepare a comprehensive response. The level of detail of the information requested is not systematically tracked in a centralized database. The RCMP concluded that producing and validating a comprehensive response to this question would require a manual collection of information that is not possible in the time allotted and could lead to the disclosure of incomplete and misleading information.

    With regard to (e), on December 7, 2020, OM - ch. 99.2., Active Threat Training and Equipment, was updated to ensure that as many operational frontline members as possible are personally assigned unit-issued hard body armour, or HBA. This national operational standard ensures that the members at greatest risk receive the equipment and training they need to perform their duties as safely as possible.

    The current benchmark for HBA is that “all operational frontline members are to be personally assigned unit-issued HBA by March 31, 2022.”

    With regard to (f), as of October 26, 2023, 1,619 sets of HBA have been ordered, but have not yet been delivered to the RCMP National Warehouse. As soon as the HBA sets are received by the RCMP Uniform and Equipment Program, or U&E, there is a two-week preparation and quality assurance process that takes place before they can be shipped out to the Divisions.

    With regard to (g) to (h), as of October 26, 2023, according to procurement records, there have been 18,595 sets of HBA procured by the RCMP. Since this number is based on procurement records, it does not take into account HBA sets that have been disposed of, lost, or destroyed. Of the sets that were deployed, 3,994 have expired. Based on Divisional annual HBA attestations, there are 12,607 HBA sets in use in the Divisions.

    With regard to the morale of the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) and the statement in a July 23, 2023, briefing note from Canadian Forces Chaplain General, BGen Guy Bélisle, that “CAF leaders and members feeling more undervalued and underappreciated than at any point in recent memory”: (a) what is the government’s assessment of why CAF leaders and members feel undervalued and underappreciated; (b) what new measures, if any, will the government implement to improve CAF morale; and (c) when was the last time that the CAF conducted a thorough analysis of the state of morale, and what were the findings of that analysis?

    Mr. Speaker, the well-being of Canadian Armed Forces, or CAF, personnel is of the highest priority to the CAF and National Defence, and the retention of trained and experienced personnel is fundamental to the professionalism and operational effectiveness of the organization. The Defence Team wants every Canadian to see service to Canada within the CAF as a first-rate career choice, which is why efforts are underway to strengthen how the organization recruits, retains, and takes care of its people.

    With regard to (a) and (c), National Defence and the CAF recognize that military service places unique demands on CAF members and their families, including unique cost-of-living challenges due to operational tempo and job requirements. The CAF is also experiencing a shortfall in personnel, and the Defence Team is undertaking significant reconstitution efforts to make the organization stronger and more effective.

    Your Say Matters: Defence Team Well-Being Survey, or YSM, is a survey aimed to obtain Defence Team members’ attitudes, perceptions, and experiences on a broad range of work and organizational factors related to well-being, organizational culture, and retention.

    The 2022 YSM was administered, at random and in anonymous format, to members of the Defence Team, including CAF members, Regular and Primary Reserve, and National Defence civilian personnel, between March and May 2022, with approximately 8,000 CAF respondents. The results showed overall that the responding CAF members have moderate levels of morale, with more than a third of the respondents reporting low morale.

    With regard to (b), National Defence is committed to improving the morale and welfare of the CAF and have implemented a number of initiatives in support of this effort. This includes delivering a 12.03% cost of living increase for CAF members and covering rations and quarters for members who have not yet completed all qualifications required for their first employment in their military occupation.

    The CAF is further advancing meaningful culture evolution efforts to help build a more inclusive environment. Since its creation in 2021, Chief Professional Conduct and Culture conducted engagement with over 16,000 Defence Team members and external stakeholders to listen and learn from their lived experience, which informs the way forward to improving the culture within the Defence Team.

    Ensuring that our soldiers, sailors, and aviators are equipped with modern and effective equipment also remains a priority for National Defence. This includes continued investments through Strong, Secure Engaged. For example, since 2017, the Government of Canada has developed a clear plan of action to modernize continental defence, including an investment of $38.6 billion over 20 years in NORAD modernization, and delivered critical new equipment to the CAF. This includes the purchase of F-35 advanced fighter aircraft, Canadian Surface Combatant ships, Arctic and Offshore Patrol Ships, Tactical Armoured Patrol Vehicles and the Medium Support Vehicle System.

    Finally, further initiatives will be launched in 2024 as efforts continue to create a healthier work environment for all to thrive and achieve increased operational readiness and effectiveness.

    With regard to the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada’s (FCAC) July 2023 Guideline on Existing Consumer Mortgage Loans in Exceptional Circumstances (Guideline): (a) how many financial institutions who provide mortgage lending in Canada were consulted by the FCAC on this Guideline; (b) did any of the financial institutions consulted raise concerns with the FCAC regarding the Guideline, prior to the implementation, and, if so, what are the details, including what concerns were raised and by which financial institutions; (c) if no financial institutions were consulted before the FCAC implemented the Guideline, why were they not consulted; (d) have any financial institutions raised concerns with the FCAC since the Guideline was introduced, and, if so, what are the details, including what concerns were raised and by which financial institutions; and (e) is the Guideline temporary or will the FCAC leave it in place indefinitely?

    Mr. Speaker, the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada, or FCAC, protects Canadians by supervising the compliance of federally regulated financial entities, such as banks, with their legislative obligations, codes of conduct and public commitments, and by strengthening Canadians’ financial literacy.

    In response to the current economic environment, FCAC developed the Guideline on Existing Consumer Mortgage Loans in Exceptional Circumstances, which can be found at https://www.canada.ca/en/financial-consumer-agency/services/industry/commissioner-guidance/mortgage-loans-exceptional-circumstances.html. The Guideline sets out how FCAC expects federally regulated financial institutions to provide tailored support to consumers with mortgages on their principal residence who are experiencing severe financial difficulty.

    Guidelines establish practices that FCAC expects regulated entities to incorporate within their business operations. They are intended to assist regulated entities in complying with market conduct obligations stemming from legislation, regulations, codes of conduct and public commitments.

    With regard to (a), consultations are part of FCAC’s standard practice in developing guidelines. FCAC launched public consultations on the proposed Guideline on March 21, 2023, and received comments until the close of the consultation period on May 5, 2023.

    FCAC participated in 13 stakeholder engagements and received 36 written submissions from stakeholders, including members of the public, consumer advocacy groups, academics, financial institutions, and industry associations.

    Industry-specific consultations took place via engagements with the Canadian Bankers Association, or CBA, representing a wide range of Schedule I, Schedule II, and Schedule III banks, namely Member banks, which are listed at https://cba.ca/member-banks?l=en-us, the Canadian Credit Union Association, or CCUA, for Canada’s credit unions, and some caisses populaires.

    With regard to (b), four of the 36 written submissions received from stakeholders were submitted by financial institutions or their respective trade associations (the CBA and the CCUA). FCAC’s “What we heard: Public consultation on the Guideline on Existing Consumer Mortgage Loans in Exceptional Circumstances”, which can be found at https://www.canada.ca/en/financial-consumer-agency/corporate/transparency/consultations/mortgage-loans/what-we-heard.html, provides an anonymized summary of all the comments received during the public consultations and indicates how FCAC addressed this input.

    With regard to (c), this part is not applicable given the response to (a).

    With regard to (d), since the Guideline’s implementation, financial institutions raised some of the following concerns with FCAC through regulatory supervisory touchpoints: consistency of guidelines and the consistent interpretation of those guidelines, timelines for the update of systems, how to define and identify consumer at risk, and more.

    With regard to (e), the guideline is a response to the current exceptional circumstances facing mortgage holders. FCAC will continue to monitor the economic environment and adjust its approach, as appropriate.

    With regard to the Privy Council Office's Results and Delivery Unit: (a) what is the total amount of mandate letter commitments that are being tracked from the 2021 ministerial mandate letters, broken down by reporting lead (i.e. minister); and (b) as of October 2023, broken down by reporting lead (i.e. minister) and identification number, how many of the 2021 ministerial mandate letter commitments are identified (i) as completed by the government, (ii) to have seen actions taken by the government but not completed, (iii) as not being pursued by the government?

    Mr. Speaker, the list of mandate letter commitments, as aligned with the December 2021 mandate letters, is publicly available at https://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/8f6b5490-8684-4a0d-91a3-97ba28acc9cd.

    Information regarding the progress of our government’s commitments is publicly available as part of the Public Accounts of Canada, at https://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/recgen/cpc-pac/index-eng.html, the Government Expenditure Plan and Main Estimates, at https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/services/planned-government-spending/government-expenditure-plan-main-estimates.html, the Supplementary Estimates, at https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/services/planned-government-spending/supplementary-estimates.html, and the budgets, at https://www.canada.ca/en/department-finance/services/publications/federal-budget.html and at https://www.canada.ca/en/news.html.

    With regard to the Lytton Homeowner Resilient Rebuild Program: (a) how much money has been distributed through the program to date; (b) how many recipients have received funding through the program; (c) what was the average payment amount received; and (d) how many applications have been received to date?

    Mr. Speaker, with regard to (a), concerning the Lytton Homeowner Resilient Rebuild Program, Pacific Economic Development Canada, or PacifiCan, distributed $0 between May 31 and October 24, 2023. In order to receive the fire-resilient or fire-resilient and net zero homes grant, the homeowner is required to complete home construction and meet all stated program requirements. As of October 24, 2023, all three applicants were in process but had not yet achieved the requirements.

    With regard to (b), as of October 24, 2023, a total amount of $279,288 has been committed towards three recipients.

    With regard to (c), the average payment to participants is $0 as of October 24, 2023. The average is expected to be $93,096 once grants are distributed.

    With regard to (d), as of October 24, 2023, PacifiCan received three applications.

    With regard to the government’s response to the explosion at the Al Ahli Hospital in Gaza, which occurred on October 17, 2023: (a) to whom were the Minister of Foreign Affairs' comments on October 17, 2023, that “Bombing a hospital is an unthinkable act, and there is no doubt that doing so is absolutely illegal”, which were posted on X (Twitter), addressed; (b) on what basis did the Minister of Foreign Affairs assess that the explosion at the Gaza hospital was illegal; (c) when did the Minister of National Defence notify the Minister of Foreign Affairs that the government’s statement, the “more likely scenario is that the strike was caused by an errant rocket fired from Gaza”, would be issued; and (d) did the Minister of Foreign Affairs change her position regarding the illegality of the explosion at the Al Ahli hospital following the statement in (c) from the Minister of National Defence, and, if not, why not?

    Mr. Speaker, the following reflects a consolidated response approved on behalf of Global Affairs Canada ministers.

    The Government of Canada unequivocally condemns the brutal and horrific terrorist attacks against the people of Israel by Hamas, which took place October 7, 2023. Canada has been clear that Israel, like all states, has a right to defend itself, and that it has an obligation to do so in accordance with international law. Canada has called on all parties to protect civilians and civilian infrastructure.

    The Government of Canada also recognizes the dire situation and human tragedy in Gaza and has been clear that the price of justice cannot be the continued suffering of all Palestinian civilians. Canada has called for Canadians, including foreign nationals, to be permitted to leave, for the release of all hostages, for unimpeded access for humanitarian aid, including life-saving access to medical services, food, fuel, and water, and for an end to the violence.

    The Government of Canada continues to work with allies and partners in the region towards a lasting peace. Canada stands firmly with the Israeli and Palestinian peoples in their right to live in peace, security, and dignity, without fear, and supports a two-state solution where a peaceful, prosperous, and safe Palestinian state thrives alongside a peaceful, prosperous, and safe state of Israel.

    Global Affairs Canada regularly prepares situation reports and briefing products that cover a broad range of developments in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza, as it does for other regions. Such reports are used alongside a variety of other sources, including open-source media reports and information from other government departments, in assessing the veracity of reporting on international incidents and determining an appropriate response.

    As indicated by the Department of National Defence, or DND, on October 21, 2023, analysis conducted independently by the Canadian Forces Intelligence Command indicates with a high degree of confidence that Israel did not strike the al-Ahli hospital on October 17, 2023. Based on open source and classified reporting, the DND and the Canadian Armed Forces have assessed that the strike was more likely caused by an errant rocket fired from Gaza. This assessment is informed by an analysis of the blast damage to the hospital complex, including adjacent buildings and the area surrounding the hospital, as well as the flight pattern of the incoming munition. Reporting from Canada’s allies corroborates the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces’ findings.

    With regard to the Auditor General’s report entitled “Modernizing Information Technology Systems”: why does the government not retain historical data as cited in section 7.40 of the report?

    Mr. Speaker, due to technical limitations with the Application Portfolio Management, or APM, system, it cannot record historical information about applications. The system was designed in 2013, and at the time it was only meant to record a point-in-time snapshot about applications, and not a historical time series. There is currently an active APM system redesign project and retaining historical data is one of the requirements for the new system, and although we cannot confirm that the vendor will be able to implement this requirement in the new software, appropriate solutions will be in place to alleviate the current limitations.

    The upcoming systems will be designed to integrate a robust array of cutting-edge features and data, enhancing our capabilities and providing deeper insights into our environment. Through these modern advancements, we will gain a more comprehensive understanding of the IT ecosystem, fostering improved adaptability and informed decision-making.

    As an interim solution and given the existing limitation, Excel extracts of the data have been made annually since 2018-19, and daily since January 2022 to allow for historical data analysis.

    With regard to the finding in the Auditor General’s report entitled “The Benefits Delivery Modernization Programme”, that “Employment and Social Development Canada, in 2017, encountered numerous obstacles and delays in its implementation of the programme and had to make difficult choices about the sequence of key steps”: (a) what were these obstacles and delays; and (b) what difficult choices were made?

    Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General’s report on Benefits Delivery Modernization, or BDM, states that “Employment and Social Development Canada, since 2017, encountered numerous obstacles and delays in its implementation of the programme and had to make difficult choices about the sequence of key steps.”

    BDM is a complex, large scale, multi-year undertaking, and the programme plan continues to be refined as scope, timing and other factors are assessed. As the work underway in BDM continues, the Programme is gaining a greater understanding of the complexity of unraveling the decades-old Old Age Security, or OAS, and Employment Insurance, or EI, system.

    The obstacles and delays encountered by Employment and Social Development Canada, or ESDC, since 2017 were mainly due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the downstream impacts, as well as the switch from EI to OAS as the first benefit to onboard.

    Due to COVID impacts, a number of key resources were temporarily deployed outside of the Programme to support the GC’s overall emergency response. At the peak of the response, nearly 25% of BDM’s employees were deployed outside of the Programme to assist other departments and agencies. Specifically, BDM’s employees assisted with the Canada Emergency Response Benefit, or CERB, the Public Health Agency of Canada, or PHAC, with their call centre and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, or DFO, with their Fish Harvesters Benefit. As a result, some key decisions and activities related to the BDM Programme were delayed, resulting in downstream impacts on the Programme Definition phase.

    To address these developments, the BDM Programme conducted an assessment to identify what elements of Programme Definition could still be delivered. Consequently, the timelines for the completion of the Programme Definition phase were delayed.

    In 2021, in response to an elevated risk of system failure, ESDC accelerated the migration of OAS, the oldest of the three legacy systems, ahead of EI.

    With regard to the Canada Revenue Agency’s (CRA) administration of Part XIII of the Income Tax Act over the past 20 tax years: (a) has the CRA held any Canadian resident tenant (i.e. residential or commercial) liable for failing to withhold and remit the tax payable by their non-resident landlord or required a Canadian resident tenant (i.e. residential or commercial) to pay any outstanding taxes of their non-resident landlord; (b) if the answer to (a) is affirmative, what are the total number of instances of this occurring, broken down by tax year, tenancy type (i.e. residential or commercial), and total amount of funds that the Canadian resident tenant was held liable to pay; (c) does the CRA have any internal policies, directives, standards or guidelines on administering Part XIII of the Income Tax Act within the context of a relationship between a Canadian resident tenant (i.e. residential or commercial) and a non-resident landlord; (d) if the answer to (c) is affirmative, what are the details of any such documents; (e) has the CRA modified, or does the CRA have plans to modify in the future, its policies, directives, standards or guidelines on administering Part XIII of the Income Tax Act following the ruling of the Tax Court of Canada in 3792391 Canada Inc. V. The King, 2023 TCC 37; and (f) if the answer to (e) is affirmative, what are the details of any such modifications?

    Mr. Speaker, what follows is the response from the Canada Revenue Agency, or CRA, as of October 24, 2023, the date of the question.

    With regard to (a), per a review of the records available within its systems, the CRA has held one Canadian resident tenant liable for failing to withhold and remit the tax payable by their non-resident landlord as a result of an audit.

    With regard to (b), only one case, which was a commercial tenancy, was found. To protect the integrity of the CRA’s work and to respect the confidentiality provisions of the Acts it administers, the CRA cannot provide taxpayer information or comment on specific taxpayer files.

    With regard to (c), the CRA’s Non-Resident Audit Manual contains guidance on the administration of Part XIII of the Income Tax Act in cases where rental income for Canadian properties is received by a non-resident.

    With regard to (d), to preserve the integrity of its compliance programs, as a standard practice the CRA does not disclose specific details about its audit or review techniques. However, a general summary of the CRA’s Non-Resident Audit Manual referred to in (c) follows: If a payer fails to withhold the required amount of the Part XIII tax from an amount paid to a non-resident, the payer and non-resident are both liable for this amount and the general practice of the CRA is to assess the payer for any amount owing. However, the CRA’s Non-Resident Audit Program takes into consideration all relevant facts and may instead assess the non-resident.

    With regard to (e) and (f), as there are currently no plans to make changes to the CRA’s policies, directives, standards or guidelines on administering Part XIII of the Income Tax Act following the ruling of the Tax Court of Canada in 3792391 Canada Inc. V. The King, 2023 TCC 37, no further details regarding modifications apply in this case.

    With regard to Infrastructure Canada’s program funding: (a) since 2015, has Infrastructure Canada become aware of any projects funded by the department that have, or are alleged to have, employed illegal labour or projects in which any employee, or individual working in relation to the project, was not paid the minimum hourly wage required by federal or provincial law; (b) if the answer to (a) is affirmative, what are the details of each instance, including the (i) name of project, (ii) project description, (iii) summary of wrongdoing or allegations, (iv) date on which the department became aware, (v) description of the actions taken, including the dates of each action, (vi) date on which the Minister of Housing, Infrastructure and Communities or the minister’s office was first notified, (vii) actions taken by the Minister of Housing, Infrastructure and Communities, if any; and (c) what mechanisms are in place to ensure that no projects receiving government funding employ illegal labour or labour that is not paid the minimum hourly wage required by law?

    Mr. Speaker, with regard to program funding for Infrastructure Canada, or INFC, in response to (a), INFC is not aware of any projects that have been funded by the department since 2015 that have, or are alleged to have, employed illegal labour or projects in which any employee, or individual working in relation to the project, was not paid the minimum hourly wage required by federal or provincial law.

    With regard to (b), the answer to (a) is negative. INFC has not been made aware of illegal labour practices or minimum wage infractions on its funded projects through any of its project monitoring practices or interactions with recipients.

    With regard to (c), information on recipients’ labour practices is not collected through project applications or project reporting. However, INFC’s contribution agreements with funding recipients include a standard provision requiring that all projects be compliant with all applicable laws and regulations, which would include all applicable labour laws.

    With regard to visas for international students in Canada: how many international students (i) are currently studying in Canada, (ii) are studying at institutions accredited by Universities Canada, (iii) are in post-graduate studies, (iv) have transferred institutions within Canada during their period of study, (v) have completed their program of study in the last year, (vi) dropped out of their program of study in the last year, (vii) died in the last year, (viii) died by suicide in the last year?

    Mr. Speaker, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, IRCC, does not hold information on the number of study permit holders who are currently residing in Canada, mainly due to the fact that people can leave the country at any point in time.

    With regard to part (i), as a proxy, IRCC holds information on the total number of study permit holders. On September 30, 2023, 1,015,744 study permit holders held a valid permit.

    With regard to part (ii), 343,470 students are studying at institutions recognized by Universities Canada.

    With regard to part (iii), 133,370 are in post-graduate studies.

    With regard to parts (iv) through (viii), this data is not tracked by IRCC.

    Please note that data are preliminary estimates and subject to change. Study permits are valid on September 30, 2023, and a client’s most recent study permit is considered. A client’s designated learning institution, DLI, is based on the current permit. The list of DLIs is based on the following website for Universities Canada: https://www.univcan.ca/universities/member-universities/. Universities Canada is a membership organization and not an official accrediting organization.

    Please also note that the study level of a client is based on the recent permit. Post-graduate studies are defined as clients who have identified their level of study being either a master or a doctorate.

    With regard to the government's recently published draft Clean Electricity Regulations: (a) how many megawatts of unabated fossil fuel electricity does Environment and Climate Change Canada estimate will be remaining on Canada's electricity grid in 2035; and (b) how many tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions will this represent on an annual basis?

    Mr. Speaker, to support reliability and affordability, the draft regulations include flexibilities that allow a limited and declining ongoing role for fossil fuel generation. This flexible approach will enable provincial utilities and system operators to plan and manage their systems in accordance with relevant provincial circumstances, while creating a clear signal for reducing emissions over time.

    According to the regulatory impact analysis statement, RIAS, for the draft clean electricity regulations, CER, in 2035, 9% of Canada’s electricity capacity will come from emitting sources, which are expected to decline over time. This would account for approximately 19,789 megawatts of emitting electricity capacity. However, it is important to note that this value also includes biomass and waste generation, which are not considered fossil fuels. The complete breakdown of forecasted electricity capacity under the draft regulatory scenario can be seen in table 5 of the CER RIAS. Further information is available at the following link: https://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2023/2023-08-19/html/reg1-eng.html

    The regulations on their own would decrease annual emissions from 62 megatonnes to less than nine megatonnes remaining from grid electricity in 2035. These remaining emissions will also be exposed to the carbon price of a particular year to further bring us to net zero.

    The proposed CER is expected to deliver nearly 342 megatonnes of cumulative emissions reductions between 2024 and 2050.

    These projections are from the RIAS that accompanied the draft CER. Please note that Environment and Climate Change Canada will provide updated estimated impacts associated with the final regulations when they are published. The impacts may differ to the extent that the final regulations differ from the draft CER published in the Canada Gazette, part I.

    With regard to the Pacific Salmon Strategy Initiative: (a) how much of the initiative's $650 million budget has been allocated within each of the strategy's pillars; (b) what projects have received funding commitments and under which pillars do these fall; and (c) what is the total amount of funding that has been disbursed under each of the pillars?

    Mr. Speaker, with regard to part (a), program funding for the Pacific salmon strategy initiative, PSSI, is distributed in the following manner: $262.5 million over five years, starting in 2021-22, is for conservation and stewardship; $145.3 million over five years, starting in 2021-22, is for salmon enhancement; $204.4 million over five years, starting in 2021-22, is for harvest transformation; and $35 million over five years, starting in 2021-22, is for integration and collaboration.

    With regard to part (b), numerous new initiatives and projects are now under way across all four implementation pillars of the Pacific salmon strategy initiative.

    Under the conservation and stewardship pillar, new science investments have been made to improve understanding of salmon ecosystems. The British Columbia salmon restoration and innovation fund, a cost-shared federal-provincial program, has also been renewed. Fisheries and Oceans Canada, DFO, is demonstrating leadership internationally through funding science and high seas inspection in the north Pacific Ocean. Funding is also supporting the launch of the new DFO habitat restoration centre of expertise, which is advancing a number of initiatives related to salmon habitat restoration, including emergency salmon recovery efforts related to the recent flood, drought and wildfires in British Columbia.

    Examples of current projects under way under the salmon enhancement pillar include the expansion of mass marking programs, which supports mark selective fisheries for the recreational fishing sector; the retrofitting and modernizing of existing hatcheries; and the planning and designing of new salmon hatchery facilities.

    Under the harvest transformation pillar, PSSI is supporting modernized harvest management approaches for indigenous, commercial and recreational Pacific salmon fisheries that respond to current and future population trends. In addition, the department continues to explore new harvest opportunities for indigenous harvesters through terminal fisheries, and the recreational sector through mark selective fisheries. The new Pacific salmon commercial licence retirement program has also recently completed the first application round, where commercial salmon licence eligibility holders are able to voluntarily retire their licence eligibilities permanently for market value through reverse auction.

    Finally, several initiatives are under way under the PSSI’s integration and collaboration pillar, most notably the launch of a targeted action plan measure, number 41, under the recently announced federal UN declaration act action plan, and efforts to modernize DFO’s Pacific salmon data and its availability through a new Pacific salmon data portal.

    With regard to part (c), here is a breakdown of funds disbursed under each of the four PSSI implementation pillars: $33.5 million has been disbursed under conservation and stewardship; $28.4 million has been disbursed under salmon enhancement; $33 million has been disbursed under harvest transformation; and $8.4 million has been disbursed under integration and collaboration.

    With regard to cost estimates related to the Benefits Delivery Modernization Programme: (a) what methodology was used by Employment and Social Development Canada to conclude the programme would cost $1.7 billion; and (b) what methodology was used by the third-party review to conclude that the cost would be between $2.7 billion and $3.4 billion?

    Mr. Speaker, with regard to part (a), in 2017, the benefits delivery modernization program was in the initial planning or program definition phase. As is typical and expected for programs of this size and magnitude, at the program definition stage there is uncertainty around the program’s overall scope, full requirements, including the technology solutions, and the procurement necessary to support those solutions. The combination of these factors means that the initial $1.7-billion cost was an initial planning assumption based on what was known at the time. In multi-year, large-scale IT transformations, it is very difficult to forecast costs with any degree of precision at program inception. As expected and known, the cost profile would evolve and move upwards as further planning, deeper discovery and learned experience become clearer.

    With regard to part (b), preliminary benchmarking exercises and third party validations were used to support those initial planning efforts, again with the information known at the time. As the program has evolved and more is known about the sheer complexity of unravelling decades of IT systems structure, benefits delivery modernization, BDM, is in a better position to offer more realistic cost forecasts. This case study used a data-driven approach to develop a top-down rough order of magnitude costs for the BDM program based on the experiences of other comparator organizations selected for the study that were undertaking IT transformation projects related to benefits delivery modernization. These organizations are located in Australia, Scotland, the U.K., Ontario and New Zealand. While no comparator organizations were a match for the BDM’s scope and complexity, the report did conclude that based on the experiences of those organizations, cost and time would increase. A secondary analysis was performed to consider these findings and impacts of higher inflation, actual expenditures and the inherent complexity of decades-old IT systems on overall program costs.

    With regard to the government’s approach to a digital services tax (DST): (a) will the DST still go into effect as of January 1, 2024, as planned; (b) how much revenue is the government expected to receive as a result of the retroactivity of the tax back to 2022; (c) how much DST revenue is the government projected to receive in 2024; (d) has the government done a cost-benefit analysis on the DST, and, if so, what are the details, including the findings of the analysis; and (e) what are the details of all communication or representations the government received from representatives of other G20 countries related to the implementation of a DST since the proposal was first unveiled, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) country, (iii) type of communication, (iv) summary of the comments or concerns raised?

    Mr. Speaker, Canada’s priority and preference have always been to take a multilateral approach to the tax challenges of digitalization. Canada continues to strongly support the two-pillar multilateral plan agreed to in 2021 and has been actively working with international partners to bring it into effect. In October 2021, the federal government agreed to pause the implementation of Canada’s digital services tax, which had been announced in 2020, until the end of 2023, in order to give time for negotiations on pillar one to conclude. Meanwhile, at least seven other countries, including Austria, France, India, Italy, Spain, Turkey and the United Kingdom, have continued to apply their own digital services taxes. Canada reaffirms its desire to see pillar one implemented and will continue to work with our international partners to bring the new multilateral system into effect as soon as a critical mass of countries is willing. Until that time, and in order to protect Canada’s national economic interest, the government intends to move ahead with its long-standing plan for legislation to enact a digital services tax in Canada and ensure that businesses pay their fair share of taxes and that Canada is not at a disadvantage relative to other countries. Current legislation in the House, Bill C 59, would allow the government to determine the entry into force date of the new digital services tax.

    With regard to the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (TBS) and information technology (IT): (a) what policies and procedures are in place to ensure independent assessment and oversight, as well as ensuring value-for-money, on IT projects over $2.5 million; (b) does the TBS have a policy regarding the role of research (IT database subscription services), benchmarking and value-assurance services in IT, and, if so, what is that policy; (c) how many contracts are currently in place for research (IT database subscription services), benchmarking and value-assurance services in IT; (d) what is the total value of the contracts in (c); (e) how many suppliers does the TBS use for research (IT database subscription services), benchmarking and value-assurance services; (f) of the suppliers in (e), how many suppliers include retired civil servants from the government; (g) what steps does the TBS take to ensure these service providers aren’t conflicted through partnerships, alliances, downstream implementation conflicts and other contractual arrangements; and (h) did the TBS request research, benchmarking or value-assurance services for the development of the ArriveCan app, and, if so, what are the details of what was done?

    Mr. Speaker, with regard to part (a), as per the policy on the planning and management of investments, deputy heads are responsible for ensuring that investment decisions demonstrate best value and sound stewardship, taking into account the life-cycle costs of assets and services, as well as ensuring that the governance of all projects provides for effective and timely decision-making, communication, control and oversight and is supported by appropriate structures and processes, such as committees, quality assurance and the use of independent reviews.

    As per the directive on the management of projects and programs, the chief information officer of Canada is responsible for establishing a digital investment oversight program, including identifying projects that are subject to oversight by the chief information officer of Canada; conducting oversight activities; requiring the responsible deputy head to commission independent reviews; commissioning independent reviews; and requiring the responsible deputy head to undertake specific course corrections as deemed necessary by the chief information officer of Canada based on evidence gathered in the course of overseeing identified projects.

    With regard to part (b), the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, TBS, does not have a policy regarding the role of research on IT database subscription services, benchmarking and value-assurance services in IT.

    With regard to part (c), TBS has one contract for independent IT project review services for Government of Canada digitally enabled projects and programs, with contract number 24062-22-021, in which two suppliers were qualified: BDO Canada LLP, 2406A-22-021, and MDOS Consulting Inc., 2406B-22-021.

    With regard to part (d), the total value of the contract is $3,616,000, or $1,808,000 for each of the two vendors, on an as- and when-needed basis through the issuance of individual task authorizations against the contract, over the three-year term of the contract, signed November 2021.

    With regard to part (e), TBS uses the two suppliers, BDO Canada LLP and MDOS Consulting, associated with the independent review contract.

    With regard to part (f), of these suppliers, both have used former civil servants retired from the government during the course of our engagement with them.

    With regard to part (g), TBS ensures procurement activities are conducted in accordance with regulations, trade agreements and Treasury Board policies and procedures, such as the directive on the management of procurement and the integrity regime. Furthermore, TBS specifically works with vendors to ensure that there are no real or perceived conflicts of interest that could compromise the integrity of review activities or outputs.

    With regard to part (h), TBS did not request any independent review services for the development of the ArriveCAN application.

    With regard to rescue missions by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard: (a) how many search and rescue missions were required to respond to incidents arising from the recreational cod or groundfish fishery in each of the last five years, broken down by month, year and province or territory; and (b) what are the details of each mission since 2018, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) location, (iii) incident summary?

    Mr. Speaker, with regard to rescue missions by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, please note that the Canadian Coast Guard, CCG, does not track data specific to recreational fishing activities, and as such, any data is at risk of being incomplete or not representative of the question asked. Therefore, the CCG is providing a nil response.

    With regard to Marine Protected Areas in Atlantic Canada and the Canadian Arctic: (a) how many new Marine Protected Areas are planned by 2025 in Atlantic Canada, and what are the details, descriptions, and locations of each area; (b) how many new Marine Protected Areas are planned by 2025 in the Canadian Arctic, and what are the details, descriptions, and locations of each area; (c) for each new area in (a) and (b), what are the (i) latitudinal and longitudinal coordinates, (ii) protection goals and the planned fighting restrictions; and (d) what percentage of Canada’s (i) Atlantic waters, (ii) Arctic waters, are Marine Protected Areas as of now, and what will the percentage be in 2025 and 2030?

    Mr. Speaker, the following response from Fisheries and Oceans Canada, DFO, describes marine protected areas established under the Oceans Act that are under the authority of the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard. This response does not include information on other marine protected areas, such as national marine conservation areas, marine national wildlife areas and migratory bird sanctuaries, that are established and managed by Environment and Climate Change Canada or Parks Canada.

    With regard to part (a), there is one Oceans Act marine protected area, MPA, proposed in Atlantic Canada as a contribution toward the marine conservation target of 25% by 2025: Fundian Channel-Browns Bank.

    The proposed Fundian Channel-Browns Bank area of interest, AOI, is located south of Yarmouth, Nova Scotia, in the Scotian Shelf bioregion. The site’s approximate size is 7,200 square kilometres. The AOI is divided into two geographically separate components. The western section is centered on Georges Basin, and the larger eastern section encompasses the Fundian Channel, also known as the northeast channel, and part of Browns Bank. It encompasses diverse sensitive benthic habitat that provides feeding and nursery areas for a variety of commercial and non-commercial species. The site is representative of a diverse range of habitat types, including basin, bank, deepwater slope and channel habitats. It includes a migratory corridor and is an area of high biodiversity. The site hosts the densest known concentration of large gorgonian corals in Atlantic Canada and significant concentrations of sponges, which provide important habitat for several depleted groundfish species.

    With regard to part (b), there are three proposed MPAs being considered for designation in the Arctic: the Southampton Island AOI, Sarvarjuaq and Qikiqtait.

    The Southampton Island AOI encompasses the nearshore ocean around Southampton Island and Chesterfield Inlet in the Kivalliq region of Nunavut. The site’s approximate size is 93,087 square kilometres, and it is located near the confluence of Hudson Bay and Foxe Basin waters, making it an area of high marine productivity. The area serves as an important migration pathway for marine mammals such as narwhals, beluga whales and bowhead whales, and the marine area supports colonies of nesting seabirds.

    Sarvarjuaq is on the Canadian side of the North Water Polynya and is located in northern Baffin Bay between Canada and Greenland. It is one of the largest reoccurring polynyas in the Arctic, and Inuit-led conservation of this area is being advanced in partnership with the Qikiqtani Inuit Association, QIA. This area is a highly productive ecosystem; its high rates of biodiversity and biological productivity support an abundance of marine life. It is a key feeding area and migration corridor for seabirds, fish and mammals such as narwhals, walruses, beluga and bowhead whales, ringed, bearded and harp seals, and polar bears.

    Qikiqtait is the marine region surrounding an archipelago of over 1,500 islands in southeastern Hudson Bay and is home to the southernmost community in Nunavut’s Qikiqtani region, Sanikiluaq. Inuit-led conservation of this site is being advanced in partnership with the QIA and local boards and organizations.

    QIA’s terrestrial priorities for conservation and protection are being advanced collaboratively with Environment and Climate Change Canada. This area is surrounded by 35 recurrent polynyas that help sustain high populations of invertebrates such as sea urchins, sea cucumbers and bivalves. It is also a refuge, feeding area and migratory corridor for marine mammals such as seals, belugas, polar bears and walruses; fish such as Arctic char; and seabirds such as the Arctic eider duck.

    With regard to part (c)(i), latitudinal and longitudinal coordinates for the proposed MPAs outlined in this response are not available as boundaries have not been finalized. Consultation on site design, including boundary delineation, is ongoing with partners and stakeholders as part of the MPA establishment process.

    With regard to part (c)(ii) on protection goals, in the Atlantic, the overreaching conservation goal for Fundian Channel-Browns Bank is “to conserve and protect the ecological integrity of the area, including its biodiversity, productivity, ecosystem components and special natural features”. In the Arctic, the conservation objectives and priorities for the Southampton Island AOI, Qikiqtait and Sarvarjuaq are in development with partners, communities and stakeholders.

    On planned activity restrictions, in the Atlantic, activity restrictions for the Fundian Channel-Browns Bank AOI are still being developed with partners, communities and stakeholders. In the Arctic, activity restrictions for each of the three proposed MPAs in the area are still being developed with partners, communities and stakeholders and will depend on the tool used to designate the area.

    With regard to part (d), Canada has conserved 14.66%, or 842,823 square kilometres, of its marine and coastal areas to date through MPAs and other effective area-based conservation measures. With regard to part (d)(i), 3.72%, or 214,176, square kilometres, is in Atlantic waters. Of the current percentage total, Oceans Act MPAs protect 6.11%, or 351,517 square kilometres, of Canada's total marine and coastal areas, with 0.34%, or 19,388 square kilometres, of protected area in Atlantic waters. With regard to part d(ii), 9%, or 517,779 square kilometres, is in Arctic waters. Of the current percentage total, Oceans Act MPAs protect 6.11%, or 351,517 square kilometres, of Canada's total marine and coastal areas, with 5.63%, or 323,519 square kilometres, in Arctic waters. The percentage of area designated as Oceans Act MPAs in Atlantic and Arctic waters in 2025 and 2030 will depend on the final boundaries of the proposed MPAs and the point at which they are designated.

    With regard to exhibit 8.2 in the Auditor General’s report entitled “The Benefits Delivery Modernization Programme”: (a) in reference to the June 2022 case study, what were the transformational steps that were postponed; (b) in reference to the November 2022 case study, (i) by how much did costs actually increase since the study was conducted, (ii) are initial cost estimates for software and implementation still well below the average comparator project and the industry average; and (c) in reference to the March 2023 programme review, were there delays to the migration component, and, if so, how long were they?

    Mr. Speaker, with regard to part (a), as a result of the strategic assessment conducted by Canada’s chief information officer, CIO, in June 2022, Employment and Social Development Canada, ESDC, reviewed the remaining approved scope of the benefits delivery modernization program, BDM, and proposed moving several planned BDM deliverables to organizations outside of BDM, such as digital identity services, social insurance register replacement and long-term cloud service procurement. Also, BDM agreed to defer some of its planned deliverables until after old age security, OAS, benefits are transferred through the workforce and workload management systems implementation. The department further assessed the impacts, risks and dependencies associated with the scope changes and developed an integrated plan for formally amending the BDM program’s scope.

    With regard to part (b), BDM is a complex, large-scale, multi-year undertaking, and as expected, costs continue to be refined as scope, timing and outside factors are assessed. In 2017, $1.75 billion was the preliminary planning assumption. In 2020, $2.2 billion was the updated planning estimate. From 2021 to 2023, there was a recognition of increased costs and a need to reset the program.

    The main drivers for the evolution of costs are a greater understanding of the complexity of unraveling 60-year-old systems, experience and lessons learned, increased global security threats and the impact of unanticipated global inflation. Since the November 2022 case study by PricewaterhouseCoopers, PwC, on benchmarking for cost estimation, BDM undertook an internal exercise to further refine estimates based on current plans, which have been revised as the program progresses and moves into implementation. The revised program estimate is based on the latest BDM integrated road map and accounts for known costs from the program definition, foundations phase, OAS implementation, platform maturity, employment insurance, EI, on BDM planning and implementation, Canada pension plan, CPP, on BDM, and the program management and oversight BDM project costs. Cost projections to the end of the program in 2030 have increased based on the above but have not yet been confirmed.

    With regard to part (c), in the fall of 2022, the revised OAS on the BDM project plan was approved, with the migration of 600,000 foreign benefit recipients scheduled for June 2023 and the migration of all 6.9 million OAS recipients scheduled for December 2024. In March 2023, ESDC reviewed cloud security measures to better protect the new cloud platform from security issues. The first OAS release was successfully achieved on June 12, 2023, and the project remains on track for the full migration for the December 2024 date.

    With regard to the Disaster Mitigation and Adaptation Fund (DMAF), since the program officially launched in 2018: (a) how many applications for funding have been received from the City of Windsor, Ontario; (b) of the applications in (a), how many have been approved; (c) what is the total amount of funding distributed in Windsor, Ontario, through the fund since its official launch; (d) does the government have a plan in place to assist with increased inflationary costs to the currently approved projects; and (e) does the government plan to increase the total federal DMAF fund due to the ever-increasing costs associated with DMAF projects?

    Mr. Speaker, the disaster mitigation and adaptation fund program, DMAF, was officially launched in 2018.

    With respect to part (a), since 2018, the DMAF has received a total of four applications from the City of Windsor, Ontario.

    With respect to part (b), among the four applications received, two projects were approved.

    With respect to part (c), the total federal contribution committed for the projects is $64,831,491 from the DMAF.

    With respect to part (d), applicants under direct delivery programs are encouraged to build appropriate contingencies into their budget estimates. Contingencies provide a buffer for early cost estimates but can also serve as a cushion toward unexpected increases.

    With respect to part (e), the maximum federal contribution committed for a specific project is based on the cost estimates provided by the recipient at the application stage. As stipulated in the applicant guide, the approval in principle letter and the contribution agreements, it is the recipient’s responsibility to manage the approved funding amount for a given project.

    With regard to the Pacific Salmon Strategy Initiative: (a) how much of the $647 million pledged for the initiative has been spent since the announcement in budget 2021; (b) what are the objectives and deliverables of the fund; (c) how are the objectives and deliverables measured; and (d) what are the details of each project funded through the initiative, including, for each, the (i) date of the announcement, (ii) project description, (iii) project location, (iv) funding recipient, (v) projected total project cost, (vi) amount of federal contribution towards the total project cost, (vii) expected completion date of the project?

    Mr. Speaker, with regard to part (a), the total program expenditures for the Pacific salmon strategy initiative, PSSI, across year one, 2021-22, and year two, 2022-23, to date is $58.8 million, with $37.3 million for operational expenses, $9.4 million for capital and $12.1 million for grants and contributions. In 2023-24 to date, mid-year, a total of $44.7 million has been spent, of which $21.6 million is for vote 10.

    With regard to part (b), the PSSI seeks to address the steep declines in Pacific salmon through a series of immediate and long-term measures to conserve and rebuild Pacific salmon and their ecosystems. The goal is that over the long term, Pacific salmon and their ecosystem are conserved and restored through targeted action in collaboration with partners.

    With regard to part (c), the PSSI’s results are being measured in accordance with the Government of Canada’s planning and reporting requirements and reported on annually through the departmental results report of Fisheries and Oceans Canada. The department is also tracking implementation through internal project management and governance structures. Through PSSI’s external engagement, first nations, partners and stakeholders have expressed strong support for DFO to share outcomes publicly and enhance transparency. In response to this feedback, the department has committed to publishing year in reviews, which will share progress and key results achieved through the PSSI on an annual basis. The first year in review is expected to be published later this fall.

    With regard to part (d)(i), the PSSI was launched on June 8, 2021. Since 2021, a number of key activities have been implemented, with external funding provided through programs including but not limited to the renewed B.C. salmon restoration and innovation fund, the Pacific salmon commercial licence retirement program and over 30 indigenous harvest transformation projects.

    With regard to part (d)(ii), the PSSI is a five-year initiative aimed at stemming historic declines in Pacific salmon by conserving and restoring Pacific salmon and their ecosystems. Through collaboration with first nations, the Province of British Columbia, the Yukon territory, harvesters and key salmon stakeholders, the PSSI aims to improve understanding of salmon stocks and ecosystems, protect and conserve salmon habitats and ensure the sustainability of Canada’s Pacific salmon populations.

    With regard to (d)(iii), PSSI projects and activities take place across British Columbia and the Yukon territory.

    With regard to part (d)(iv), through PSSI investments, the department has provided funding to a broad range of recipients, including first nations in British Columbia and the Yukon territory, indigenous organizations, environmental groups, harvesters and other key salmon stakeholders.

    With regard to parts (d)(v) and (vi), the total cash profile for the PSSI is $741.3 million over five years. Budget 2021 announced $647.1 million over five years, as well as $98.9 million in amortization funds for the PSSI. The resulting $746 million included $4.7 million in revenues that have been lost as a result of reduced revenues from fishing licences, hence $741.3 million. The current projected total cost for the PSSI is $741.3 million over five years.

    (vii) PSSI is funded until March 31, 2026.

    With regard to the Canada Emergency Business Account (CEBA): (a) as of October 25, 2023, in total, how many businesses that received CEBA funding have repaid their loan in full; and (b) what is the total dollar amount owing on the principal balance of outstanding loans?

    Mr. Speaker, with regard to part (a), as of August 31, 2023, a total of 176,353 businesses that received CEBA funding have repaid their loan in full.

    The numbers are not available as of October 25, 2023. There is a reporting lag as businesses repay their financial institutions and the financial institutions remit to us.

    With regard to part (b), $38.669 million is the total dollar amount owing on the principal balance of outstanding loans.

    With regard to the government’s Rapid Response Mechanism and the reaction to the Spamouflage campaign: (a) which members of Parliament were targeted; (b) which other elected officials, including at a provincial, territorial, or local level were targeted; (c) which unelected officials or individuals were targeted; (d) on what date did the government first become aware of the program; and (e) for each individual in (a) through (c), on what date did the government (i) become aware that that individual was targeted, (ii) notify that individual that they were being targeted?

    Mr. Speaker, with regard to part (a), 47 members of Parliament were targeted across the political spectrum and all geographic regions of Canada. All those targeted parliamentarians have been notified. Parliamentarians affected by this “spamouflage” campaign have been offered a briefing by rapid response mechanism Canada, RRM, on the findings of the report. It has also been made clear to them that nothing observed in this activity represents a threat to their safety or that of their family.

    With regard to part (b), Global Affairs Canada is currently aware of one other provincial, territorial or local-level official having been targeted. The individual has also been notified and their identity will be kept confidential for privacy reasons. It is conceivable that additional elected officials at other levels of government may have also been targeted.

    With regard to part (c), RRM Canada has a mandate to monitor and counter foreign information operations that represent a direct threat to our democracy and democratic institutions. However, RRM Canada does not have the mandate, jurisdiction or capacity to monitor all activity online affecting individuals and society at large. RRM Canada is continuing to monitor the digital environment for “spamouflage” targeting democratic institutions.

    With regard to parts (d) and (e), RRM Canada first became aware of some of this activity on September 5, 2023, and launched a broader investigation. RRM Canada became aware of the full extent of the campaign by September 20, 2023. RRM Canada then conducted due diligence through consultations with other government departments; a partner of the Five Eyes, the intelligence alliance comprising Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States; and external experts such as the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, before finalizing conclusions and beginning the notification of targeted individuals on October 23, 2023.

    With regard to Sustainable Development Technology Canada (SDTC): (a) is the independent impartial report completed by Raymond Chabot Grant Thornton regarding the allegations of mismanagement of SDTC and provided to the minister available to the public; (b) if the report in (a) is published, where is it published on a government of Canada website; (c) if the report in (a) is not published, when and where will it be published on a government of Canada website; (d) when and where will the government publish its action plan to correct any reported deficiencies; and (e) what further additional oversight will be implemented to ensure that SDTC is delivering on expected outcomes and provides value added investment of public funds?

    Mr. Speaker, with regard to parts (a), (b), (c) and (d), the report and action plan have been made available to interested parties upon request through the access to information request process. Those seeking a copy can make a request by email to the Department of Innovation, Science and Economic Development’s access to information and privacy team at ic.atip-aiprpa.ic@ised-isde.gc.ca.

    With regard to part (e), the findings of the report are being actioned as follows. Sustainable Development Technology Canada, SDTC, received a detailed management response and action plan, MRAP, to address the issues identified in the report. The MRAP is to be implemented no later than December 31, 2023. Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, ISED, temporarily suspended the funding for new projects until the corrective measures are in place. The Auditor General will be conducting an audit of sustainable development technologies in Canada, which will provide the opportunity for a more comprehensive review of SDTC. With SDTC consent, ISED is conducting an independent review via a third party law firm that will report its findings to the minister.

    Any future potential additional measures will be informed by due process and due diligence.

    With regard to Public Safety Canada’s Firearms Buyback Program for recently prohibited firearms: (a) how much was spent to develop the information technology required to administer the program; and (b) what are the details of all contracts signed in relation to the program, including, for each, (i) the date, (ii) the vendor, (iii) the amount, (iv) a description of the goods or services, (v) the duration, (vi) whether the contract was awarded through a competitive bid or sole-source process?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the Dimensions program: (a) what is the size of the current team that leads the program; (b) what are the details of the team that leads the program, including (i) the name of all the positions of the current team, (ii) whether any positions have been cut since its inception, (iii) the dates for any positions that were cut; (c) what are the details of the program’s financing, including (i) the cost to administer the program annually, (ii) whether there have been any financial cuts to the program since its inception, (iii) the dates of any cuts, if any; (d) what are all of the accomplishments of the program since its inception; (e) what third-party international organizations have recognized the program since its inception; and (f) what are the details of any external reviews of the program, including (i) the start date of the review, (ii) the end date of the review, (iii) who led the review, (iv) the structure of the review, (v) who specifically was consulted in the review, including, but not limited to, the Chief Science Advisor, granting councils, research networks, research organizations, and all researchers or experts?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to military housing and the Canadian Forces Housing Agency, in total and broken down by location: (a) what is the total number of rental housing units of military housing; (b) how many units are currently (i) occupied, (ii) unoccupied and available for rent, (iii) unoccupied and unavailable for rent; (c) outside of routine maintenance, how many units are currently in need of repairs, renovations or upgrades; (d) what are the details of the actions required in (c), including, for each, the description of what is needed and the projected completion date; (e) how many units are currently considered to be in disrepair; and (f) how many of the units in disrepair are currently (i) occupied, (ii) available for rent, (iii) unoccupied and unavailable for rent?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the Canada Dental Benefit, broken down by federal electoral district since the program’s inception: (a) what is the total number of applications (i) received, (ii) approved; (b) what is the total dollar value of payments delivered to eligible applicants; and (c) how many children, in total, have been helped by the program?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the measures in Bill C-30, An Act to amend the Income Tax Act (temporary enhancement to the Goods and Services Tax/Harmonized Sales Tax credit), concerning GST credits, broken down by federal electoral district: (a) what is the total number of eligible Canadians who saw their GST credits double; and (b) what is the total dollar value of additional GST payments delivered to payees in (a)?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to Canada’s participation in the World Health Organization's (WHO) proposed international treaty on pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response: (a) what is the government’s formal position with regard to a proposed legally binding international treaty, and why; (b) what are the details of all documents the government has provided to the WHO or the World Health Assembly (WHA) related to the treaty or the International Health Regulations since July 2022, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) sender, (iii) recipient, (iv) title, (v) subject matter, (vi) summary of contents, (vii) file number; (c) what are the details of Canada’s submission or contribution to the 76th WHA meeting with regard to strengthening WHO preparedness for and response to health emergencies; (d) which elected and unelected officials led Canada’s delegation at the 2023 WHA meeting, including the number of people in the delegations and their titles and positions; (e) what are the details of Canada’s contributions to the WHO’s Executive Board since May 2022, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) sender, (iii) recipient, (iv) title, (v) subject matter, (vi) summary of contents, (vii) file number; (f) what meetings, including the Global Affairs Canada call on July 11, 2022, have been and will be scheduled for public consultation with Canadians; (g) for each public consultation meeting in (f), what are the details of the meetings, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) names and titles of the attendees, (iii) purpose of the meeting, (iv) agenda items, (v) summary of what occurred at the meeting, including anything that was agreed to; (h) does the government have any plans to undertake a formal and public review of Canada’s whole-of-government pandemic response to inform future national pandemic planning, and, if so, what are the details; (i) what input fed into and/or informed the government’s rationale for recommending that the WHO include “other global health threats”, including climate change impacts in the scope of a pandemic instrument; and (j) what criteria did the government envision the WHO would use to determine when climate change impacts would reach a pandemic threshold?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to Canada's participation in the First Movers Coalition (FMC): (a) what will be the specific obligations and actions undertaken to fulfill its commitments as a partner of the FMC; (b) what are the projected annual expenditures or costs to the government as a result of the government's participation in the (i) current fiscal year, (ii) next fiscal year; (c) what are the details of any policy measures that have been or will be implemented as part of the FMC; (d) what private sector consultation or engagement has the government undertaken thus far, and what are the results of that consultation; (e) has the government signed any contracts or agreements related to its FMC membership or FMC-related commitments, and, if so, what are the details of any such contracts or agreements, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) summary of terms, (iii) vendor, if applicable, (iv) financial value, if applicable, (v) titles of signatories to the agreement or contract; and (f) what FMC meetings have taken place or are currently planned, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) list of invitees, (iii) meeting purpose, (iv) location, (v) agenda?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to Canadian Armed Forces Reconstitution Directive released in October 2022: what are the details of all briefing notes, placemats, or analysis reports the government has in relation to the directive, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) type of document, (iii) title, (iv) sender, (v) recipient, (vi) file number?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to bi-annual compliance reporting required by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) since April 2015, for each Designated Learning Institution (DLI) in Canada, excluding those located in Quebec: (a) what is the total number of international students reported, broken down by DLI, bi-annual reporting period, and student status (i.e. academic break, academic suspension, authorized leave, deferred enrolment, full-time studies, no longer registered/enrolled, no show, not started, part-time studies, program/degree completed, unknown/no record); (b) has IRCC identified any non-genuine or non-compliant international students as a result of the information collected through DLI’s bi-annual compliance reporting; and (c) if the answer to (b) is affirmative, what is the total number of instances of non-genuine or non-compliant international students identified, broken down by DLI and bi-annual reporting period?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to funding provided by the government to organizations for the purpose of advocacy, since 2019, and broken down by department, agency, or other government entity: (a) what was the total amount of funding on advocacy, broken down by year; (b) what are the details of all government programs that fund advocacy or similar activities, such as lobbying, including, for each, the (i) name of the program, (ii) purpose, (iii) annual budget; (c) what are the details of all funding provided through the programs in (b), including, for each, the (i) recipient, (ii) amount, (iii) date, (iv) purpose of the funding; and (d) what are the details of all funding for advocacy or similar types of activities that were not included in the response to (c), including, for each, the (i) recipient, (ii) amount, (iii) date, (iv) purpose of the funding, (v) program under which funding was provided?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the ban on the use of TikTok on government devices: (a) what evidence was used as the basis for the ban; (b) who approved the ban; (c) how many security breaches involving TikTok is the government aware of, and what are the details of each breach, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) summary; and (d) what is the timeline for when the ban will either expire or be up for renewal?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the travel by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and the accompanying delegation to the China Council for International Cooperation on Environment and Development in late August 2023: (a) what are the details of the trip, including the (i) names and titles of all attendees, (ii) costs associated with the trip, in total, and broken down by each individual that incurred expenses and the type of expense; and (b) what are the details of each meeting attended by the minister or any member of the Canadian delegation, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) location, (iii) names and titles of attendees, (iv) purpose of the meeting?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the Canadian Forces Housing Agency (CFHA): (a) how many people have applied for, but have not yet been placed into, military housing, as of October 24, 2023; (b) within the current 2023-24 fiscal year, how many applicants to the CFHA waited (i) between one and 30 days, (ii) between 31 and 60 days, (iii) between 61 and 90 days, (iv) more than 90 days, between the date of application and the date of placement into military housing; and (c) during the (i) 2020-21, (ii) 2021-22, (iii) 2022-23, fiscal years, what was the greatest number of applicants on the waiting list on any one specific date?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to violent crimes and the firearms ban that prohibited certain firearms as of May 1, 2020: (a) in the last fiscal year, how many violent crimes, defined by Statistics Canada as “Crimes against the person involve the use or threatened use of violence against a person, including homicide, attempted murder, assault, sexual assault and robbery”, involving firearms were committed with firearms that were included in the 2020 ban; (b) of the firearms in (a), (i) how many of the guns' origins could be traced via a serial number, (ii) how many guns' origins were traced back to the United States; and (c) how many violent crimes committed with firearms in the last fiscal year were committed by individuals without proper firearms licensing?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to Parks Canada expenditures: (a) how much money did Parks Canada spend on (i) gasoline, (ii) diesel fuel, in the last fiscal year; (b) what portion of the total in (a), in dollar amounts, was spent on (i) federal carbon taxes, (ii) provincial carbon taxes; (c) how much money did Parks Canada spend on building heating in the last fiscal year; (d) what portion of the total in (c), in dollar amounts, was spent on (i) federal carbon taxes, (ii) provincial carbon taxes; and (e) what are Parks Canada’s projections on how much more money the clean fuel regulations will add to their total expenditures on (i) gasoline, (ii) diesel fuel, (iii) building heating?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the Mortgage Loan Insurance Select program offered by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, since 2016: (a) what are the details of all projects completed as a result of the program, including, for each, the (i) location, (ii) number of units, (iii) value of the project, (iv) date of application, (v) date of approval; and (b) what was the number of units completed each year as a result of the program, including the current year to date?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to expenditures by the government on cannabis intended for veterans: (a) what were the total expenditures on cannabis intended for veterans, broken down by year for the past five years; and (b) what are the details of all contracts that the government has for cannabis intended for veterans since 2018, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) vendor, (iii) value, (iv) amount of cannabis provided?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the design selection of the National Monument to Canada’s Mission in Afghanistan: (a) what surveys did the government conduct to solicit feedback on the monument’s design that were conducted (i) online, (ii) in-person, (iii) by mail; (b) on what date was each survey in (a) conducted; (c) how many respondents to surveys in (a) were (i) veterans of Canada’s mission in Afghanistan, (ii) Canadian veterans, (iii) active service members in the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF), (iv) family members of CAF members or veterans, (v) family members of veterans who served in Canada’s mission in Afghanistan, (vi) members of the general public; (d) how was each survey in (a) communicated with potential respondents, especially with veterans of Canada’s Mission in Afghanistan, their families, and current CAF members; (e) what were the costs associated with each survey in (a), broken down by survey; and (f) what was the reason given by the government as to why survey results would be used to select the monument over the advice of the commemorative advisory committee?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to sexual misconduct complaints within the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) for calendar years 2022 and 2023: (a) what is the current total number of complaints received by the (i) chain of command, (ii) Military Police, (iii) Military Police Complaints Commission; (b) of the complaints received in (a), what specific administrative actions were taken, including the (i) initial counselling, (ii) recorded warning, (iii) counselling and probation, (iv) release from the CAF; (c) how many complaints are before a military tribunal; (d) broken down by province or territory, what is the total number of cases that have been transferred to (i) the RCMP, (ii) provincial police forces, (iii) municipal police forces; (e) what is the total number of cases that have been declined or sent back to the military; and (f) of the cases in (d) and (e), what is the average number of days for the relevant jurisdiction to accept or reject the case?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the Canada Infrastructure Bank (CIB): (a) since 2017, what are the total expenditures by the CIB on projects that were not completed, indefinitely delayed or otherwise abandoned, including projects announced that never reached the Financial Close stage; (b) what is the breakdown of the expenditures in (a) by (i) project name and project partners, (ii) category and type of expenditure; (c) to date, how many (i) unsolicited project proposals has the CIB received, (ii) solicited proposals has the CIB proactively pursued; and (d) of the projects announced to date, how many of those were the result of (i) the CIB seeking those investments out, (ii) unsolicited proposals in which partners sought out CIB investment in their project?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to Canada’s census of agriculture and government information about farmland in Canada: (a) how many farm properties exist, broken down by federal electoral district; (b) how many different entities own agricultural land, broken down by federal electoral district; (c) how many different farm businesses are located in each federal electoral district; (d) what is the total number of acres of farmland in each federal electoral district; and (e) what is the average size of farms, in acres, in each federal electoral district?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the Federal Skilled Worker Program, in the past five years: (a) how many and what percentage of applications exceeded the six months service standard for processing; and (b) of the applications in (a), how many and what percentage took (i) six months to nine months, (ii) nine months to one year, (iii) one year to 18 months, (iv) 18 months to five years, (v) more than five years, to be processed?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the Auditor General’s report entitled “Modernizing Information Technology Systems”, in section 7.44: (a) what are details of the 22 high-risk projects monitored by the Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS), including, for each, the (i) name of the department or agency overseeing the project, (ii) project name, (iii) description, (iv) action taken by the government to address the concerns raised in the report; and (b) what are the total expenditures to date, and the project future expenditures of each of the 22-high risk projects monitored by the TBS?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the Auditor General’s report entitled “Modernizing Information Technology Systems”, in section 7.50: (a) which departments or agencies have requested funding for “modernization needs” and how much has each one requested; and (b) which departments or agencies were represented by the 83% of Chief Technology Officers that expressed they were not satisfied with the available mechanisms for funding modernization projects?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the Aboriginal Head Start in Urban and Northern Communities program, broken down by fiscal year and province or territory, since November 2015: (a) what is the annual budget of this program; (b) what are the details of all activities funded by this program, including the (i) community or First Nation that received funding, (ii) amount of funding received, (iii) number of children expected to benefit; (c) how many proposals for funding were denied funding; and (d) what is the total amount of lapsed spending by this program?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the Nutrition North program, broken down by province or territory and fiscal year since 2015-16: (a) what is the total amount of funding directed towards culturally appropriate retail and community-based nutrition education activities; (b) how many initiatives received funding for the purpose of (i) nutrition workshops, (ii) healthy cooking classes, (iii) in-store sampling of healthy food, (iv) knowledge and skill building related to traditional or country food harvesting and preparation, (v) gardening, (vi) training of community workers, (vii) the development of local nutrition education materials; and (c) what are the details of all initiatives in (b), including the (i) name of the community, organization, or company that received funding, (ii) date the funding was received, (iii) amount of funding?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the Canada Emergency Response Benefit and the Canada Recovery Benefit: (a) how much does the government estimate is owed in repayments; (b) how many individuals owe repayments; (c) how many individuals in (b) reported an income below the low-income cut off on their 2022 income tax return; (d) what is the lowest amount owed; (e) what is the highest amount owed; (f) what is the average amount owed; (g) of the individuals owing money, how many does the government estimate were victims of fraud; (h) of the total estimate amount owed, how much does the government expect to (i) successfully recover, (ii) recover from those whose income is below the low-income cut-off; and (i) how much does the government intend to spend on staff time and resources to recover these debts, broken down by department, agency or other government entity?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) and the Canada Recovery Benefit (CRB): (a) broken down by province or territory, what is the total number of individuals who have had their government benefits or credits applied to outstanding CERB or CRB debt; (b) of the individuals in (a), what is the total number who have had tax refunds or benefit payments offset to recover debt, broken down by costs recovered from (i) individual tax returns, (ii) the Canada Child benefit, (iii) provincial or territorial child benefits, (iv) GST or HST credits, (v) Canada Disability Benefits, (vi) Climate Action incentive?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the government’s response to the situation in Sudan: (a) how many people have been evacuated from Sudan who are (i) Canadian citizens, (ii) Canadian permanent residents, (iii) family members of Canadian citizens or permanent residents, since April 1, 2023; (b) what special immigration measures has the government implemented for people leaving Sudan; (c) what additional special immigration measures is the government examining or considering for people leaving Sudan; (d) is the government investigating allegations against any Canadian firms relating to their relationships with Sudanese military or paramilitary groups, and, if so, which firms are under investigation; (e) what is the government’s position regarding (i) the presence of the Wagner Group in Sudan, (ii) calls for the listing of the Wagner Group as a terrorist entity?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to members of the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) posted in Europe: are members of the CAF still being asked to pay for their own meals upfront and then seek reimbursements, and, if so, how many are currently required to do this, in total, and broken down by rank and location of service?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to Canadian citizens detained or incarcerated abroad, in total, and broken down by country of detention or incarceration: (a) how many citizens are detained or incarcerated; (b) how many citizens are detained in circumstances that violate their human rights; (c) how many citizens are detained for offenses that would not be considered offenses if committed in Canada; and (d) how many Canadian detainees is the government seeking to have released?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the Northern Residents Tax Deduction: (a) what is the total number of claimants and the total amount of residency deduction claimed between 2018 and 2022, broken down by province; and (b) what is the total number of claimants and the total amount of residency deduction claimed by residents of Haida Gwaii between 2018 and 2022?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to federally owned lands in British Columbia: (a) what federally owned lands fall within the municipal boundaries of the (i) City of Terrace, (ii) the District of Kitimat, (iii) Town of Smithers, (iv) City of Prince Rupert; and (b) for each parcel in (a), what is the (i) size in hectares, (ii) current use?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to Health Canada’s authorization of the Comirnaty Omicron XBB.1.5 and Spikevax XBB.1.5 vaccines: (a) is there any clinical data demonstrating efficacy of these vaccines, and, if so, what data; (b) is there any clinical data demonstrating safety of these vaccines, and, if so, what data; (c) is there any data suggesting that previously authorized messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) vaccines are outdated with respect to currently circulating variants of the SARS-CoV-2 virus; (d) is there any concern that currently authorized mRNA vaccines will help select for more successful variants of the SARS-CoV-2 virus; (e) is there any data suggesting that disease-induced immunity is stronger than vaccine-induced immunity from authorized mRNA vaccines for COVID-19; (f) do currently authorized mRNA vaccines prevent COVID-19 infection; (g) do currently authorized mRNA vaccines prevent COVID-19 transmission; and (h) what positive health impact do currently authorized mRNA vaccines have on recipients?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the government’s policies governing information technology (IT) projects, delivery, and contracting: (a) what policies and procedures are in place to ensure independent assessment and oversight, as well as ensuring value-for-money, on IT projects over $2.5 million; (b) what contract vehicles are in place for departments and agencies to secure the resources needed to perform the procedures in (a); (c) what are the details of each contract related to (b), including, for each, the (i) date the contract came into force, (ii) vendor, (iii) amount, (iv) description of goods or services provided; and (d) what were the total expenditures on federal IT (i) infrastructure, (ii) software, (iii) services, (iv) consultants, in each of the last three years, in total and broken down by department or agency?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the government’s approach to information technology (IT): (a) what were the total expenditures on (i) research or IT database subscription services, (ii) benchmarking, (iii) value-assurance services for IT, in total, and broken down by department or agency and by each client department of Shared Services Canada; (b) which companies or stakeholders were consulted when Public Services and Procurement Canada made the decision to eliminate the National Master Standing Offers for Research (IT database subscription services) and Benchmarking for IT services that was previously in place for research and benchmarking services; (c) what are the details of the consultations in (b), including, for each, (i) the date, (ii) who was consulted, (iii) the feedback received; (d) what are the details of any outside consultants or service providers that have been involved in the development of a new contracting vehicle for these services, and what are the details of each, including the (i) name of the individual or firm, (ii) contract value, (iii) date of the contract, (iv) description of the goods or services provided; (e) how many government employees or full-time equivalents worked on the redesign and consultations; (f) what are the (i) travel, (ii) hospitality, costs associated with the redesign and consultations incurred to date, in total, and broken down by year and type of expense; (g) how many suppliers does the government use for research (IT database subscription services), benchmarking and value-assurance services relating to IT, and who are the suppliers; (h) how many of the suppliers in (g) include retired civil servants from the government; (i) what steps does the government take to ensure these service providers aren’t conflicted through partnerships, alliances, downstream implementation conflicts and other contractual arrangements; (j) how many and which departments and agencies use research (IT database subscription services), benchmarking and value-assurance services; and (k) for each department or agency in (j), what service providers are contracted to provide these services?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to government funding provided to Greenfield Construction or its subsidiaries: what are the details of all funding, since November 4, 2015, broken down by department or agency, including, for each, (i) the date, (ii) the amount, (iii) the type of funding (i.e. repayable loan, grant, contract), (iv) the purpose of funding or the project description, (v) the repayment terms, if applicable, (vi) whether there has been a change order associated with the funding, and, if so, what are the details, including the revised amount of the change order?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to government funding provided for projects at or in the vicinity of North Head Harbour on Grand Manan Island, New Brunswick: what are the details of all funding, since November 4, 2015, broken down by department or agency, including, for each, (i) the date, (ii) the amount, (iii) the type of funding (i.e. repayable loan, grant, contract), (iv) the purpose of funding or the project description, (v) the repayment terms, if applicable, (vi) whether there has been a change order associated with the funding, and, if so, what are the details, including the revised amount of the change order?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to VIA Rail Canada: what are the details of all meetings involving the current President and CEO and one or more government officials not employed by VIA Rail Canada, including elected and non-elected officials of all federal, provincial, and municipal governments, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) location, including if the meeting was in person or virtual, (iii) names and titles of the attendees, (iv) purpose of the meeting?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to Global Affairs Canada and foreign aid funding: (a) what are the details of how much funding was received by (i) the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs funding, (ii) the United Nations Development Programme, (iii) the World Health Organization, (iv) the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, (v) the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women, (vi) the World Food Programme, (vii) any other organization that received over $1 million in foreign aid funding in the last fiscal year; (b) for each organization in (a), on what date were they last audited to ensure that their funding was being spent appropriately; and (c) what were the findings of each audit in (b)?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to efforts by the government to combat illegal fishing by vessels off the British Columbia coast, broken down by year since 2019: (a) how many boats were intercepted for allegedly engaging in illegal fishing; and (b) what are the details of each incident where a vessel was intercepted, including, for each, the (i) name, (ii) country of origin, (iii) location where the vessel was intercepted, (iv) type of alleged illegal fishing, (v) resulting action (i.e. fine, seizure, criminal charges, etc.), (vi) quantity of illegal fish caught, broken down by species?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to government expenditures on aircraft rentals or charters since December 1, 2020, broken down by department, agency, Crown corporation and other government entity: (a) what is the total amount spent on the rental of aircraft; and (b) what are the details of each expenditure, including the (i) amount, (ii) vendor, (iii) dates of rental, (iv) type of aircraft, (v) purpose of the trip, (vi) origin and the destination of flights, (vii) titles of passengers, including which passengers were on which segments of each trip?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to Indigenous Services Canada’s funding of the seasonal ferry Aazhaawe that travels between Virginia Beach, Ontario, to the Chippewas of Georgina Island First Nation on Lake Simcoe: (a) how much funding has been provided related to the ferry by Indigenous Services Canada, broken down by year for each of the last five years; and (b) what costs are covered by this funding, including whether (i) fuel costs, (ii) maintenance and repair costs, (iii) operations costs, (iv) other costs, broken down by type, are covered?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans: (a) what was the average hourly catch rate, per net, of northern cod, broken down by area for fishing areas 2J, 3K and 3L, in 1988, 2015, 2017, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2023, for the commercial and stewardship fisheries; (b) what was the average catch rate, per net, of northern cod, broken down by area for fishing areas 2J, 3K, and 3L, in 1994, 2005, 2010, 2015, 2017, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2023, in the sentinel fishery program; and (c) what is the annual cost to carry out the sentinel cod fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador in 1994, 2005, 2015, 2020 and 2022?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the Auditor General’s report entitled “The Benefits Delivery Modernization Programme”: (a) what were the total expenditures associated with the June 2022 review by the Treasury Board Secretariat; (b) what is the breakdown of (a) by line item and type of expense; (c) what were the total expenditures associated with the March 2021 schedule review; (d) what is the breakdown of (c) by line item and type of expense; and (e) what were the costs associated with the delays associated with the March 2021 schedule review?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the export of Canada’s plastic waste under the Basel Convention: (a) what measures are in place to ensure that plastic waste exported without a permit is clean, sorted, and intended for recycling; (b) how many times since January 1, 2021, has the government imposed punitive measures on companies for failing to comply with these requirements; (c) does the government monitor the final country of destination for plastic waste exported to the United States, and, if so, what specific processes are in place to accomplish this; (d) does the government track the exported plastic waste that is (i) covered under export permits, (ii) exempted from the permit process, to determine if this waste is recycled or disposed of safely, and, if so, what specific processes are in place to accomplish this; (e) since November 4, 2015, has the government conducted research to evaluate the potential impact that banning the export of plastic waste would have on stimulating investments in a national circular economy, and, if so, what are the details of this research, including (i) who conducted it, (ii) its methodology, (iii) its findings; and (f) what are the details of each punitive measure in (b), including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) name of the company, (iii) type of punitive measure, including the amount fined, (iv) incident summary?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the carbon footprint resulting from the Minister of Environment and Climate Change’s air travel: (a) what are the details of all trips involving air travel taken by the minister since January 1, 2019, including, for each, the (i) dates, (ii) origin and the destination, (iii) purpose of the trip, (iv) number of travellers accompanying the minister, (v) estimated carbon footprint resulting from the minister’s travel, (vi) estimated carbon footprint resulting from the delegation’s travel, (vii) total expenditures related to the trip, broken down by each traveller and type of expense; and (b) for each trip in (a), were virtual or other options that did not involve air travel considered, and, if so, why were the other options not chosen?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to federal spending on settlement services and newcomer housing in the electoral district of Winnipeg Centre, broken down by fiscal year since November 2019: (a) what is the amount of federal funding committed for the purpose of (i) settlement services, (ii) newcomer housing; (b) what are the details of all initiatives that received funding, including the (i) name of the organization that received funding, (ii) date the funding was received, (iii) amount of funding; and (c) what is the total amount of lapsed spending?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the government’s response to homelessness and tent cities: (a) what are the details of all programs currently in place to deal with homelessness and tent cities; (b) for each program in (a), how much funding is allocated in (i) the current fiscal year, (ii) each of the next five fiscal years; (c) which of the programs in (a) involve funding for addiction treatment and recovery; (d) how is the funding for each program tracked, monitored and audited; and (e) does the government have any quantifiable goals for reducing the number of homeless Canadians, and, if so, what are they, nationally and broken down by region?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to expenditures on social media influencers, including any contracts which would use social media influencers as part of a public relations campaign, since January 1, 2021: (a) what are the details of all such expenditures, including the (i) vendor, (ii) amount, (iii) campaign description, (iv) date of the contract, (v) name or handle of the influencer; and (b) for each campaign that paid an influencer, was there a requirement to make public, as part of a disclaimer, the fact that the influencer was being paid by the government, and, if not, why not?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the Great Lakes Fishery Commission’s (GLFC) machinery of government interface with the government, its financing and its obligations to Canada under the Convention on Great Lakes Fisheries Between the United States of America and Canada (1954): (a) from what statute(s) or Act(s) of Parliament does the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard derive the legislative authority to function as the lead minister; (b) does the existing legislative authority of the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard negate, alter or eliminate the GLFC Privileges and Immunities Order (originally made under section 3 of the Privileges and Immunities (International Organizations) Act and subsumed into section 16 of the Foreign Missions and International Organizations Act); (c) what are the primary functions and operational limitations of the ministers responsible for the interface functions pursuant to all relevant statutes and regulations; (d) does the Great Lakes Convention Act, or any other statutes, regulations or Acts of Parliament, provide any ministers with the authority to direct the commission or the commission’s routine activities and programming beyond Parliament’s prerogative to approve annual budget allocations to the Commission; (e) what are the implications of paragraph 10(2)(b) of the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Act for the interaction of Canada with the commission; (f) has Canada’s annual financial allocation to the commission been “fenced” as described by the Department of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard (DFO) officials during their testimony on June 8, 2023, to the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans (FOPO); (g) what is the precise nature, structure and limitations of the “fencing” structure described by DFO officials during testimony on June 8, 2023, to the FOPO; (h) what sources, officials, or departments would possess the authority to alter, reverse or eliminate the financial “fencing” described by DFO officials during their testimony on June 8, 2023, to FOPO; (i) who or what body is the Canadian Contracting Party as described under Article II; (j) what is the role of Parliament with regard to supervision, directing and oversight of the activities and programming of the commission; (k) if the Contracting Party is not Parliament, what is the role of Parliament with regard to the supervision, direction and oversight of the Contracting Party; (l) does the existing legislative framework provide the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard with the authority to administer the Great Lakes Fishery Convention Act or does the legislative framework provide specific ministerial authority, and, if so, what is the precise nature and limit of that authority; (m) does the Convention on Great Lakes Fisheries Between the United States of America and Canada (1954) stipulate that commissioners are representatives of the Contracting Parties, and, if so, does this stipulation provide commissioners with the authority to represent Canada at Commission meeting and events; and (n) does the Convention on Great Lakes Fisheries Between the United States of America and Canada (1954) provide for a specific authority for any minister(s) to directly represent Canada at commission meetings and events?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the housing crisis and affordable housing in Canada: (a) will the government commit to the recommendations of the Canadian Real Estate Association to (i) create a permanent national housing roundtable to bring together housing stakeholders in order to address the housing crisis through an inclusive, holistic approach that emphasizes collaboration, innovation and policy coordination, (ii) leverage federal infrastructure funding with municipal, provincial and territorial partners requiring the creation of more housing supply, (iii) develop a housing workforce immigration strategy to attract tradespeople from abroad while streamlining the immigration process for qualified professionals willing to work in the construction industry; and (b) how much funding for affordable housing has been distributed to the City of Windsor, Ontario, through federal government programs over the last five years, from January 1, 2018, through present, including (i) what federal funding programs were applied for, (ii) the amount of funding distributed, (iii) the list of specific projects funded, (iv) whether the funding was in the form of grants or loans?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to Canada Mortgage Housing Corporation (CMHC) funding for Indigenous housing in Edmonton, broken down by fiscal year since 2015-16: (a) what are the details of all funding applications received, including the (i) name of the requester, (ii) amount requested, (iii) status of the application, (iv) amount of funding granted, (v) progress on the project; (b) what actions has the CMHC undertaken to make it easier for Indigenous housing providers to apply for funding; (c) does the CMHC record data on potential applications who have abandoned projects because of burdensome or overly complicated application procedures, and, if so, what indicators does the CMHC use to make the process easier; and (d) what is the CMHC doing to ensure that Indigenous housing providers, such as Tribal Chiefs Ventures Inc., are not encumbered by debt when co-investing in Indigenous housing?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to the Post-Secondary Student Support Program, broken down by fiscal year since 2008-09 and by province or territory: (a) what are the details of all funding arrangements made with Indigenous governments and organizations concerning this program, including the (i) name of the First Nations or First Nations-designated organization, (ii) amount of funding to cover eligible expenses for students, (iii) number of students who received support; and (b) what is the total annual expenditure by the government on this program?

    (Return tabled)

    With regard to contract work performed for the Canadian Border Services Agency, since November 2015, and broken down by fiscal year: (a) what is the total number of contracts awarded to (i) GCStrategies, (ii) Dalian Enterprises Inc., (iii) Coradix Technology Consulting, (iv) Moravej Inc., (v) 10583308 Canada Inc.; (b) what are the details of all contracts in (a), including the (i) date the contract was awarded, (ii) value of the contract, (iii) number of amendments to the initial contract; and (c) what is the total number of government employees who reviewed, processed and approved each contract in (a)?

    (Return tabled)

    The House proceeded to the consideration of Bill C-57, An Act to implement the 2023 Free Trade Agreement between Canada and Ukraine, as reported (with amendment) from the committee.

    (The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

    The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-57, An Act to implement the 2023 Free Trade Agreement between Canada and Ukraine, be read the third time and passed.

    The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C‑57, An Act to implement the 2023 Free Trade Agreement between Canada and Ukraine, be read the third time and passed.