House Publications
The Debates are the report—transcribed, edited, and corrected—of what is said in the House. The Journals are the official record of the decisions and other transactions of the House. The Order Paper and Notice Paper contains the listing of all items that may be brought forward on a particular sitting day, and notices for upcoming items.
For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
|
|
|
Notice PaperNo. 334 Tuesday, June 18, 2024 10:00 a.m. |
|
|
|
|
Introduction of Government Bills |
|
Introduction of Private Members' Bills |
|
Notices of Motions (Routine Proceedings) |
|
Questions |
|
| Q-28522 — June 17, 2024 — Mrs. Wagantall (Yorkton—Melville) — With regard to government approval of the mixing and matching of COVID-19 vaccines (heterologous vaccination): (a) what data did the manufacturers of the Pfizer, Moderna and AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccines have with respect to mixing their products with other COVID-19 vaccine products; (b) in mid-2021, when Health Canada (HC), the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) and the National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) were recommending mixing vaccines to Canadians, what did the Pfizer, Moderna and AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine monographs recommend at that same time; (c) what scientific rationale did HC, the PHAC and the NACI have for heterologous vaccination, broken down by (i) Pfizer mRNA vaccine and Moderna mRNA vaccine, (ii) mRNA vaccine and adenovirus vaccine; (d) what advice or instruction did the government receive from the World Health Organization’s Chief Scientist, Dr. Soumy Swaminathan, regarding the safety and efficacy of this approach in July 2021; (e) with respect to the advice in (d), did HC follow that advice and, if not, why not; (f) what data regarding the safety and risks of heterologous vaccination in Canadians (i) did the PHAC, the NACI or HC have at the time mixing was recommended, (ii) does the PHAC, the NACI or HC have currently; (g) with respect to the Canadian study related to the mixing and matching of COVID-19 vaccines, when will the results of the MOSAIC trials (CT24) NCT04894435 sponsored by the Canadian Immunization Research Network become available; (h) with respect to the study in (g), what are the interim results; and (i) with respect to the study in (g), what are the final results, if anything? |
| Q-28532 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Bachrach (Skeena—Bulkley Valley) — With regard to the decision to alter the remote work policy for federal employees to require them to appear three days in-office: (a) what are (i) the names of all individuals involved in the decision making process, (ii) the criteria used to justify the change, (iii) the needs assessments and office capacity assessments conducted, (iv) productivity indicators used to make the decision; and (b) how do these productivity indicators compare to those in the departmental plans? |
| Q-28542 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Bachrach (Skeena—Bulkley Valley) — With regard to the decision of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) that “recreational fishing for Chinook salmon will be closed on the Skeena River watershed and all rivers and lakes in Region 6 flowing into PFMAs 3 to 6, not including the Kitimat River and Nass River watersheds,”: (a) how does this decision relate to the DFO’s allocation policy; (b) on what empirical data was this decision based; (c) given previous seasons since 2018 have also seen similar closures, what evidence does the DFO have regarding the efficacy of this measure; (d) given the DFO forecasts a 2024 Skeena Chinook return of 28,000 fish, which is lower than last year’s return and far below the historic average, how is the DFO improving management to ensure both conservation and recreational opportunities in future seasons; (e) what does the DFO estimate the impact of the Alaskan commercial fishery’s interception of Skeena-bound Chinook salmon will be in 2024; and (f) what conservation measures are being imposed on other fisheries that catch Skeena Chinook? |
| Q-28552 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Reid (Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston) — With regard to training and employment programs for offenders in federal penitentiaries: (a) does Correctional Service Canada (CSC) currently offer registration and training in any provincial or territorial apprenticeship programs and, if so, which programs and in which institutions; (b) are there provincial or territorial apprenticeship programs in which CSC has previously offered registration and training but which are no longer offered and, if so, which programs and when was registration and training discontinued; (c) if the response to (a) or (b) is negative, has CSC considered offering registration in provincial or territorial apprenticeship programs and, if so, which programs and when; (d) for cases in which registration in a provincial or territorial apprenticeship program was offered and discontinued, or considered but not offered, what was the reason for discontinuing or not offering, as the case may be, in each case; and (e) with regard to offenders taking part in penitentiary farm and agriculture and agri-food operations, what are the vocational certificates that have been issued to these offenders, broken down by institution and year of issuance? |
| Q-28562 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Reid (Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston) — With regard to Health Canada’s (HC) Priority Review of Drug Submissions policy (hereinafter the policy): (a) since December 1996, how many submissions have been made under the policy, broken down by year; (b) since December 1996, how many submissions have been approved under the policy, broken down by year; (c) since March 2006, how many submissions have been made under the policy, broken down by year; (d) since March 2006, how many submissions have been approved under the policy, broken down by year; (e) for submissions granted Priority Review status since March 2006, for what percentage of those submissions has HC met its current reduced target time frame for submission screening, broken down by year; (f) for submissions granted Priority Review status since March 2006, for what percentage of those submissions has HC met its current reduced target time frame for submission review, broken down by year; (g) has consideration been given to reducing the current reduced target time frames for submission screening or submission review and, if so, when and in what way; (h) what has been the cost of administering the policy, broken down by fiscal year, since March 2006; (i) what costs or fees are assessed to or required of the originators of submissions to the policy, broken down by type of cost or fee, and how have those costs or fees changed since March 2006; (j) what costs or fees are assessed to or required of the originators of submissions to HC’s non-expedited drug approval process, broken down by type of cost or fee, and how have those costs or fees changed since March 2006; (k) what is the average time, from submission to approval, for submissions made under HC’s non-expedited drug approval process, since March 2006, broken down by year of submission; and (l) what is the average time, from submission to approval, for submissions made under the policy, since March 2006, broken down by year of submission? |
| Q-28572 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Cannings (South Okanagan—West Kootenay) — With regard to federal housing investments for military housing for Canadian Armed Forces members and their family, since January 1, 2006, broken down by province or territory and by year: (a) how much federal funding has been provided to support the construction of military housing; and (b) how many housing units were built? |
| Q-28582 — June 17, 2024 — Ms. Blaney (North Island—Powell River) — With regard to the administration of benefits to veterans: (a) how does Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) distinguish between Wartime service (WS), Special Duty Area service (SDA), and Special Duty Operation service (SDO); (b) in what ways does VAC deliver to disability or pension benefits differently to veterans based on their classification in (a); and (c) what are the details of all consultations undertaken by the Minister of Veterans Affairs and the Minister of National Defence since January 1, 2023, regarding the reclassification of WS, SDA, or SDO, including the (i) date of consultation, (ii) group or organization consulted, (iii) geographic area of service? |
| Q-28592 — June 17, 2024 — Ms. Blaney (North Island—Powell River) — With regard to Veterans Affairs Canada, broken down by fiscal year since 2015-16: (a) what are the available funding streams that (i) support Indigenous veterans’ mental health, (ii) support Indigenous Veterans in finding employment after service; (b) of the funding streams in (a), what is the total amount of funding that remained unspent, uncommitted, or undelivered; and (c) what criteria or justifications were used to evaluate and reject the Burns Way Program which has been established to improve mental health services for Indigenous, non-Indigenous and minority veterans and their family members? |
| Q-28602 — June 17, 2024 — Ms. McPherson (Edmonton Strathcona) — With regard to federal funding and loans to Canada’s banking sector since January 1, 2006: how much federal funding has been provided to the (i) Royal Bank of Canada, (ii) Toronto-Dominion Bank, (iii) Bank of Nova Scotia, (iv) Bank of Montreal, (v) Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, broken down by bank, year and type of funding? |
| Q-28612 — June 17, 2024 — Ms. Barron (Nanaimo—Ladysmith) — With regard to vessel and related policies that support owner operator in Atlantic Canada and Quebec, since February 1, 2023: (a) what are the details of all consultations and engagement sessions that have been undertaken or are currently scheduled as part of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans’ (DFO) efforts to better understand inshore fish harvesters and association representatives concerns, including the (i) date of the consultation or engagement session, (ii) organization or individuals consulted, (iii) recommendations heard in each consultation or session; and (b) what resources has the DFO allocated for the purposes of the consultations in (a), including the (i) number of staff, (ii) budget, (iii) administrative resources? |
| Q-28622 — June 17, 2024 — Ms. Barron (Nanaimo—Ladysmith) — With regard to the government’s response to the 13th report of the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans entitled “Foreign Ownership and Corporate Concentration of Fishing Licenses and Quota”: (a) what are the details of all “in-depth engagement with Indigenous peoples and organizations, fishery participants, and key stakeholders” as part of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans’ (DFO) West Coast Fisheries modernization efforts, including the (i) date of the consultation, (ii) name of the fishery participant or rights-holding Indigenous group consulted, (iii) recommendations heard from the consultation; and (b) what resources has the DFO allocated for the purposes of the consultations in (a), including the (i) number of staff, (ii) budget, (iii) administrative resources? |
| Q-28632 — June 17, 2024 — Ms. Barron (Nanaimo—Ladysmith) — With regard to funding programs managed by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, broken down by fiscal year since 2015-16: (a) what are the details of each funding program, broken down by (i) name of the program, service, fund, or initiative, (ii) amount of funding allocated for funding of the program; (b) which of the funding programs in (a) have been identified by the department as part of budget 2023’s commitment to refocus government spending; and (c) what is the total amount of funding reduction that each program or grant in (b) will experience? |
| Q-28642 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. MacGregor (Cowichan—Malahat—Langford) — With regard to the Pacheedaht First Nation’s request for funding for a community school, since October 23, 2016: (a) what are the details of all actions undertaken by the Department of Indigenous Services concerning the school’s completion, including the (i) titles of reports or feasibility studies, (ii) date of the report or feasibility study, (iii) recommendations of the reports or feasibility studies; (b) what is the total value of funding provided to the Pacheedaht First Nation regarding the completion of the community school; (c) what funding decisions have been made by (i) the Department of Indigenous Services, (ii) the Office of Infrastructure of Canada; and (d) what are the justifications for each funding decision in (c)? |
| Q-28652 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. MacGregor (Cowichan—Malahat—Langford) — With regard to the Indigenous Agriculture and Food Systems Initiative (IAFSI), broken down by fiscal year since the program’s inception: (a) what is the total amount of funding available through the IAFSI; (b) what is the total amount of funding delivered, broken down by province and territory; (c) how much funding has been delivered to (i) Indigenous communities and governments, (ii) Indigenous for-profit corporations, (iii) Indigenous not-for-profit corporations, associations, cooperatives, and institutions, (iv) Indigenous businesses, partnerships and joint ventures; and (c) what is the total amount of lapsed spending? |
| Q-28662 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. MacGregor (Cowichan—Malahat—Langford) — With regard to the Grocery Task Force’s mandate, since the task force’s inception: (a) in what ways does the Grocery Task Force promote information to consumers so they are aware of their rights and empowered to make informed marketplace choices; and (b) what are the details of all efforts to communicate with consumers in (a), including the (i) type of communication, (ii) budget for the communication, (iii) message being communicated? |
| Q-28672 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Chambers (Simcoe North) — With regard to the Underused Housing Tax (UHT) that came into effect on January 1, 2022, broken down by year: (a) how many UHT returns have been (i) filed by taxpayers, (ii) filed and then reviewed by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA); (b) how many UHT returns reviewed by the CRA in (a)(ii) had no amounts owing, in total and percentage; (c) what is the total amount of the UHT assessed; (d) what is the amount of the UHT assessed that has been collected or payments submitted and processed by taxpayers; (e) what are the costs to (i) implement, (ii) annually administer, the UHT by government departments or agencies; (f) how many employees or full-time equivalents are or were assigned to work on the UHT by government departments or agencies; and (g) how much has been spent to date by government departments or agencies on (i) public consultations, (ii) advertisements, (iii) promotion, (iv) publications, (v) stakeholder meetings or engagements, (vi) public opinion research, (vii) other communications, public relations and information efforts, related to the UHT, in total and broken down by type of expense? |
| Q-28682 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Chambers (Simcoe North) — With regard to the recovery of overpayments and fraudulently obtained payments of the various COVID-19 related financial relief programs put in place by the government, broken down by the various COVID-19 related financial relief programs: (a) what are the Canada Revenue Agency's (CRA) (i) total expenditures to date, (ii) expected expenditures in the future, on recovering the payments; (b) how many CRA employees or full-time equivalents are assigned to files related to the recovery of such payments; (c) how many individuals and business are (i) currently subject to collection or legal activities, (ii) are planned to be subject to collection or legal activities in 2024 or 2025, by the CRA or other organizations on their behalf related to the recovery of such payments; (d) what is the cost of the collection or legal activities outlined in (c); and (e) what is the single lowest and single highest recovery of payment being sought? |
| Q-28692 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Chambers (Simcoe North) — With regard to the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB), broken down by department, agency, Crown corporation, or other government entity: (a) which departments, agencies, Crown corporations, or other government entities conducted a review or requested a review by another Government of Canada entity to ensure no possible fraudulent claims for the CERB; (b) if such a review was conducted, how many government employees were found to have made fraudulent claims for the CERB; and (c) if such a review was not conducted, why did the entity not deem it necessary to review possible fraudulent claims for the CERB among their employees? |
| Q-28702 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Dreeshen (Red Deer—Mountain View) — With regard to overtime pay of all types for Government of Canada employees since January 1, 2016, broken down by year: (a) what is the total cost of overtime, broken down by department, agency, or other government entity; (b) how many employees had annual overtime payments over $10,000 in each given year, broken down by department, agency, or other government entity; and (c) what was the single highest annual overtime payment for an individual employee in each given year, broken down by department, agency, or other government entity? |
| Q-28712 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Dreeshen (Red Deer—Mountain View) — With regard to expenditures related to the Benefits Delivery Modernization programme: (a) how much has been spend on the programme to date; (b) what are the details of all contracts over $50,000 related to the program, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) amount, (iii) vendor, (iv) manner in which the contract was awarded (sole sourced or competitive bid), (v) start and end date, (vi) description of goods or services; and (c) has the government signed any contracts related to the program which were either cancelled or for which the goods or services outlined in the contract were not delivered, and, if so, what are the details of each, including (i) the date the contract was signed, (ii) the original amount or value of the contract, (iii) the vendor, (iv) the description of goods or services which were not delivered, (v) the reason for the cancellation or non-delivery of contract terms, (vi) whether the contract was still paid out following the cancellation or non-delivery, and, if so, how much was paid out? |
| Q-28722 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Dowdall (Simcoe—Grey) — With regard to the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) and its Voluntary Disclosure Program (VDP), since January 1, 2016: (a) how many (i) individuals, (ii) employers, (iii) corporations, (iv) partnerships, (v) trusts, have successfully used the VDP (i.e. their application for the VDP was accepted), broken down by year; (b) how many (i) individuals, (ii) employers, (iii) corporations, (iv) partnerships, (v) trusts, with accounts outside of Canada have successfully used the VDP, broken down by year; (c) how much in relief has been granted through the VDP, broken down year and by (i) individuals, (ii) employers, (iii) corporations, (iv) partnerships, (v) trusts; (d) how many Canadians have been convicted of tax evasion related to money and other assets held overseas; and (e) how many Canadians have been convicted of tax evasion related to money and other assets held overseas? |
| Q-28732 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Dowdall (Simcoe—Grey) — With regard to transcriptions or transcripts prepared by the government since January 1, 2022, and broken down by department or agency: (a) for each occurrence, what is the (i) date of the proceeding or event, (ii) location of the proceeding or event, (iii) description or summary of the proceeding or event, (iv) main participants speaking at the proceeding or event, (v) subject matter of the proceeding or event; (b) what was the cost of each transcription in (a); (c) who requested each transcription in (a) be prepared; and (d) what was the total amount spent on transcriptions or transcripts, broken down by year? |
| Q-28742 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Cooper (St. Albert—Edmonton) — With regard to the Special Report on Foreign Interference in Canada’s Democratic Processes and Institutions of the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians (hereinafter the committee): (a) on what date was it transmitted to (i) the Privy Council Office, (ii) the Office of the Prime Minister, (iii) the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, (iv) the Office of the Minister of Public Safety, Democratic Institutions and Intergovernmental Affairs; (b) was it read by, and, if so, on what date was it read by, (i) the Prime Minister, (ii) the Minister of Public Safety, Democratic Institutions and Intergovernmental Affairs, (iii) the Minister of National Defence, (iv) the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (on maternity leave), (v) Cindy Termorshuizen, (vi) David Morrison, (vii) Michael Duheme, (viii) Mark Flynn, (ix) Dan Rogers, (x) David Vigneault, (xi) Michelle Tessier, (xii) Cherie Henderson, (xiii) Bo Basler, (xiv) Allen Sutherland, (xv) Lyall King, (xvi) Gallit Dobner, (xvii) Tara Denham, (xviii) Eric Gordon, (xix) Lisa Ducharme, (xx) Nathalie Drouin, (xxi) Marta Morgan, (xxii) Gina Wilson, (xxiii) Greta Bossenmaier, (xxiv) Monik Beauregard, (xxv) Janice Charette, (xxvi) Rob Stewart, (xxvii) François Daigle, (xxviii) Vince Rigby, (xxix) Dominic Rochon, (xxx) Katie Telford, (xxxi) Jeremy Broadhurst, (xxxii) Brian Clow, and (xxxiii) Patrick Travers; (c) if specific reading dates are not available with respect to any of the individuals named in (b), for each such individual, did he or she read the report before publicly giving sworn or solemnly affirmed evidence to the Public Inquiry into Foreign Interference in Federal Electoral Processes and Democratic Institutions (the Hogue Commission); (d) which ministers and ministers’ exempt staff, not listed in (b), have read the report; (e) with respect to each person named in response to (d), on what date did he or she read it; (f) on what date did the Prime Minister provide the committee with his direction under subsection 21(5) of the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act to submit a revised report to him; and (g) on what date did the committee provide its revised report in response to the Prime Minister’s direction? |
| Q-28752 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Bezan (Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman) — With regard to the Department of National Defence, the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development, and the deployment of HMCS Margaret Brooke to Havana, Cuba: (a) who authorized the HMCS Margaret Brooke’s deployment; (b) what was the purpose of the deployment in (a); (c) when did the Minister of National Defence become aware that Russian naval vessels would also be in Havana during the deployment; (d) when did the Minister of Foreign Affairs first become aware of this deployment; (e) what is the Government of Canada position on whether Cuba is considered an ally of Canada; (f) what is the Government of Canada’s policy with respect to Royal Canadian Navy ports of call to Havana, Cuba, and was this policy amended prior to the visit by HMCS Fredericton in November, 2016; and (g) what support is the Government of Canada aware of that the Government of Cuba provided to the Russian Federation for its ongoing war in Ukraine? |
| Q-28762 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Reid (Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston) — With regard to the National Strategy for Drugs for Rare Diseases: (a) since January 1, 2023, including announced commitments by all departments and agencies, what is the dollar amount that has been provided to, or committed for the purpose of provision to, the provinces and territories, through the National Strategy for Drugs for Rare Diseases, broken down by purpose; (b) for which drugs, therapies, treatments, and diseases or conditions, and what dollar amount for each type, have funds been allocated, broken down by province; (c) what funds have been directed toward providing drugs, therapies, or treatment for patients diagnosed with Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension (PAH), broken down by province; (d) what funds have been directed to the provinces and territories for drugs, therapies, and treatments relating to PAH, broken down by province; and (e) which specific drugs, therapies, or treatments have been funded for treatment of PAH? |
| Q-28772 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Reid (Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston) — With regard to the Canada Summer Jobs program: (a) what is the formula used to calculate the youth unemployment rate for each riding in Canada; (b) from what sources is the data used to calculate the youth unemployment rate obtained; (c) what method is used to apply census data on youth unemployment from the municipal level to arrive at useful youth unemployment data by federal electoral district; (d) what method is used to generate per federal electoral district funding using the applicable youth unemployment data by federal electoral district; (e) what were the youth unemployment rates, applied for the purposes of the Canada Summer Jobs program, for each of the federal electoral districts of Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, Kingston and the Islands, and Mississauga—Erin Mills, for each of the 2019 through 2024 program years; (f) how many applications were received for the federal electoral district of Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston in each of the program years 2019 through 2024, broken down by year; (g) how many of the applications in (f) were rejected and not placed into consideration for funding in each of the program years 2019 through 2024, broken down by year; (h) were organizations whose applications were rejected contacted to provide additional information and, if so, when and by what means, in each case; (i) how many individuals, occupying which levels and positions, must concur with a rejection decision; (j) are the individuals, levels, or positions in (i) different for rejection decisions and approval decisions; (k) are there additional approval or concurrence requirements for rejection decisions and approval decisions; (l) what is the appeal process for organizations whose applications are rejected and how many individuals, occupying which levels and positions, are involved in the appeal process; and (m) are the individuals, levels, or positions in (l) different for appeals than for rejection decisions and approval decisions? |
| Q-28782 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Green (Hamilton Centre) — With regard to the Canada Dental Benefit, broken down by benefit period and federal electoral district since the program’s inception: (a) what is the total number of approved applications; and (b) how many children have been helped by the program? |
| Q-28792 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Green (Hamilton Centre) — With regard to the Canada Dental Care Plan, broken down by federal electoral district since the program’s inception: (a) what is the total number of applications (i) received, (ii) approved; and (b) how many people have benefitted from the Canada Dental Care Plan, broken down by age group and by Disability Tax Credit Certificate status? |
| Q-28802 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Green (Hamilton Centre) — With regard to federal spending in the constituency of Hamilton Centre, in each fiscal year between 2019-20 and 2023-24, inclusively: what are the details of all grants and contributions and all loans to any organization, group, business or municipality, broken down by the (i) name of the recipient, (ii) municipality in which the recipient is located, (iii) date the funding was received, (iv) amount received, (v) department or agency that provided the funding, (vi) program under which the grant, contribution or loan was made, (vii) nature or purpose? |
| Q-28812 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Johns (Courtenay—Alberni) — With regard to funding for disability management, accommodating people with disabilities in the workplace, and related training and education programs, broken down by fiscal year and department or agency since 2005-06: (a) what funding streams have been made available to help accommodate people with disabilities and for disability management, including related training and education programs; (b) what is the total amount of funding for each stream in (a); and (c) for each funding stream in (a), what is the total amount of (i) spent or committed funding, (ii) lapsed funding? |
| Q-28822 — June 17, 2024 — Ms. Barron (Nanaimo—Ladysmith) — With regard to the national inventory of wrecked, abandoned or hazardous vessels, broken down by fiscal year since 2011-12: (a) what is the total number of vessels added to the inventory located (i) on the Pacific coast, (ii) on the Arctic coast, (iii) on the Atlantic coast, (iv) in the Great Lakes, (v) in the St. Lawrence Seaway; (b) what is the total number of vessels removed from the inventory located (i) on the Pacific coast, (ii) on the Arctic coast, (iii) on the Atlantic coast, (iv) in the Great Lakes, (v) in the St. Lawrence Seaway; (c) what risk categories does the government use to prioritize the removal of vessels; and (d) what is the current number of vessels in the inventory, broken down by risk category? |
| Q-28832 — June 17, 2024 — Ms. Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe) — With regard to the budget 2024 decision to reduce funding by $625 million for the Labour Market Development Agreement, broken down by province or territory, city, and organization: how much funding will no longer be provided to support community organizations? |
| Q-28842 — June 17, 2024 — Ms. Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe) — With regard to federal housing investments for London and Windsor, since January 1, 2014: (a) how much federal funding was provided to the electoral districts of (i) London Centre, (ii) London—Fanshawe, (iii) London West, (iv) Windsor—Tecumseh—Lakeshore, (v) Windsor West, (vi) Essex, to support the construction of cooperative housing, and how many units were developed in each electoral district; and (b) how much federal funding was provided to the electoral districts of (i) London Centre, (ii) London—Fanshawe, (iii) London West, (iv) Windsor—Tecumseh—Lakeshore, (v) Windsor West, (vi) Essex, to support the construction of purpose-built rental housing, and how many units were developed in each electoral district? |
| Q-28852 — June 17, 2024 — Ms. Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe) — With regard to the electoral district of London—Fanshawe, between the fiscal year 2015-16 and the current year: (a) what are all the federal infrastructure investments, including direct transfers to municipalities, regional district associations or First Nations, national parks, highways, etc., broken down by (i) fiscal year, (ii) total expenditure, (iii) project; and (b) what funding is allocated to highways, broken down by (i) fiscal year, (ii) total expenditure, (iii) project? |
| Q-28862 — June 17, 2024 — Ms. Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe) — With regard to the federal government’s refocused spending initiative, broken down by department or agency, program and year: how much funding has been refocused away from funding emergency management-based initiatives, broken down by the phase of (i) mitigation, (ii) preparedness, (iii) response, (iv) recovery? |
| Q-28872 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Epp (Chatham-Kent—Leamington) — With regard to the awarding of the contract to CIMA+ for the site pre-engineering contract, of which one project included the bury of the transmission and distribution lines on the construction of the Gordie Howe International Bridge project: (a) why was CIMA+ chosen to replace the original design consultant Stantec for the Gordie Howe International Bridge pre-engineering contract; (b) if CIMA+ was awarded the contract due to lower cost considerations over Stantec, what was the initial awarded contract cost, and what the final paid amounts to CIMA+; (c) were there any official memos between the Director of the Canadian Port of Entry, Joe Maghnieh, and former Windsor-Detroit Bridge Authority (WDBA) Chairman, Dwight Duncan, regarding the awarding of the CIMA+ contract; (d) if so, what were the details of those memos regarding the awarding of the CIMA+ contract; (e) did the WDBA Chairman, Dwight Duncan, send any official memos to the Office of the Prime Minister over the awarding of the contract to CIMA+; (f) if so, what were the details of those memos over the awarding of the contract to CIMA+; (g) did the Office of the Prime Minister send any official memos to the Director the Canadian Port of Entry, Joe Maghnieh, regarding the awarding of the CIMA+ contract; and (h) if so, what were the details of those memos regarding the awarding of the CIMA+ contract? |
| Q-28882 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Epp (Chatham-Kent—Leamington) — With regard to the failure of the Schedule 40 pipe used on the Gordie Howe International Bridge project: (a) why did the Windsor-Detroit Bridge Authority (WDBA) ignore the independent engineering evidence of Kinectrics, Geotherm and Brierley, who all confirmed that the Schedule 40 pipe was the wrong pipe specified for this project; (b) why did the WDBA accept the opinion of CIMA+ private consulting engineer firm on this issue when they were the firm who specified the use of the Schedule 40 pipe and therefore were in a conflict-of-interest to make such a determination; and (c) why did the WDBA not seek an independent opinion on the Schedule 40 pipe after its failure as CIMA+ was in a conflict of interest on the issues with the Schedule 40 pipe? |
| Q-28892 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Epp (Chatham-Kent—Leamington) — With regard to the tendering process and announcement that CIMA+ was to be awarded the pre-engineering contract for the Gordie Howe International Bridge project: (a) were there any official memos between the Chairman, Dwight Duncan, the Chief Financial Officer, Linda Hurley, and the Chief Executive Officer, Mike Cutillo, of the Windsor-Detroit Bridge Authority regarding the tendering process and CIMA+ being awarded the contract for the Gordie Howe International Bridge project; (b) if the answer to (a) is affirmative, what are the details of those memos regarding the tendering process and CIMA+ being awarded the contract for the Gordie Howe International Bridge project? |
| Q-28902 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Epp (Chatham-Kent—Leamington) — With regard to the delays of the Gordie Howe International Bridge project: (a) were there any official memos sent between the Chief Communications Stakeholder Officer, Heather Grondin, the Chairman Dwight Duncan, the Chief Financial Officer, Linda Hurley, and the Chief Executive Officer, Mike Cutillo, of the Windsor-Detroit Bridge Authority regarding the error made by CIMA+ regarding the installation and subsequent failure of the Schedule 40 pipe; and (b) if so, what are the details of those memos regarding the error made by CIMA+ regarding the installation and subsequent failure of the Schedule 40 pipe? |
| Q-28912 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Johns (Courtenay—Alberni) — With regard to federal investments and the communities which comprise the federal electoral district of Courtenay—Alberni, between the 2005-06 and current fiscal year: (a) what are the federal investments in innovation, science, economic development, and forestry, including investments in and direct transfers to the municipalities and First Nations, for the communities of (i) Tofino, (ii) Ucluelet, (iii) Port Alberni, (iv) Parksville, (v) Qualicum Beach, (vi) Cumberland, (vii) Courtenay, (viii) Deep Bay, (ix) Dashwood, (x) Royston, (xi) French Creek, (xii) Errington, (xiii) Coombs, (xiv) Nanoose Bay, (xv) Cherry Creek, (xvi) China Creek, (xvii) Bamfield, (xviii) Beaver Creek, (xix) Beaufort Range, (xx) Millstream, (xxi) Mt. Washington Ski Resort, broken down by fiscal year, total expenditure, and project; (b) what are the federal investments in innovation, science, economic development, and forestry invested in and transferred to the regional districts of (i) Comox Valley, (ii) Nanaimo, (iii) Alberni-Clayoquot, (iv) Powell River, broken down by fiscal year, total expenditure, and project; (c) what are the federal investments in innovation, science, economic development, and forestry invested in and transferred to the Island Trusts of (i) Hornby Island, (ii) Denman Island, (iii) Lasquetti Island, broken down by fiscal year, total expenditure, and project; (d) what are the federal investments in innovation, science, economic development, and forestry invested in and transferred to (i) the Ahousaht First Nation, (ii) Hesquiaht First Nation, (iii) Huu-ay-aht First Nation, (iv) Hupacasath First Nation, (v) Tla-o-qui-aht First Nations, (vi) Toquaht First Nation, (vii) Tseshaht First Nation, (viii) Uchucklesaht First Nation, (ix) Ucluelet First Nation, (x) K'omoks First Nation, broken down by fiscal year, total expenditure, and project; (e) what are the federal investment funding of the Strategic Innovation Fund, broken down by (i) fiscal year, (ii) total expenditure, (iii) project; (f) what are the funding of the Government of Canada's Sectoral Initiatives Program, broken down by (i) fiscal year, (ii) total expenditure, (iii) project; and (g) what are the federal investment funding of the Forest Industry Transformation (IFIT) program, broken down by (i) fiscal year, (ii) total expenditure, (iii) project? |
| Q-28922 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Ruff (Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound) — With regard to the Privy Council Office's response to the question on the Order Paper Q-2571, namely, that “Members of Parliament being considered for Cabinet position undergo a pre-appointment Governor-in-Council background check conducted by the Privy Council Office. Once appointed to Cabinet, the background check, coupled with the oath they take and the Ministerial Security Briefing they receive, permits them access to information classified to Top Secret for the duration of their tenure as Cabinet Minister”: (a) when did this become the policy of the government; (b) why was the 2008 policy, reportedly "that security background checks on Ministers, Ministers of State and Parliamentary Secretaries, and their spouses or partners, be renewed every two years while the appointee occupies a position as Minister, Minister of State or Parliamentary Secretary", changed; and (c) was there any other intervening policy, and, if so, (i) what was it, (ii) when was it in effect? |
| Q-28932 — June 17, 2024 — Ms. Kwan (Vancouver East) — With regard to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) and the temporary public policy creating permanent resident pathways for Hong Kong residents since 2021, broken down by month and year: (a) how many individuals of Hong Kong origin have immigrated to Canada, broken down by immigration stream; (b) how many individuals of Hong Kong origin have applied for permanent residency on humanitarian and compassionate grounds separate from the temporary public policy permanent residency pathways since 2021; (c) with regard to the figures in (a) and (b), how many have received permanent residency; (d) with regard to figures in (c), what was the average processing time; (e) what is the breakdown of the application numbers since 2021, broken down by Permanent Residency category for (i) Stream A, (ii) Stream B; (f) with regard to the figures in (e), how many applications have been (i) approved, (ii) rejected, (iii) are under review; (g) of the rejections in (f), what are the categorized reasons for rejecting the application, broken down by number; (h) of the cases under review in (f), how many of them are (i) individual applications, (ii) family applications; (i) of the approvals in (f), were any tied to existing departmental quotas for the temporary public policy or allocations made within annual immigration levels targets; (j) of applications for the open work permits for applicants of the Hong Kong permanent resident pathways, how many were made by individuals with “HKPPTR” inputted for the job title since the program was instituted in 2021; (k) of the applications in (j), how many were (i) accepted, (ii) rejected, (iii) under review; (l) of the rejections in (k), what is the breakdown of rejections by IRCC office or processing center; and (m) how many applications were rejected based, at least in part, on a labour market impact assessment? |
| Q-28942 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Johns (Courtenay—Alberni) — With regard to federal funding and the communities which comprise the federal electoral district of Courtenay—Alberni, between the 2005-06 and current year fiscal year: (a) what are the federal funding and capital investments related to the areas of arts and culture, environment and climate change, and higher education, broken down by these areas, including direct transfers to the municipalities and First Nations, for the communities of (i) Tofino, (ii) Ucluelet, (iii) Port Alberni, (iv) Parksville, (v) Qualicum Beach, (vi) Cumberland, (vii) Courtenay, (viii) Deep Bay, (ix) Dashwood, (x) Royston, (xi) French Creek, (xii) Errington, (xiii) Coombs, (xiv) Nanoose Bay, (xv) Cherry Creek, (xvi) China Creek, (xvii) Bamfield, (xviii) Beaver Creek, (xix) Beaufort Range, (xx) Millstream, (xxi) Mt. Washington Ski Resort, broken down by fiscal year, total expenditure, type of funding, funding opportunity or program, and project; (b) what are the federal funding and capital investments related to the areas of arts and culture, environment and climate change, and higher education, broken down by these areas, transferred to the regional districts of (i) Comox Valley Regional District, (ii) Nanaimo Regional District, (iii) Alberni-Clayoquot Regional District, (iv) Powell River Regional District, broken down by fiscal year, total expenditure, type of funding, funding opportunity or program, and project; (c) what are the federal funding and capital investments related to the areas of arts and culture, environment and climate change, and higher education, broken down by these areas, transferred to the Island Trusts of (i) Hornby Island, (ii) Denman Island, (iii) Lasquetti Island, broken down by fiscal year, total expenditure, type of funding, funding opportunity or program, and project; (d) what are the federal funding and capital investments related to the areas of arts and culture, environment and climate change, and higher education, broken down by these areas, transferred to (i) the Ahousaht First Nation, (ii) Hesquiaht First Nation, (iii) Huu-ay-aht First Nation, (iv) Hupacasath First Nation, (v) Tla-o-qui-aht First Nations, (vi) Toquaht First Nation, (vii) Tseshaht First Nation, (viii) Uchucklesaht First Nation, (ix) Ucluelet First Nation, (x) K'omoks First Nation, broken down by fiscal year, total expenditure, type of funding, funding opportunity or program, and project; (e) what are the federal funding and capital investments related to the area of environment and climate change, broken down by fiscal year, total expenditure, type of funding, funding opportunity or program, and project, including funding under the (i) Aquatic Invasive Species Prevention Fund, (ii) Oceans Management Contribution program, (iii) Coastal Restoration Fund, (iv) Aquatic Ecosystems Restoration Fund, (v) Canada Nature Fund for Aquatic Species at Risk, (vi) Ecosystems and Ocean Science Contribution Framework, (vii) Ghost Gear Fund, (viii) Whalesafe Gear Adoption Fund, (ix) any other funding opportunities and programs; (f) what is the funding of higher education, including, but not limited to, (i) funding offered through Indigenous Services Canada, (ii) student aid programs, (iii) grants for students with disabilities, and (iv) funding for educational infrastructure and institutions, broken down by fiscal year, total expenditure, type of funding, funding opportunity or program, and project; and (g) what is the funding of arts and culture, broken down by (i) fiscal year (ii) total expenditure, (iii) type of funding, (iv) funding opportunity or program, (v) project? |
| Q-28952 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Angus (Timmins—James Bay) — With regard to the Public Health Agency of Canada's (PHAC) work to prepare its Canadian Child Welfare Information System (CCWIS) report: (a) with which governments, organizations, and associations is the PHAC partnering to ensure this report is completed; (b) from which data sources does the CCWIS collect information to inform the policies and programs aimed at improving child and family health in Canada; and (c) by what date will the PHAC publish its second report using the CCWIS’s data? |
| Q-28962 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Angus (Timmins—James Bay) — With regard to the Canada School of Public Service, broken down by department: (a) how many government employees, broken down by unit and percentage of total employees, have completed the Indigenous Learning Series, as of June 10, 2021; (b) is participation in the Indigenous Learning Series mandatory; (c) are new employees expected to complete any part of the Indigenous Learning Series as part of their training; (d) how many employees have access to the available learning products of the Indigenous Learning Series; (e) are employees, both new and experienced, given time to complete training through the Indigenous Learning Series during contracted working hours; and (f) what percentage of content available through the Canada School of Public Service is available in an Indigenous language? |
| Q-28972 — June 17, 2024 — Ms. Idlout (Nunavut) — With regard to Indigenous Services Canada (ISC) capital allocation policies on school expansions and renovations: (a) on what basis does the department determine the level of funding to be determined for school expansions and renovations; (b) does the department consider students from neighbouring communities as part of its decision-making processes in allocating funding; (c) which regional ISC offices have ruled that they will no longer consider out-of-reserve children when calculating per-student funds for capital projects, including building renovations; (d) what is the total number of schools that have seen their allocation decline due to changes in how funding is allocated; and (e) what measures has ISC undertaken to ensure that affected communities, like the Sunchild First Nation, can continue to provide education to students from outside of their communities who attend their schools? |
| Q-28982 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Ruff (Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound) — With regard to consultations for budget 2024: (a) were measures to assist individuals living with Celiac disease presented, and, if so, (i) by what organization, (ii) when; (b) why were no supports for those living with Celiac disease included in budget 2024; and (c) what initiatives are the federal government exploring to help with the high cost of gluten-free foods for those living with Celiac disease to include any possible changes to the Gluten-Free Food Tax Credit? |
| Q-28992 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Arnold (North Okanagan—Shuswap) — With regard to the $130 million over six years in budget 2024 to Fisheries and Oceans Canada, with $20 million ongoing to address marine fuel cost pressures to address the unpredictability and volatility of marine fuel costs: (a) how much of the $20 million in ongoing funding is a result of the carbon tax; and (b) how much will fuel costs be, in total dollars, increased for the Canadian Coast Guard by the carbon tax over the next five years after the proposed carbon tax increases are implemented? |
| Q-29002 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Arnold (North Okanagan—Shuswap) — With regard to the replacement vessels for the Canadian Coast Guard: (a) what were procurement cost estimates in 2016, for Canadian Coast Guard vessels scheduled for replacement in 2016 through 2025; (b) what were final procurement costs for vessels replaced from 2016 to date; (c) what are estimated final procurement costs for vessels currently in production; and (d) what is the breakdown of (a) through (c) by each vessel? |
| Q-29012 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Seeback (Dufferin—Caledon) — With regard to individual expense receipts submitted by a board of director, chair, or Chief Executive Officer, at lnvest in Canada, since 2018: what are the details of all items expensed, including the (i) dollar value of each expense, (ii) product or service expensed, (iii) name of the venue for the product or service expensed, (iv) name of the city in which it was expensed, (v) reason for the expense, (vi) name and title of the individual it was expensed under, (vii) date? |
| Q-29022 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Scheer (Regina—Qu'Appelle) — With regard to events sponsored by the government since January 1, 2023, where the sponsorship amount was in excess of $500,000: what are the details of all such events, including, for each, the (i) dates, (ii) location, (iii) title of the event, (iv) event description, (v) amount of sponsorship, (vi) other costs associated with sponsoring the event (e.g. signage, hospitality, etc.), (vii) reason for sponsorship? |
| Q-29032 — June 17, 2024 — Ms. Gazan (Winnipeg Centre) — With regard to the National Research Council (NRC) buildings located at 435 and 445 Ellice Avenue, in Winnipeg, Manitoba, that were declared surplus in 2012: (a) at what point in time was it determined that the property, including both (i) the laboratory building, (ii) the office tower, would be maintained under federal government ownership; (b) whereas the removal of the laboratory building from the market was justified on the grounds of urgent need for laboratory space on behalf of the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, what has been the primary use of the laboratory since COVID-19 cases have declined nationally; (c) is the NRC considering placing this property on the market for private purchase at any time in the future; (d) what commitments did the NRC make to the Manitoba Metis Federation (MMF) concerning its intent to sell the property, including either (i) the laboratory building, (ii) the office tower; (e) what was the cause of delays on the approval of the MMF’s draft offer to purchase the office tower for $3,660,000 submitted in February 2021; (f) why did the NRC seek bids other than that offered by the MMF for the office tower following March of 2022; and (g) did the NRC engage in any negotiations with other potential bidders while the property, including both (i) the laboratory building, (ii) the office tower was for sale, and, if so, what are their names? |
| Q-29042 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Garrison (Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke) — With regard to the electoral district of Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, between the fiscal year 2015-16 and the current year: (a) what are all the federal infrastructure investments, including direct transfers to municipalities, regional district associations or First Nations, national parks, highways, etc., broken down by (i) fiscal year, (ii) total expenditure, (iii) project; and (b) what funding is allocated to highways, including, broken down by (i) fiscal year, (ii) total expenditure, (iii) project? |
Notices of Motions for the Production of Papers |
|
Business of Supply |
|
Government Business |
|
Private Members' Notices of Motions |
|
| M-130 — June 17, 2024 — Mr. Garrison (Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke) — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should: |
| (a) undertake a study on the practice of Applied Behavior Analysis Therapy in Canada with respect to its impacts on people with autism, their families and networks of support, making sure this study (i) gives priority to the perspectives of people with autism and in particular those with lived experience of Applied Behavior Analysis, (ii) includes recommendations on what actions should be undertaken by the government, including an assessment of the need for a federal ban on Applied Behaviour Analysis Therapy as it has been historically practiced; and |
| (b) present a report to the House on the study within six months after it has been undertaken or within such further time as the House may authorize, including a statement on any changes the study recommends. |
Private Members' Business |
| S-224 — May 23, 2024 — Mr. Carrie (Oshawa) — Resuming consideration at report stage of Bill S-224, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (trafficking in persons), as reported by the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights with amendments. |
| Resuming debate on the motions in Group No. 1. |
| Pursuant to Standing Order 86(3), jointly seconded by: |
| Ms. Lewis (Haldimand—Norfolk) — November 28, 2022 |
| Committee report — presented on Wednesday, September 20, 2023, Sessional Paper No. 8510-441-318. |
| Report and third reading stages — limited to two sitting days, pursuant to Standing Order 98(2). |
| Report stage motions — see “Report Stage of Bills” in today's Notice Paper. |
| Report stage concurrence motion — question to be put immediately after the report stage motions in amendment are disposed of, pursuant to Standing Order 76.1(9). |
| Motion for third reading — may be made in the same sitting, pursuant to Standing Order 98(2). |
| Voting for report stage and third reading — at the expiry of the time provided for debate, pursuant to Standing Order 98(4). |
|
|
|
| 2 Response requested within 45 days |
|