House of Commons Hansard #121 of the 35th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was agency.

Topics

Questions On The Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

3:45 p.m.

Windsor West
Ontario

Liberal

Herb Gray Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada

In so far as the Ministry of the Solicitor General of Canada and its agency are concerned, the answer is as follows:

ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE (RCMP)

Part a:

The requested data are being provided for 1994 and 1995. The data are held in electronic form and were relatively easy to assemble from all the regional sources. The data for previous years would have to be compiled manually and would require significant time and effort. The requested data are set out below in table form.

Firearms Received by RCMP Forensic Laboratories for Destruction

Comments with respect to part a ) vis-à-vis the above data: The rifles and shotguns, almost without exception, were firearms commonly used for hunting and sporting purposes; the handguns are restricted weapons; the submachine guns and machine guns for the most part would have fallen into the prohibited category, although some may have been only restricted; and firearms, such as sawed off shotguns and rifles, are prohibited weapons, however,for RCMP Forensic Laboratory purposes they are recorded according to the actual make, model, etc. Barrel and overall lenghts are key factors in determining if a particular firearm is a prohibited weapon, however, these are recorded only if the firearm is an exhibit in a laboratory case. If it is simply received for destruction, neither is recorded for inventory purposes and cnsequently there is no way of determining how many of the rifles and shotguns listed above actually fell within the ``prohibited weapons'' category.

Part b:

Fair Market Value

Rifle: $175.00 ea

Shotguns: $200.00 ea

Handguns: $250.00 ea

For inventory and destruction purposes the actual condition of the firearms as received is not recorded and therefore the values

given are an average based on the overall general condition for the various categories of firearms received for destruction.

Part c:

The "approximately 2,617 firearms" stated as destroyed in 1994 by the RCMP Forensic Laboratories, Firearms Sections, would have come from three sources:

1) The vast majority of these firearms were received from Canada Customs. These were disposed of in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Canada Customs and the Firearms Section at Central Forensic Laboratory, Ottawa. Available options are listed in Laboratory Services Manual, chapter 21, paragraph G.7.c.10. Specifically the options are: retain in a Forensic Laboratory Services Directorate (FLSD), return to the contributor (Canada Customs), dispose of according to written instruction from Canada Customs, or destroy. There are no other options with respect to the firearms received from Canada Customs;

2) Of the total, a number were destroyed in accordance with a Court Order. This category forms the next largest portion, and usually are representative of the firearms seized during investigation of criminal matters. Their disposition is nearly always at the direction of the courts who direct that either they be destroyed or forfeited to the Crown. Those forfeited to the Crown are then disposed of (destroyed) according to the wishes of the various provincial Crowns and/or their representatives. This group would also include firearms turned in during the various amnesty periods which have been proclaimed over the past few years; and

3) A smaller portion were destroyed as an assistance to the general public. Firearms are turned into local detachments by either the owners, or in many cases, by executors of estates, who wish to have them destroyed. Others, such as firearms used in suicides, are destroyed in accordance with family wishes. Selling any of these firearms may undermine public confidence in the RCMP, other police services, and the justice system as a whole.

With respect to the first portion of Q-52, information provided pertains only to firearms destroyed by the Forensic Laboratory Services Directorate of the RCMP and not by any other unit of the RCMP that may have destroyed seized firearms during the years in question. The vast majority of firearms seized by the operation units of the RCMP are disposed of through being ordered forfeited by the applicable court for the provincial Crowns. These firearms are then disposed of, generally by destruction, by the provincial Chief Provincial Firearms Officers (CPFO'S) or other provincial authority.

Question No. 58-

Questions On The Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

3:45 p.m.

Reform

Jake Hoeppner Lisgar—Marquette, MB

Regarding the Canadian Wheat Board's long-term debts and forgiven debts to foreign borrowers, could the Minister give the following figures for the past three crop years: ( a ) how much in long-term debts or liabilities is owed to the Canadian Wheat Board and from what countries (please give the amount for each country); ( b ) how much interest is being paid on these long-term debts or liabilities (please give details for each country); and ( c ) how many loans have been forgiven in the past three crop years and for each of them, what dollar amount do they represent?

Questions On The Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

3:45 p.m.

Regina—Wascana
Saskatchewan

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food

a) The long term debts or liabilities owed to the Canadian Wheat Board, CWB, by individual countries is commercially sensitive information and public disclosure would be considered a breach of customer confidentiality. However, the volume of CWB's credit sales by country is regularly disclosed in the CWB's annual report.

b) The total value of outstanding debt owed to the CWB from sales made under credit arrangements is approximately $6.7 billion. The interest accumulated for the period between August 1, 1994 and July 31, 1995 was approximately $444.5 million, which is included in the total value of the outstanding debt and hence in the government guarantee. Non-payment of principle or interest, if it occurs, does not represent a cost to farmers.

c) The Paris Club is the institution through which major creditor governments reschedule or refinance credits they have extended to public or private sector borrowers in developing countries and which enjoy the sovereign guarantee of the borrowing country.

During the last three years, three countries have received some limited debt reduction through Canada's participation in the Paris Club process. The Government of Canada has agreed to forgive a portion of the debt of these countries as follows (in millions of Canadian dollars):

Zambia and Haiti do not appear in the attached table, Canadian Grain Exports Under Credit Agreements, because the credit sales made to these countries occurred before 1985/86. The debt forgiven for Zambia and Haiti relates to wheat sales made as follows:

Year Wheat Exports Under Credit Agreement

Haiti 1984/85 25,000 tonnes Zambia 1972/73 16,000 tonnes 1973/74 45,000 tonnes

Canadian Grain Exports under Credit Agreements 1985-86 to 1994-95 (thousand tonnes)

Question No. 60-

Questions On The Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

3:45 p.m.

Reform

Elwin Hermanson Kindersley—Lloydminster, SK

For the fiscal years 1993/1994 and 1994/1995 which departments, agencies or crown corporations contributed funding to the following organizations: ( a ) Planned Parenthood of Canada and Planned Parenthood International; ( b ) Legal Education and Action Fund; ( c ) National Action Committee on the Status of Women; ( d ) Campaign Life Coalition; and ( e ) Realistic Equal Active for Life (R.E.A.L.) Women and what were the amounts contributed?

Questions On The Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

3:45 p.m.

Fundy Royal
New Brunswick

Liberal

Paul Zed Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Other departments, agencies and crown corporations have no information on this subject.

Question No. 94-

Questions On The Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

Charles Caccia Davenport, ON

What are the reasons the Motor Vehicle Fuel Consumption Act, passed by both Houses of Parliament in the early 1980's, was not proclaimed into law?

Questions On The Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

3:45 p.m.

Victoria
B.C.

Liberal

David Anderson Minister of Transport

In 1982, during the time when the Motor Vehicle Fuel Consumption Standards Act, MVFCSA, was being considered by Parliament, the motor vehicle industry agreed to meet the provisions of the proposed act voluntarily under the existing joint government-industry voluntary fuel consumption program, including the company average fuel consumption, CAFC, requirements. The government felt that all the benefits of a mandated program could be realised at a lower cost to government, industry and consumers through the voluntary approach. This option was therefore chosen and the MVFCSA was retained as contingency legislation should the voluntary program fail.

The Canadian company average fuel consumption for new passenger cars has been consistently better than the annual CAFC goal and overall program effectiveness has paralleled that of the legislated U.S. program.

Questions Passed As Orders For Returns
Routine Proceedings

February 3rd, 1997 / 3:45 p.m.

Fundy Royal
New Brunswick

Liberal

Paul Zed Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, if Question No. 71 could be made an order for return, this return would be tabled immediately.

Questions Passed As Orders For Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:45 p.m.

The Speaker

Is that agreed?

Questions Passed As Orders For Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:45 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Question No. 71-

Questions Passed As Orders For Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:45 p.m.

Reform

Lee Morrison Swift Current—Maple Creek—Assiniboia, SK

With respect to the consultants working at the headquarters of the Canadian International Development Agency, will the government provide a list of all consultants, including the following information: ( a ) branch and division, ( b ) remuneration, ( c ) terms of reference, ( d ) resume (or employment background), ( e ) past positions at CIDA (contract or otherwise) and ( f ) whether the contract went through a competitive allocation process?

Return tabled.

Questions Passed As Orders For Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

Paul Zed Fundy Royal, NB

Mr. Speaker, I ask that the remaining questions be allowed to stand.

Mr. Speaker, while I am on my feet perhaps I could be permitted to reply to my hon. colleague. While I understand he is losing some patience on this issue, he has asked a comprehensive question. It is a very detailed question and is a question that requires a good bit of information to come from one of the government departments that is very consumed with getting his information.

I assure him that we are working on the question and I can assure the hon. member we are doing everything we can to have the answer as soon as possible.

Questions Passed As Orders For Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:45 p.m.

The Speaker

It is rather a strange twist but you have answered the question and you have presented Questions on the Order Paper which is all right.

Shall the remaining questions be allowed to stand?

Questions Passed As Orders For Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:45 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Questions Passed As Orders For Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:45 p.m.

The Speaker

I wish to inform the House that because of the ministerial statement, government orders will be extended by 10 minutes.