House of Commons Hansard #26 of the 37th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was c-17.

Topics

Question No. 4
Routine Proceedings

3:20 p.m.

Toronto Centre—Rosedale
Ontario

Liberal

Bill Graham Minister of Foreign Affairs

Legislation mandating the domestic implementation of the proposed Kimberley process certification scheme for rough diamonds was tabled in the House of Commons on October 10, 2002, and completed third reading on November 8. The proposed legislation, Bill C-14, has now been referred to the Senate. At a ministerial meeting of the process held on November 5, 2002, in Interlaken, Switzerland, representatives of Canada and more than 30 other countries, and the European Union, restated their commitment to introduce the scheme beginning on January 1, 2003.

Question No. 7
Routine Proceedings

3:20 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

John Williams St. Albert, AB

With regard to the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, ACOA, from 1998 to the present: ( a ) how many construction and/or renovation projects has ACOA approved in Prince Edward Island; ( b ) who was the contractor for each project; ( c ) what was the dollar amount for each project; ( d ) in a brief narrative description, what work was carried out under the project; ( e ) on what date was the contract awarded; ( f ) was the contract awarded through an open competition, an advance contract award notice, ACAN, or a non-competitive award; and ( g ) who at ACOA approved the contract?

Question No. 7
Routine Proceedings

3:20 p.m.

Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte
Newfoundland & Labrador

Liberal

Gerry Byrne Minister of State (Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency)

With regard to the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, ACOA, attached is a table covering the period 1998 to the present, responding to the following questions: a) how many construction and/or renovation projects has ACOA approved in Prince Edward Island; b) who was the contractor for each project; c) what was the dollar amount for each project; d) in a brief narrative description, what work was carried out under the project; e) on what date was the contract awarded; f) was the contract awarded through an open competition, an advance contract award notice, ACAN, or a non-competitive award; and g) who at ACOA approved the contract.

Renovations ACOA PEI

Fiscal year 1998-99 to date

As at June 24, 2002

LPO: Local purchase order

SSA: Small Projects/Specific Service Agreements--These are for services to be provided by Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC); all contracts are let and managed by PWGSC.

Number of Renovation Projects: 9

Number of Contracts: 22

Question No. 10
Routine Proceedings

3:20 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Joe Clark Calgary Centre, AB

With regard to the cost of the June 2002 G-8 Summit: ( a ) what specifically was the cost of security for (i) the G-8 site at Kananaskis; and (ii) G-8 related activities in Calgary by the RCMP, the city of Calgary, the Department of Defence; and ( b ) what was the total cost of the Summit?

Question No. 10
Routine Proceedings

3:20 p.m.

Halifax West
Nova Scotia

Liberal

Geoff Regan Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

I am informed as follows:

Canada Customs and Revenue Agency:

The following is the amount spent by the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency on the 2002 G-8 summit:

Fiscal year 2001-02: $79,000

Fiscal year 2002-03: $907,000

Canadian Food Inspection Agency:

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency’s share of the total cost for the June 2002 G-8 summit is estimated at $500,000.

Foreign Affairs and International Trade:

As summit security was the responsibility of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, RCMP, any questions concerning security costs should be directed to the RCMP. This would include G-8 related activities in Calgary by the RCMP and City of Calgary as Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, DFAIT, is not privy to arrangements entered into between the city and the RCMP. Department of National Defence, DND, will be reporting on its own costs.

Non-security costs for the summit are still being tallied. The Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade is not able to provide summit cost figures for other departments, however summit costs for the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade for fiscal year 2001-02 amounted to $12,400,000. In addition, from April 1 to September 30, 2002, the department expended $23,116,000 with another $15,230,000 in commitments which may or may not be expended in full. A full reconciliation will be made available once all the invoices are submitted, reviewed, settled and accounted for.

Health Canada: The costs related to the G-8 summit are approximately $131,000.

Industry Canada: Approximately $498,000.

Justice Canada: Justice Canada costs related to the June 2002 G-8 summit are $232,840, provision of legal advice and services related to the G-8.

National Defence: (a)(ii) As of September 30, 2002, the total estimated incremental cost for fiscal year 2002-03 to the Department of National Defence for the planning, preparation and execution of the security tasks in support of the G-8 summit was approximately $43 million. The incremental cost is that which is over and above the amount that would have been spent for personnel and equipment if they had not deployed on this task.

Public Works and Government Services, PWGSC:

Fiscal year 2001-02: $ 9,292,500.00

Fiscal year 2002-03: $ 6,070,005.00

Total cost: $15,362,505.00

The amounts identified are to cover such activities as accommodation, interpretation services and procurement and contract management for which PWGSC received appropriated funds. Activities, such as the management of the executing agency, are funded by other government departments and should be calculated in their total cost.

Please note that the amount for 2002-03 was calculated on cost to date plus any known outstanding commitments.

Solicitor General of Canada: With regard to the cost of the June 2002 G-8 summit, the department is not in a position at this time to determine its total cost for security for the G-8.

Canadian Security Intelligence Service: It is the policy of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service not to comment on operational activities nor release specific details of its budget and expenditures for reasons of national security.

Correctional Service of Canada, CSC: The CSC spent a total of $1,600,000 associated with the G-8 summit.

These costs were a result of CSC housing provincial offenders in its federal institutions during the G-8 summit. This allowed the province to have the space available at their provincial jails should it be required.

Royal Canadian Mounted Police: With regard to the cost of the June 2002 G-8 summit, the RCMP is not in a position at this time to determine its total cost for its portion of the security for the G-8.

Question No. 12
Routine Proceedings

3:20 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Joe Clark Calgary Centre, AB

Since 1997, what has been the amount of annual funding for the Language Instruction for New Canadians (LINC) program that has gone to: ( a ) the province of Alberta; ( b ) the city of Calgary; and ( c ) how does this funding compare to other provinces and cities?

Question No. 12
Routine Proceedings

3:20 p.m.

Bourassa
Québec

Liberal

Denis Coderre Minister of Citizenship and Immigration

Insofar as Citizenship and Immigration Canada, CIC, is concerned, the amount of annual funding for the language instruction of new Canadians, LINC, since 1997 is as follows:

(a) The Province of Alberta

Source: CIC Integration, Settlement Grants & Contributions Expenditures Tables.

(b) The City of Calgary

Source: CIC Regional Office--Prairies & Northern Territories

(c) Provinces

Source: CIC Integration, Settlement Grants & Contributions Expenditure Tables and CIC Regional Office--Atlantic for NS.

N.B. Under the terms of the Canada-Quebec Accord funds are transferred directly to the provincial government for settlement services, not specifically for language training. British Columbia and Manitoba have also signed settlement agreements with the Department of Citizenship and Immigration in 1998. CIC transfers a lump sum to the provinces to be used in the delivery of all settlement programs. In general, approximately 80% of funds are allocated to language training.

(d) Cities

Source: CIC Regional Offices--Atlantic, Ontario, Prairies & Northern Territories and Ontario Region Constituency Reports for 99-00, 00-01 & 01-02

All three areas are part of the Greater Toronto Area.

N.B.1: The above cities were selected randomly based on existing data for the purpose of providing information on LINC funding in other cities. Immigrant intake was not specifically considered, thus the above data can be used for information purposes but is not suited for comparisons.

N.B.2: All figures exclude funding for Kosovo refugees.

Question No. 13
Routine Proceedings

3:20 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Joe Clark Calgary Centre, AB

With regard to development assistance for each year since 1993 until present: ( a ) how much of Canada's official development assistance has been devoted to sub-Saharan Africa; and ( b ) per year and by country, what was the amount of aid?

Question No. 13
Routine Proceedings

3:20 p.m.

Essex
Ontario

Liberal

Susan Whelan Minister for International Cooperation

Total ODA Disbursements for Sub-Saharan African Countries from 1993/94 to 2000/01* ($ Millions)

  • Total disbursements include: Government to Government, Canadian Partnership Program, Multilateral Assistance (Imputed Costs), Commonwealth Scholarships, Food Aid, Humanitarian Assistance, IDRC and ICHRDD.

Source: Table M of the Statistical Report on ODA (excluded from the Africa country list are Tunisia, Morocco, Egypt and Algeria)

October 11, 2002

Question No. 16
Routine Proceedings

3:20 p.m.

Bloc

Pierre Paquette Joliette, QC

What are the amounts and contributions from the different federal government organizations and departments that have been directed to the Inter-Parliamentary Forum of the Americas (FIPA) since 2000?

Question No. 16
Routine Proceedings

3:20 p.m.

Halifax West
Nova Scotia

Liberal

Geoff Regan Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

I am informed as follows: Canadian International Development Agency, CIDA: CIDA has not funded the Inter-Parliamentary Forum of the Americas, FIPA, directly but has provided a $400,000 grant to the Organization of American States, OAS, in August 1999 which was used by the OAS to support the development of FIPA. CIDA made a further contribution of $70,000 in March 2002 to support costs of the OAS to be incurred in their capacity as a technical adviser to FIPA.

Foreign Affairs and International Trade:

Canada encourages inter-parliamentary relations in the hemisphere, and in particular the work of the Inter-Parliamentary Forum of the Americas, FIPA. The participation of parliamentarians is key in the success of the implementation of the plan of action of the summit of the Americas. Since 2000, the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade has contributed a total amount of $150,000 Canadian, through the Canadian Parliamentary Centre, in order to support the Canadian presidency of FIPA.

Question No. 22
Routine Proceedings

November 18th, 2002 / 3:20 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Ted White North Vancouver, BC

With respect to the Compass Program of Human Resources Development Canada: ( a ) what were the costs associated with running the program over the past year; ( b ) what are the projected costs for the current year; ( c ) how is the success rate of the program measured and what were the most recent results of those measurements; and ( d ) if no measurements have been made to determine the success of the program, how is its continuation being justified?

Question No. 22
Routine Proceedings

3:20 p.m.

Brant
Ontario

Liberal

Jane Stewart Minister of Human Resources Development

The Nova Scotia Compass program was funded under the federal strategic initiatives program. This program ended in December 1996.

Compass was delivered by the N.S. Department of Community Services and was designed to provide employment opportunities and/or work experience to job ready clients from both provincial and municipal social assistance caseloads. Total expenditures were $12.5 million over two years from October 1994 to December 1996.

A summative evaluation was conducted in the winter of 1997 to measure labour market outcomes of program participants as compared to a comparison group. In addition to the participant/non-participants surveys, an econometric analysis was conducted to determine program impact.

Program outcomes at time of survey: 56% of participants were working as opposed to only 37% of non-participants; 33% of participants were on social assistance while 57% of non-participants were on social assistance; 25% of participants were on EI compared to 12% of non-participants.

Econometric analysis: Evidence showed that the Compass program increased participants proportion of time spent working by 12% to 14%; participants showed reduced reliance on social assistance.

Question No. 23
Routine Proceedings

3:20 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Ted White North Vancouver, BC

With respect to documents known as “trespass warnings”, whether in the form of “constructive” or “actual” notices, sent by registered mail to the Minister of National Revenue by persons acting on instructions provided to them in the Detax strategy promoted by Mr. Eldon Warman of Calgary: ( a ) how many such notices have been received by the Minister in each of the tax years 1996 through 2002; and ( b ) how many of the persons filing such notices have since begun or resumed paying taxes, been prosecuted, and been sentenced or acquitted during that same period?

Question No. 23
Routine Proceedings

3:20 p.m.

Thornhill
Ontario

Liberal

Elinor Caplan Minister of National Revenue

(a) During the period 2000-01, the Minister of National Revenue received 571 so-called “constructive notices”. The minister received 274 during 2001-02, and 57 from April 1, 2002 to September 30, 2002. There is no reliable data for the periods prior to 2000. Similarly, the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency, CCRA, has no data with respect to the source of these “constructive notices” or where a client may have obtained instructions on their use.

(b) The CCRA does not keep statistics on the number of persons filing “constructive notices” in relation to their filing status and does not prosecute Canadians for filing a “constructive notice”. However if a client chooses not to file a return and not comply with a “requirement to file a tax return”, the client may then be prosecuted for the failure to file a required return.