House of Commons Hansard #175 of the 37th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was wto.

Topics

Questions on the Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Kitchener Centre
Ontario

Liberal

Karen Redman Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Nos. 120, 123, 124, and 131.

Question No. 120—
Routine Proceedings

April 24th, 2002 / 3:15 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

John Herron Fundy Royal, NB

Why is the definition of “disabled” used in the Canada pension plan disability benefit program not also used for applications for the disability tax credit with Canada Customs and Revenue Agency?

Question No. 120—
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Thornhill
Ontario

Liberal

Elinor Caplan Minister of National Revenue

The fact that a person is unable to work due to medical reasons or is receiving Canada pension plan, CPP, benefits or payments from other types of disability or insurance plans does not necessarily mean the person qualifies for the disability tax credit, DTC.

The CPP disability program is intended to provide benefits to individuals who are no longer able to work because of a “disability”. Criteria for the DTC, however, do not consider an individual’s ability to work. The issue is whether an individual is affected in a “basic activity of daily living”, e.g. walking, hearing, et cetera.

For example, an individual who was born “legally blind” would qualify for the DTC, but might not be eligible to receive CPP disability payments. Conversely, an individual who was no longer able to work because of a bad back might qualify for a CPP disability pension, but may not qualify for the DTC if he or she could perform all of the “basic activities of daily living”.

The role of the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency is to administer the Income Tax Act as enacted by parliament. The policy rationale behind the legislation falls under the jurisdiction of the Minister of Finance.

Question No. 123—
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Gerald Keddy South Shore, NS

How many people are affected by the court decision that Treaty 8 members are exempt from federal taxes, and how much money was received from federal taxation of Treaty 8 members in 2000, 1999, and 1998?

Question No. 123—
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Thornhill
Ontario

Liberal

Elinor Caplan Minister of National Revenue

With respect to the March 7, 2002, decision of the federal court, trial division, in Benoit v The Queen, it is not possible for the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency, CCRA, to answer the hon. member’s question with precision. There are approximately 40,000 status Indian members of Treaty 8 bands. Of these, about 22,500 live off reserve and would likely be affected by the court decision. Those Treaty 8 members with income or property on reserves already benefit from the Indian Act tax exemption. However, the right described in the Benoit case is potentially broader than the Indian Act tax exemption.

The CCRA does not maintain statistics with regard to the amount of money received from federal taxation of Treaty 8 members. There is no requirement under federal tax legislation to indicate one’s treaty affiliation or band membership.

Question No. 124—
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Scott Reid Lanark—Carleton, ON

What were the translation costs associated with the production of the report entitled “Canadian Environmental Asssessment Act, CEAA, Screening Report for the OMYA (Canada) Inc.--Tay River Water Intake Project”, dated March 2002 and disseminated by habitat chief, Ontario-Great Lakes area, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Edwin R. DeBruyn?

Question No. 124—
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

West Nova
Nova Scotia

Liberal

Robert Thibault Minister of Fisheries and Oceans

The costs associated with the translation of the document “Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, CEAA, Screening Report for the OMYA (Canada) Inc.--Tay River Water Intake Project” were as follows:

Total as of 22/03/02: $10, 538

$2,017--English/French public notice of comment period on screening report (10/10/01)

$4,675--English/French screening report and revisions from public comment (23/10/01)

$3,846--English/French translation, amendments, editorial revisions of screening report (11/03/02)

Outstanding payable(s) for translation, amendment and editorial revision to the screening report of March 2002 should be received in the Burlington District Office within the next month.

Question No. 131
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Garry Breitkreuz Yorkton—Melville, SK

With regard to the Canadian Firearms Program: ( a ) what is the proposed budget allocation for fiscal year 2002-03; ( b ) what are the line-item cost projections for fiscal year 2002-03; ( c ) what are the cost projections by department and agency for 2002-03; ( d ) what is the total cost of the program since its inception in 1995; and ( e ) what is the projected annual cost for each of the next 10 years?

Question No. 131
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Northumberland
Ontario

Liberal

Paul MacKlin Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

(a) The Canadian Firearms Centre’s, CFC, proposed budget allocation for fiscal year 2002-03 is $113.5 million.

(b) The CFC line item cost projections for 2002-03 are as follows:

Vote 1--Operating Expenditures: $97.3 million

Vote 5--Contributions: $10.4 million

Statutory--Employee Benefits: $5.8 million

(c) The cost projections by department and agency that will receive funding through the Canadian Firearms Centre in 2002-03 are as follows:

Department of Justice--CFC: $109.5 million

Solicitor General--RCMP: $3.0 million

Canada Customs and Revenue Agency: $1.0 million

(d) The total cost of the program since inception in 1995 is:

From 1995-96 to 2000-01 the net cost of the program incurred by the Department of Justice--CFC is $484.1 million. This consists of $551.5 million in gross expenditures minus $23.1 million in C-17 expenditures minus $44.3 million in net revenue.

As of March 31, 2002, period 12, the net cost of the program incurred by the Department of Justice--CFC for fiscal year 2001-02 is $88.6 million. This consists of $102.9 million in gross expenditures minus $14.3 million in revenue.

(e) The projected annual costs for the next 10 years are as follows:

i. For 2002-03 the net costs are projected to be $101.2 million (this consists of projected gross expenditures of $113.5 million minus $12.3 million in revenue);

ii. For 2003-04 the net costs are projected to be $59.8 million (this consists of projected gross expenditures of $95.0 million minus $35.2 million in revenue);

iii. For 2004-05 the net costs are projected to be $44.8 million (this consists of projected gross expenditures of $80.0 million minus $35.2 in revenue);

iv. Funding has not yet been finalized for fiscal years 2005-06 through 2011-12, but is expected to continue to decrease.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Kitchener Centre
Ontario

Liberal

Karen Redman Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, if Question No. 118 could be made an order for return, the return would be tabled immediately.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

The Speaker

Is that agreed?

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Question No. 118—
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Grant McNally Dewdney—Alouette, BC

With regard to instances of environmental or other damage at the National Library: ( a ) how many instances have occurred; ( b ) what was the type of damage and the date of each occurrence; ( c ) how many documents, artifacts or other stored items have been damaged; ( d ) what specific costs for repair, restoration or replacement are associated with those damaged items; ( e ) how many items have been permanently lost as a result of this damage including the type of item, the date it was damaged, and the value in dollars associated with its loss; ( f ) how much money has been spent on repairs, renovations or maintenance to the National Library and when did this work take place; ( g ) what is the current value of the inventory and all holdings of the National Library; and ( h ) has the government completed a cost analysis of the repairs necessary to maintain the current library as compared to the costs of constructing a new National Library?

Return tabled.

Question No. 118—
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

Karen Redman Kitchener Centre, ON

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

Question No. 118—
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

The Speaker

Is that agreed?