House of Commons Hansard #71 of the 37th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was war.

Topics

Question No. 121
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Hamilton East
Ontario

Liberal

Sheila Copps Minister of Canadian Heritage

The National Capital Commission informs me as follows:

(a) The 1990 Gatineau Park master plan identified the need for the NCC to rationalize the legal boundary of the park to make it compatible with the various natural or geographic realities and to simplify daily management and park administration. As a result, several land parcels were severed from the park that no longer had a role in achieving the NCC’s mandate and were not essential within the context of the federal land use plan.

Following the 1993 construction of the Wakefield by-pass portion of autoroute 5, three (3) parcels of vacant land, totalling an area of approximately 50.35ha and also an improved parcel of approximately 62.5ha, which was being leased to Vorlage Ski and Recreation Area Limited, were severed from Gatineau Park. Vorlage Ski and Recreation Area Limited purchased the lands for the purposes of continuing the ski centre’s operations and activities.

The proposed disposals were consistent with the environmental impact assessment performed for the transaction and approval was given under the federal land use process.

The NCC has legislative authority for the disposal pursuant to subsection 15(2) of the National Capital Act and subsection 99(2) of the Financial Administration Act .

(b) On November 17, 1994, the NCC sold approximately 112.85 ha of land to the Vorlage Ski and Recreation Area Limited at a price of $296,616. This land sale comprised three parcels of vacant land, totaling approximately 50.35 ha, and of an improved parcel of leased land to the club totaling approximately 62.5 ha.

During the original transfer in 1994, an inadvertent omission of a part of the Vorlage Ski Club property occurred in the legal description. As a result, on November 8, 1995, the NCC completed the sale by transferring a parcel of vacant land having an area of approximately 0.3876 ha. It was sold for a nominal consideration to the Vorlage Ski and Recreation Area Limited since it was part and parcel of the original land description and the NCC had already been paid for the land.

(c) and (d) The NCC did not submit this sale to public consultation and did not inform the public about the sale since Vorlage Ski and Recreation Area Limited was the adjacent owner, it was already leasing over 55 % of the Vorlage Ski Club property and it owned the improvements situated on the leased parcel. These improvements were built by different tenants for purposes of operating the ski club, as early as 1963 and with NCC approval. However, the 1990 Gatineau Park master plan, which recommended a review of the park legal boundary in the context of a rationalization of park properties, was submitted to public consultations

Question No. 123
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Assad Gatineau, QC

What are the full terms and conditions of the development agreement between the National Capital Commission and the Grand Beach Ski Corporation concerning the Camp Fortune ski facility?

Question No. 123
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Hamilton East
Ontario

Liberal

Sheila Copps Minister of Canadian Heritage

The National Capital Commission informs me as follows:

The terms and conditions for the development of the facility are as follows:

The agreement provides for an emphyteutic deed (whereby 3133591 Manitoba Ltd, o/a Ski Fortune, owns the facility for a fixed period and returns it the NCC upon expiry) for a term of 25 years commencing July 1, 1994 to June 30, 2019. An audit will be conducted by both Ski Fortune and the NCC in year 20 of the deed, and Ski Fortune must return all improvements to the NCC in the same condition as evidenced by the audit

Ski Fortune is to assume all risk and expense related to its project to construct a new chalet, an addition to the Skyline Lodge, renovations to the Alexander Lodge, maintenance of Fortune Lodge for user groups, demolition for various structures on the lands, site clean-up of old equipment and machinery, trail improvements to the Skyline, Fortune, Alexander and Meech areas, uphill lift capacity improvements as well as snowmaking system improvements, and any other improvements to the lands.

Ski Fortune shall submit an annual business plan each June 30th over the agreement period, detailing any proposed additional improvements and operation of the project for the next following deed year. Any improvements will be subject to an environmental assessment and federal land use approval, and must be in conformance to the Gatineau Park master plan, all applicable municipal, provincial and federal laws, by-laws and regulations and applicable municipal zoning. As well, any existing and additional improvements must not diminish the value of the lands. The NCC will have 45 days from receipt of the annual business plan to complete its review.

All and any improvements done to the Camp Fortune ski facility must be submitted to the NCC for approval before any work can commence and must abide by the schedule as detailed in the annual business plan.

These improvements will become the property of the NCC upon expiration of the agreement and Ski Fortune will not be entitled to any compensation as such.

Ski Fortune must obtain and pay for all of the permits required for the construction, reconstruction, modification and operation of any existing and additional improvements to the lands.

Ski Fortune must also post a performance security of $250,000 to secure the construction of the new chalet. This security will remain in place until substantial completion of the chalet. A performance security, in the amount of 25% of the value of the work, must also be posted for any construction, replacement, reconstruction, installation or modification of other additional or existing improvements to the lands approved by the NCC. The NCC may waive any performance security at its discretion.

Question No. 124
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Assad Gatineau, QC

Concerning the July 15, 2001 fire at the former residence of Roderick Percy Sparks at 420 Meech Lake Road, why did the National Capital Commission not press the authorities to conduct an investigation?

Question No. 124
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Hamilton East
Ontario

Liberal

Sheila Copps Minister of Canadian Heritage

The National Capital Commission informs me as follows:

Under the conditions of the original lease to Roderick Sparks dated 1971, and the renewals thereof, and the conditions of the lease to Robert Sparks dated April 1989, and the renewals thereof, the tenant was responsible for all maintenance and repairs.

At the request of Robert Sparks, the lease was terminated at the end of November 2000. The property remained unoccupied after November 30, 2000. Mr. Sparks remained responsible until April 15, 2001, to thoroughly clean and remove all chattels and personal property of every kind and description from the lands and premises, including all accumulated refuse, garbage or other waste material.

The property remained unoccupied after November 30, 2000, since the structures had deteriorated beyond economical repair. Given the condition of the buildings, the NCC intended to demolish these buildings and renaturalize the site. In January 2001, Minto Properties Ltd., as agent for the NCC, applied for federal land use approval, FLUA, for the demolition of all structures and renaturalization of the site. This property was reviewed by FHBRO (1989) and classified as non-heritage.

Unfortunately, the buildings were destroyed by fire on July 15, 2001. The NCC then proceeded with the necessary site clean up, restored the site to a natural setting and integrated the lands with the conservation lands of the Gatineau Park portfolio.

In cases where derelict buildings are destroyed by fire, especially when the fire is an isolated event, the NCC does not pursue investigations as to the cause of the fire. The NCC understands that both the fire and police services of the local municipality filed a report on the incident. The NCC has given permission to the municipality, upon receiving an official request, to release the police report to the requestor.

Question No. 127
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Loyola Hearn St. John's West, NL

How much does the government receive annually in civil aviation and airspace charges for the use of airspace over the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador?

Question No. 127
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Hull—Aylmer
Québec

Liberal

Marcel Proulx Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport

The setting and collection of aviation enroute terminal and overflight fees is the sole responsibility of NavCanada, the not-for-profit provider of air navigation services in Canada. The federal government is not a party to these fees, and as such, receives none of the fee revenue for use of airspace over the province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Question No. 141
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Gerry Ritz Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK

For all polling by Ekos Research or any of its affilliates and paid for by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation in calendar years 2000, 2001 and 2002: ( a ) what specific questions were asked; ( b ) what was the total contract amount paid for each respective poll; ( c ) what written analysis was provided following the results of each poll and ( d ) what was the total number of people contacted for each poll?

Question No. 141
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Hamilton East
Ontario

Liberal

Sheila Copps Minister of Canadian Heritage

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation informs me as follows:

(a) Questions included in polls conducted by EKOS Research under contract with CBC/Radio-Canada (usually in partnership with other media organizations) and published via CBC/Radio-Canada’s services are posted on its websites or through links to the EKOS websites and are therefore readily available for scrutiny by the public.

(b) CBC/Radio-Canada is unable to release this information as prescribed by the confidentiality clauses contained in the contracts with the supplier, EKOS Research, and by confidentiality agreements with other media partners.

(c) The written analysis available to the public under the terms of contract with EKOS Research is posted on the websites of CBC/Radio-Canada and/or EKOS Research as per answer (a) above. Additional information may be obtained by contacting the supplier, EKOS Research, directly.

(d) Samples sizes for polls conducted by EKOS Research under contract to CBC/Radio-Canada vary in accordance with the parameters of each poll, but are never lower than 1000 people for national samples.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Halifax West
Nova Scotia

Liberal

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

Mr. Speaker, if Questions Nos. 110, 111 and 122 could be made orders for return, these returns would be tabled immediately.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

The Speaker

The questions enumerated by the hon. parliamentary secretary have been answered. Is it agreed that Questions Nos. 110, 111 and 122 be made orders for return?

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Question No. 110
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Bloc

Gilles Duceppe Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

With respect to each of the grants and contributions made by the Canada Economic Development for Quebec since 2000-2001, can the government: ( a ) provide the name of the recipient organization; ( b ) indicate the date; ( c ) specify the amount of the grant or contribution; ( d ) indicate whether or not it was repayable; ( e ) specify the name of the program in question; ( f ) give the name of the federal constituency in which the recipient organization is located; and ( g ) provide a brief description of the purpose of the contribution or grant?

(Return tabled.)

Question No. 111
Routine Proceedings

March 17th, 2003 / 3:15 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

John Williams St. Albert, AB

With regard to performance pay for public servants in the Executive (EX) category and the Deputy Minister (DM) category in fiscal year 2001-2002: ( a ) for each department, agency or Crown corporation, how many employees received performance pay, broken down by EX category (e.g. EX-1, EX-2, etc.); ( b ) for each department, agency or Crown corporation, how many employees are there in each EX category; ( c ) for each department, agency or Crown corporation, how many employees received performance pay, broken down by DM category (i.e. DM-1, DM-2, etc.); ( d ) for each department, agency or Crown corporation, how many employees are there in each DM category; and ( e ) for each department, agency or Crown corporation, what was the total amount paid out in performance pay?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 122
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Assad Gatineau, QC

Besides the land sold to the Vorlage Ski Club, the National Capital Commission sold a number of lots within Gatineau Park between September 2, 1992 and September 2, 2002: ( a ) for what purpose and according to what process did the National Capital Commission determine that the sale of that land was necessary; ( b ) on what date, or dates, in parcels of how many hectares/acres, for what price per parcel and to whom did the National Capital Commission sell this land; ( c ) did the National Capital Commission subject this sale to a public consultation; If not, why not; and ( d ) did the National Capital Commission inform the public about this sale; If so, on what date and by what means; If not, why not?

(Return tabled)