House of Commons Hansard #80 of the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was colombia.

Topics

Question No. 393
Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

Navdeep Bains Mississauga—Brampton South, ON

With regards to Citizenship applications: (a) what is the processing time for applications broken down by Immigration office and provided for each calendar year since 2006; (b) what are the geographic areas those offices serve; (c) how many full-time, part-time and temporary staff are employed in each of these offices; (d) how many full-time, part-time and contract staff specifically handle citizenship applications; (e) what is the budget allocated to each of those offices for each fiscal year since 2005-2006; (f) how much of the budget is committed specifically for the handling of citizenship applications per fiscal year; and (g) what information was provided to the Minister on Citizenship processing times since 2006?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 394
Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

Marlene Jennings Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC

With respect to the government’s 2009 spending: (a) excluding the Building Canada Fund, how much money was spent in the first 120 days of the government’s Economic Action Plan, that is from January 27 to May 26 on economic stimulus measures; (b) including the Building Canada Fund, how much money was spent in the first 120 days of the Plan, that is from January 27 to May 26 on economic stimulus measures; (c) with respect to the Building Canada Fund, which applications have received funding since 2006 within the province of Quebec; and (d) with respect to the Building Canada Fund, which applications have received funding since 2006 within the City of Montréal?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 396
Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

Gerard Kennedy Parkdale—High Park, ON

With respect to the Economic Action Plan in Budget 2009: (a) under the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund, (i) what projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what are each partner's contribution, (vi) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects; (b) under the Building Fund Communities Component top-up, (i) what projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what are each partner's contribution, (vi) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects; (c) under the Provincial/Territorial Base funding acceleration, (i) what projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what are each partner's contribution, (vi) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects; (d) under the Recreational Infrastructure program, (i) what projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what are each partner's contribution, (vi) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects; (e) under the Green Infrastructure Fund, (i) what projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what are each partner's contribution, (vi) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects; and (f) under the National recreational trails program, (i) what projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are the located and in which federal riding, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what are each partner's contribution, (vi) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 397
Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

Gerard Kennedy Parkdale—High Park, ON

With respect to the Knowledge Infrastructure programs within Budget 2009: (a) under the Universities and colleges program, (i) what projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what are each partner's contribution, (vi) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects; (b) under the Canada Foundation for Innovation, (i) what projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what are each partner's contribution, (vi) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects; (c) under Canada Health Infoway, (i) what projects have been approved for funding to date, ii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what are each partner's contribution, (vi) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects; (d) under the broadband in rural communities, (i) what projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what are each partner's contribution, (vi) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects; and (e) under the First Nations infrastructure programs (i) what projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iii) who are the partners involved, (iv) what is the federal contribution, (v) what are each partner's contribution, (vi) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (vii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 398
Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

Gerard Kennedy Parkdale—High Park, ON

With regards to the infrastructure programs within Budget 2009 and the Building Canada plan: (a) what are the due diligence guidelines and processes used to select approved projects for (i) Building Canada Fund Major infrastructure, (ii) Building Canada Fund Communities Component, (iii) Public-Private Partnerships Fund, (iv) Gateways and Border Crossings Fund, (v) Provincial-Territorial Base Funding, (vi) Infrastructure Stimulus Fund, (vii) Green Infrastructure Fund, (viii) Universities and Colleges Knowledge Infrastructure program; (b) what auditing requirements are being placed on approved projects for (i) Building Canada Fund Major infrastructure, (ii) Building Canada Fund Communities Component, (iii) Public-Private Partnerships Fund, (iv) Gateways and Border Crossings Fund, (v) Provincial-Territorial Base Funding, (vi) Infrastructure Stimulus Fund, (vii) Green Infrastructure Fund, (viii) Universities and Colleges Knowledge Infrastructure program; (c) was any targeting done for areas with respect to unemployment level or need for (i) Building Canada Fund Major infrastructure, (ii) Building Canada Fund Communities Component, (iii) Public-Private Partnerships Fund, (iv) Gateways and Border Crossings Fund, (v) Provincial-Territorial Base Funding, (vi) Infrastructure Stimulus Fund, (vii) Green Infrastructure Fund, (viii) Universities and Colleges Knowledge Infrastructure program; and (d) which projects were exempted due to changes in environmental regulations and/or changes to the Navigable waters protection act for (i) Building Canada Fund Major infrastructure, (ii) Building Canada Fund Communities Component, (iii) Public-Private Partnerships Fund, (iv) Gateways and Border Crossings Fund, (v) Provincial-Territorial Base Funding, (vi) Infrastructure Stimulus Fund, (vii) Green Infrastructure Fund, (viii) Universities and Colleges Knowledge Infrastructure program?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 399
Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

Gerard Kennedy Parkdale—High Park, ON

With regards to the infrastructure programs within Budget 2009 and the Building Canada plan: (a) do the Treasury Board guidelines differ in any way between the new infrastructure programs within the Economic Action plan and the Building Canada programs from Budget 2007; and (b) what analysis has been undertaken to evaluate the effects of infrastructure programs on increased costs of construction?

(Return tabled)

Starred Questions
Routine Proceedings

September 14th, 2009 / 3:19 p.m.

Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre
Saskatchewan

Conservative

Tom Lukiwski Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, would you please call Starred Question no. 363. I ask that the question and answer be printed in Hansard as if read.

*Question No. 363
Starred Questions
Routine Proceedings

3:19 p.m.

Liberal

Irwin Cotler Mount Royal, QC

With respect to Canada’s obligation to prevent genocide: (a) does the government consider the obligation to prevent genocide, pursuant to Article 1 of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, to be binding under international law and, if not, on what basis is the government absolved of its obligation under international law; (b) does the government recognize incitement to genocide as a warning sign of genocide; (c) does the government consider the government of Iran to have engaged in incitement to genocide and, if so, what measures has the government taken to respond to the incitement to genocide in Iran, and to curb that incitement to genocide; (d) if the answer to (c) is negative, on what basis does the government dispute the evidence or conclusions presented in the Danger of a Genocidal, Rights-Violating and Nuclear Iran: The Responsibility to Prevent Petition, available online at http://www.irwincotler.parl.gc.ca/documents/081209_petition.pdf (the “Petition”); (e) does the government consider itself to be in standing violation of its “normative and compelling” obligation to “employ all means reasonably available [...] so as to prevent genocide so far as possible” pursuant to the Genocide Convention, as characterized by the International Court of Justice (case no. 91, 26 February 2007) and, if not, on what basis does the government consider its obligation to have been satisfied; (f) does the government consider Iran to have violated the prohibition under the Genocide Convention on direct and public incitement to genocide and, if so, (i) what measures has the government taken to hold Iran accountable for its breach of the Genocide Convention, (ii) has the government or a delegation thereof at the United Nations ever made a public statement calling out Iran for its breach of the Genocide Convention and, if so, by whom was the statement made, to what audience, on what date and at what location; and (g) if the government does not consider Iran to have violated the prohibition under the Genocide Convention on direct and public incitement to genocide, on what basis does the government dispute the evidence or conclusions presented in the Petition?

*Question No. 363
Starred Questions
Routine Proceedings

3:19 p.m.

Pontiac
Québec

Conservative

Lawrence Cannon Minister of Foreign Affairs

Mr. Speaker, in response to (a), yes.

In response to (b), yes.

In response to (c) and (d), Canada and like-minded states will continue to monitor statements emanating from the government of Iran, including its president.

Canada has consistently taken Iran to task for its unacceptable behaviour in international affairs and for the appalling abuses of human rights that the regime carries out against its own people and has publicly condemned President Ahmadinejad’s egregious and offensive comments. For the sixth consecutive year in 2008, Canada led the international community in drafting and passing a resolution before the United Nations General Assembly calling upon Iran to respect its international human rights obligations.

In response to (e) Canada delivers on its obligations to both prevent and punish genocide by criminalizing the crime of genocide under its domestic law and thus enabling its domestic prosecution in Canadian courts where there is evidence to support such action. Canada is also a supporter of the International Criminal Court, which both deters and punishes perpetrators of genocide; as well, Canada supported the appointment of a Special Advisor on the Prevention of Genocide with the mandate to make appropriate recommendations for prevention to the United Nations Security Council through the UN Secretary-General.

Canada delivered a statement on the Responsibility to Protect, R2P, on July 24th at the UN General Assembly Open Debate, which demonstrated our support for the principle and emphasized our continued work in enhancing conflict prevention, preventive advocacy, and early warning mechanisms.

At the international level, Canada has supported the development of the new international norm of the Responsibility to Protect. The concept of the Responsibility to Protect, as endorsed by the 2005 World Summit Outcome Document and reaffirmed by UN Security Council Resolution 1674(2006) on the protection of civilians in armed conflict acknowledges both the responsibility of each individual state as well as the international community to protect civilian populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. According to the summit outcome document, this responsibility of a state towards its own population includes “the prevention of such crimes, including their incitement, through appropriate and necessary means”.

In response to (f), see response to questions (c) and (d).

In response to (g), see response to questions (c) and (d).