House of Commons Hansard #30 of the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was public.

Topics

Question No. 85
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 applications for projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) has the provincial government approved funding for the project, (iii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iv) who are the partners involved, (v) what is the federal contribution, (vi) what is each partner’s contribution, (vii) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (viii) 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) has the provincial government approved funding for the project, (iii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iv) who are the partners involved, (v) what is the federal contribution, (vi) what is each partner’s contribution, (vii) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (viii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects; (c) under Canada Health Infoway, (i) what applications for projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) has the provincial government approved funding for the project, (iii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iv) who are the partners involved, (v) what is the federal contribution, (vi) what is each partner’s contribution, (vii) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (viii) 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) has the provincial government approved funding for the project, (iii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iv) who are the partners involved, (v) what is the federal contribution, (vi) what is each partner’s contribution, (vii) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (viii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects; and (e) under the First Nations infrastructure programs, (i) what applications for projects have been approved for funding to date, (ii) has the provincial government approved funding for the project, (iii) where are they located and in which federal riding, (iv) who are the partners involved, (v) what is the federal contribution, (vi) what is each partner’s contribution, (vii) how much of the funding has flowed and to whom, (viii) what were the criteria used to determine approved projects?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 86
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) for the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund, (i) what meetings have taken place to date between federal government officials and their provincial counterparts, (ii) who was in attendance, (iii) what agenda or minutes were produced in the lead up or subsequent to the meeting, (iv) what briefing notes were prepared for the meeting or as a result of decisions taken at the meeting, (v) when and where did the meetings occur, (vi) was a cabinet minister, parliamentary secretary, or employee of the office of a cabinet minister in attendance and, if so, who; (b) under the Building Canada Fund – Communities Component, (i) what meetings have taken place to date between federal government officials and their provincial counterparts, (ii) who was in attendance, (iii) what agenda or minutes were produced in the lead up or subsequent to the meeting, (iv) what briefing notes were prepared for the meeting or as a result of decisions taken at the meeting, (v) when and where did the meetings occur, (vi) was a cabinet minister, parliamentary secretary, or employee of the office of a cabinet minister in attendance and, if so, who; (c) under the Building Canada Fund – Communities Component top-up, (i) what meetings have taken place to date between federal government officials and their provincial counterparts, (ii) who was in attendance, (iii) what agenda or minutes were produced in the lead up or subsequent to the meeting, (iv) what briefing notes were prepared for the meeting or as a result of decisions taken at the meeting, (v) when and where did the meetings occur, (vi) was a cabinet minister, parliamentary secretary, or employee of the office of a cabinet minister in attendance and, if so, who; (d) under the Building Canada Fund – Major Infrastructure Component, (i) what meetings have taken place to date between federal government officials and their provincial counterparts, (ii) who was in attendance, (iii) what agenda or minutes were produced in the lead up or subsequent to the meeting, (iv) what briefing notes were prepared for the meeting or as a result of decisions taken at the meeting, (v) when and where did the meetings occur, (vi) was a cabinet minister, parliamentary secretary, or employee of the office of a cabinet minister in attendance and, if so, who; (e) under the Provincial/Territorial Base funding acceleration, (i) what meetings have taken place to date between federal government officials and their provincial counterparts, (ii) who was in attendance, (iii) what agenda or minutes were produced in the lead up or subsequent to the meeting, (iv) what briefing notes were prepared for the meeting or as a result of decisions taken at the meeting, (v) when and where did the meetings occur, (vi) was a cabinet minister, parliamentary secretary, or employee of the office of a cabinet minister in attendance and, if so, who; (f) under the Recreational Infrastructure program, (i) what meetings have taken place to date between federal government officials and their provincial counterparts, (ii) who was in attendance, (iii) what agenda or minutes were produced in the lead up or subsequent to the meeting, (iv) what briefing notes were prepared for the meeting or as a result of decisions taken at the meeting, (v) when and where did the meetings occur, (vi) was a cabinet minister, parliamentary secretary, or employee of the office of a cabinet minister in attendance and, if so, who; (g) under the Green Infrastructure Fund, (i) what meetings have taken place to date between federal government officials and their provincial counterparts, (ii) who was in attendance, (iii) what agenda or minutes were produced in the lead up or subsequent to the meeting, (iv) what briefing notes were prepared for the meeting or as a result of decisions taken at the meeting, (v) when and where did the meetings occur, (vi) was a cabinet minister, parliamentary secretary, or employee of the office of a cabinet minister in attendance and, if so, who; and (h) under the National recreational trails program, (i) what meetings have taken place to date between federal government officials and their provincial counterparts, (ii) who was in attendance, (iii) what agenda or minutes were produced in the lead up or subsequent to the meeting, (iv) what briefing notes were prepared for the meeting or as a result of decisions taken at the meeting, (v) when and where did the meetings occur, (vi) was a cabinet minister, parliamentary secretary, or employee of the office of a cabinet minister in attendance and, if so, who?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 88
Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

Carolyn Bennett St. Paul's, ON

With respect to Internet applications: (a) is the government working towards the inclusion of rich Internet applications within its design and development with regard to its Web sites; (b) what is the government’s response to the American response to rich Internet applications made ten years ago; (c) is the government planning on adopting the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 standard; (d) what is the monetary impact of the government’s present use of WCAG 1.0 standard knowing that software contractors have built WCAG 2.0 accessibility into their software; (e) have software contractors requested that the government's Common Look and Feel (CLF) Committee relax or amend their CLF standards to allow for accessibility and, if so, can the government give details of the correspondence; (f) have software contractors required that the government pay extra because it must simplify their software in order to remove these accessibility features; (g) which federal department has the responsibility to ensure that all programs, services and technologies are accessible to people with disabilities and that they are available through the mainstream channels such as the Internet and in alternate formats; (h) is accessibility a mandatory requirement within information and communications procurements to ensure that blind Canadians have access to the same resources as all other Canadians and that they can access all of this through mainstream channels such as the Internet and in alternate formats; (i) how does the government of Canada inform blind Canadians about the availability of information to protect them from incidents of identity theft and fraud; (j) are the government's Web accessibility regulations up to date with today's Web technologies; (k) are Web developers in the government given the support they need to build accessible interactive Web sites, especially when building sites that offer essential services; (l) are Web developers in the government trained in the latest Web accessibility techniques; and (m) are Web developers provided with development tools that support creating accessible Web sites and government services online?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 91
Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

Scott Andrews Avalon, NL

With regard to the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency (ACOA) and, more specifically, projects approved for funding in Atlantic Canada for fiscal years 2005-2006 to 2008-2009 and for the period ending February 28 of fiscal year 2009-2010, broken down by the provinces of New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, and Newfoundland and Labrador: what specific projects were approved in each fiscal year, including (i) the names of proponents, (ii) the project title, (iii) the total cost of project, (iv) the amount of funding approved by ACOA, (v) the funding programs within ACOA for which the funding was approved?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 92
Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

Scott Andrews Avalon, NL

With regard to the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency (ACOA) and, more specifically, the Recreational Infrastructure Canada (RInC) Program administered by ACOA in Atlantic Canada: (a) what was the allocation of funding available for projects under RInC for the time period between January 27, 2009 and March 31, 2010 in Atlantic Canada; (b) how much of this allocated funding has been committed as of March 3, 2010; (c) how much of the allocated funding has actually been expended to the applicants as of March 3, 2010; (d) what were the names, addresses and submission dates of the applicants submitting an application between January 27, 2009 and March 3, 2010 from the constituency of Avalon, (i) how much funding did each applicant apply for, (ii) how much funding was approved, (iii) what percentage of the overall project was funded through RInC; and (e) what is the allocation of funding for RInC in Atlantic Canada for fiscal year 2010-2011?

(Return tabled)

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Conservative

Tom Lukiwski Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK

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

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

Is that agreed?

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Motions for Papers
Routine Proceedings

April 21st, 2010 / 3:15 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, I ask that all Notices of Motions for the Production of Papers be allowed to stand.

Motions for Papers
Routine Proceedings

3:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

Is that agreed?