House of Commons Hansard #44 of the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was judges.

Topics

Multiple Sclerosis
Petitions
Routine Proceedings

12:10 p.m.

Liberal

Kirsty Duncan Etobicoke North, ON

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition regarding chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency, or CCSVI. Over 15,000 procedures have now been performed in over 60 countries. In May 2010, my colleague from St. Paul's and I brought the fight for clinical trials and the registry for CCSVI to Parliament. Almost a year later, in March 2011, the government announced a registry, although it would not start until July 2012. In June 2011, at last the government announced clinical trials.

I want to be very clear. All we have right now is announcements. What we need is action. Canadians with MS cannot afford to wait.

The petitioners call for the Minister of Health to consult experts actively engaged in diagnosis and treatment of CCSVI to undertake phase 3 clinical trials on an urgent basis with a large patient participation in multiple centres across Canada and to require follow-up care.

Training at Flight Schools
Petitions
Routine Proceedings

12:10 p.m.

NDP

Djaouida Sellah Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition signed by 2,000 of my constituents. These signatures were collected by Longueuil's Comité anti-pollution des avions. The petition is calling for a ban on training flights over residential areas. The petition is just one indication of the importance of this issue, which affects Saint-Bruno as much as it does Saint-Hubert.

I intend to demonstrate goodwill and work with all those affected to find a solution for the well-being of my constituents.

International Aid
Petitions
Routine Proceedings

12:10 p.m.

Liberal

Scott Simms Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour of presenting this petition. It is the first one of its kind that I have presented. It is a petition to the Government of Canada highlighting Canada becoming a global leader in aid effectiveness.

In 2009, $4.73 billion went into aid, but some of my constituents want the Government of Canada to be more proactive on transparency, creativity and accountability, doing things such as calling on the G8 to standardize tracking and reporting major international commitments. They also call for an innovation fund worth $200 million per year and new and riskier approaches to development so that there would be proactive element to this, as well as being very transparent. Certainly CIDA projects have been completely transparent in the last few years.

I want to congratulate the petitioners in the towns of Grand Falls—Windsor, Twillingate and Summerford for sending me this petition.

Questions on the Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

12:10 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, the following question will be answered today: No. 143.

Question No. 143
Questions on the Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

12:10 p.m.

Liberal

Scott Simms Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL

With regard to the Service Canada Employment Insurance (EI) modernization plan: (a) what are the itemized costs incurred for operating the EI Processing Unit in Gander, Newfoundland and Labrador (NL); (b) what are the itemized costs incurred for operating the EI Processing Unit in St. John’s, NL; (c) what are the itemized costs for transferring the EI Processing Unit from Gander to St. John’s including, but not limited to, severance pay, relocation allowances, building costs for the new facility (Pippy Place); (d) what are the itemized costs for transferring the EI Processing Unit from Grand Falls-Windsor to St. John’s; (e) how many employees are working in each EI Processing Unit in NL, including the units in (i) Gander, (ii) Grand Falls-Windsor, (iii) St. John’s; (f) what are the itemized cost savings realized by consolidating all NL EI Processing sites in St. John’s; (g) what criteria were used in deciding that St. John’s is the most appropriate and cost-effective location for an EI Processing Centre in NL, as opposed to Gander; and (h) what is the estimated time frame for the closing of the EI Processing Units in Gander and Grand Falls-Windsor?

Question No. 143
Questions on the Order Paper
Routine Proceedings

12:10 p.m.

Haldimand—Norfolk
Ontario

Conservative

Diane Finley Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development

Mr. Speaker, with regard to (a), the costs are as follows: salary, $1,607,417; non-salary, $207,352.

With regard to (b), the estimated expenditures for the EI processing unit in St. John’s are as follows: salary, $3,046,616; non-salary, $636,604.

With regard to (c), itemized costs related to the consolidation of EI processing sites are not yet available. Service Canada is working with regions to determine relocation, accommodation and other associated costs. The overall transition, including the allocation of resources, will be business-driven, aligned with Service Canada’s automation agenda.

With regard to (d), please refer to the response provided above for (c).

With regard to (e), as of September 20, 2011, Gander had 32 employees; Grand Falls-Windsor is not a designated EI processing site; St. John’s had 58 employees; Corner Brook had 12 employees; and Happy Valley-Goose Bay had 9 employees.

With regard to (f), Service Canada has made considerable progress in modernizing how EI is processed, resulting in significant savings.

Processing costs have been reduced as a result of our automation agenda by almost 30% since 2003. Current EI modernization plans will yield over 15% in further cost savings over the next three years.

Specific itemized cost savings realized by consolidating all NL EI processing sites to St. John’s are not yet available. These savings will be confirmed as site-specific decisions related to workforce, accommodation and timing have been determined.

With regard to (g), each of the 22 sites was chosen following a careful review in which both national and regional perspectives were taken into consideration. This is a national program, and many factors were considered, such as, among others, existing labour force, skill availability, bilingual capability, and real estate.

With regard to (h), no dates have been set to formally close the existing EI processing centres. The transition from 120 to 22 sites will happen gradually over the next three years.

The overall transition will be business-driven, aligned with Service Canada’s automation agenda.

A workforce management strategy is in effect to assist with planned personnel changes, which will include anticipated attrition, retirement, reassignments and training.

Opportunities for transitioning into other business lines will also be available for some EI employees currently working in sites with other lines of business.

This will mean that positions in the consolidated centres will be filled as vacancies are created in the sites that will not be EI processing centres.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

November 4th, 2011 / 12:10 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, if Questions Nos. 140, 141 and 144 could be made orders for returns, these returns would be tabled immediately.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

12:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Andrew Scheer

Is that agreed?

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

12:10 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Question No. 140
Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

12:10 p.m.

Liberal

Kirsty Duncan Etobicoke North, ON

With respect to development of the oil sands, its impacts on the environment and surrounding communities, and the economic effects of these impacts: (a) what, if any, steps has the government taken to establish air emission limits or air quality standards to achieve the World Health Organization’s Air Quality Guidelines to protect air quality and human health; (b) what, if any, steps has the government’s sector-by-sector approach taken to regulate carbon emissions in the oil sands to ensure the oil sands industry makes appropriate reductions in its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to contribute to Canada’s GHG emission reduction goal of 17% below the 2005 level; (c) what, if any, studies has the government undertaken to examine the effect of the oil sands expansion on (i) GHG emissions, (ii) Canada’s ability to meet its GHG emission reduction goals, (iii) Canada’s contribution to the goal of staying below a 2°C increase in global average surface temperature, relative to the pre-industrial level, as articulated at the G8 meeting in L’Aquila, Italy and at the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change negotiations through the Copenhagen Accord in December 2009 and the Cancun Agreements in December 2010, (iv) the full suite of sustainability criteria, including environmental, economic and social sustainability, and (v) what were the results of any studies identified in (c)(i), (c)(ii), (c)(iii), and (c)(iv); (d) what, if any, studies has the government undertaken to examine (i) the scope of oil sands expansion if the oil sands sector is not required to deliver its proportional share of GHG reductions, (ii) the impacts such a decision would have on other sectors’ allowable GHG emissions, (iii) whether other sectors of the Canadian economy would have to do more than their proportional share to reduce emissions, (iv) what were the results of any studies identified in (d)(i), (d)(ii), and (d)(iii); (e) what, if any, studies has the government undertaken to assess safety, risks and effectiveness of carbon capture and storage (CCS) and what were the results of any identified study; (f) what, if any, studies, has the government undertaken to assess safety, risks and effectiveness of enhanced oil recovery and what were the results of any identified study; (g) what, if any, studies has the government undertaken to examine the possible impact of CCS technology on GHG emissions in the oil sands, (i) what are the government’s projections for the level of reductions that is feasible with CCS, (ii) what are the government’s projections for how CCS technology would impact oil sands emissions by 2020 and by 2050, (iii) does the government project that an oil sands industry equipped with CCS technology would be able to meet the specific reductions targets established by the government for 2020 and 2050; (h) how does the government plan to address emissions that cannot be reduced by CCS, such as (i) emissions from smaller in situ projects, (ii) mine fleet emissions, (iii) tailings fugitives; (i) what, if any, steps has the government taken to set an economy-wide price on carbon, rather than a sector-by-sector regulatory approach, as a means to reducing GHG emissions from the oil sands; (j) what, if any, steps has the government taken to adopt regulations to require all new oil sands facilities that began operations in 2010 or later to implement full-scale CCS by 2015, and will projects for which CCS is not an option still be approved by the government, whenever such approval is required for the project to proceed; (k) what, if any, steps has the government taken to quantify and eliminate air and water pollution discharge from tailings ponds by 2020 through Section 36(3) of the Fisheries Act (i) by identifying substances associated with tailings ponds as toxic under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), and (ii) what would be the projected impacts on the environment, human health, industry, and migratory birds of such legislative measures; (l) what, if any steps has the government taken to implement its phase ll monitoring plan (i) when will data collection of begin, (ii) when will data be available for inclusion in decision-making processes, (iii) will monitoring programs be reformed in advance of any new oil sands expansion; (m) what steps is the government taking to ensure sufficient capacity exists to (i) implement the Northwest Territories Water Strategy, (ii) help reform water monitoring in the Mackenzie River Basin; (n) what, if any, steps has the government taken to develop a federal emergency response plan to strengthen the Mackenzie River Basin Transboundary Waters Master Agreement in case of a failure of a tailings lake dyke; (o) are Mackenzie River Basin residents in particular and Canadians in general financially protected from a major industrial accident such as the failure of a tailings dyke and, (i) if so, why are both groups protected, (ii) if not, why, and does the government plan to implement measures to ensure these groups are protected; (p) what, if any, studies has the government undertaken to identify critical habitats for woodland caribou in north-eastern Alberta, and what were the conclusions of each study, including the results of consultations with First Nations on conservation of woodland caribou; (q) what, if any, studies has the government undertaken to determine the level of oil sands development that is consistent with caribou conservation in Alberta; and (r) does the government plan (i) to conduct a comprehensive health study of the impacts of oil sands development on surrounding communities, (ii) to identify and implement measures to reduce any health impacts discovered in such a study?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 141
Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

12:10 p.m.

Liberal

Kirsty Duncan Etobicoke North, ON

With respect to climate change and international and national security: (a) what does the government project are the potential impacts on currently stable regions of the world of such climate change-related phenomena as, but not limited to, (i) rises in sea level, (ii) increases in extreme weather events, (iii) increases in the spread of infectious disease, (iv) increases in environmental refugees; (b) what does the government project will be (i) the consequences of the impacts identified in (a)(ii), (a)(iii), and (a)(iv) on domestic military missions, (ii) the consequences of (a)(i), (a)(ii), (a)(iii), (a)(iv) and (b)(i) in terms of the military’s capacity to respond and the availability of troops for missions not related to conflicts induced by climate change-related phenomena; (c) what does the government project will be the potential impacts on already-weakened states of such climate change-related phenomena as, but not limited to, (i) sea level rise, (ii) extreme weather events, (iii) the spread of infectious diseases; (d) what does the government project will be the extent of the effects climate impacts could have on already-weakened states, including, but not limited to, (i) expanded ungoverned spaces, (ii) further weakened and failed states, (iii) increased conflicts, (iv) increased migrations; (e) what does the government project will be the impact of the effects identified in (d) on Canada’s national security; (f) which nations does the government project will be most affected by climate change, (i) what is the government’s assessment of each such country’s capacity to adapt or cope, (ii) what, if any, action is Canada taking to strengthen the capacity of weak governments to better cope with societal needs projected to arise as a result of climate change-related impacts, (iii) what is the government’s assessment of possible security risks if Canada does contribute to international efforts related to (f)(i) and (f)(ii); (g) has DND or the Canadian military conducted any studies of how climate change can have a multiplier effect on instability in unstable regions of the world and, if so, what were these studies and their results; (h) what are the studies, along with their dates and results, undertaken by the government concerning the possible national security risks of climate change, and what specific observations were included in these studies concerning the impacts the research might have for government efforts pertaining to, but not limited to, (i) the encouragement of regional cooperation, (ii) the improvement of international confidence, (iii) the improvement of public relations; (i) what, if any, departments have participated in an inter-departmental process to develop a policy to reduce national security risks resulting from climate change and (i) if departments have participated in such a process, have all agencies involved with climate science, treaty negotiations, economic policy, and national security been involved in the process, and what were the results, (ii) if departments have not participated in such a process, why not; (j) what, if any, strategies has the government developed, including the dates of each completed strategy, concerning the integration of the national security consequences of climate change into national security and national defence strategies, and if the government has developed such strategies, (i) do the strategies examine the capabilities of the Canadian military to respond to the consequences of climate change, (ii) do the strategies include guidance to military planners to assess climate change risks on future missions, (iii) do the strategies provide guidance for updating defence plans based on new assessments; (k) for each strategy identified in (j), what are (i) the details of any testing of the strategy that has been conducted, (ii) the details of the implementation of the strategy, including, but not limited to, working with allies and partners to incorporate climate mitigation strategies, capacity building, and relevant research and development; (l) what are the government’s plans as concerns its engagement in global partnerships intended to help less developed nations build the capacity and resiliency to better manage climate impacts; and (m) what, if any, conferences has DND undertaken with respect to climate change and national security, if no such conferences have been undertaken, why not, and, if any such conferences have been undertaken, (i) who participated, (ii) what topics were covered, (iii) what findings were made, (iv) what recommendations were made, (v) what follow-up has occurred?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 144
Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

12:10 p.m.

NDP

Philip Toone Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC

With regard to Service Canada programs and services within the riding of Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine: (a) what is the current baseline for service; (b) what value-for-money studies, reviews or summaries have been undertaken relating to Service Canada programs; (c) what are the recommended changes in Service Canada programs in Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine; (d) what is the level of spending on Service Canada operations in the riding for this year and 2010–2011; (e) what is the planned level of spending on Service Canada operations in the riding for 2012–2013 and 2013–2014; (f) what are the numbers for Full Time Equivalents (FTEs) for this year and 2010–2011 in the riding; (g) what are the planned numbers of FTEs for 2012–2013 and 2013–2014 in the riding; (h) how many clients did Service Canada serve in the riding this year and 2010–2011; (i) what is the number of inquiries per FTE for this year and 2010–2011; and (j) what is the demographic make-up of the clients served in the riding this year and in 2010–2011?

(Return tabled)