Human Resources committee  It's not up to me to say whether the government's actions are positive or negative. Unless I have misunderstood, you are asking whether there is an agreement between the province and the federal government. An agreement is negotiated for spending funds or for beginning a progra

Human Resources committee  That's correct.

Human Resources committee  That's correct. It's not too often that I think a provincial government will spend money in an area of federal legislation. It can happen in the reverse from time to time, and it gives rise to some debates.

Human Resources committee  If by changes you're talking about the regulations regarding the accreditation to be given for foreign qualifications, generally it does not.

Human Resources committee  But it may happen in some cases. For example--and I'm not sure of this, but I'll offer it as a hypothetical--airlines are federally regulated. Can the federal government accept qualifications of an immigrant who claims to be qualified as a pilot? It could, possibly, as being inci

Human Resources committee  Our system of government certainly can be interesting from time to time.

Human Resources committee  Yes. It has to do with federal expenditures. The federal government could get involved in areas administered by the provinces through expenditures, but the areas are defined when it comes to legislative issues. In addition, the federal government could spend money in the provinc

Human Resources committee  It was any spending by the federal government. The accountability is a parliamentary one, of course, although the federal government might spend federal funds in areas of provincial legislative jurisdiction. Nonetheless, it has to have an appropriation from Parliament for the spe

Human Resources committee  Accountability measures as such?

Human Resources committee  I don't know that I understand how accountability measures as such could go over into provincial areas. As you may know, there's been an ongoing debate for some years between the Province of Quebec and the federal government regarding spending by the federal government in that

Human Resources committee  Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have provided to the committee clerk a memo on this subject, which I understand has been distributed to members. I'll just speak briefly from that. The Constitution Act, 1867, in sections 91, 92, and 93, divides legislative powers between the federal

Procedure and House Affairs committee  My answer is the same as before: it is not for me to make a judgment on contempt. That is up to you.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Again, it's like the earlier use of suffisants used by Monsieur Paquette. Now it is “adequately”. This is the judgment you have to make on whether they have been addressed adequately. To go to your point about the use of terminology, such as “CIDA's decision” or “the department

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Mr. Chairman, there are a couple of issues there. One, you began by referring to a dictionary definition of “contempt”. Dictionaries have tried, since Samuel Johnson's time, to give objective meaning to words, but we all know that many times words are applied in a way outside o

Procedure and House Affairs committee  If I may articulate a standard that I think I had occasion with other committees to articulate, and that is for witnesses, it's that you don't just answer a question within the four corners of the words used by the member posing the question, particularly when the question is one