Debates of Nov. 30th, 2007

Oral Questions

[The Speaker, Liberal, Peter Milliken]

Order. The fact that members make misstatements in questions or answers is not normally the subject of points of order in the House. The difficulty is that the member is raising a matter that sounds like there is an objection to facts that were stated or misstated or whatever.

The Speaker cannot make decisions as to what are facts and what are not. That is a matter for debate in the House. It is not something that the Speaker can be involved in and, accordingly, if the member is raising a matter about facts as stated or not stated or as misrepresented, I am afraid it is beyond the scope of the Chair, and is not a valid point of order.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, during question period the Minister of Natural Resources, in replying to a question, made reference to the global nuclear energy partnership agreement and document, and in fact, referred to a number of specific clauses in that document.

We would ask the minister to table that document and information so that all members of the House could review it since he referred to it.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform]

Clearly, Mr. Speaker, the minister was not reading from a document. There is nothing to table.

Government Response to Petitions

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8) I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to five petitions.

Criminal Code

[Charles Hubbard, Liberal, Miramichi, NB]

moved for leave to introduce Bill S-203, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (cruelty to animals).

Mr. Speaker, with your permission, it is my pleasure to reintroduce a bill to the House which recently has been approved in the Senate, entitled Bill S-203.

Pursuant to Standing Order 86(2), I wish to state that Bill S-203 is in the same form as Bill S-213 which was before the House in the first session, and I ask that the bill be now reinstated.

For your information, Mr. Speaker, it is an act to amend the animal cruelty act. I believe it has broad support across the House and for those who have better ideas in terms of what might happen here, I know that it may be a matter of some debate, but we have to do something to amend an old act which has been before our country for so many years.

This certainly would give greater support to those who are concerned about what happens with the many animals that people enjoy and which often are our friends.

(Motion agreed to and bill read the first time)

[The Speaker, Liberal, Peter Milliken]

The Chair is satisfied that this bill is in the same form as Bill S-213 was at the time of prorogation of the first session of the 39th Parliament.

Accordingly, pursuant to Standing Order 86.2, the bill is deemed read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.

(Bill read the second time and referred to a committee)

Age of Consent

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present to the House a petition on behalf of many of my constituents who are calling on the Liberal Senate to immediately pass the tackling violent crime act, so that we can raise the sexual consent from 14 to 16 and protect youngsters from adult sexual predators.

As you know, Mr. Speaker, that bill would ban adults from sexual relations with kids under the age of 16. It is the right thing to do for our kids. It is just plain right for all Canadians.

Justice

[Leon Benoit, Conservative, Vegreville—Wainwright, AB]

Mr. Speaker, petitioners in my constituency and other petitioners from the area ask, due to an inadequate sentence passed in Shane Rolston's murder and in other crimes, that the sentences for criminals be re-evaluated to ensure that the sentences are adequate and that they match the crime committed. The petitioners are of course delighted with the action our government has taken in this matter.

Property Rights

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West—Glanbrook, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is my honour today to present a petition signed by over 200 petitioners. The petition states that all Canadians deserve the right to own property and that the property be protected from undue seizure.

The petitioners call on parliamentarians to support Motion No. 315 that is before the House and amend section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to extend property rights to Canadians.

Questions on the Order Paper

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform]

Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Questions Nos. 15, 32 and 104.

Question No. 15

[Denise Savoie, NDP, Victoria, BC]

With respect to the National Homeless Initiative (NHI) and the Homelessness Partnering Strategy (NPS): (a) what is the process and protocol for making local or regional announcements regarding funding for specific projects, from the time of approval of application to the time of formal announcement and media releases; (b) what, if any, directives or instructions exist, from cabinet or elsewhere, with respect to MP participation in government announcements; (c) what is the protocol for inviting the local MP to participate in such announcements; (d) for what proportion of NHI / NPS-approved projects are formal announcements and media releases made; (e) what is the date, location, project name and attending MP for each such formal announcement; (f) has any non-cabinet MP participated in a NHI /NPS announcement and media release for a project located outside of her or his riding and, if yes, to which ones and was the local MP in whose riding the project is located invited to participate, and what was the response to the invitation; (g) broken down by each federal party represented in the House, in how many such announcements has a non-Cabinet MP been invited to participate; (h) broken down by each federal party represented in the House, in how many media releases related to the NHI and NPS posted on the government Web site is a non-cabinet MP mentioned; (i) to date, what projects have been funded by the NHI and NPS, with dollar amount, broken down by federal constituency; and (j) what is the total and the average-per-constituency number of projects funded by NHI and NPS and dollar amount for each federal party represented in the House?

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Minister of Human Resources and Social Development]

Mr. Speaker, the response is as follows:

a) The National Homelessness Initiative (NHI) and the Homelessness Partnering Strategy (HPS) are programs of the Government of Canada.

The minister responsible for the program and its funding may announce his decisions or ask a delegate to do so on his behalf.

b) The minister responsible for the program and its funding co-ordinates announcements of Government of Canada funding decisions.

c) The minister responsible for the program co-ordinates announcements of Government of Canada funding decisions.

d) & e) The department does not track this information.

f) The department does not track this type of information. The minister responsible for the program co-ordinates announcements of Government of Canada funding decisions. Organizations may invite anyone they choose to an event.

g), h) & j) The department does not track this information.

i) Government information on funds, grants, loans and loan guarantees issued by departments and agencies is based on parliamentary authorities for departmental or agency programs and activities. This information is listed by department and government organization in the public accounts and disclosed on the web sites of government organizations. However, government organizations do not systematically compile or analyze expenditure information by electoral district. Consequently, at present, it would not be possible to provide most of the information in the form requested.

Over the course of the 39th Parliament, a number of government organizations have undertaken efforts to identify federal expenditures by postal codes which could then be summarized by electoral districts using a tool developed by Statistics Canada. While there is some promise in this approach, there remains a significant potential for error since many postal codes straddle two or more electoral districts. Moreover, the government would have significant concerns about the quality of the financial data derived by this approach because there is no way to track the geographic area in which federal funding is actually spent. For example, federal funding could be provided to the head office of a firm situated in one electoral district, while the funding was actually spent by a subsidiary located in another electoral district. This may also be the case for payments to individuals, organizations or foundations.

Statistics Canada has initiated a process to enhance the accuracy of the tool that provides the link between postal codes and electoral districts. The process will allow departments which use the tool to better approximate by electoral district, data gathered on a postal code basis. The improved tool is expected to be available by January 2008, and training for government organizations on the use of this tool is planned for February--March 2008.

Question No. 32

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

With regard to the Homelessness Partnering Strategy announced on December 19, 2006, and coming into effect on April 1, 2007: (a) what amount is allocated to Quebec; (b) has the government signed an agreement with the Quebec government; (c) when will the transitional measures end; (d) when will the funding be paid; (e) when will organizations be able to submit funding applications; and (f) when will the Strategy be permanently implemented?

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Minister of Human Resources and Social Development]

Mr. Speaker, the response is as follows:

a) The Quebec allocation is $40,108,848 for fiscal years 2007--2008 and 2008-2009. Of that funding, $36,841,152 is allocated to designated communities; $1,284,084 to Aboriginal communities; and $1,983,612 to outreach communities.

b) The current Canada-Quebec agreement has been extended pending the finalization of a new agreement which is expected to be concluded by December 2007.

c) The transitional measures have been effective since April 1, 2007 and will end on December 31, 2007.

d) Through contribution agreements, funds for transitional measures have been flowing to organizations as of April 1, 2007.

e) Organizations will be able to submit funding applications once the Canada-Quebec agreement is renewed and the call for proposals is advertised.

f) The Homelessness Partnering Strategy, a two-year program, came into effect on April 1, 2007.

Question No. 104

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

What is the position of the government with respect to the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation and will the government renew its funding?

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Minister of Human Resources and Social Development]

Mr. Speaker, the future of the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation, CMSF, after January 5, 2010, is understandably a matter of interest to parliamentarians, students, provinces, territories and stakeholders.

A number of reviews have been undertaken to assess the CMSF’s performance, effectiveness and success in achieving its mandate.

The results of these reviews are being examined and will have an impact on the government’s decision in this regard. That decision will be announced accordingly.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform]

Mr. Speaker, if Questions Nos. 3, 16, 17, 19, 44, 46, 52, 53 and 75 could be made orders for return, these returns would be tabled immediately.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Peter Milliken]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Question No. 3

[Sue Barnes, Liberal, London West, ON]

With regard to the National Crime Prevention Centre (NCPC): (a) how many programs will receive funding from the NCPC in 2007; (b) how many programs will receive funding from the NCPC in 2008; (c) what is the breakdown for crime prevention funding per riding for 2007; and (d) what is the proposed funding allocation per riding for 2008?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 16

[Denise Savoie, NDP, Victoria, BC]

With respect to programs and spending under the auspices of Human Resources and Social Development Canada, within the riding of Victoria: (a) in each year, fiscal or calendar, from 1993-2006 inclusive, what was the total (i) annual dollar amount of funding allocated, in grants, loans or loan guarantees, broken down by program, (ii) number of grants allocated, broken down by program; (b) for each of the two periods between June 28, 2004 and January 22, 2006, and between January 23, 2006 to September 27, 2007 inclusive, (i) what funds, grants, loans and loan guarantees has the government issued, (ii) under which program was each payment made, (iii) to whom and for what dollar amount was each payment, (iv) what percentage of each project's funding did the payment cover; (c) for the Summer Career Placement Program and the Canada Summer Jobs program, (i) what was the total annual expenditure for each year from 2003 to 2007 inclusive, (ii) how many job positions were supported through the programs for each year from 2003 to 2007 inclusive, (iii) for the year 2007, how many applications were received, (iv) for the year 2007, how many applications were accepted in each of the first and second rounds of approval, and for which employers, (v) for the year 2007, how many applications were denied or placed on a waiting list, and for which employers; and (d) for programs and spending administered by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC), in each year, from 1993 to 2006 inclusive, (i) what was the total of CMHC spending, (ii) how many CMHC-funded housing units for singles and families existed, (iii) how many new CMHC-funded units were added, (iv) how many CMHC-funded housing units ceased to be available?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 17

[Denise Savoie, NDP, Victoria, BC]

With respect to workplace skills programs as listed in the 2007-2008 Estimates: (a) why did the government cut $22 million from workplace skills programs; (b) which programs qualify under the government's definition of “workplace skills program“ as listed in the line item in the 2007-2008 Estimates; (c) which programs received funding from the government for the 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 fiscal years, broken down by province or territory; (d) how much money did each program receive from the government for 2006-2007 and 2007-2008; (e) which programs received funding from the government for 2006-2007, but not for 2007-2008; (f) what are the expiration dates for each specific program that received funding from the government for 2006-2007 and 2007-2008; (g) which programs received funding from the government for 2007-2008 fiscal year, but not for 2006-2007; (h) for those programs that did not receive funding this fiscal year, was there a review process where applications were re-evaluated and, if so, was more funding applied to those programs; (i) with respect to those programs that had decreased amounts of funding or received no funding, what effect did that have on those specific programs; (j) for those programs that lost funding, what methods did those programs use to compensate for the amount of money not provided by Human Resources and Social Development Canada (HRSDC), specifically in regard to private donations, public fundraisers and applications for other grants outside of HRSDC; (k) what specific services had to be cut or eliminated from those programs because of a loss of funding; (l) what impact did the decrease in or elimination of services have on the surrounding community with the specific groups; (m) what specific demographic groups lost the most from the decrease in or elimination of services; and (n) with respect to workplace skills continued on p. 14-11 of the 2007-2008 Estimates, can the government provide a more detailed breakdown of this figure in the same manner as described in (i), (d), (e), (f) and (g)?

(Return tabled)