Debates of June 13th, 2013

Chief Firearms Officers

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the petitioners ask that the chief firearms officers appointed federally, territorially and provincially be replaced with a civilian agency, which would be service oriented, to prevent the introduction of draconian and impractical regulations.

Shark Finning

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to present two petitions from thousands of Canadians.

The first petition calls on the government to ban shark fin imports. The petitioners say that measures must be taken to stop the global practice of shark finning and to ensure the responsible conservation and management of sharks. The petitioners call on the Government of Canada to immediately legislate a ban on the importation of shark fins.

Search and Rescue

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the second petition calls on the government to save the Kitsilano Coast Guard station. The petitioners say that the recent decision by the federal government to close the station is a grave mistake that will undoubtedly cost the lives of those in peril on the shores and waters near Vancouver Harbour.

The petitioners call on the Government of Canada to rescind the decision and to reinstate full funding to maintain the Kitsilano Coast Guard station.

International Development

[Raymond Côté, NDP, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition signed by many of my constituents.

The petition concerns the amalgamation of the Canadian International Development Agency with the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade. The petitioners are concerned about the amalgamation, particularly the possible realignment of international development assistance programs. They are calling on the government to uphold international aid principles. Also, to ensure the integrity of assistance programs, they want the minister to be given the same status as the Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Trade.

Sex Selection

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise on behalf of my constituents in the beautiful riding of Kelowna—Lake Country. I have to two petitions.

The first calls upon Parliament to condemn discrimination against girls through sex selection.

The second is from another part of the beautiful province of British Columbia. Folks in Kamloops are supporting Motion No. 408 condemning sex selection.

Questions on the Order Paper

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Nos. 1333, 1334, 1341 and 1342.

Question No. 1333

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

With regard to page 40 of the 2013-2014 Report on Plans and Priorities, which states, “the minister of national defence has provided direction for the targeted divestment of certain infrastructure holdings”: (a) which infrastructure holdings has the Minister of National Defence provided for targeted divestment; (b) on what basis has the Minister decided to divest certain infrastructure holdings; (c) what are the associated costs of these targeted divestments; (d) what are the expected savings of these targeted divestments; (e) how are the expected costs and savings of these targeted divestments calculated; (f) what are the impacts on the Canadian Forces of these targeted divestments; and (g) what are the impacts on the local communities of these targeted divestments?

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to (a), the following buildings were selected for targeted divestment: Area Support Unit Chilliwack, British Columbia, building B1041; Area Support Unit Calgary, Alberta, Northeast Armoury; Area Support Unit London, Ontario, buildings B53, B55, B56, B57, B91, B92, B130, O Block and P Block; Area Support Unit Northern Ontario, North Bay, Ontario, building B45 and Timmins Garage; Area Support Group Detachment Moncton, New Brunswick, buildings B1, B2, B35, B41, B42, B60, B60A, B66 and B70, and 70 residential housing units.

With regard to (b), this divestment is linked to the transfer of functions from the area support units in Chilliwack, Calgary, London and northern Ontario and Area Support Group Detachment Moncton to major bases. This will allow the Canadian Army to reduce administrative overhead. This will also increase overall efficiency and allow investment in key priorities, such as training and equipment.

With regard to (c), the preliminary estimated disposal costs are provided below. These costs include demolitions, renovations, environmental assessments and appraisals, as well as any activities required to address the findings of these assessments and appraisals, such as the removal of contaminants. These estimates are subject to service cost fluctuations.

In the case of Area Support Unit Chilliwack in British Columbia, the potential transfer of building B1041 to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police is under consideration. This transfer is estimated to cost approximately $300,000.

In the case of Area Support Unit Calgary in Alberta, the Mewata Armouries and Currie Barracks will be renovated to accommodate units. These renovations are expected to cost approximately $500,000. The disposal of the facility is expected to cost approximately $500,000. In addition, moving these units is expected to cost approximately $161,000.

In the case of Area Support Unit London in Ontario and Area Support Unit Northern Ontario in North Bay, Ontario, the targeted divestments of Area Support Unit London and Area Support Unit Northern Ontario are expected to have a combined cost of approximately $3.12 million.

In the case of Area Support Group Detachment Moncton in New Brunswick, the targeted divestment of these buildings and residential housing units is expected to cost approximately $9.6 million.

With regard to (d), the expected savings of these targeted divestments are as follows:

In the case of Area Support Unit Chilliwack in British Columbia, the divestment of building B1041 is expected to generate savings of approximately $62,000 annually.

In the case of Area Support Unit Calgary in Alberta, the targeted divestment of the Northeast Armoury is expected to generate savings of approximately $631,000 annually. The sale of the building is also expected to generate revenue. The building does not currently have an estimated value, as an appraisal of its value has not been conducted yet.

In the case of Area Support Unit London in Ontario and Area Support Unit Northern Ontario in North Bay, Ontario, the targeted divestments of Area Support Unit London and Area Support Unit Northern Ontario are expected to generate savings of approximately $500,000 annually.

In the case of Area Support Group Detachment Moncton in New Brunswick, the targeted divestment of these buildings and residential housing units is expected to generate approximately $1.16 million annually.

With regard to (e), the expected savings are calculated by using payment in lieu of taxes, utilities costs and operations and maintenance costs, and facilities maintenance costs. The expected costs are calculated by using management fees until disposal, as well as payments to other government departments.

With regard to (f), as a result of targeted divestments, lines of communication between the remaining supported dependencies and their new support bases will be longer. However, the savings generated by reducing infrastructure holdings will be used to support operational readiness or other areas of higher priority.

With regard to (g), the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces are not in a position to determine the impact of these targeted divestments on local communities.

Question No. 1334

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

With regard to the target for the performance indicator “the total average reserve force paid strength by FY (determined by Director Reserves) compared to the target planned strength as published in annual RPP as %”, as cited on page 33 of the 2013-2014 Report on Plans and Priorities: (a) why is the government’s target “to be determined”; (b) how does the government calculate this target; (c) what information is the government missing in order to calculate this target; (d) what government decisions have not been made in calculating this target; and (e) what has changed since the last target so that the government is not capable of having a target until spring 2014?

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to (a), the government target should read 100% of the target planned reserve strength of 27,000. This information was omitted in error and is intended to reconcile with the information found in the human resources full-time equivalent table on page 22 of the report on plans and priorities for fiscal year 2013-14.

With regard to (b), the target is a result of government direction in budget 2012 to maintain reserve strength at 27,000. The response to (c), (d) and (e) is provided in the answer to (a).

Question No. 1341

[Glenn Thibeault, NDP, Sudbury, ON]

With regard to the importation of music devices, broken down by fiscal year since 2006-2007: (a) what is the total value of music devices imported into Canada under tariff codes (i) 8519.81.29, (ii) 8521.90.90, (iii) 8521.13.90, (iv) 9948.00.00); and (b) how much was paid in tariffs for the importation into Canada of music devices under tariff code (i) 8519.81.29, (ii) 8521.90.90, (iii) 8521.13.90, (iv) 9948.00.00?

[Shelly Glover, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the tariff items listed in (a)(i), (a)(ii) and (a)(iv) and (b)(i), (b)(ii) and (b)(iv) are broad tariff categories that encompass several different types of products. These categories do not distinguish music players from the other goods covered, and it is impossible to distinguish the total value of imported music devices from other products in the category with data that can be made public. However, music devices, irrespective of their origin, are eligible for duty-free treatment under the long-standing tariff exemption 9948.00.00.

The tariff item listed in (a)(iii) and (b)(iii) is not a valid tariff item in the Customs Tariff--i.e., this item number does not exist.

Question No. 1342

[Glenn Thibeault, NDP, Sudbury, ON]

With regard to the changes to the Customs Tariffs on page 433 of Budget 2013 and the removal of the General Preferential Tariff regime on pages 134-5 of Budget 2013: (a) what monitoring will be carried out in relation to changes in (i) consumer prices, (ii) the total GST collected by the government, (iii) the total revenue collected by the government; and (b) what are the benchmarks that these changes need to meet in order to be considered successful?

[Shelly Glover, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, economic action plan 2013 announced the elimination of tariffs on babies’ clothing and certain sports and athletic equipment, providing $79 million annually in tariff relief. This measure comes with the expectation that wholesalers, distributors and retailers will fully pass these tariff savings on to Canadian consumers in the form of lower retail prices on the products covered by the measure. The government will be monitoring the impact of tariff reductions on the retail prices for these items over the coming months and is working with the Retail Council of Canada, consumer groups and other independent sources. This initiative will allow the government to assess whether tariff elimination can help narrow the price gap for consumers.

With respect to the general preferential tariff, the changes announced in economic action plan 2013 will be effective January 1, 2015. The modernized GPT will continue to promote economic growth and export diversification in the countries most in need of this type of assistance by providing tariff-based incentives for Canadian importers to source their goods from the remaining 103 eligible countries. GPT changes announced in economic action plan 2013 will accomplish the goal of better aligning the program to the current global economic reality.

The government’s monitoring of revenue is ongoing and will continue.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, if Questions Nos. 1335, 1339 and 1346 could be made orders for return, these returns would be tabled immediately.

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Question No. 1335

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Charlottetown, PE]

With regard to the presence of foreign governments in Canada, specifically the operation or presence of any security, intelligence or law enforcement agencies: (a) what are the names of all law agencies operating with the permission and consent of the government within the sovereign territory of Canada, broken down by country; (b) is the government aware of any law enforcement agency present or operating without the consent and permission of the government; (c) what are the police powers of foreign law enforcement within Canada; (d) does the government allow any foreign law enforcement agency the power to act alone without the presence of a designated Canadian police or peace office present; (e) does the government grant power on a case-by-case basis to an agent of foreign law enforcement to stop any resident of Canada for questioning; (f) does the government allow agents of foreign law enforcement the power to present identification or a badge within Canada for the purpose of investigating within Canada; (g) does the government currently allow agents of foreign law enforcement agency the power to cross a Canadian border either by air, sea or land in possession of a weapon; (h) does the government intend to allow agents of a foreign law enforcement agency the power to enter, leave and operate in Canada with the power to enforce Canadian law, including the power to detain, questions and arrest a citizen or permanent resident of Canada; (i) does the government intend to extend the power to agents of a foreign government law enforcement agency the right of pre-emptive arrest or pre-emptive detention without warrant, as provided in Bill S-7; (j) does the government currently have a cap on the number of agents from a foreign law enforcement agency assigned to Canada and, if so, what is the maximum number of agents allowed; and (k) does the government allow agents of a foreign law enforcement agency the authority to operate their own police vehicles, including police boats, airplanes, or any motor vehicle, within Canada, including the use of sirens or other identifiable police markings?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 1339

[Matthew Kellway, NDP, Beaches—East York, ON]

With regard to military procurement projects, since 2001: (a) how many projects have been sole-sourced as opposed to following a competitive process; (b) which of these have been sole-sourced; (c) what was the rationale for each project being sole-sourced; (d) what is the Industrial and Regional Benefits (IRB) value for each sole-sourced procurement project; (e) does the IRB value for each sole-sourced project represent 100% of the project value (acquisition and in-service support); (f) what percentage of military procurement projects have been sole-sourced since 2001; (g) how many procurement projects have been sole-sourced each year between 2001 and the present year; and (h) which specific projects in each year have been sole-sourced between 2001 and the present?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 1346

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

With regard to the Canadian Armed Forces, what was the breakdown of strength by rank for each Regular Force Unit of the Royal 22nd Regiment as of (i) January 1, 1995, (ii) January 1, 2000, (iii) January 1, 2005, (iv) January 1, 2010?

(Return tabled)

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

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

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Is that agreed?