Debates of April 20th, 2015

Wolfe Island Ferry

[Ted Hsu, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Speaker, on Wolfe Island, if empty but unpurged propane trucks return to the mainland by themselves on empty ferries in the middle of the summer, tourist season, there is a long lineup for the rest of the day. That is why Wolfe Island had a short-run ferry exemption from the Cargo, Tackle and Fumigation Regulations.

The distance between the two ferry docks is 5.03 kilometres, only half a boat length over the 5 kilometre limit for short ferry runs. Recently, however, the exemption was denied because a different short-run ferry definition of three kilometres from the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Regulations was used.

My constituents on Wolfe Island ask the government to harmonize the definition of short-run ferries at 5 kilometres, and to renew the short-run ferry exemption based on a previous exemption and on the fact that the Wolf Island ferry is never more than 1.15 kilometres from land.

Agriculture

[Paul Calandra, Conservative, Oak Ridges—Markham, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition today from St. Patrick's Church, which is the church I attended as a young kid. It is next to St. Patrick School, the grade school I went to in Markham, which is a great school.

The petitioners ask the government to consider international aid policies that promote small farms, especially the role of women.

I am excited by a petition like this because it also gives us an opportunity to highlight some of the great work we are doing in Haiti with our Canadian embassy and McGill University to promote such farming techniques, and the great work by Professor Dion, the brother of the Liberal member of Parliament in the House. We continue to do that, and I am proud to present this petition on behalf of my constituents.

[Adam Vaughan, Liberal, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition to the House of Commons demanding respect for the right of small-scale family farmers to preserve, exchange and use seeds.

The petitioners ask the House to adopt international aid policies that support small family farmers, especially women, and recognize their vital role in the struggle against hunger and poverty. They also ask the House to ensure that Canadian policies and programs are developed in consultation with small family farmers and that they protect the rights of small family farmers in the global south to preserve, use and freely exchange seeds.

Impaired Driving

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have two petitions.

The petitioners deem the impaired driving laws to be too lenient. They want to see tougher laws and the implementation of a new mandatory minimum sentence for those persons convicted of impaired driving causing death. My colleague has just talked about his experience with people he knew. This is similar in that the petitioners ask that the Criminal Code of Canada be changed to redefine the offence of “impaired driving causing death” to “vehicular manslaughter”.

Sex Selection

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the second petition is one that has come forward a number of times also. It goes back to when the CBC revealed that ultrasounds are being used in Canada to tell the sex of an unborn child so that expecting parents can choose to terminate the pregnancy of the unborn child if it is a girl. It is condemned here by all national political parties. Ninety-two per cent of Canadians disagree with it. Millions of girls have been lost through this pregnancy termination, and many who were not have gone into prostitution.

Therefore, the petitioners ask that Parliament condemn the practice of sex-selective pregnancy termination.

CBC/Radio-Canada

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present six petitions: three on one topic and three on another.

The first three petitions relate to the need to ensure that the CBC, our national public broadcaster, receives predictable, stable and long-term funding. The petitioners are from Vancouver, Kingston, Ontario, as well as Saskatchewan, Pender Island, Gabriola Island and Salt Spring Island.

The Environment

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the second set of petitions relate to the need to have a legislated ban on tanker traffic, particularly, supertankers contain dilbit.

These petitioners, in three different petitions, come primarily from the Vancouver area. They want a legislated ban.

CBC/Radio-Canada

[Bruce Hyer, Green, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I also rise to present petitions regarding CBC Radio.

The petitioners say that we need national, regional and local programming across Canada and that we reiterate the need to maintain stable and predictable long-term funding to CBC Radio.

Questions on the Order Paper

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, Questions Nos. 1067 and 1084 will be answered today.

Question No. 1067

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

With regard to government communications: for each announcement made by a Minister or Parliamentary Secretary since January 1, 2006, in a location other than the Parliamentary precinct or the National Press Theatre, what were the (i) dates, (ii) venues, (iii) purposes or subject matters, (iv) names and portfolios of the Ministers or Parliamentary Secretaries, (v) amounts and details of all expenses related to making each such announcement?

[Paul Calandra, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the information requested consists of thousands of records, mostly available in original language only. It is not possible to produce and translate the requested information in the time period required for this response.

Question No. 1084

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

With respect to the Raven Underground Coal Mine Project: (a) has the Minister of the Environment had, or does the Minister plan to have, any public consultations regarding the proposed project and, if so, what are the details of these consultations; (b) has the Minister been in contact with representatives from the (i) Comox Valley Regional District, (ii) Island Trust Council, (iii) Cumberland Village Council, (iv) Courtenay City Council, (v) Comox Town Council, (vi) Port Alberni City Council; and (c) has there been any consideration on the part of the Minister to refer this project to a review panel with public hearings in order to allow the public to address concerns related to the environmental effects of this project and, if so, what are the details of any such planned panels?

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to (a), the raven underground coal mine project is subject to a comprehensive study under the former Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, and is being reviewed in close co-operation with the Province of British Columbia. The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency and British Columbia’s Environmental Assessment Office have consulted the public as part of this co-operative environmental assessment process through public comment opportunities and community meetings, including on the potential environmental effects of the project. In 2013, the agency asked the Compliance Coal Corporation to provide more information to fully understand the environmental effects of the project. Should this information be provided, future steps in the environmental assessment would include public consultation on the proponent’s environmental impact statement and the agency’s comprehensive study report.

With regard to (b) (i), (ii), (iii), (iv) and (v), I have written directly to these municipalities in response to correspondence they had sent.

With regard to (b) (vi), the Port Alberni City Council is participating in the technical working group as part of the environmental assessment for the project. This working group communicates with the agency for which I am responsible.

With regard to (c), based on the information currently available on the potential environmental effects of the project, the agency is of the view that a comprehensive study is the most appropriate type of assessment for the raven underground coal mine project.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, if Questions Nos. 1056, 1059, 1061, 1063, 1066, 1068, 1069, 1071, 1072, 1077 to 1081, and 1083 could be made orders for returns, these returns would be tabled immediately.

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Question No. 1056

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

With respect to government grants and contributions allocated within the constituency of New Westminster—Coquitlam from fiscal year 2011-2012 to the present: what is the total amount allocated, broken down by (i) amount, (ii) individual recipient?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 1059

[Mark Eyking, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

With regard to government investments, excluding those in relation to the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency: what are the details of all investments made in Nova Scotia from 2005-2006 to 2013-2014, broken down by (i) project, (ii) fiscal year?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 1061

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

With regard to exceptions granted under the Policy on Tabling of Treaties in Parliament (the Policy): (a) broken down by year, since the Policy became effective, how many and which specific instruments were granted exemptions; (b) on what basis was each exemption granted in (a); (c) if the exemption in (b) was based on urgency, (i) how was the treaty determined to be urgent, (ii) who made this determination, (iii) when; (d) if the exemption in (b) was for a reason other than urgency, (i) what was the reason, (ii) how was this determined; (e) who determines what constitutes an acceptable reason, other than urgency, to exempt a treaty from the normal tabling requirements under the Policy; (f) have any requested exceptions to the Policy not been granted; (g) broken down by treaties exempted, (i) on what date did Canada sign the instrument, (ii) when did Canada ratify the agreement, (iii) when was the treaty tabled in Parliament; (h) broken down by treaty exempted, was a joint letter drafted "that clearly articulates the rationale to proceed with the ratification, without tabling in the House of Commons"; (i) for each letter described in (h), (i) what is the date of the letter, (ii) to whom is it addressed, (iii) who signed it; (j) broken down by year, what treaties have been exempted from the Policy without a joint letter; (k) broken down by treaty in (j), why was no draft letter created; (l) with respect to the response of the government to part (gg) of Q-816, stating that no joint letter was created with respect to the exemption granted to the Agreement Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of Canada to Improve International Tax Compliance through Enhanced Exchange of Information under the Convention Between the United States of America and Canada with Respect to Taxes on Income and on Capital, is the lack of such a letter typical; (m) in each case where an exception to the Policy was granted, was the approval of the Prime Minister sought; (n) in each case where approval for an exception to the Policy was sought from the Prime Minister, was the approval granted; (o) if there were any cases where an exception was granted without approval being sought from the Prime Minister or being granted by the Prime Minister, (i) what treaty was at issue, (ii) what happened, (iii) what justified the course of action; (p) has any study or analysis been undertaken with respect to exceptions granted under the Policy; (q) when was the last time the Policy was reviewed and what were the conclusions of this review with respect to exemptions; (r) what is the policy justification for allowing an exception to the tabling policy; (s) is the granting of an exception always indicated in the explanatory memorandum; (t) if the answer to (s) is no, in what cases was a treaty granted an exception to the Policy but this information not included in the explanatory memorandum; (u) when an exception is granted and this is indicated in the explanatory memorandum, is the reason for the exception indicated in all cases; (v) in what cases has an exception been granted but the treaty still tabled for twenty-one sitting days prior to any Parliamentary action to bring it into force, where applicable; (w) may an exception be granted to the Policy without the Prime Minister's approval being sought; (x) may an exception to the Policy be granted without the Prime Minister's approval; (y) what statistics are kept and by whom regarding exceptions to the Policy; (z) by what means, and when in the process, is the public informed that an exception to the Policy has been granted; and (aa) by what means, and when in the process, is Parliament informed that an exception to the Policy has been granted?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 1063

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

With regard to Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada and to each First Nation reserve community: (a) does the community have its own on-reserve fire department or fire protective service; (b) if the answer to (a) is negative, does the community have a contract or agreement with a municipality or other fire department or fire protective service, providing (i) the name of the other party to that contract or agreement, (ii) the start and end dates of that contract or agreement; (c) if the answer to (b) is negative, did the community formerly have a contract or agreement with a municipality or other fire department or fire protective service, providing (i) the name of the other party to that contract or agreement, (ii) the start and end dates of that contract or agreement, (iii) the reason for which the contract or agreement is no longer in force; and (d) what are the titles, dates, and file numbers of all reports, briefing materials, briefing notes, memoranda, dossiers, dockets, or assessments, created or modified since January 1, 2010, held by Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada, Public Safety Canada, Health Canada, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, or Intergovernmental Affairs, concerning fire protective services in any particular First Nations reserve community or group of communities, or concerning fire protective services in First Nations reserve communities in general?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 1066

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

With regard to government communications: what are the details of all bulk-mail or addressed direct-mail advertising or communications activities undertaken by any department, agency, or crown corporation since January 1, 2011, including the enclosure of informational pamphlets or leaflets along with a cheque, statement or notice, giving in each instance (i) the start and end date of the advertising or communications activity, (ii) the nature, purpose, or description of the activity, (iii) the cost of printing the advertising or communications piece, pamphlet, or leaflet, (iv) the cost of mailing the advertising or communications piece, pamphlet, or leaflet, other than in those instances where it was mailed along with a cheque, statement or notice, (v) the language or languages in which the communications piece, pamphlet, or leaflet was printed, (vi) the title, headline, or rubric of the communications piece, pamphlet, or leaflet, if applicable, (vii) the intended demographic segment which the activity was intended to reach or influence, and the criteria by which that demographic segment was identified, if applicable, (viii) the geographical distribution which the activity was intended to reach or influence, such as Forward Sortation Area, municipality, province or territory, federal electoral district, or other geographical area or areas, and the criteria by which that geographical distribution was identified, if applicable, (ix) the file or other identification number of the activity, (x) the file or other identification number, title, and date, of any report or analysis of the effectiveness or outcome of the bulk-mail or direct-mail campaign?