Debates of June 19th, 2024

Question No.2687—

[Leslyn Lewis, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

With regard to government information on weather modification activities in Canada since 2015: (a) what weather modification activities is the government aware have taken place, including, but not limited to, cloud seeding or modification, hail suppression, fog dissipation, precipitation modification, lightning modification, hurricane seeding; (b) what are the (i) start and end dates of the activities in (a), (ii) stated objectives, (iii) geographic areas affected; (c) what techniques, chemicals and equipment are involved in each of the known weather modification activities; (d) is the government aware of any unlawful or disputed weather modification activities in Canada, and, if so, what are the details including the dates and summaries of each activity; (e) what, if any, government support or funding is provided to any of the activities in (a); (f) which government departments or agencies are involved in activities in (e), and what are the program objectives and research areas; (g) which, if any, international entities are involved in any of the activities; and (h) what outcomes and impacts have been observed by these activities and the methods and chemicals employed, including impacts on the environment, storm severity, and any other impacts?

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to (a), since 1996, only one company has reported undertaking weather modification activities in Canada, Weather Modification Inc., which operates a hail suppression program in Alberta.

With regard to (b), annual operations happen between June 1 and September 15 each year. The objective of the cloud seeding operations is to reduce hail damage caused by thunderstorms in central and southern Alberta.

With regard to (c)(i), according to the 2023 Atlantic High-Skilled Program, or AHSP, notice of intent, clouds are seeded either from the base or from the top. Cloud base seeding involves releasing silver iodide, or AgI, particles at the base of updraft areas near the cloud base, which then get transported up to the clouds through the updraft winds. Cloud top seeding, conducted between the levels of -5 and -10 degrees Celsius, involves dropping flares into the cloud which release AgI and will penetrate the edges of single convective cells meeting the seed criteria. Factors that determine cloud top or cloud base seeding are storm structure, visibility, cloud base height, or time available to reach seeding altitude.

With regard to (c) (ii), AgI is used as the primary seeding agent.

With regard to (c) (iii), according to the 2020 and 2021 AHSP Notices of Intent, five aircraft are used every season to execute on the operations, which are tagged as Hailstop 1 to Hailstop 5. Between 2015 and 2020, the fleet included three Beechcraft King Air C90 prop-jet aircraft and two Cessna C340 aircraft, and since 2021 the fleet consists simply of five Beechcraft King Air C90 prop-jet aircraft. The operational equipment also consists of one C-band Doppler weather radar, 250 kilowatt peak power, with 1.65 degree beam width, located at the Olds-Didsbury airport, 15.3 metres tower-mounted, including a radome, as per the 2020 and 2021 AHSP Notice of Intent.

With regard to (d), to date, Environment and Climate Change Canada, or ECCC, is not aware of any weather modification activities in Canada that would violate the Weather Modification Information Act, other Acts administered by ECCC.

With regard to (e), ECCC does not provide any funding in support of this activity.

With regard to (f), there are no government agencies responsible for the activities in part (e) at the federal level.

With regard to (g), Weather Modification International works under contract to conduct cloud seeding operations on behalf of the Alberta Severe Weather Management Society, or ASWMS. They are an American organization based in Fargo, North Dakota, as per the 2023 AHSP Notice of Intent.

With regard to (h), the emissions produced by AgI, as a seeding agent, are considered to have negligible environmental or human health impacts according to a screening assessment done by ECCC and Health Canada.

Question No.2690—

[Leslyn Lewis, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

With regard to Canada’s participation in the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos, Switzerland, from January 15 to 19, 2024: (a) how many individuals were part of Canada’s delegation; (b) who were the members of the delegation, including, for each, their (i) name, (ii) title, (iii) role; (c) what are the details of all meetings held in Davos involving the Deputy Prime Minister, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) names and titles of the attendees, (iii) purpose of the meeting, (iv) agenda items, (v) summary of what occurred at the meeting, including any agreements made; (d) what are the details of all meetings held in Davos involving members of the Canadian delegation other than the Deputy Prime Minister, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) names and titles of the attendees, (iii) purpose of the meeting, (iv) agenda items, (v) summary of what occurred at the meeting, including anything that was agreed to; (e) what are the details, including the summary of terms, of any agreements entered into during the forum; (f) what are the details of all follow-up action taken by the government as a result of what happened at the forum; (g) what are the details of all memoranda or briefing notes prepared to support Canada’s delegation to the forum, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) sender, (iii) recipient, (iv) title, (v) subject matter, (vi) summary of contents, (vii) file number; and (h) what was the total cost to the taxpayer, broken down by category of expense?

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the Department of Finance response to parts (a) through (h) is as follows:

The World Economic Forum Annual Meeting was held in Davos, Switzerland, from January 15 to 19, 2024. As the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, I attended from January 16 to January 19, 2024, to advance Canadian economic interests.

I held meetings with business leaders and other participants, including members of the Ukrainian delegation; a variety of business leaders about opportunities for Canada; and foreign government leaders and elected representatives.

I also participated in a panel entitled “No Recovery without Trade and Investment". Participants included Brian Moynihan, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Bank of America; Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Director-General of the World Trade Organization; and Valdis Dombrovskis, European Commissioner for Trade.

Regarding the Department of Finance response to part (h): please note that travel expenditures for senior level departmental officers or employees, Ministers, ministerial advisors and ministerial staff are proactively disclosed on Open.Canada.ca (https://search.open.canada.ca/travel/).

Question No.2691—

[Leslyn Lewis, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

With regard to the Canada Infrastructure Bank's (CIB) investment in the Avenue Living residential retrofits: (a) what is the summary of the terms of the project agreement with Avenue Living; (b) which properties are undergoing retrofits financed by the CIB; (c) at which properties is the CIB aware of significant rent increases since the financial close of the agreement; (d) how much of the investment has been disbursed to date and how has that financing been disbursed; (e) what is the current status of each of the retrofit projects at Avenue Living properties; (f) what measures did the CIB take when the investment agreement was made to ensure the investment would not be used as a rationale to increase rent; (g) if the answer to (f) is none, why were no measures taken; (h) what, if any, changes to the agreement will the CIB make in light of the rent increases at some properties; and (i) what changes is the CIB implementing to ensure its financing of retrofits do not result in rent increases at rental properties?

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Housing]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to the investment of the Canada Infrastructure Bank, or CIB, in the Avenue Living residential retrofits, with regard to (a), the CIB’s investment is structured as two corporate loans, together the “CIB credit facility”, to two Avenue Living entities, together, “Avenue Living”, that wholly own the properties being considered for decarbonization retrofits, each a “project”. Drawdowns under the CIB credit facility are made available to Avenue Living pursuant to a four-year availability period up to a maximum amount of 80% of total eligible project costs net of grants, not to exceed $130 million in aggregate. The aggregate amount drawn will convert to a fully amortizing term loan which at the earliest of the completion of the final project; or one year following the end of the availability period. The CIB’s investment must be fully repaid within 24 years of financial close.

With regard to (b), Avenue Living has not used the CIB credit facility to finance retrofits of any properties as of May 3, 2024. Avenue Living has identified a preliminary list of approximately 95 properties that it intends to retrofit with CIB financing. The proposed portfolio consists of approximately 240 buildings, all of which are bound by specific eligibility criteria, including a required minimum decarbonization threshold. In accordance with the provisions of the CIB credit facility, Avenue Living can add, remove or replace properties in the preliminary list throughout the availability period, subject to meeting the defined eligibility criteria and satisfying the minimum decarbonization threshold, always subject to the term of the availability period and the maximum aggregate CIB investment amount.

With regard to (c), the CIB is not privy to any information related to specific properties and rent increases. Furthermore, Avenue Living has not used the CIB credit facility to finance retrofits of any properties as of May 3, 2024.

With regard to (d), no disbursements under the CIB credit facility have been made to Avenue Living as of May 3, 2024.

With regard to (e), all projects are at various stages of early development as of May 3, 2024, with certain properties further along and nearing eligibility criteria and conditions for disbursements under the CIB credit facility.

With regard to (f), the core mandate of the CIB’s Building Retrofits Initiative, or BRI, is to reduce investment barriers to modernize and improve the energy efficiency of existing buildings to drive significant reduction in carbon emissions, which additionally will improve the living conditions for tenants through co-benefits. In the case of Avenue Living, each project is subject to meeting specific minimum decarbonization targets and the potential CIB investment was assessed on that basis. The CIB credit facility was agreed on terms that made those reductions economically feasible. Also, Avenue Living is bound under the CIB credit facility by requirements to comply with applicable law, including any applicable landlord-tenant laws, regulations and policies in effect at the time in the relevant jurisdictions. The goal for Avenue Living is to achieve a greenhouse gas, or GHG, remissions reduction of over 49% across the portfolio of retrofitted projects, while maintaining a required minimum annual GHG reduction threshold of at least 30% for each building.

With regard to (g), while an indirect benefit of the CIB credit facility is to lower the economic burden on Avenue Living and its tenants that benefit from retrofits, the core mandate of the CIB’s BRI is to support existing property owners in reducing investment barriers to modernize and improve the energy efficiency of existing buildings, which dictates the specific provisions included in any given credit agreement.

With regard to (h), CIB understands that affordability is a critical issue for Canadians, which is why going forward we are ensuring residential building upgrades financed by CIB will not be used as a rationale to increase rent. Avenue Living and the CIB continue to discuss this matter.

With regard to (i), for all subsequent CIB investments under the BRI that finance retrofitting of multi-unit residential buildings, the loan agreements will include provisions that limit a borrower’s ability to increase rents or impose additional utility burdens on existing tenants as a result of the CIB’s investment in the decarbonization retrofits.

Question No.2692—

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

With regard to Canada Revenu Agency registered charities: (a) which charities that had Israeli nationals as agents or intermediaries had their status revoked due to a failed audit between 2017 and 2023; (b) which charities that had Israeli nationals as agents or intermediaries failed audits between 2017 and 2023 and did not have their status revoked; (c) what are the internal rules, regulations, and protocols around revocation of charity status with regard to both domestic and international recipients; and (d) what are the CRA’s risk assessment tools, and the risk matrix surrounding charities with international intermediaries?

[Marie-Claude Bibeau, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, with respect to my colleague’s question, what follows is the response from the Canada Revenue Agency, or CRA, as of May 3, 2024, that is, the date of question.

With regard to (a) and (b), the CRA does not collect information on the nationality of a registered charity’s agents or intermediaries.

With regard to (c), in order to be registered as a charity, an organization must be constituted exclusively for charitable purposes and devote all of its resources to activities that further those purposes. Charitable purposes fall into one or more of the following categories: the relief of poverty; the advancement of education; the advancement of religion; and other purposes beneficial to the community.

The Income Tax Act allows a registered charity to operate in the following ways: carrying on its own charitable activities through its staff and volunteers; or an intermediary, where a charity must exercise direction and control over its own resources; making qualifying disbursements through gifts to qualified donees; or grants to grantees, or non-qualified donees, where a charity must meet accountability requirements.

A registered charity’s purposes must also provide a tangible benefit to the public as a whole, or a significant section of it. In addition, purposes and activities that are illegal in Canada or contrary to Canadian public policy are prohibited, including support for terrorist and military activities.

Also, registered charities must keep adequate books and records to allow the CRA to verify donations made to the charity, to ensure the proper use of charitable resources, and that the charity's purposes and activities continue to be charitable.

As is always the case, in order to determine if a particular activity furthers a charitable purpose and meets all other registration requirements under the Income Tax Act, the CRA would need to consider all the relevant facts on a case-by-case basis. If the CRA identifies non-compliance as a result of an audit, it uses a risk-based approach where possible. By taking this approach, the CRA generally gives a charity the opportunity to correct non-compliance through education or a compliance agreement; while other interventions, such as sanctions or revocations, are reserved for cases where a charity has engaged in more serious acts of non-compliance. The facts of the charity’s case will determine which compliance approach the CRA will take.

The CRA makes its decisions around the audit of registered charities involved with “domestic and international recipients” based on the Income Tax Act and common law requirements for registered charities. The application of these requirements is applied regardless of the country in which a charity may operate, and/or the nationality of any agents and intermediaries they may choose to engage.

With regard to (d), sensitive information about the CRA’s internal processes, such as its risk assessment strategies, audit techniques, and file selection reasons, as well as any other information that a member of the public would otherwise be ineligible from accessing, cannot be disclosed. Given that this type of information could be used to undermine and potentially jeopardize the CRA's compliance efforts, the CRA does not disclose that type of information to external parties under any circumstance, even where authorization on specific taxpayer files is obtained.

Question No.2697—

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

With regard to defence procurement contracts since 2015: what have been the industrial and technological benefits, broken down by province and territory?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Minister of Innovation]

Mr. Speaker, Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, or ISED, publishes an Industrial and Technological Benefits, or ITB, Annual Report in an effort to be transparent about the results and status of the ITB Policy. The most recent ITB Annual Report, in 2023, highlights, at a national level, the impact of ITB obligations active in 2022, which presents a point in time snapshot using the latest available data. The report provides information on obligations over the 15-year time period from 2017 to 2033. This timeframe is used for the annual report to reflect the achievement period of ITB obligations by prime contractors, which can last a number of years. The report was updated in fall 2023 and is published annually to provide information on leveraging current and planned military procurements. The 2022 Annual Report presents data beginning 2016; the 2021 Annual Report presents data beginning 2015.

The 2023 ITB Annual Report, specifically page 5, which shows a breakdown by region of ITB activity in Canada. This includes figures broken out across the regions of Western Canada, Ontario, Quebec and Atlantic Canada, and shows activity broken down by sector, such as aerospace, marine, information technology and land-based something, space and “other industries”. As an example, the ITB business activity in Quebec over the reporting period is focused on aerospace, 68%, followed by information technology and land-based something, 20%, marine, 8%, space, 2% and other industries, 2%. For the purposes of reporting and given the need to aggregate data values, projects in the territories are captured under Western Canada.

Foundation data for the overall eport is based on ITB credits and commitments of ITB obligations active in 2022, over the 2017-2033 15-year period, as found specified on each slide. Page 4 provides information on the annual average economic impact of the ITB Policy based on ITB transactions credited over the 2017-2021 period from ITB obligations active in 2022. Economic impact estimates are reported at the national level and cannot be broken down at the regional level; economic impact methodologies principles are presented on page 12.

In addition to the ITB Annual Report, ISED also publishes a report on contractor progress each year to demonstrate contractors’ progress in fulfilling their ITB obligations. The report on contractor progress provides information broken down by project and by contractor. This information includes the amount of obligation, completed, in progress and not identified.Report on Contractor Progress

In processing parliamentary returns, the government applies the Privacy Act and the principles set out in the Access to Information Act, and certain information has been withheld on the grounds that it is third party information.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, if the government's responses to Questions Nos. 2653, 2655 to 2657, 2671, 2673, 2674, 2676 to 2682, 2684, 2688, 2689, 2693 to 2696, 2698, and 2699, could be made orders for return, these returns would be tabled in an electronic format immediately.

[The Speaker, Greg Fergus]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Question No.2653—

[Lianne Rood, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

With regard to Report 5 (2024) of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development to the Parliament of Canada: (a) how much has the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food spent in the past five years on developing a climate change mitigation strategy; (b) how many employees were or are assigned to work on the strategy; and (c) how was the money spent, broken down by initiative?

(Return tabled)

Question No.2655—

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

With regard to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) and the temporary public policy creating permanent resident pathways for Hong Kong residents since 2021, broken down by year: (a) how many individuals of Hong Kong origin have immigrated to Canada under the permanent residency program, broken down by (i) economic class migration, (ii) the family reunification program, (iii) the refugees and protected persons class, (iv) the "humanitarian and other" class, broken down by individualized stream; (b) how many individuals of Hong Kong origin have applied for permanent residency on "humanitarian and compassionate grounds" separately from the temporary public policy permanent residency pathways since 2021; (c) with regard to the temporary public policy, what is the breakdown of the application numbers since 2021 for (i) Stream A, (ii) Stream B, broken down by PR category; (d) of the figures in (c), how many applications were (i) approved, (ii) rejected, (iii) under review; (e) of the rejections in (d), what are the categorized reasons for rejecting the application, broken down by number; (f) of the cases under review and rejections in (c), what is the breakdown of the applications by (i) individual applications, (ii) family applications; and (g) of the approvals in (c), how many were tied to existing departmental quotas for the temporary public policy or the department's annual planned admission range per IRCC's annual report for permanent residency admissions under (i) economic class migration, (ii) the family reunification program, (iii) the refugees and protected persons class, (iv) the "humanitarian and other" class?

(Return tabled)

Question No.2656—

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

With regard to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) and the open work permit pathway under a temporary public policy for Hong Kong residents: (a) what is the number of applications received by individuals of Hong Kong origin with "HKPPTR" inputted for the job title since the program was instituted in 2021; (b) of the applications in (a), how many were (i) accepted, (ii) rejected, (iii) under review; (c) of the rejections in (b), what is the breakdown of rejections by the location of the IRCC office or processing center; and (d) how many applications were rejected based on the lack of labour market impact assessment?

(Return tabled)

Question No.2657—

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

With regard to the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB): (a) what is the total number of adjudicators at the Refugee Protection Division; (b) of the adjudicators in (a), how many have post­secondary degrees, broken down by (i) office, (ii) type of degree; (c) of the adjudicators in (a), how many have previous tribunal experience; (d) of the adjudicators with prior tribunal experience, (i) what office do they work in, (ii) how many years of experience do they have, (iii) what year were they hired; (e) of the adjudicators in (a), how many have prior public service experience; (f) for each adjudicator with prior public service experience, (i) what office do they work in, (ii) how many years of experience do they have, (iii) what year were they hired; and (g) what was the essential qualification criteria required to be an adjudicator at the IRB in (i) 2011, (ii) 2012, (iii) 2015, (iv) 2020, (v) August 2021, (vi) November 2021, (vii) 2023?

(Return tabled)

Question No.2671—

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

With regard to the arrangements and travel costs for all government press briefings and pre-budget announcements in the lead-up to the tabling of the federal budget and to highlight the measures to be contained in the budget: what were the expenses and costs incurred from March 4, 2024, to April 16, 2024, the day of the budget speech, broken down by type of announcement, by date, by location and by the ministers, parliamentary secretaries and political staff present?

(Return tabled)

Question No.2673—

[Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

With regard to the COVID-19 Therapeutics Task Force (TTF) who oversaw submissions for grant funding from Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED)’s Strategic Innovation Fund: (a) in total, how many projects were considered for funding; (b) with respect to the projects which were funded, (i) how many received funding, (ii) how much funding was allocated per project, (iii) which drugs were being investigated per each approved project, (iv) what was the total amount of funding granted for the approved projects; (c) with regard to the projects which were not approved for funding, what recommendations were made to them; (d) with regard to the therapeutics which were recommended for purchase, (i) what were these therapeutics, (ii) were these therapeutics purchased, (iii) what was the implementation plan, (iv) if there was no plan, why not; (e) were the drugs Ivermectin or Hydroxychloroquine considered by the TFF; (f) if the answer to (e) is affirmative, what were their recommendations and how did they arrive at them; (g) who were the members of the TTF; (h) were any of the members pharmacists, pharmacologists, or toxicologists; (i) what were the members' conflicts of interest; (j) did any of the members withdraw from the task force prior to its conclusion; (k) if the answer to (j) is affirmative, who left early and why; (l) regarding the document entitled “HEALTH CANADA/ PUBLIC HEALTH AGENCY OF CANADA MEMORANDUM TO THE MINISTER OF HEALTH, Meeting with the COVID-19 Therapeutics Task Force” dated February 24, 2021, and signed by the President of the Public Health Agency of Canada and the Deputy Minister of Health, which reads that “At the previous meeting TTF members expressed concern that their mandate was ending. TTF members were specifically concerned about what they felt was insufficient attention to therapeutics, failures of implementation, and the need to be forward looking for surveillance of upcoming therapeutic opportunities. It is expected that TTF members will raise these concerns to you”, (i) what concerns were raised to the signee, (ii) what documents were provided with respect to expressing those concerns; and (m) when and why was the TTF mandate ended?

(Return tabled)