Debates of Sept. 16th, 2024

Persons with Disabilities

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise on this first day back of the fall sitting of our Parliament to present a petition on behalf of petitioners who would remind us that folks with disabilities across the country continue to disproportionately live in poverty.

They make it clear that this is because federal and territorial programs are below the poverty line. They note that the Canada disability benefit was promised as a benefit to reduce poverty for persons with disabilities in the same manner as the guaranteed income supplement and the Canada child benefit. However, instead, the proposed Canada disability benefit from budget 2024 is nothing that the disability community had been calling for, falling well short of the many promises made by the Liberal government.

The petitioners note that the maximum amount is just $200 a month, that it requires a new application process in contravention of section 11(f) of the Canada Disability Benefit Act and that it is restricted to folks who have the disability tax credit, which is long known for the many barriers to access.

The petitioners call on the government, in short, to fix the Canada disability benefit. They go on to itemize the numerous ways that this needs to be done, first, by fully funding the benefit to actually lift folks out of poverty with the urgency seen with the CERB, the Canada emergency response benefit, for example. They go on to call for the government to automatically enrol folks with disabilities who are already a part of provincial and territorial programs, rather than using this disability tax credit. They call on the government to tie it to an individual's income as opposed to household income.

In short, it is a clear set of principles and actions that could be taken to fix the Canada disability benefit. I am glad to present this petition on behalf of over 3,000 people who have signed it.

Questions on the Order Paper

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

Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Nos. 2701, 2703 to 2705, 2712, 2716, 2718, 2724, 2726, 2739, 2742, 2744, 2747, 2753, 2756, 2757, 2760, 2762, 2765, 2766, 2770, 2771, 2773, 2774, 2776 to 2780, 2782, 2783, 2788, 2791, 2792, 2794, 2795, 2799, 2800, 2803, 2805, 2808, 2811, 2812, 2814, 2815, 2817, 2819 to 2821, 2827, 2828, 2830, 2832, 2833, 2836, 2838, 2843, 2849, 2851, 2853, 2854, 2859, 2861, 2862, 2872, 2876, 2887 to 2890, 2895, 2897 to 2899, 2901 and 2903.

Question No.2701—

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

With regard to government hospitality expenditures related to the government’s supply and confidence agreement with the NDP, including any expenses related to all meetings, negotiations, or other events attended by those involved in the agreement: what are the details of such expenditures since the beginning of the 44th Parliament, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) location, (iii) vendor, (iv) event description, (v) amount, (vi) number of attendees, (vii) names of the attendees?

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and Special Advisor for Water]

Mr. Speaker, the Privy Council Office searched the departmental financial system and has not identified any information regarding government hospitality expenditures related to the government’s supply and confidence agreement with the NDP, or any expenses related to all meetings, negotiations, or other events attended by those involved in the agreement.

Question No.2703—

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

With regard to requests submitted through Jordan’s Principle and the Inuit Child First Initiative, broken down by fiscal year since the program's inception: (a) what is the total number of requests received from (i) parents or guardians of Indigenous children, (ii) Indigenous children at the age of consent in their province or territory, (iii) an individual authorized to represent an Indigenous child, parent, or guardian, (iv) businesses where the requester has authorized the business to represent them; (b) what is the total amount of funding requested through these programs by (i) 511825 Ontario Inc., (ii) Maryhomes Inc., (iii) Enterphase Child & Family Services, (iv) Hatts Off Inc., (v) Unison Treatment Homes for Youth Inc., (vi) Kom’s Kid Kare Agency, (vii) Kushions Inc., (viii) Hand in Hand Children’s Services; and (c) what measures does the government have in place to ensure that funding applied for by for-profit corporations is delivered in full to the children who need care?

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous Services]

Mr. Speaker, in response to part (a) of the question,the Jordan’s Principle and Inuit Child First Initiatives collect a range of information on all requests, whether approved or denied, however data on the requestor is not collected in a standardized format that allows for a breakdown by those eligible to send requests. Due to the extremely high volume of requests received by Jordan’s Principle by email, fax or phone by either the National Call Centre or regional focal points, reporting on data collected in a non-standardized format is complex. For example, in 2023-24, a total of 145,769 requests were approved through Jordan’s Principle for 2.17 million products, services and supports for First Nations children. Specific to the Inuit Child First Initiative, in 2023-24 a total of 12,822 requests were approved for 92,800 products, services and supports for Inuit children.

Indigenous Services Canada, or ISC, is continuing to increase funding for products, services and supports to First Nations children. Since 2016, the department has invested more than $8.1 billion to support meeting the needs of First Nations children through Jordan’s Principle, working collaboratively with the First Nations Parties, and enhancing operations to meet the growing volume of requests.

In previous years, typical requests through Jordan’s Principle included supports for mental health, special education, dental, physical therapy, speech therapy, medical equipment and physiotherapy. The initiative has evolved to address requests for services that are very different in type than previously submitted to ISC. Jordan’s Principle is seeing an increase in socioeconomic supports such as rent, groceries and utilities which has contributed to the increase in requests, complexity and processing times. However, while the types of requests have evolved over time, the goal of ensuring that First Nations children have an equal chance to thrive as other children in Canada remains.

The department is working towards improving operational and technological efficiencies to streamline workloads and reduce manual processes to improve service timelines. For example, ISC developed measures in 2023 to help address backlogs, such as measures to manage call volumes; the use of surge teams to address backlogs; hiring additional staff; measures to manage staff retention; and use of technology.

The Jordan's Principle National Call Centre has seen a steadily increasing volume of calls, in addition to the usual peaks in calls at different times of the year, such as in August, when there is an influx of school-related requests. For example, from March 2022 to March 2023, the call volume increased by approximately 300%.

As for part (b) of the question, ISC provides funding to First Nations child and family services agencies, which are established, managed and controlled by First Nations and delegated by provincial authorities to provide prevention and protection services. In areas where these agencies do not exist, ISC funds services provided by the provinces and Yukon but does not deliver child and family services. These services are provided in accordance with the legislation and standards of the province or territory of residence. As of January 1, 2020, service providers delivering child and family services to Indigenous children must comply with the national principles and minimum standards set in An Act respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families.

ISC uses a prevention-based funding model to support early intervention and alternatives to traditional institutional care and foster care, such as the placement of children with family members in a community setting. The program provides 3 streams of funding:operations, namely, core and operational funding for protection services (such as salaries and overhead); prevention, namely, resources for enhanced prevention services; and maintenance, including the direct costs of placing First Nations children into temporary or permanent care out of the parental home, such as foster care rates and group home rates.

Questions relating to child and family services and funding provided for Inuit and Métis children and First Nations children living off reserve should be directed to the appropriate provincial or territorial ministry.

As for part (c) of the question, ISC has measures in place to ensure that the funds expended through the Jordan's Principle and Inuit Child First Initiatives to requestors for approved products, services and supports reach the child/children for whom the request was approved.

ISC investigates complaints and concerns such as: invoicing irregularities; concerns regarding the appropriate delivery of products, services, and supports; potential and/or suspected misuse of approved funds; and complaints related to child safety. Findings can result in a range of actions, including supporting the requestor to become compliant with ISC financial requirements, denial of future requests, consultations with the Department of Justice, and engaging with Assessment and Investigation Services Branch of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada to support investigations when there are allegations of fraud.

Question No.2704—

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

With regard to the Greenland Halibut in Nunavut, since 2017: (a) what are the details of all assessments of Greenland Halibut stocks, including the (i) date, (ii) location, (iii) conclusions; (b) what are the details of all Greenland Halibut fisheries management decisions, including the (i) date, (ii) scientific assessment used to justify the decision, (iii) decision on total allowable catch and sharing arrangements; (c) what investments has the government made to improve data collection on Greenland Halibut to make more informed decisions on Greenland Halibut fisheries; and (d) what efforts has the government made to incorporate Inuit traditional knowledge and Inuit science in Greenland Halibut data collection and fisheries decisions?

[Diane Lebouthillier, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to the Greenland Halibut in Nunavut, since 2017, in response to part (a) of the questionthe offshore Greenland Halibut stock is shared between Canada and Greenland. It is assessed jointly by both countries through the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization, or NAFO, Scientific Council every 2 years, which is reviewed by subject matter experts from both countries.

Since 2017, NAFO Scientific Council has conducted stock assessments in 2018, 2020 and 2022. The details and results of these stock assessments can be found on the NAFO website.

As for part (b) of the question, each year, TAC decisions are based on the most recent advice of the NAFO Scientific Council.

The total allowable catch (TAC) for 2017 and 2018 was set at 16,150 tonnes by Canada. Distribution of the TAC between Divisions 0A and 0B were set at 8,575 tonnes and 7,575 tonnes, respectively, and included the allocation of 100 tonnes from Division A to be fished by Nunavut-based harvesters to help develop inshore fisheries inside the Nunavut Settlement Area.

The TAC for 2019 and 2020 was set at 18,185 tonnes by Canada. Distribution of the TAC between Divisions 0A and 0B were set at 9,592.5 tonnes and 8,592.5 tonnes, respectively, and included the allocation of 100 tonnes from Division A to be fished by Nunavut-based harvesters.

For 2021 and 2022, Canada maintained the 2020 TAC and distributions between Divisions 0A and 0B.

In 2023, Canada and Greenland lowered their TACs by 9.25% to 16,502.5 tonnes in consideration of NAFO Scientific Council advice, taking a precautionary approach that balances the overall sustainability of the fishery with the economic needs of Indigenous communities and Canadian fish harvesters. Distribution of the TAC between Divisions 0A and 0B were set at 8,704.99 tonnes and 7,797.51 tonnes, respectively. Allocations to fleets in Division 0A remained the same, including the allocation of 100 tonnes to be fished by Nunavut-based harvesters. Division 0B enterprise and special allocations were reduced proportionally.

In 2024, Canada maintained the 2023 TAC and distributions between Divisions 0A and 0B.

As for part (d) of the question, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, or DFO, supports surveys in NAFO Divisions 0A and 0B through a Collaborative Agreement with the Greenland Institute of Natural Resources using the R/V Tarajoq research vessel. DFO's financial contributions to the surveys were $1,239,300 in 2022-23 and $1,534,263 in 2023-024.

Following a change in the research vessel, DFO invested in new research to develop a model-based calibration approach to align survey data from the new time series with the previous time series. Please refer to Science Advisory Report 2023/020.

DFO has contributed to collaborative research through the Ocean Tracking Network to quantify Greenland Halibut habitat use and movement patterns, and movement of fish among fishing areas.

Lastly, in response to part (d) of the question, DFO seeks advice on Greenland Halibut from the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board, or NWMB, in accordance with the Nunavut Agreement. The NWMB provides advice and recommendations on the Canadian TAC, distribution, and allocation for Subarea 0. This decision considers both the immediate and long-term health of Canada’s Greenland Halibut fishery to grow a stronger, more sustainable fishery.

In collaboration with the Government of Nunavut, DFO has conducted surveys at Scott Inlet, Pond Inlet, and Broughton Island documenting Greenland Halibut distribution, fish size, and catch rates to support emerging fishery development by the communities of Clyde River, Pond Inlet, and Qikiqtarjuaq.

Question No.2705—

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

With regard to members of the Border Services (FB) group who work at the Canada Border Services Agency and the commitment made by the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat during the 2021 round of bargaining to resubmit the Border Services (FB) group’s proposal to introduce legislative amendments providing enhanced early retirement benefits under the public service pension plan, to facilitate an expedited opportunity to bring forward its related business case to the Public Service Pension Advisory Committee (PSPAC), and to facilitate a streamlined process to have these issues reviewed and ensure that related recommendations are brought forward in a timely manner: (a) who has the government consulted with through this process, including, but not limited to, members of the Border Services (FB) group, through their bargaining agent; (b) what information, advice, and recommendations have the (i) PSPAC, (ii) Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC), (iii) Public Sector Pension Investment Board (PSPIB), presented to the Treasury Board; (c) what information, statements, advice, and recommendations has the Treasury Board presented to the (i) PSPAC, (ii) PSAC, (iii) PSPIB; (d) what is the timeline to implement the promised changes; and (e) what steps still need to be taken to ensure these changes take place?

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, in response to part (a) of the question, as per the 2021 agreement between the Public Service Alliance of Canada and the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, the proposal to extend eligibility for early retirement benefits to the Border Services (FB) group was brought forward for consultations held through the Public Service Pension Advisory Committee, or PSPAC. The PSPAC was established pursuant to the Public Service Superannuation Act. It is composed of six employer representatives, six employee representatives, and one retiree representative. Members of the Public Service Alliance of Canada are represented on this committee.

With respect to part (b) of the question, in December 2023, the PSPAC completed a comprehensive assessment of the proposal to extend eligibility for early retirement benefits to the Border Services (FB) group and provided a recommendation to the President of the Treasury Board. The advice of the Public Service Alliance of Canada is reflected in the PSPAC recommendation to the President of the Treasury Board. The Public Sector Pension Investment Board was not involved in the development of this proposal.

With respect to part (c) of the question, after receiving the PSPAC’s recommendation in December 2023, the President of the Treasury Board responded to the PSPAC to acknowledge its recommendation and communicate that she had taken it under advisement.

With respect to part (d) of the question, on June 13, 2024, the President of the Treasury Board announced the Government of Canada’s intention to expand early pension eligibility for certain public safety and security workers, including frontline members of the Border Services (FB) group. Per the President’s announcement, legislative amendments to the Public Service Superannuation Act are expected to be introduced in Parliament in the fall of 2024.

Lastly, with respect to part (e) of the question, in order to implement the changes to expand early pension eligibility for certain public safety and security workers, including frontline members of the Border Services (FB) group, legislative amendments to the Public Service Superannuation Act will need to be passed by Parliament and amendments to the Public Service Superannuation Regulations will need to be approved by the Governor in Council. Considerable pay and pension system changes will also need to be completed before the changes can be operationalized.

Question No.2712—

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

With regard to the statement from the Minister of Health on March 20, 2024, indicating that Health Canada is pursuing legislative and regulatory mechanisms to place restrictions on the flavors of nicotine replacement therapies: (a) what specific studies have been conducted by Health Canada related to the impact of such a restriction; and (b) what are the details of all studies in (a), including, for each, the (i) date the study was completed, (ii) names and titles of who conducted the study, (iii) methodology, (iv) findings, (v) website location where the study can be found online?

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, as outlined in the notice of intent, found at https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/natural-non-prescription/notice-intent-address-risks-youth-appeal-access-nicotine-replacement-therapies.html and published by the department on March 20, 2024, Health Canada is considering legislative and regulatory mechanisms to address access and potential youth appeal of nicotine replacement therapies, or NRTs. New requirements, such as but not limited to specific requirements for labelling and packaging, as well as restrictions related to colours, flavours, advertising and place of sale, are being considered.

Health Canada is considering many sources of input as it continues to develop a proposed path forward, such as, for example, the publicly available information below. Please note that information on sources of input related to regulatory mechanisms will be published as part of a regulatory impact analysis statement along with any regulatory measures in the Canada Gazette, where appropriate.

Here are some examples of publicly available information: “Canada Gazette, Part 1, Volume 155, Number 25: Order Amending Schedules 2 and 3 to the Tobacco and Vaping Products Act (Flavours)”, at https://gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2021/2021-06-19/html/reg2-eng.html; and the “Canadian Tobacco and Nicotine Survey (CTNS): summary of results for 2022”, at https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/canadian-tobacco-nicotine-survey/2022-summary.html.

Question No.2716—

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

With regard to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC), as of March 31, 2024: (a) how many employees or full-time equivalents (FTEs) are currently employed by IRCC; (b) how many of these employees or FTEs are classified as EX or above; (c) how many of these employees or FTEs are classified below the EX level; (d) of the employees or FTEs that are classified as EX or above and below EX, how many work (i) physically full-time in a government office, (ii) completely remotely, (iii) in a hybrid situation, where they work certain days in the office and certain days remotely; (e) for hybrid workers, how many days per week are they required to come to an office location; (f) what monitoring is done by IRCC to ensure that remote and hybrid employees are putting in the equivalent to a full day while working remotely; (g) what remedial action is undertaken when a supervisor has discovered that an employee is not putting in the equivalent to a full day while working remotely, and what thresholds or limits have been established by IRCC before formal action is taken, such as loss of pay or termination; (h) how many instances of remedial and formal action were taken in the 2023-24 fiscal year; and (i) if remedial or formal action is not taken when the situation outlined in (g) occurs, why not?

[Paul Chiang, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, insofar as Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, or IRCC, is concerned, in response to part (a) of the question, according to IRCC’s Departmental Human Resources System, PeopleSoft, IRCC counts 14,034 employees who are currently employed by IRCC.

In response to part (b) of the question, of the employees in (a), IRCC counts 272 employees as EX or above.

In response to part (c) of the question, of the employees in (a), IRCC counts 13,762 employees below the EX level.

With respect to part (d) of the question, of the employees that are classified as EX or above and below EX, based on departmental records, approximately 2.6% of IRCC employees work from a government office every day, approximately 47.4% of IRCC employees work completely remotely, and approximately 50% of IRCC employees are in a hybrid situation, working certain days in the office and certain days remotely.

In response to part (e) of the question, IRCC employees following a hybrid work schedule are required to come into the office a minimum of 40% of their regular schedule on a weekly or monthly basis.

In response to part (f) of the question, managers are responsible for ensuring the employees adhere to the conditions set out in their telework agreement, including those governing their hours of work.

With respect to part (g) of the question, a range of corrective administrative or disciplinary measures may be imposed should an employee not abide by the conditions set out in their telework agreements, including those governing their hours of work. The appropriate remedial action is established on a case-by-case basis and can include, without being limited to, a letter of expectations, a revocation of the telework agreement, administrative recovery of salary owed, rejection on probation, term non-renewal, oral or written reprimand, suspension or termination of employment.

With respect to part (h) of the question, 21 instances of remedial and formal action were taken in the 2023-24 fiscal year.

Lastly, with respect to part (i) of the question, remedial action will always be taken to ensure the situation is rectified and does not reoccur.

Question No.2718—

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC]

With regard to the RCMP's Canadian Firearms Program in British Columbia (BC): (a) how many full-time individuals are currently employed by the program in BC; (b) how many staff members in BC work exclusively remote or from home; (c) how many BC staff members work exclusively in person; (d) what percentage of all BC work hours are spent (i) in person, (ii) remotely or at home; and (e) what is the (i) average salary, (ii) total annual expenditures on salaries, for BC employees of the Canadian Firearms Program?

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, in response to part (a) of the question, a) As of May 23, 2024, there are 22 full-time individuals employed by the Chief Firearms Office, the CFO, in British Columbia.

In terms of part (b) of the question, there are no employees with the British Columbia CFO working exclusively remote or from home.

(c)With regard to part (c) of the question, all employees with the British Columbia CFO work exclusively in person.

With regard to part (d)(i) of the question, 100% of the employees are working in person.

With regard to part (d)(ii) of the question, there are no employees with the British Columbia CFO working remote or from home.

With regard to part (e)(i) of the question, based on fiscal year 2023-24, the average salary is $73,924.

Lastly, concerning part (e)(ii) of the question, based on fiscal year 2023-24, the total expenditures on salaries for the British Columbia CFO is $1,922,013.

Question No.2724—

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

With regard to the residence located in Winnipeg previously known as Lions Place: (a) did the City of Winnipeg or the Government of Manitoba contact the federal government to request assistance in maintaining non-profit ownership of Lions Place; (b) what measures did the federal government undertake to assist, prevent or otherwise shape the sale of Lions Place to its purchaser, Mainstreet Equity; (c) what financing or support did the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) provide to the previous owner of Lions Place, Lions Housing Centres Inc., prior to its sale to Mainstreet Equity, broken down by year and dollar amount; (d) what financing or support did the CMHC provide to Mainstreet Equity to assist with its purchase of Lions Place, broken down by year and dollar amount; (e) did any CMHC board members recuse themselves from participating in votes or decisions surrounding the sale of Lions Place; and (f) since January 1, 2015, has any CMHC board member recused themselves from decisions surrounding the sale or purchase of a residential property?

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

Mr. Speaker, with regard to part (a), as of October 1, 1998, under the Social Housing Agreement, or SHA, found at https://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/about-us/social-housing-information/administration-of-social-housing, CMHC transferred Lions Place, a 287-unit building located at 610 Portage Avenue in Winnipeg to the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation, the MHRC. Under the terms of the SHA, MHRC, was given the responsibility, rights for the management and administration for the social housing programs and projects listed under the SHA.

With regard to part (b), the federal government does not intervene in private sale transactions.

With regard to part (c), CMHC provided a direct loan of $12.5 million to Lions Club of Winnipeg. Seniors, Lions Place, a 287-unit building at 610 Portage Ave, Winnipeg, which was paid in full by August 1, 2018.

With regard to part (d), further information can’t be provided as disclosing any detail would compromise client privacy and CMHC is unable to confirm or deny specifics.

With regard to part (e), Operational matters are outside of the scope of the CMHC board of directors.

With regard to part (f), Operational matters are outside of the scope of the CMHC board of directors.

Question No.2726—

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

With regard to the testimony from the Information Commissioner on May 16, 2024, at the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in which she said that "We are now looking at a total funding shortfall of $700,000 which represents a reduction in my budget of approximately 5%": why did the government make this reduction to the Information Commissioner's budget?

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker,Tthe 2024-25 Main Estimates included funding of $15,344,268 in program expenditures funding for the Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada. This is an increase of approximately 8% relative to $14,212,216 in program expenditures funding presented in the estimates in 2023-24.

This additional funding for the office reflects salary increases due to new collective agreements. Similar funding top-ups are allocated to 90 organizations across government. Amounts are calculated using a longstanding process based on the number and classifications of employees at a specific point in time.

TBS will continue to work with the Information Commissioner to address financial pressures faced by her office.

Question No.2739—

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

With regard to Possession and Acquisition Licenses (PAL) and Restricted Possession and Acquisition Licenses (RPAL) applications for renewal or first licensing, as of December 31, for each year from 2016 to 2023, inclusively, broken down by type of application (New PAL, Renewal, Minor PAL, or Transfer), and province or territory of application: (a) how many applications have been in processing for over (i) one month, (ii) three months, (iii) six months, (iv) one year, (v) 18 months; (b) how many of the applications required secondary and tertiary reviews; (c) how many applications were delayed due to administrative issues; (d) how many employees or full time equivalents were employed at the Canadian Firearms Program office to process applications; and (e) how many PAL or RPAL renewal applications remained in processing six months after the listed expiry date on the license?

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, the RCMP undertook an extensive preliminary search in order to determine the amount of information that would fall within the scope of the question and the amount of time that would be required to prepare a comprehensive response. The level of detail of the information requested is not systematically tracked in a centralized database. The RCMP is a decentralized organization comprised of over 700 detachments in 150 communities across the country. The RCMP concluded that producing and validating a comprehensive response to this question would require a manual collection of information that is not possible in the time allotted, and this could lead to the disclosure of incomplete and misleading information.

Question No.2742—

[Mark Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Hope, BC]

With regard to the High Frequency Rail project and the options analyzed by CPCS Transcom Limited (CPCS) and WSP Global Inc. (WSP), to enhance passenger rail service in Southwestern Ontario: (a) on what date was the analysis provided to the Minister of Transport; (b) what are the details of the findings of the analysis; (c) on what date will the findings be made available on the government’s website; and (d) how much did the government pay CPCS and WSP for these analyses?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, my office was provided the analysis in May 2024.

Transport Canada is currently in the process of reviewing the analysis and determining next steps. The findings will be included in a summary report that is scheduled for publication on Transport’s Canada website in the coming months.

The Government of Canada paid CPCS Transcom Limited and WSP Global Inc. $1,068,424.36 to carry out its study of how to improve intercity passenger rail service in southwestern Ontario.

Question No.2744—

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

With regard to Canada’s Heads of Mission to each G7 member state, since January 1, 2022, and broken down by year: (a) how much has been spent on lobbyists and consultants, in total and broken down by embassy or high commission; (b) what is the breakdown of (a) by type of service (lobbying or consulting); and (c) what are the details of each contract for lobbying or consulting for any embassy or high commission in a G7 country abroad, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) vendor, (iii) amount, (iv) description of the services, (v) manner in which the contract was awarded (sole-sourced or competitive bid)?