Debates of Sept. 15th, 2025

Question No.16—

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Riding Mountain, MB]

With regard to the government’s Net Zero Accelerator Initiative: (a) what are the details of the funding under the “decarbonization of large emitters” investment pillar, including the total (i) funding allocated, (ii) funding committed, (iii) funding disbursed, (iv) funding uncommitted, (v) number of applicants, (vi) commitments for emission reductions in tonnes; (b) what are the details of the funding under the “industrial transformation” investment pillar, including the total (i) funding allocated, (ii) funding committed, (iii) funding disbursed, (iv) funding uncommitted, (v) number of applicants, (vi) commitments for emission reductions in tonnes; (c) what are the details of the funding under the “clean technology and battery ecosystem development” investment pillar, including the total (i) funding allocated, (ii) funding committed, (iii) funding disbursed, (iv) funding uncommitted, (v) number of applicants, (vi) commitments for emission reductions in tonnes; (d) for large emitters, what (i) is the total number of applications received, (ii) is the total number of contributions signed, (iii) is the dollar value of the contribution agreements signed, (iv) are the total disbursements, (v) are the commitments in the contribution agreement to reduce emissions in tonnes, (vi) are the actual results achieved in terms of carbon reductions in tonnes; (e) for medium emitters, what (i) is the total number of applications received, (ii) is the total number of contributions signed, (iii) is the dollar value of the contribution agreements signed, (iv) are the total disbursements, (v) are the commitments in the contribution agreement to reduce emissions in tonnes, (vi) are the actual results achieved in terms of carbon reductions in tonnes; (f) for small emitters, what (i) is the total number of applications received, (ii) is the total number of contributions signed, (iii) is the dollar value of the contribution agreements signed, (iv) are the total disbursements, (v) are the commitments in the contribution agreement to reduce emissions in tonnes, (vi) are the actual results achieved in terms of carbon reductions in tonnes; (g) what was the emission reduction target at the program level when the Net Zero Accelerator Initiative was created; (h) what is the amount of actual emission reductions achieved to date; (i) what are the details of the contribution agreements that have been signed under the initiative, including, for each, (i) the company name, (ii) the amount of funding, (iii) whether the applicant was seeking funding of $50 million or more, (iv) the date when the application was received, (v) the date the contribution agreement was signed, (vi) cost of emissions reduction per tonne; (j) what is the total number of employees or full time equivalents working on delivering the Net Zero Accelerator; and (k) what are the details of all contracts signed to date related to the initiative, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) amount or value, (iii) vendor, (iv) description of the goods or services, (v) manner in which contract was awarded (sole-sourced or competitive bid)?

[Mélanie Joly, Liberal, Minister of Industry and Minister responsible for Canada Economic Development for Quebec Regions]

Mr. Speaker, Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada has determined that producing and validating a comprehensive response to this question would require the manual collection of data that cannot be completed within the allocated timeframe. Proceeding under these constraints risks the disclosure of incomplete or inaccurate information.

Question No.26—

[Alex Ruff, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

With regard to the December 5, 2024, and March 7, 2025, announcements that the government would extend the list of prohibited "assault-style" firearms to include 503 new makes and models: (a) how many of these new models have been used in crimes in Canada since 2015, broken down by (i) model, (ii) make, (iii) crime committed, (iv) whether the crime was committed with a legally-owned or illegally-owned firearm, (v) the date the crime was committed; (b) did the government consult with Indigenous people on this program expansion; (c) if the answer to (b) is affirmative, who was consulted, how were they consulted and what were the results; and (d) how is the government notifying impacted law-abiding, non-restricted and restricted firearms owners, who do not have email, internet or phone services, of these changes in a timely fashion?

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, in response to part (a) of the question. data on the specific makes and models of firearms used in crime are collected by individual law enforcement agencies across Canada for record keeping purposes. There is no central database at the national level with this information.

With respect to part (b), extensive public engagement on the issue of banning handguns and assault-style firearms, or ASFs, led by the then Minister of Border Security and Organized Crime Reduction, took place between October 2018 and February 2019 with the provinces and territories, municipalities, Indigenous partners, law enforcement, community organizations, and industry. The engagement process included a series of in-person meetings and virtual submissions, of which the following Indigenous organizations participated: Tsuut’ina Nation Police Service; File Hills First Nation Police Service; Assembly of First Nations; Congress of Aboriginal Peoples; Grand Chief of Atikamekw; Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami; Kwanlin Dün First Nation; Métis National Council; Native Women’s Association of Canada; Treaty #3 Indigenous Police Service; Treaty 7 Chiefs.

In the context of Parliament’s consideration of former Bill C-21, in 2022 and 2023, there was extensive parliamentary debate and engagement with Indigenous groups and stakeholders on ASFs. A broad range of views and considerations were raised, including the public safety imperative of achieving a comprehensive prohibition of ASFs and concerns regarding potential impacts on hunting. From January to May 2023, the Government of Canada held discussions with a number of National Indigenous Organizations, Modern Treaty and Self Government Agreement Holders, and Indigenous communities to understand concerns and obtain a better understanding of the impacts of prohibiting firearms, that is, how firearms are used by members of Indigenous communities, key capabilities and features of firearms, impacts of firearm prohibitions/substitutions.

With respect to part (c), in the context of Parliament’s consideration of former Bill C-21, officials held virtual and in-person discussions: on January 20, a virtual technical briefing with National Indigenous Organizations; on January 27, a virtual technical briefing with Modern Treaty and Self-Government Agreement Holders; on March 8, virtually with the Manitoba Metis Federation; onMarch 14, in person with Tribal Chiefs Ventures; on March 15, in person with the Manitoba Metis Federation; on March 16, in person with Manitoba Keewatinowi Okimakanak Inc; on March 27 and April 21, virtually with the Metis National Council, Metis Nation British Columbia, Metis Nation Alberta, Metis Nation Saskatchewan, Metis Nation Ontario, and Les Femmes Michif Otipemisiwak; on March 28, virtually with the Metis Nation BC; on April 6, in person with the Hunting, Fishing, Trapping Coordinating Committee; on May 3, virtually with the First Nations Chiefs of Police;on May 10, in person with the Native Council Prince Edward Island; on May 24, virtually with the Wolastoqey Nation New Brunswick; on May 25, virtually with the Native Council of Nova Scotia

Overall, Indigenous organizations were supportive of initiatives to enhance public safety initiatives, while also underlining the importance of upholding rights recognized and reaffirmed in section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982. Indigenous organizations noted the importance of consultation to identify and consider potential adverse impacts on hunting and harvesting, food sovereignty, conservation, cultural practices/traditions, and protection from predators on the land.

With respect to part (d), through the Canadian Firearms Program, licence holders were informed of the December 5, 2024 and March 7, 2025, prohibitions through several methods of communication. Individuals and businesses received a notification detailing the impacts and options, which was sent by email; those without an email address on file were advised by mail.

Additionally, the Canadian Firearms Program published web content and updated its toll-free phone line with a recorded notice.

This is in addition to the news releases and backgrounders published by Public Safety Canada.

Question No.29—

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

With regard to the government’s announcement on November 4, 2024, to cap emissions on the Canadian oil and gas sector by about one-third over the next eight years: (a) has the government undertaken an assessment on how this will impact Canadian families, and, if so, what were the results of the assessment; (b) what will be the estimated increased cost to average Canadians as a result of increased prices for groceries, gas and home heating, broken down by year over the next eight years; (c) what increases does the government expect in Canadian energy imports from countries with lower environmental and ethical standards as a results of the cap; (d) did the government consider the impact that an increased reliance on oil and gas from countries with lower environmental standards will have as a result of imposing this cap, and, if not, why was it not considered; (e) what assessments, if any, has the government undertaken to examine the impact of the emissions cap across the (i) construction, (ii) manufacturing, (iii) finance, (iv) hospitality, sectors; (f) how many jobs have been cut by oil and gas companies as a result of emissions caps in the last nine years; and (g) how does the government plan to ensure that Canada’s oil and gas competitors (United States, Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, United Arab Emirates) have comparable emissions caps, and, if they do not, how does the government plan to allow Canadian oil and gas companies to compete with them?

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to (a), yes, a thorough analysis of impacts has been conducted and can be found in the Canada Gazette, Part 1, Volume 158, Number 45: Oil and Gas Sector Greenhouse Gas Emissions Cap Regulations. Because oil prices are set internationally and natural gas prices are set continentally, the analysis suggests that cost pass-through to consumers would be minimal. The ability for firms to pass on costs to consumers is further detailed in the response to question (b).

With regard to (b), the department concluded in its analysis of the proposed Regulations that there is low risk of costs being passed through to fuel consumers. The price of crude oil and natural gas commodities are generally determined in global or continental markets. Given that oil prices are set in international markets, the ability of firms to pass on these compliance costs to consumers is limited. In some instances, prices can be influenced by regional dynamics, which could result in some ability for oil and gas producers to affect downstream prices.

With regard to (c), departmental modelling indicates that the proposed Regulations would have very minimal impact on import levels and would not result in any increases in imports. Imports of oil and gas are in fact estimated to fall over time under scenarios with and without the emissions cap in place. Between 2019 and the 2030-2032 period, oil and gas imports are estimated to decrease by 5.6% without the emissions cap in place, and by 5.4% with the emissions cap in place. The increase between these two scenarios corresponds to 0.2% more oil imports in the regulatory scenario (with the emissions cap in place) than the baseline (without the emissions cap) over the 2030-2032 period. The modelling conducted for this analysis does not estimate from which jurisdictions the imports would originate.

With regard to (d), as noted in the answer to question C, departmental modelling indicates that the proposed Regulations will not have a significant impact on imports, and that imports are expected to continue to decrease with the oil and gas emissions cap in place. Likewise, departmental modelling shows that production is expected to grow by 16% between 2019 and 2030 under a scenario with the oil and gas emissions cap in place, compared to 17% growth in a scenario without the emissions cap. These very small decreases in production could be offset by production elsewhere in the world that is either more or less carbon intensive.

With regard to (e), as noted above, the price of crude oil and natural gas commodities are generally determined in global or continental markets. As such, there is limited ability for the oil and gas sector to pass on costs to end-users including Canadian households and other sectors. The cost of the emissions cap on the above noted sectors is thus expected to be very limited.

With regard to (f), the proposed emissions cap is not yet in place and would not establish a restriction on emissions until 2030. The department estimates that labour expenditure in the oil and gas sector will continue to grow with the emissions cap in place. The analysis projects growth of 53% from 2019 to the 2030 to 2032 period with the proposed emissions cap in place, which is only slightly below the 55% growth expected without the emissions cap. This corresponds to labour expenditure being only 1.6% lower in the 2030 to 2032 period under the emissions cap than without it, and this does not account for increases in labour expenditures in other parts of the economy or from post-2032 activity driven by decarbonization investments and long-term competitiveness in a net-zero future.

With regard to (g), the proposed Regulations would cap greenhouse gas emissions, not production and they are designed to ensure predictable emissions reductions from the oil and gas sector while enabling increased production.

Although global demand for oil and gas is expected to decline as the global economy switches to cleaner fuels to address the urgent issue of climate change, global demand for oil and gas is expected to continue for the foreseeable future. In a low-carbon world, improvements in emissions intensity are expected to improve the sector’s competitiveness over time.

Question No.34—

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Ponoka—Didsbury, AB]

With regard to the Substance Use and Addictions Program, and safe and safer supply projects, commissioned by or which have received funding from Health Canada, since January 1, 2024: (a) what were the costs incurred by the government related to the program, in total and broken down by type of expenditure; and (b) what are the details of all projects, including the (i) project name, (ii) location, (iii) amount of government funding, (iv) description of the project?

[Maggie Chi, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, information regarding grants provided under the Substance Use and Addictions Program is available at https://search.open.canada.ca/grants/.

Question No.39—

[Scot Davidson, Conservative, New Tecumseth—Gwillimbury, ON]

With regard to the government's response to Order Paper Question Q-3051 of the first session of the 44th Parliament showing the number of taxpayers in each riding that received the Canada Carbon Rebate rural supplement: what is the government's explanation for why certain individuals in completely urban ridings, such as Winnipeg Centre, Ottawa Centre and numerous completely urban ridings in the Greater Toronto Area, are receiving the rural supplement?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Minister of Finance and National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, with respect to my colleague’s question, what follows is the response from the Canada Revenue Agency as of May 27, 2024, that is, the date of the question.

Some individuals received the Canada Carbon Rebate, or CCR, Rural Supplement despite living in urban ridings, mainly due to the mailing address of the recipient at the time of payment.

Mailing addresses were used when generating the data for Q-3051 because it aggregates how many people received the CCR payment at the time of the quarterly issuance in each federal electoral district. The mailing address is what is used to aggregate benefits data in past publications and reports. For consistency purposes, this address type was chosen.

Note 11 in the original response to Q-3051 is as follows: “The Federal Electoral District information is based on the recipient’s mailing address(es) of the benefit year. This data captures recipients across the four quarters of the benefit year, thereby reflecting movement between federal electoral districts.”

Eligibility and entitlements of the CCR and the Rural Supplement are based on the province of residence indicated on a recipient’s tax return for that benefit year, qualifying them for CCR throughout the year. The Rural Supplement is calculated by using both the recipient’s mailing and home address postal codes. If one of these postal codes is considered outside a Census Metropolitan Area, or CMA, based on our CMA validation table, the recipient is entitled to the Rural Supplement.

CCR entitlements are calculated based on the province of residence on the first day of the payment month. If an individual lived in a rural area when the CCR entitlement was calculated, but moved to an urban area, it could appear as though they were issued a rural supplement amount while living in an urban area.

Question No.41—

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L’Érable—Lotbinière, QC]

With regard to the $247,485 announced for Island Telecom Services Inc. to connect 106 households in Prince Edward Island with high-speed internet: (a) on what date is this project expected to be completed; (b) why was the funding recipient unable to complete this project by the original prescribed project completion date; (c) were there any penalties given to the funding recipient for not meeting the original project completion date, and, if so, what are the details of those penalties; (d) has the funding recipient requested additional funding to complete the project; and (e) how much of the $247,485 in funding was from the (i) federal government, (ii) provincial government?

[Buckley Belanger, Liberal, Secretary of State (Rural Development)]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to (a), 81% of households now have improved connectivity. Work is underway by another Internet Service Provider to connect the remaining households by March 2027 at the latest.

With regard to (b), the funding recipient was initially impacted by supply chain issues delaying procurement of necessary materials as well as local labour shortages. Subsequently they faced delays due to extreme weather, such as a hurricane and heavy rain, as well as permitting delays.

With regard to (c), payments have been withheld, pending continued investigation on the funding recipient’s compliance against the terms and conditions of the contribution agreement.

With regard to (d), the funding recipient has not requested additional funding to complete the project.

With regard to (e)(i), the federal government authorized funding of up to $247,485.00.

With regard to (e)(iii),the Government of Prince Edward Island authorized funding of up to $42,262.00.

Question No.42—

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L’Érable—Lotbinière, QC]

With regard to the $445,395 announced for Island Telecom Services Inc. to connect 150 households in Prince Edward Island with high-speed internet: (a) on what date is this project expected to be completed; (b) why was the funding recipient unable to complete this project by the original prescribed project completion date; (c) were there any penalties given to the funding recipient for not meeting the original project completion date, and, if so, what are the details of those penalties; (d) has the funding recipient requested additional funding to complete the project; and (e) how much of the $445,395 in funding was from the (i) federal government, (ii) provincial government?

[Buckley Belanger, Liberal, Secretary of State (Rural Development)]

Mr. Speaker, in response to part (a) of the question,77 percent of households now have improved connectivity. Work is underway by another Internet Service Provider to connect the remaining households by March 2027 at the latest.

With respect to part (b),the funding recipient was initially impacted by supply chain issues delaying procurement of necessary materials as well as local labour shortages. Subsequently they faced delays due to extreme weather (e.g. hurricane and heavy rain) as well as permitting delays.

Concerning part (c), payments have been withheld, pending continued investigation on the funding recipient’s compliance against the terms and conditions of the contribution agreement.

With respect to part (d) the funding recipient has not requested additional funding to complete the project.

With respect to part (e)(i), the federal government authorized funding of up to $445,395.00.

Lastly, with regard to part (e)(ii), the Government of Prince Edward Island did not co-fund for the project.

Question No.43—

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

With regard to the government's "Choose Canada" advertising campaigns, including social media, in late March and early April 2025, broken down by participating department or agency's campaign: (a) who is the highest-ranking official who approved the campaign; (b) on what date was final approval given for the campaign; (c) on which platforms and dates was the campaign (i) scheduled to be disseminated, (ii) disseminated; (d) was its continued dissemination during the 2025 general election consistent with the Treasury Board's 2016 Directive on the Management of Communications or 2025 Directive on the Management of Communications and Federal ldentity; (e) following the dissolution of Parliament on March 23, 2025, what steps were taken to suspend or end the campaign; (f) on what date was the campaign fully suspended or ended; and (g) what was the total expense incurred in relation to the campaign?

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to (a), the Clerk of the Privy Council Office was the highest-ranking official who approved the campaign.

With regard to (b), the Clerk of the Privy council approved the campaign on March 17, 2025.

With regard to (c)(i), digital Advertising purchased programmatically including static, audio, video and connected television advertisements were scheduled to begin on March 21, 2025. Social Media Advertising on Meta, TikTok, Snapchat and Reddit were scheduled to begin on March 24, 2025.

With regard to (c)(ii), programmatic advertisements went live on March 21, 2025, and social media advertising went live on March 24, 2025, apart from Meta advertisements, which went live on March 26, 2025, due to a technical issue.

With regard to (d), the Policy on Communications and Federal Identity allows deputy heads of departments to approve specific types of advertising to proceed during general federal elections. The Clerk of the Privy Council is the Deputy Head of PCO. He approved the continuation of the Choose Canada campaign during the 2025 federal election on March 17, 2025.

With regard to (e), no steps were taken to suspend the campaign, as the Clerk of the Privy Council had previously provided approval for the campaign to continue during a federal election.

With regard to (f), the first phase of the campaign ended March 31, 2025.

Lastly, with regard to (g), the total net expenditure of this campaign is $2,517,000. This figure includes production costs, media costs and fees. Following the completion of the media agency’s billing reconciliation, additional credits may be received which could impact this figure.

Question No.44—

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Airdrie—Cochrane, AB]

With regard to Veterans Affairs Canada: (a) how many lawsuits have been brought against the government related to the issue of medical assistance in dying since January 2018; (b) what is the overall cost of these lawsuits that the government of Canada had to pay to settle, in total and broken down by legal fees versus settlement payments; (c) how many veterans have accepted medical assistance in dying from the government of Canada since January 2018; and (d) how many of the settlements involved the recipients signing a non-disclosure agreement to ensure that the government wouldn't be further embarrassed by its actions?

[Sean Casey, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, in response to part (a) of the question,two legal actions were filed against Veterans Affairs Canada related to medical assistance in dying, or MAID, since January 2018.

As for part (b), the Department of Justice Canada represents the Canadian government in any litigation matter, and when a settlement takes place, it is common for the terms to be confidential.

With respect to part (c), medical assistance in dying is not something that the government offers to Veterans. It is something that is discussed between the person and their primary care provider. Health Canada released the fifth annual report on MAID, which can be consulted at https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/publications/health-system-services/annual-report-medical-assistance-dying-2023.html.

Canada’s MAID system has been carefully designed with safeguards to affirm and protect the inherent and equal value of every person’s life. To be eligible for MAID, a person must have a serious and incurable medical condition, be in an advanced state of irreversible decline in capability, and be experiencing enduring and intolerable suffering related to their medical condition. The person and their practitioners must have discussed reasonable and available means to relieve the person’s suffering (including counselling services, mental health and disability support services, community services, and palliative care, and be offered consultations with professionals who provide those services) and agree that the person has seriously considered those means.

With respect to part (d), one legal action brought against Veterans Affairs Canada related to medical assistance in dying has been the subject of a settlement and, in accordance with common practice, the terms are confidential.

Question No.50—

[Lianne Rood, Conservative, Middlesex—London, ON]

With regard to projects funded under Canada’s Feminist International Assistance Policy, since its inception in 2017, and broken down by year: (a) what are the details of all projects funded, including the (i) project name, (ii) implementing partner, (iii) country, (iv) total funding amount, (v) project description, (vi) date of the funding; (b) for each project, what was the proportion of funding allocated toward activities related to gender-based ideology versus measurable humanitarian outcomes such as clean water, food, health care and education; (c) which projects were flagged for ideological risk, redundancy with multilateral efforts or weak accountability measures in internal departmental risk assessments, and what specific actions were taken in response to each flag; (d) what indicators does the government use to measure its effectiveness; (e) what performance metrics have been met since 2017; and (f) what are the total expenditures under the Feminist International Assistance Policy, broken down by year and region?

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade and to the Secretary of State (International Development)]

Mr. Speaker, Global Affairs Canada delivers international assistance programming aligned with the Feminist International Assistance Policy through a diverse portfolio of bilateral and multilateral projects. These initiatives aim to advance gender equality while achieving sustainable development outcomes across sectors such as health, education, and humanitarian assistance.

Furthermore, Global Affairs Canada and its partners manage risks associated with all development projects. For example, fiduciary risks are managed via Global Affairs Canada’s Fiduciary Risk Evaluation Tool, while context-specific non-fiduciary risks are managed in coordination with implementing partners. In both cases, this requires identifying specific risks, assessing their likelihood of happening and potential impacts, identifying appropriate responses to those risks, and monitoring their evolution in order to avoid negative effects on project implementation. Global Affairs Canada’s new grants and contributions integrated management system will include a dedicated component to enhance risk management across all grants and contributions.

Next, Global Affairs Canada does not use a standard set of results indicators across all projects. Each development project funded by Global Affairs Canada must include a tailored, context-specific logic model and performance measurement framework. These frameworks use indicators that will also align with government priorities, such as the Feminist International Assistance Policy. This requirement applies to more than 2,000 development projects active at any given time, with larger projects using on average 40 indicators.

For example, in a typical health project, effectiveness is measured using quantitative and qualitative indicators such as quality of care, thenumber of people accessing essential health services, such as maternal health, family planning and nutrition, as well as the use of supplements like vitamin A, iron, and folic acid. These indicators help track improvements in health service delivery.

Moreover, the Office of the Auditor General’s 2023 report on the Implementation of the Feminist International Assistance Policy recommended that Global Affairs Canada measure both outputs and outcomes so that the department fully reports on the impact of funding against policy goals and priorities. Global Affairs Canada is committed to implementing improved solutions to address this recommendation, completing several actions to that effect. For example, the department refocused the International Assistance Report to Parliament to report on Feminist International Assistance Policy, policy-level outcomes. In addition, Global Affairs Canada’s new grants and contributions integrated management system will support results reporting and information management needs.

Moreover, the Department 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 Department 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 could lead to the disclosure of incomplete and misleading information.

Due to the broad scope and volume of the data requested, and the time required to compile it in the format requested, Global Affairs Canada refers the member to a few publicly available resources for project-level information.:

First is a downloadable dataset that includes comprehensive historical data on international assistance projects funded by Canada since 2005, including those aligned with Feminist International Assistance Policy since 2017. It can be found at https://www.international.gc.ca/transparency-transparence/international-assistance-report-stat-rapport-aide-internationale/index.aspx?lang=eng.

Next is DevData, a data visualization platform that offers dashboards, charts, and maps to explore Canada’s international assistance by theme, country, and policy priority, including gender equality. It can be found at https://www.international.gc.ca/transparency-transparence/international-assistance-report-stat-rapport-aide-internationale/dashboard-tableau-bord.aspx?lang=eng.

Lastly, there is Project Browser, an interactive tool that allows users to search, filter, and export information on active and completed projects by year, country, partner, and sector. It can be found at https://w05.international.gc.ca/projectbrowser-banqueprojets/.

These platforms provide transparent and accessible means to explore project-level data, in line with Canada’s commitment to aid transparency, accountability, and open government.

Question No.51—

[Lianne Rood, Conservative, Middlesex—London, ON]

With regard to all international development projects funded by the government that include language related to "climate justice", "intersectionality", "anti-racism" or "decolonization" since January 1, 2018: (a) what are the details of each such project, including the (i) project name, (ii) recipient organization, (iii) country or region, (iv) funding amount, (v) project description, (vi) date of the funding; (b) what were the measurable humanitarian outcomes produced by each project, as assessed by (i) Global Affairs Canada, (ii) third-party evaluations, broken down by evaluator; and (c) which projects underwent formal audits for cost-effectiveness or ideological bias, and what were the details, including the results of each audit?

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade and to the Secretary of State (International Development)]

Mr. Speaker, Global Affairs Canada manages an extensive network of 181 missions in 112 countries. Global Affairs Canada undertook an extensive preliminary search in order to determine the amount of information that would fall within the scope of these questions and the amount of time that would be required to prepare a comprehensive response. The department does not use object codes related to "climate justice", "intersectionality", "anti-racism" or "decolonization". The department concluded that producing and validating a comprehensive response to these questions would require a manual collection of information that is not possible in the time allotted and could lead to the disclosure of incomplete and misleading information.

Question No.57—

[Fred Davies, Conservative, Niagara South, ON]

With regard to homes constructed under the Housing Accelerator Fund, since the program's introduction in March 2023: what are the details of each finished home completed by the fund, including, for each, the (i) address, (ii) date on which construction began, (iii) date on which construction was completed, (iv) description of the home (three-bedroom house, studio apartment, etc.)?

[Jennifer McKelvie, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Housing and Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to homes constructed under the Housing Accelerator Fund, or HAF, since the program's introduction in March 2023, growth resulting from the Housing Accelerator Fund is measured by the number of permitted housing units approved under the Fund agreement, compared to a baseline anchored in the community’s historical growth. Each agreement includes an overall Housing Supply Growth Target that must be achieved by the end of the agreement.

The Fund will fast track more than 112,000 permits for new homes over the course of the program, which runs from 2024 to 2028. Over the next decade, municipalities forecast that these agreements will unlock more than 750,000 newly permitted homes.

The earliest short-term impacts were reported through communities’ annual reports, submitted to Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation from November 2024 up to March 2025. In the first year of the program, communities issued 160,585 building permits, beating the combined forecast by 22,000, an early indicator of mid-term potential.

The Housing Accelerator Fund incentivizes local governments to make systemic reforms to land use planning and development approvals that will accelerate the supply of housing that Canadians need, with long-term impacts. Local governments have a significant impact on housing development. Local regulations and municipal bylaws influence where, what kind, and how quickly housing can be built.

To earn funding, approved local governments commit to a set of initiatives and growth targets called an Action Plan. Each community’s Action Plan is unique, but all will result in more new housing permits than would have been approved otherwise. Following an initial payment upon signing, three annual payments are conditional upon satisfactory implementation of Action Plan commitments. All initiatives must be completed by the end of the second year of the agreement.

While construction of individual homes or housing projects is not a universally mandated reform under the program, once the funds from the Housing Accelerator Fund are earned, communities may choose to invest in a range of housing-related priorities, including individual housing projects or housing-related infrastructure. Many communities have dedicated funds from the Housing Accelerator Fund to directly support housing and infrastructure development, and details on such would be captured by the unique agreements signed with each of them.

Question No.58—

[Fred Davies, Conservative, Niagara South, ON]

With regard to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada: how many provincial attestation letters or territorial attestation letters has Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada permitted designated educational institutions to allocate for international students, for each province and territory since 2024, broken down by Classification of Instructional Programs tied to the allocation, including (i) Classification of Instructional Programs code, (ii) Classification of Instructional Programs series, (iii) Classification of Instructional Programs subseries?