David McGuinty

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, June 5th, 2012]

With regard to Old Age Security: (a) has Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC) or any other department undertaken new estimates since 2009 of the number of people over the age of 65 who are not receiving their OAS pension despite being eligible for it, and, if so, what are those estimates; (b) has HRSDC or any other department undertaken new estimates of the number of people aged 60-64 who are not receiving their OAS Spouse's Allowance despite being eligible for it, and, if so, what are those estimates; (c) Has HRSDC or any other department undertaken new estimates of the number of people aged 60-64 who are not receiving their OAS Survivor's Allowance despite being eligible for it, and, if so, what are those estimates; (d) how many of the people included in the estimates referred to in (a), (b) or (c) are currently in receipt of benefits under the Canada Pension Plan; (e) what outreach activities or initiatives has HRSDC, Service Canada or any other department undertaken to notify eligible seniors who are not currently in receipt of OAS pension, Spouse's Allowance or Survivor's Allowance; (f) has HRSDC, Service Canada or any other department undertaken any notifications by mail to eligible seniors who are not currently in receipt of OAS pension, Spouse's Allowance or Survivor's Allowance; and (g) if the answer to (f) is affirmative, (i) in what years were letters mailed, (ii) how many were sent in each of those years, (iii) what was the response rate in each of those years?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, June 4th, 2012]

With respect to greenhouse gas emissions: (a) what particular programs or initiatives was the Minister of Natural Resources referring to in the statement that “since 2006, our government has invested more than $10 billion to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and build a more sustainable environment” (interview with The Hill Times published Monday, August 16, 2010); (b) what is the full breakdown of that spending; (c) for each program in (a), (i) what was the total amount of emissions reductions which resulted, (ii) how was the amount of reduction quantified and by whom; and (d) for all programs included in the $10 billion expenditure, what was the average cost per unit of greenhouse gas emissions reduced?

[Restoring Rail Service Act, May 29th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I have a simple question for my colleague across the floor.

We hear an awful lot about the economic rationale and justification for this intervention. Following that logic, can the member please stand and tell Canadians who are watching the debate this evening in what instance the government would not intervene?

There are work stoppages that occur on a regular basis. These, of course, have an impact on customers, on inventory and on deliveries. The government has already intervened repeatedly in a single year four or five times: Air Canada, Canada Post, CP Rail.

Could the member please inform the House in what instance the government would not interfere in collective bargaining?

[Jobs, Growth and Long-Term Prosperity Act, May 3rd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I followed my colleague's speech intently. We worked together on environment committee for many years.

He and several of his ministers have been making pretty impressive and frankly wild comments about the funding of Canadian NGOs. We are hearing now that apparently international oil companies that are probably active in the oil sands are funding environmental NGOs to attack Canadian oil. I am wondering if the member could name the oil companies, the foundations, and their activities. More important, I wonder if he could stand outside the House and name them.

Is the member prepared to go as far as the Minister of Natural Resources and the Minister of the Environment who have said on public record that these contributions are illegal? Can he stand and state categorically that these contributions are illegal?

[Safe Streets and Communities Act, March 7th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the minister could comment on the comments that were made by David Daubney, a former member of Parliament who sat in caucus with the minister in Mr. Mulroney's government. Mr. Daubney is a former director of the criminal law policy section at Justice Canada. Several days after terminating his career, Mr. Daubney said to the minister that he did not agree with this bill, that fear was at the basis of much of these measures, and he did not agree that it was constitutional.

For the third time, would the minister respond to the direct question: Will he table the evidence in the House of Commons today to substantiate that he has proof that this bill is constitutional?

[Business of Supply, February 28th, 2012]

Madam Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague from Toronto Centre for such a balanced perspective on what could be described as a moving target for Canadians. Technology is evolving very quickly. Knowledge is doubling every 18 months. I would like to raise two points and ask him to take a second to elucidate for Canadians.

First, how important is it for Canada to get this right, because of the extent to which developing countries, emerging economies, countries around the world are looking to Canada as a touchstone for balance in terms of privacy, the protection of our right to privacy, and access to this information?

Second, we often hear from the Conservative government how, perhaps, distrustful it is of the existing members of the judiciary. The Conservatives have often talked about judges making the law. The Minister of Public Safety has criticized for years members of the judiciary as being too liberal.

Could my colleague expand on that to help us understand, and should we be addressing this at committee as well?

[Business of Supply, February 16th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I want to pick up on the point about opportunity raised by my colleague across the floor.

Just some 120 short days ago the Province of Ontario was described in the English-speaking world, not just in Canada or the United States or North America but in the English speaking world, as having the best educational test scores globally. That is after considerable investment has been made over almost eight years by a government that has profoundly invested in education in contradistinction to the federal government here.

I want to ask my colleague an important question about opportunity. We are studying right now at the natural resources committee the massive mining and resource opportunities in and around aboriginal communities. We are hearing that these opportunities are not going to be available for so many young aboriginal people.

Could the member expand on the importance of education in actually achieving these opportunities?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, January 30th, 2012]

With respect to Canada’s oil sands: (a) how does the government define the oil sands geographically; (b) what are the known reserves in the oil sands; (c) how many jobs are directly or indirectly linked to the oil sands, (i) where, specifically, are these jobs located, (ii) in what sectors are the previously mentioned jobs; (d) how much revenue accrues annually to the government from oil sands exploitation for the years 2000 to 2011 inclusively; (e) what infrastructure investments regarding oil sands have been made by the government since January 2006; and (f) what federal subsidies are in place to incentivise oil sands exploitation and what has it cost the government on an annual basis since 2000?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, January 30th, 2012]

With respect to the project in conjunction with Public Works and Government Services Canada and Environment Canada which involves the Place Vincent Massey Building at 351 St. Joseph Boulevard in Gatineau, Quebec: (a) who made the decision not to proceed with the waste and cost reduction strategy of refurbishing the existing workstations; (b) what criteria were used in determining that the procurement process for refurbishment was time consuming and that buying was easier; (c) what were the expected costs for refurbishment to fit up the property; (d) what analysis was conducted to determine whether to buy new or to refurbish; (e) who approved the budget for the new furniture; (f) who approved the cost of storing the existing furniture; (g) what is the complete inventory of workstations and other furniture being stored, (i) how long will the previously mentioned furniture inventory be stored, (ii) what are the total storage costs expected to be, (iii) how much of this furniture has been declared surplus and will be sold; and (h) what is the total cost for new furniture at Place Vincent Massey?

[Questions on the Order Paper, January 30th, 2012]

Does the Department of Natural Resources have any plans to abolish the Low Level Radioactive Waste Management Office or merge it with another office?