Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 1-15 of 72
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Industry committee  The inspection frequencies are between one and five years for the devices in the eight sectors. To be fully rolled out, to have the devices in the retail food sector it would be five years.

October 19th, 2010Committee meeting

Carl Cotton

Industry committee  As I understand the way this is drafted, it would neutralize the purpose of the AMPs. You have to keep in mind that AMPs would be used in the context of the graduated enforcement policy that we have spoken about, so we likely wouldn't be in a position to issue an AMPs until we've

October 19th, 2010Committee meeting

Carl Cotton

Industry committee  I believe Alan already answered that question at a previous meeting. Measurement Canada--

October 19th, 2010Committee meeting

Carl Cotton

Industry committee  I've been told to shut up.

October 19th, 2010Committee meeting

Carl Cotton

Industry committee  What you're looking at there are not regulations.

October 19th, 2010Committee meeting

Carl Cotton

Industry committee  Those are not regulations. You're looking at an implementation manual for our STARS data entry process. I mean, we still call inspections “inspections”. We have been advised throughout the legislative process that “examination” is the more appropriate word in the current contex

October 19th, 2010Committee meeting

Carl Cotton

Industry committee  No, we're not suggesting that, and “examination” has been introduced.

October 19th, 2010Committee meeting

Carl Cotton

Industry committee  I just want to point out the amendment on page 30. Proposed section 29 talks about “examination”, “inspection”, and “examined”. It's on page 30 of Bill C-14. It's in fine print buried at the back. It says: The Act is amended by replacing “inspected” and “inspection” with “exam

October 19th, 2010Committee meeting

Carl Cotton

Industry committee  No, it doesn't.

October 19th, 2010Committee meeting

Carl Cotton

Industry committee  In my mind, they're synonymous. But “measurements” is a different beast altogether. To my knowledge, I don't believe it's set out in the Weights and Measures Act as an obligation in terms of inspection. Initial inspection, approval, calibration, and certification of standards wou

October 19th, 2010Committee meeting

Carl Cotton

Industry committee  I'm saying “examination” because my understanding of the current wording for the concept of inspections--and I may be off base here.... Because of the Jarvis decision, there has to be a clear designation of when an inspection becomes an investigation, and “examination” is the wor

October 19th, 2010Committee meeting

Carl Cotton

Industry committee  I'm not sure what you're looking at, sir.

October 19th, 2010Committee meeting

Carl Cotton

Industry committee  That's pre-Jarvis. I would imagine that at some point that would need to be changed from “inspection” to “examination”, but I don't think it affects the intent of inspections.

October 19th, 2010Committee meeting

Carl Cotton

Industry committee  I'm thinking in the context of the whole bill. The idea that all measurements made by these people or persons are conducted uniformly is not really within the context of the whole bill. It should be “inspected or examined”, so that blah, blah, blah.... “in the same manner and tha

October 19th, 2010Committee meeting

Carl Cotton

Industry committee  I think the word that is current now is “examinations”.

October 19th, 2010Committee meeting

Carl Cotton