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

Results 481-495 of 498
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Environment committee  I apologize if I took it in a different way. I was thinking about the report back to Parliament, and therefore the report back to Canadians.

June 2nd, 2016Committee meeting

Julie Gelfand

Environment committee  We found that 50% of the maps that exist are over 20 years old. Public Safety Canada itself came up with an estimate that it would take five to ten years to update those maps at a cost of about $365 million.

June 2nd, 2016Committee meeting

Julie Gelfand

Environment committee  Sixty-five percent of residences are flood plain mapped; 35% are not.

June 2nd, 2016Committee meeting

Julie Gelfand

Environment committee  I think you're absolutely right that, at the local level, Canadians probably are very aware of the infrastructure that's being built in their communities. Our job is to audit only the federal government. That's it.

June 2nd, 2016Committee meeting

Julie Gelfand

Environment committee  So the federal government gives money to the provinces and territories, and we looked at that relationship. Are they getting the reports back from the provinces and territories; how well are they issuing the cheques in a timely way; and are they getting all those reports?

June 2nd, 2016Committee meeting

Julie Gelfand

Environment committee  Just one second, I'm not finished. Let me finish. So we looked at whether or not—

June 2nd, 2016Committee meeting

Julie Gelfand

Environment committee  What we looked at was whether or not the federal government was able to do a wrap-up of all the different funding. Over 10 years, $13 billion went out.

June 2nd, 2016Committee meeting

Julie Gelfand

Environment committee  The objectives were to clean the air, clean the water, and reduce greenhouse gases. All that I was looking to find out was how many greenhouse gases were reduced overall in Canada. Parliamentarians don't know that. Generally, Canadians overall don't know. Objectives were set. Al

June 2nd, 2016Committee meeting

Julie Gelfand

Environment committee  I'll try to answer your question as well as Mr. Fast's. In the infrastructure audit, we looked at the objectives and whether or not you could report them to Canadians and to Parliament. In the first round of the gas tax fund, it was said that there would be cleaner air, cleaner

June 2nd, 2016Committee meeting

Julie Gelfand

Environment committee  We know that the Federation of Canadian Municipalities provides funding to municipalities and can trace the environmental benefits, reduced greenhouse gases. We're suggesting that if you set out an objective for your fund, set out criteria so that you can report on your performan

June 2nd, 2016Committee meeting

Julie Gelfand

Environment committee  You need to know that Health Canada is working with other OECD partners on a project to try to figure that out, because it's not just Canada that's dealing with this risk, it's around the world. Luckily Health Canada is working with other partners in the OECD to try to figure out

June 2nd, 2016Committee meeting

Julie Gelfand

Environment committee  You'd have to ask the department that.

June 2nd, 2016Committee meeting

Julie Gelfand

Environment committee  That's a great question. Cosmetics and most consumer products are not tested prior to being put on the shelves. Consumers need to understand that. That's the important part. I am not aware of any government that can or does test potentially 30,000 new products ahead of time, so

June 2nd, 2016Committee meeting

Julie Gelfand

Environment committee  It's pretty much reactive. On your question of timelines, it is not my understanding that we normally put timelines into our recommendations. I should tell you that Health Canada has already provided to us their action plan for this chapter, and that's a good thing. It does have

June 2nd, 2016Committee meeting

Julie Gelfand

Environment committee  We can give you one example that we put in our report, which is the Red River Floodway in Manitoba, where they spent $50-odd million in the 1960s, and have probably saved over $8 billion in flood risks. Yes, absolutely, that information is correct. There are more examples of that

June 2nd, 2016Committee meeting

Julie Gelfand