|
|
The Order Paper and Notice Paper is a document that guides the deliberations of the Senate and lists items of business currently before it. These items are listed in several different categories and in a priority according to an arrangement adopted by the Senate as stipulated in the rules. The majority of these items constitute the Orders of the Day which are called following the daily Routine of Business. These items are themselves divided into two principal categories - government business and other business. Within each of these two categories are items for bills, motions, inquiries and reports of committees.
The Notice Paper contains the text of motions and inquiries not yet called for debate.
The Order Paper and Notice Paper is prepared every day in advance of the actual sitting.
(The following is an outline of a typical sitting day in the Senate. Variations are possible subject to the Rules and to the decisions of the Senate.)
1. Tabling of Documents
2. Presentation of Reports from Standing or Special Committees
3. Government Notices of Motions
4. Introduction and First Reading of Government Bills
5. Introduction and First Reading of Senate Public Bills
6. First Reading of Commons Public Bills
7. Reading of Petitions for Private Bills
8. Introduction and First Reading of Private Bills
9. Tabling of Reports from Inter-parliamentary Delegations
10. Notices of Motions
11. Notices of Inquiries
12. Presentation of Petitions
Bills
Inquiries
Motions
Reports of Committees
Senate Public Bills
Commons Public Bills
Private Bills
Reports of Committees
Other
May 1, 2012—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Fortin-Duplessis, seconded by the Honourable Senator Demers, for the second reading of Bill S-10, An Act to implement the Convention on Cluster Munitions.
April 2, 2012—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Andreychuk, seconded by the Honourable Senator Tkachuk, for the second reading of Bill S-9, An Act to amend the Criminal Code.
April 2, 2012—That he will call the attention of the Senate to the budget entitled, Economic Action Plan 2012: Jobs, Growth, and Long-Term Prosperity, tabled in the House of Commons on March 29, 2012, by the Minister of Finance, the Honourable James M. Flaherty, P.C., M.P., and in the Senate on April 2, 2012.
Nil
May 10, 2012—Consideration of the fourth report of the Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade (Passport Canada's Fee-for-Service Proposal to Parliament, pursuant to the User Fees Act, without amendment), presented in the Senate on May 10, 2012.
Rule 27(3) states:
Unless previously ordered, any item under "Other Business'', "Inquiries'' and "Motions'' that has not been proceeded with during fifteen sittings shall be dropped from the Order Paper.
Consequently, the number appearing in parenthesis indicates the number of sittings since the item was last proceeded with.
May 2, 2012—Second reading of Bill S-210, An Act to amend the Fisheries Act (commercial seal fishing).—(Honourable Senator Harb)
February 8, 2012—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Watt, seconded by the Honourable Senator Lovelace Nicholas, for the second reading of Bill S-207, An Act to amend the Interpretation Act (non- derogation of aboriginal treaty rights).—(Honourable Senator Patterson)
March 15, 2012—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Runciman, seconded by the Honourable Senator Di Nino, for the second reading of Bill C-290, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (sports betting).—(Honourable Senator Carignan)
April 26, 2012—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Wallin, seconded by the Honourable Senator Martin, for the second reading of Bill C-288, An Act respecting the National Flag of Canada.—(Honourable Senator Tardif)
May 10, 2012—Second reading of Bill C-314, An Act respecting the awareness of screening among women with dense breast tissue.—(Honourable Senator Carignan)
Nil
May 15, 2012—Consideration of the fourth report of the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages (budget—study on the use of the internet, new media and social media and the respect for Canadians' language rights—power to hire staff), presented in the Senate on May 15, 2012.—(Honourable Senator Chaput)
May 3, 2012—Consideration of the sixth report of the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights (budget—study on the rights of off-reserve Aboriginal Peoples—power to hire staff and to travel), presented in the Senate on May 3, 2012. —(Honourable Senator Jaffer)
November 22, 2011—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Smith P.C. (Cobourg), seconded by the Honourable Senator Cordy, for the adoption of the first report of the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament (Revised Rules of the Senate), presented in the Senate on November 16, 2011.
April 3, 2012—Consideration of the third report of the Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade entitled: A Charter "Fit for Purpose'': Parliamentary Consultation on the Proposed Charter of the Commonwealth, tabled in the Senate on April 3, 2012. —(Honourable Senator Andreychuk)
April 26, 2012—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Dallaire, calling the attention of the Senate to Canada's continued lack of commitment to the prevention and elimination of mass atrocity crimes, and further calling on the Senate to follow the recommendation of the United Nations Secretary General in making 2012 the year of prevention of mass atrocity crimes.—(Honourable Senator Tardif)
February 28, 2012—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Eaton calling the attention of the Senate to the interference of foreign foundations in Canada's domestic affairs and their abuse of Canada's existing Revenue Canada Charitable status.—(Honourable Senator Duffy)
April 26, 2012—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Raine, seconded by the Honourable Senator Wallin:
That the Senate of Canada urge the Government of Canada to encourage local governments from coast to coast to coast to collaborate in choosing one day annually to make their health, recreational sports, and fitness facilities available to citizens at a reduced or complimentary rate, with the goals of promoting the use of those facilities and improving the overall health and well-being of Canadians for the reasons that:
(a) although Canada's mountains, oceans, lakes, forests, and parks offer abundant opportunities for physical activities outdoors, an equally effective alternative opportunity to take part in physical activities is offered by indoor health, recreational sports, and fitness facilities;
(b) despite its capacity to be a healthy and fit nation, Canada is experiencing a decline in participation rates in physical activities, with this decline having a direct consequence to health and fitness;
(c) local governments operate many public facilities that promote health and fitness, and those facilities could be better utilized by their citizenry;
(d) there is a growing concern in Canada over the rise in chronic diseases, which are attributable, in part, to inactivity and in turn can cause other impediments to achieving and maintaining a healthy lifestyle;
(e) health and fitness should be promoted and encouraged by all levels of government, to Canadians of all ages and abilities; and
(f) we aspire to increase participation by Canadians in activities that promote health, recreational sports, and fitness.—(Honourable Senator Plett)
May 15, 2012—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Losier-Cool, calling the attention of the Senate to the current state of French language education in New Brunswick.—(Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C.)
May 15, 2012—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Tardif, calling the attention of the Senate to Justice in French in Francophone Minority Communities. —(Honourable Senator Chaput)
April 26, 2012—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C., calling the attention of the Senate to the importance of food banks to families and the working poor.—(Honourable Senator Tardif)
December 16, 2011—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Mercer, calling the attention of the Senate to Canada's current level of volunteerism, the impact it has on society, and the future of volunteerism in Canada.—(Honourable Senator Mercer)
April 24, 2012—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Cowan, calling the attention of the Senate to the 30th Anniversary of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which has done so much to build pride in our country and our national identity.—(Honourable Senator Andreychuk)
January 31, 2012—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Meighen, calling the attention of the Senate to the economic benefits of recreational Atlantic salmon fishing in Canada.—(Honourable Senator Moore)
April 25, 2012—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Seth, calling the attention of the Senate to the issue of support for the visually impaired.—(Honourable Senator Di Nino)
October 20, 2011—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Cordy, calling the attention of the Senate to those Canadians living with multiple sclerosis (MS) and chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency (CCSVI), who lack access to the "liberation'' procedure.—(Honourable Senator Cordy)
November 2, 2011—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Jaffer, seconded by the Honourable Senator Munson:
That the Government of Canada officially apologize in Parliament to the South Asian community and to the individuals impacted in the 1914 Komagata Maru incident. —(Honourable Senator Tardif)
April 5, 2012—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Chaput calling the attention of the Senate to the process for readjusting federal electoral boundaries and the impact it could have on the vitality of official language minority communities.—(Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C.)
February 28, 2012—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Downe calling the attention of the Senate to:
(a) the problem of Canadians evading taxes by hiding assets in overseas tax havens;
(b) the harm this does to Canada, both in terms of lost revenue and its effect on those Canadians who obey the law and pay their fair share of taxes;
(c) the pathetic efforts of the Canada Revenue Agency to discover, halt and deter overseas tax evasion, and how, in comparison to those similar agencies in other countries, CRA falls short;
(d) the fact that this, plus recent scandals involving the CRA could lead one to conclude that there are serious problems at the Agency; and
(e) concerns that this situation amounts to a lack of leadership on the part of the Government of Canada. —(Honourable Senator Carignan)
February 2, 2012—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Meighen, calling the attention of the Senate to the unconscionable delay, despite the resolution of this Chamber passed unanimously on June 18, 2008, of the awarding of an appropriate theatre decoration for the brave Canadian flyers and crew who served in Bomber Command during World War II, without whose efforts, courage and sacrifice the war and its destruction would have continued for many more years.—(Honourable Senator Mercer)
November 2, 2011—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Hubley, calling the attention of the Senate to the 5th anniversary of the tabling of the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology's report: Out of the Shadows at Last: Transforming Mental Health, Mental Illness and Addiction Services in Canada.—(Honourable Senator Callbeck)
February 7, 2012—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Callbeck, calling the attention of the Senate to the inequities of the Old Age Security Allowance for unattached, low-income seniors aged 60-64 years.—(Honourable Senator Carignan)
January 31, 2012—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Losier-Cool, calling the attention of the Senate to the evolution of education in the language of the minority.—(Honourable Senator Comeau)
November 17, 2011—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C., calling the attention of the Senate to the issue of poverty in Canada—an issue that is always current and continues to have devastating effects.—(Honourable Senator Callbeck)
February 7, 2012—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Callbeck, calling the attention of the Senate to the importance of literacy, given that more than ever Canada requires increased knowledge and skills in order to maintain its global competitiveness and to increase its ability to respond to changing labour markets.—(Honourable Senator Tardif)
May 8, 2012—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Cowan, seconded by the Honourable Senator Tardif:
That the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance be authorized to examine and report on the tax consequences of various public and private advocacy activities undertaken by charitable and non-charitable entities in Canada and abroad;
That, in conducting such a study, the Committee take particular note of:
(a) Charitable entities that receive funding from foreign sources;
(b) Corporate entities that claim business deductions against Canadian taxes owing for their advocacy activities, both in Canada and abroad; and
(c) Educational entities that utilize their charitable status to advocate on behalf of the interests of private entities; and
That the Committee submit its final report to the Senate no later than June 30, 2013, and retain all powers necessary to publicize its findings for 180 days after the tabling of the final report.—(Honourable Senator Lang)
February 7, 2012—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Frum, calling the attention of the Senate to egregious human rights abuses in Iran, particularly the use of torture and the cruel and inhuman treatment of unlawfully incarcerated political prisoners.—(Honourable Senator Cools)
May 3, 2012—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Mockler, calling the attention of the Senate to Hunger Awareness Week, an initiative of the Food Banks of Canada from May 7-11, 2012 and the challenge calling on Parliamentarians to fast on May 9, 2012 in order to experience what hunger feels like for hundreds of thousands of Canadians.—(Honourable Senator Hubley)
February 7, 2012—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C., calling the attention of the Senate to the 2009 poverty reduction strategy of New Brunswick.—(Honourable Senator Tardif)
May 1, 2012—Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Comeau, seconded by the Honourable Senator Di Nino:
That the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration be authorized to examine and report on the powers and responsibilities of the officers of parliament, and their reporting relationships to the two houses; and
That the committee present is final report no later than March 31, 2013.—(Honourable Senator Tardif)
December 6, 2011—Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Greene, calling the attention of the Senate to the modernization of the practices and procedures of the Senate Chamber with a focus on private members bills.—(Honourable Senator Carignan)
March 28, 2012—That she will call the attention of the Senate to the need to adequately support new mothers and fathers by eliminating the Employment Insurance two-week waiting period for maternity and parental benefits.
May 3, 2012—That she will call the attention of the Senate to the state of palliative care.
By the Honourable Senator Hervieux-Payette, P.C.:
March 29, 2012—That the document entitled "Canadian experts opposed to the abolition of the long gun registry — Bill C-391, 2009-2010'', which contains the names of 298 organizations and esteemed individuals, and which was referred to on March 8 during second reading debate on Bill C-19, be deemed to have been tabled in the Senate and to form part of the official record of the proceedings of this chamber.
June 7, 2011—1. What were the total net assets of the Canada Pension Plan fund at the end of the most recent fiscal year? Of the previous fiscal year? What portion of these assets was in the form of cash for each year?
2. What was the total amount of benefits paid out during the most recent fiscal year? During the previous fiscal year?
3. Would you provide the latest actuarial assessment of the Canada Pension Plan fund with respect to its capacity to meet anticipated demand for benefits?
(a) When was this assessment performed?
(b) When is the next assessment planned?
4. In the past 5 years, have officials at Canada Pension Plan, Finance Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat or Human Resources and Social Development Canada performed any assessment or estimate of the cost of making changes to the limitation on benefits paid retroactive from the date of application?
(a) If so, would you provide the resulting assessments and/or estimates?
(b) If so, would you provide any evaluation that was made about the impact of each option on the actuarial soundness of the Plan?
5. Has any assessment or estimate been made of the cost of matching the Quebec Pension Plan's policy of making retroactive payments for up to 60 months?
(a) If so, would you provide the resulting assessments and/or estimates?
(b) If so, would you provide any evaluation that was made about the impact of each option on the actuarial soundness of the Plan?
6. Has any assessment or estimate been made of the cost of removing the limit altogether, and allowing applicants to receive payment for all retroactive benefits?
(a) If so, would you provide the resulting assessments and/or estimates?
(b) If so, would you provide any evaluation that was made about the impact of each option on the actuarial soundness of the Plan?
June 7, 2011—In response to questioning during the Senate Standing Committee on National Finance meeting on March 23, 2010, the President of the Treasury Board, the Honourable Stockwell Day, undertook to provide documentation to identify departmental savings which occurred as a result of recent strategic reviews.
On May 13, 2010, Minister Day provided to the Committee a listing of each department's total savings, but the list lacked a detailed summary.
1. As a result of Strategic Review 2007, Canadian International Development Agency identified $295.8 million in savings from fiscal years 2008-09 to 2010-11.
(a) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $52.2 million in total savings for 2008-09?
(b) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $107.6 million in total savings for 2009-10?
(c) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $136 million in total savings for 2010-11?
2. As a result of Strategic Review 2007, Foreign Affairs and International Trade identified $271 million in savings from fiscal years 2008-09 to 2010-11.
(a) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $73.1 million in total savings for 2008-09?
(b) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $92.8 million in total savings for 2009-10?
(c) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $105.1 million in total savings for 2010-11?
3. As a result of Strategic Review 2007, Statistics Canada identified $50.9 million in savings from fiscal years 2008- 09 to 2010-11.
(a) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $11.5 million in total savings for 2008-09?
(b) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $17.9 million in total savings for 2009-10?
(c) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $21.5 million in total savings for 2010-11?
4. As a result of Strategic Review 2008, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada identified $417.004 million in savings from fiscal years 2009-10 to 2011-12.
(a) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $130.227 million in total savings for 2009-10?
(b) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $143.172 million in total savings for 2010-11?
(c) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $143.605 million in total savings for 2011-12?
5. As a result of Strategic Review 2008, Correctional Services Canada identified $131.671 million in savings from fiscal years 2009-10 to 2011-12.
(a) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $42.048 million in total savings for 2009-10?
(b) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $46.323 million in total savings for 2010-11?
(c) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $43.3 million in total savings for 2011-12?
6. As a result of Strategic Review 2008, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council identified $80.76 million in savings from fiscal years 2009-10 to 2011-12.
(a) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $13.27 million in total savings for 2009-10?
(b) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $27.07 million in total savings for 2010-11?
(c) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $40.42 million in total savings for 2011-12?
7. As a result of Strategic Review 2008, Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council identified $20.11 million in savings from fiscal years 2009-10 to 2011-12.
(a) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $2.57 million in total savings for 2009-10?
(b) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $7.04 million in total savings for 2010-11?
(c) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $10.5 million in total savings for 2011-12?
8. As a result of Strategic Review 2008, Veterans Affairs Canada identified $35.156 million in savings from fiscal years 2009-10 to 2011-12.
(a) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $3.866 million in total savings for 2009-10?
(b) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $7.253 million in total savings for 2010-11?
(c) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $24.037 million in total savings for 2011-12?
9. As a result of Strategic Review 2009, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation identified $299.15 million in savings from fiscal years 2010-11 to 2012-13.
(a) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $97.02 million in total savings for 2010-11?
(b) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $99.93 million in total savings for 2011-12?
(c) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $102.2 million in total savings for 2012-13?
10. As a result of Strategic Review 2009, Canadian Tourism Commission identified $9.296 million in savings from fiscal years 2010-11 to 2012-13.
(a) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $896,000 in total savings for 2010-11?
(b) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $4.2 million in total savings for 2011-12?
(c) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $4.2 million in total savings for 2012-13?
11. As a result of Strategic Review 2009, Environment Canada identified $53.103 million in savings from fiscal years 2010-11 to 2012-13.
(a) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $13.669 million in total savings for 2010-11?
(b) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $19.714 million in total savings for 2011-12?
(c) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $19.72 million in total savings for 2012-13?
12. As a result of Strategic Review 2009, Public Safety Canada identified $35.844 million in savings from fiscal years 2010-11 to 2012-13.
(a) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $7.518 million in total savings for 2010-11?
(b) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $13.402 million in total savings for 2011-12?
(c) Would you please provide a detailed list of all sources of the $14.924 million in total savings for 2012-13?
June 14, 2011— With respect to priority hiring:
Since 2005, qualified medically released Canadian Forces (CF) veterans have been eligible for priority employment appointments in the federal public service.
These new provisions have created important future career opportunities for veterans, but unfortunately, there are low participation levels in most federal government departments — participation that is vital in making these opportunities a reality for our injured veterans.
Statistics from the Public Service Commission show that in 2007-2008, 69 percent of medically released veterans using the priority system were appointed to one department, the Department of National Defence. Other departments are only marginally participating in this program, and in that year alone, 67 veterans had their priority appointment status expire without finding a position in the public service.
For the period from January 1, 2005, to March 31, 2011:
1. How many people were hired by the federal public service?
(a) How many were term employees?
(b) How many were casual employees?
(c) How many were indeterminate employees?
2. How many members of the CF were medically released?
(a) How many of these medically released members applied for a priority employment appointment in the federal public service?
(b) How many received a priority employment appointment?
(c) How many were still on the priority employment list when their eligibility period expired?
3. How many qualified medically released Canadian Forces veterans were hired by each federal Government department?
4. What measures are being taken to extend this program to account for the large number of temporary and contract workers employed by the federal Government?
June 23, 2011—With respect to the government decentralization:
A. Could the Government of Canada provide information on proposals prepared from January 1, 2006, to May 31, 2011, regarding the relocation of federal government departments (or parts thereof), agencies and Crown corporations from the National Capital area to the regions of Canada?
B. Could the Government of Canada provide information on assessments completed from January 1, 2006, to May 31, 2011, regarding which federal government departments (or parts thereof), agencies or Crown corporations could be relocated from the National Capital area to the regions of Canada?
October 18, 2011—With respect to the Minister of Natural Resources' statement "since 2006, our government has invested more than $10 billion to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and build a more sustainable environment,'':
1. Could the government provide a full break-down of that spending?
2. For each program, could the government detail the amount of emissions reductions occurring from the program?
3. In total, for all programs included in the $10 billion expenditure, what was the average cost per unit of greenhouse gas emissions reduced?
October 18, 2011—With respect to the economic modeling of climate change impacts:
1. Could the government provide its own assessment of the economic cost of climate change in the years 2020 and 2050?
2. Could the government provide a breakdown of the projected economic costs of climate change by province and territory for both 2020 and 2050?
3. Could the government provide a detailed description of its methodology in calculating the economic impacts of climate change?
4. Could the government provide its own assessment of the economic cost of climate change in the forestry sector and on the economic cost to coastal areas?
October 27, 2011—With respect to the Canada Shipping Act and regulations concerning cruise ships and sewage discharge:
Prince Edward Island (PEI) counts itself among the many provinces that are benefitting from the growing number of cruise lines that have Canadian ports of call. In light of the importance of tourism to the local economy, and mindful of the equally important aquaculture and fisheries industries which rely on the stewardship of our waterways, inquires have been made concerning the growing numbers of cruise ships in Atlantic-Canadian waters.
Could the Government of Canada please indicate:
1. What government department or agency is responsible for enforcing the regulations under the Act?
2. How is compliance with the regulations enforced/monitored?
3. What, if any, are the fines and/or penalties for non-compliance?
4. How many complaints of violations have occurred since the regulations were implemented?
(a) How many of the complaints, if any, have occurred in waters around PEI?
(b) How many of the complaints, if any, have involved cruise ships that have ports of call in PEI?
5. What fines and/or penalties have been imposed with respect to violations in (4.)?
December 8, 2011—In June 2010, the Conservative government cancelled the mandatory long-form census and replaced it with the Voluntary Household Survey.
a) In the 2011 Census process, how many Voluntary Household Surveys were mailed to Canadians?
b) How were recipients chosen?
c) What was the cost to implement the Voluntary Household Survey?
d) How many of the Voluntary Household Surveys were returned?
e) How many Voluntary Household Surveys were completed correctly and therefore contained useful data?
f) Did Statistics Canada establish a target(s) for the 2011 Voluntary Household Survey response rate? If so, what were those targets?
g) What activities were undertaken by Statistics Canada or the Government of Canada to encourage Canadians to complete the Voluntary Household Survey? What was the cost of these activities?
h) What activities, if any, were undertaken by Statistics Canada or the Government of Canada to follow up with Canadians who did not complete the Voluntary Household Survey?
i) What was the cost to carry out the mandatory long-form census in 2006? In 2001?
j) How many mandatory long-form census forms were mailed in 2006? How many in 2001?
k) How many mandatory long-form census forms were returned in 2006? How many in 2001?
December 12, 2011—1. According to documents received through an access to information request, Human Resources and Social Development Canada estimated that in July 2005 there were as many as 70,000 people over the age of 70 who paid into the Canada Pension Plan (CPP), who might still be alive, but who were not in receipt of their CPP retirement benefits. Of those 70,000, approximately 26,000 eligible people were already getting survivor benefits, Old Age Pension or the Guaranteed Income Supplement.
(a) Has Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC) undertaken new estimates of the number of people over the age of 70 who paid into the Canada Pension Plan, who might still be alive, but who were not in receipt of their CPP retirement benefits?
(b) How many people over the age of 70 years and believed still alive are estimated to be currently missing out on their CPP retirement benefits?
(c) How many of the people in b) are currently in receipt of survivor benefits, Old Age Pension or the Guaranteed Income Supplement?
(d) Since February 2006, what outreach activities or initiatives has HRSDC or Service Canada undertaken to notify eligible seniors over the age of 70 who are not currently in receipt of their CPP retirement benefits?
(e) Since February 2006, did HRSDC or Service Canada undertake any notifications by mail to eligible seniors over the age of 70 who are not currently in receipt of their CPP retirement benefits? If so, in what years were letters mailed? How many were sent in each of those years? What was the response rate in each of those years?
2. On December 4, 2007, the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance held a hearing on the retroactivity provisions of the Canada Pension Plan (CPP). During the proceedings it was noted by government officials that since Canadians may choose to apply for the CPP at different ages, the staff of Service Canada, the service delivery unit of Human Resources and Social Development Canada, had been instructed not to invite people to apply for CPP benefits when they apply for OAS benefits.
(a) Is this policy for Service Canada frontline personnel still in place?
(b) If so, have Service Canada and/or Human Resources and Skills Development Canada given consideration to changing this policy in any way?
(c) Would you please provide the rationale for the continuation of this policy for Service Canada frontline personnel?
(d) If the policy has been changed, what is the new policy for Service Canada frontline personnel?
3. In March 2008, the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance released its report entitled "Report on the Financial Security for Seniors: Entitlements and Retroactivity Provisions under the Canada Pension Plan'', which recommended that: "The Federal Government examine new ways to reach those eligible Canadians that are not yet receiving their Canada pensions; and to encourage Canadians to avail themselves of the benefits to which they are entitled.''
(a) Has the federal government undertaken to implement this recommendation? If so, how?
(b) What specific outreach activities have been undertaken to ensure that seniors are receiving all the Canada Pension Plan benefits to which they are entitled?
December 15, 2011—With respect to Canada's liability as a financing member of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD):
(a) what is the amount of Canada's unfunded liability;
(b) what is the total amount of Canada's liability; and
(c) what are the amounts of unfunded and total liability for other financing members of the EBRD, broken down by member?
March 1, 2012—1. Since 2006, on what dates, and with what attendees present did any committee within the government of Canada, any department, or, on any inter-departmental basis meet that considers the awarding of medals, decorations, awards for present or past members of Canada's Forces?
2. Who chaired those meetings?
3. Were minutes taken?
4. Have they been made public? And if not, why not?
5. What is the involvement of Rideau Hall in these meetings?
6. Have representations been made to any of these meetings with respect to decorations for Canadian members of Bomber Command by Ministers of the Crown, directly, in writing, orally, or by a representative of their office?
7. And if not, why not?
8. What decisions about medals for the Canadian military relating to service in particular theatres have been made since 2000 and what committees or advisory boards, groups or inter-departmental units have been involved in these decisions?
9. For all theatres in which military service was recognised by Canada, what were the known and official casualties experienced by Canadian forces by theatre?
10. A memorial to Bomber Command is being built in London. Does any department of the government of Canada plan to contribute to that memorial?
11. Are there any plans to assist Canadian veterans of Bomber Command, hearty enough to travel, to attend its commemoration?
12. Is there a Canadian delegation planned for that event?
March 28, 2012—In February 2009, Human Resources and Social Development Canada received a report it had commissioned entitled "Evaluation of the Old Age Security Program (OAS) using the Longitudinal Administrative Databank (LAD)'' by Informetrica Limited. This report estimates that more than 125,000 seniors over the age of 65 years are not receiving their OAS pension, despite being eligible for it. This same report also estimates that approximately 33,000 Canadians aged 60-64 are eligible for the OAS Spouse's Allowance, while about 15,000 are eligible for Survivor's Allowance, but are receiving neither benefit.
(a) Has Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC) undertaken new estimates of the number of people over the age of 65 who are not receiving their OAS pension despite being eligible for it? If so, how many?
(b) Has Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC) 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? If so, how many?
(c) Has Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC) 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? If so, how many?
(d) How many of the people in (a), (b) or (c) are currently in receipt of benefits under the Canada Pension Plan?
(e) What outreach activities or initiatives has HRSDC or Service Canada undertaken to notify eligible seniors who are not currently in receipt of OAS pension, Spouse's Allowance or Survivor's Allowance?
(f) Has HRSDC or Service Canada undertaken any notifications by mail to eligible seniors who are not currently in receipt of OAS pension, Spouse's Allowance or Survivor's Allowance? If so, in what years were letters mailed? How many were sent in each of those years? What was the response rate in each of those years?
March 28, 2012—On its website, the Office of Literacy and Essential Skills identifies literacy skills and five other essential skills (Computer Use, Thinking, Oral Communication, Working with Others, and Continuous Learning) as necessary for the modern workplace. The website states: "These skills are used in nearly every job and at different levels of complexity. They provide the foundation for learning all other skills and enable people to evolve with their job and adapt to workplace change.''
Given the importance of literacy and essential skills to personal and workplace success, would the Government of Canada please provide:
(a) The total amount of all estimated funding in all departments for literacy and essential skills for fiscal year 2011- 12;
(b) The federal programs in all departments which will be supported by literacy and essential skills funding in fiscal year 2011-12;
(c) The total amount of all funding in all departments for literacy and essential skills for fiscal year 2010-11;
(d) The federal programs in all departments which were supported by literacy and essential skills funding in fiscal year 2010-11;
(e) The total amount of all funding in all departments for literacy and essential skills for fiscal year 2005-06;
(f) The federal programs in all departments which were supported by literacy and essential skills funding in fiscal year 2005-06;
(g) A breakdown by province for literacy and essential skills funding for fiscal year 2010-11;
(h) A breakdown by province for literacy and essential skills funding for fiscal year 2005-06;
(i) A list of all funding recipients under the 2010-11 OLES Call for Concepts, arranged by province, and;
(j) A list of all funding recipients under previous OLES Calls for Concepts, arranged by year and by province?
March 28, 2012—In 2008, the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) launched a Transformation Agenda based on five key themes. The first, "Enhancing offender accountability'', states that CSC provides opportunities for rehabilitative engagement and motivational support.
(a) Would the Government of Canada please provide a detailed list of all rehabilitation, motivational, reintegration and/or educational programs currently available in each federal institution managed by CSC?
(b) Would the Government of Canada please provide a detailed list of all rehabilitation, motivational, reintegration and/or educational programs currently available in each Community-Based Residential Facility managed by CSC?
(c) What is estimated to be the total CSC spending on all rehabilitation, motivational, reintegration and/or educational programming in fiscal year 2011-12?
(d) What is the detailed breakdown of the total CSC spending on all rehabilitation, motivational, reintegration and/ or educational programming in fiscal year 2011-12?
(e) What was the total CSC spending on all rehabilitation, motivational, reintegration and/or educational programming in each fiscal year since 2004-05?
(f) What was the detailed breakdown of the total CSC spending on all rehabilitation, motivational, reintegration and/or educational programming in each fiscal year since 2004-05?
(g) How much is spent per inmate and per former inmate on rehabilitation, motivational, reintegration and/or educational programs?
(h) Does the per capita amount differ by institution, region or province? If so, would you please provide these details?
March 28, 2012—In 2006, the Conservative government announced that it would establish a Public Appointments Commission. A Secretariat was created to support the work of this Commission, which continues to operate despite the fact that there is still no Commissioner or Commission to be supported.
(a) Would the Government of Canada please provide the total amount spent in each fiscal year to operate the Public Appointments Commission Secretariat?
(b) How many individuals are employed by the Public Appointments Commission Secretariat?
(c) To whom does the Public Appointments Commission Secretariat report?
(d) Who directs the work of the Public Appointments Commission Secretariat?
(e) Has the Public Appointments Commission Secretariat produced any reports or any other documents during its existence? If so, would you please provide a copy of each?
(f) Has the Government of Canada taken any steps to name a Public Appointments Commissioner since June 2006? If so, what has been done?
March 28, 2012—In Observation Paper #05, dated March 31, 2010, the Veterans Ombudsman disputed Veterans Affairs Canada's (VAC) current interpretation of Section 16 of the Veterans Health Care Regulations, which deals with primary caregivers and their eligibility for Veterans Independence Program housekeeping and grounds maintenance.
Section 16 states that if a Veteran was receiving both housekeeping and grounds maintenance services, then the primary caregiver is also eligible to receive both upon the death of the Veteran. If a Veteran only received one of these services, that is the only service that the primary caregiver is ever eligible to receive after the death of the Veteran. In 2008, VAC added section 16.1, which allows for low-income spouses to receive both housekeeping and grounds maintenance services, even if the Veteran died without ever having received VIP.
The Ombudsman has asked VAC to reconsider its interpretation of this section to allow all primary caregivers to receive both services upon the death of the Veteran. VAC has denied the request.
(a) Has VAC reconsidered the Ombudsman's request?
(b) Would you please provide rationale for granting or denying the Ombudsman's request, including copies of any relevant briefing notes, memos, emails, etc. leading to the department's decision?
(c) How many primary caregivers are currently in receipt of both VIP housekeeping or grounds maintenance benefits? How many qualify under section 16.1?
(d) How many primary caregivers are currently in receipt of either VIP housekeeping or grounds maintenance benefits, but not both? How many are considered low-income?
(e) What is the estimated annual cost of extending VIP housekeeping and grounds maintenance services to all low- income primary caregivers regardless of which services were received upon the death of the Veteran?
(f) What is the estimated annual cost of extending VIP housekeeping and grounds maintenance to all spouses and caregivers, regardless of income?
(g) What assumptions were used to calculate each estimate?
April 26, 2012—With respect to Treasury Board numbers for public sector employees as of March 31, 2012:
1. What is the number of public sector employees broken down by region for the fiscal years ending March 31, 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012?
2. For the answers in (1), what are the numbers in each region broken down by:
(a) Indeterminate;
(b) Specified term;
(c) Casual; and
(d) Student employees?
April 26, 2012—With respect to the Canadian Forces Reserves:
While the primary role of the Reserve Force is to augment, sustain, and support the Regular Force at home and abroad, it is important to note the valuable impact that the Reserve Force has on the lives many Canadians, particularly our youth.
Many young Reservists are future leaders of Canada who are pursuing university or college education. These young people join the Reserve Force and learn valuable technical and leadership skills, while benefiting from part-time employment.
Many Reserve Force members serve overseas as part of Canada's response to disasters, such as the earthquake in Haiti, or as part of the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan. In the past, up to 40 percent of all peacekeepers have been reservists.
In light of this, would the Government of Canada please answer the following:
A. What is the amount spent on the Reserves, broken down by province and territory, for the fiscal years ending March 31, 2009. 2010, 2011, and 2012?
B. What is the number of Reservists working full-time, broken down by province and territory, for the same periods as in (A)?
C. What is the number of reservists working part-time, broken down by province and territory, for the same periods as in (A)?
April 26, 2012—With respect to negotiation of a tax treaty or tax information exchange agreement between Canada and Liechtenstein:
Since the Liechtenstein tax evasion scandal surfaced in 2008, no less than 20 countries have concluded tax information exchange agreements with Liechtenstein in an effort to keep tabs on their citizens' tax avoidance tricks. The United States, the UK, Australia, France, and Germany have all signed agreements. Even Antigua, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Andorra, and the Faroe Islands — a self-governing territory of Denmark consisting of 18 islands in the North Atlantic Sea, and with a population of 50,000 — have signed tax information exchange agreements with Liechtenstein, but Canada has yet to conclude its negotiations and sign an agreement.
If all these other countries, big and small, can conclude a deal so quickly, what's taking Canada years to get this done? By comparison to even some of the world's smallest countries, Canada's response to the Liechtenstein tax scandal can be described as a "laissez-faire'' approach at best. The question is why?
In light of this, would the Government of Canada please answer the following questions:
A. On what date did Canada enter into negotiations with Liechtenstein for this agreement?
B. What departments are responsible for negotiation and implementation of the agreement?
C. On what date will the negotiations be completed?
D. On what date will the agreement be implemented?
E. Prior to these negotiations, had the Government of Canada ever approached Liechtenstein about negotiating a tax treaty or tax information exchange agreement?
April 26, 2012—With respect to Canadians discovered to have secret bank accounts in Liechtenstein and the Canada Revenue Agency's (CRA) Voluntary Disclosures Program (VDP):
Four years ago, the Government of Germany gave the Canadian Government a list containing the names of 106 Canadians with hidden bank accounts containing over $100 million in Liechtenstein. In 2009, the Government was asked in Parliament if any of the 106 had — or were eligible to — take advantage of the Voluntary Disclosures Program. The Government's response was:
The voluntary disclosures program, VDP, promotes compliance by encouraging taxpayers to voluntarily correct previous omissions in their dealings with the CRA. A requirement of the VDP is that taxpayers must make a full disclosure before the CRA commences any compliance action or investigation. If they do so, they may only have to pay the taxes owing, plus interest, but not face penalties or prosecution in the courts.
As compliance action has been commenced on all of the listed taxpayers, they are no longer eligible for consideration under the VDP.
The following year, however, the Government had changed its policy and, with no explanation, advised Parliament:
As of June 10, 2010, 20 residents of Canada who have accounts in Liechtenstein had availed themselves of the CRA's Voluntary Disclosures Program.
CRA's own definition of voluntary disclosures disqualifies circumstances where the taxpayer was aware of, or had knowledge of an audit, investigation, or other enforcement action set to be conducted by the CRA. The CRA has stated on the record that due to the fact that compliance action had been commenced on all of the 106 Canadians discovered to be hiding money in Liechtenstein, none of them were eligible for consideration under the VDP.
In light of this, would the Government of Canada please answer the following:
1. How does the CRA reconcile these two contradictory statements, made to Parliament only a year apart?
2. Who lobbied the CRA, or the Minister of National Revenue, to change the policy?
3. Are there any documents and communications related to this policy change?
4. If the answer to (3) is yes, please provide copies of these documents and communications, including any and all:
(a) Letters;
(b) Emails;
(c) Memoranda;
(d) Briefing notes;
(e) Other documents or communications.
5. How much of a financial benefit did the recipients of this policy change receive (i.e., reduced taxes and penalties)?
6. Since receiving the names of 106 Canadians with accounts in Liechtenstein:
(a) How many of the 106 have made an application under the VDP;
(b) How many of these VDP disclosures have been accepted?
7. Who authorized this change in policy after CRA had already declared these Canadians ineligible for the VDP?
8. How often has CRA allowed ineligible individuals with overseas bank accounts to make disclosures under the VDP:
(a) In the past 6 months;
(b) In the past year;
(c) In the past 5 years?
9. Does CRA also make exceptions to the VDP for individuals who are suspected of domestic tax evasion?
10. What percentage of individuals who disclose information to CRA through the VDP:
(a) Are fined;
(b) Are penalized;
(c) Are charged;
(d) Are convicted of tax evasion;
(e) Are placed under house arrest;
(f) Are sent to jail?
May 1, 2012—With respect to possible tax evasion in Switzerland:
In 2009, French authorities received information about 80,000 bank accounts in Switzerland, many of which were opened by French citizens in order to avoid paying taxes owed to the French state.
France has since reported that it has recovered millions in unpaid taxes.
French authorities then provided the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) with a list of 1700 Canadians who held accounts in Switzerland ± many of these thought to be secret, undeclared bank accounts.
In April, 2012, a story on CBC's The National regarding overseas tax evasion reported that 84 of the 1700 Canadians with accounts in Switzerland had come forward voluntarily to the CRA because they thought their names were likely on the list given to the Government.
In light of this, would the Government of Canada please answer the following questions:
1. Of the over 1700 names of Canadians given to the CRA, how many have been identified as having undeclared bank accounts in Switzerland?
2. How much money has the CRA assessed as a result of investigating these secret bank accounts in Switzerland:
(a) In unpaid taxes;
(b) In interest;
(c) In fines; and
(d) In penalties?
3. How much of the money in (2) has been collected in unpaid taxes, interest, fines and penalties?
4. How many of the cases are under appeal?
5. How many cases remain open?
6. How many more cases does the CRA anticipate will be opened?
7. How many cases have been closed (i.e. the full amount of taxes, interest, fines and penalties have been collected)?
8. How much money has been collected from cases in (7):
(a) In unpaid taxes;
(b) In interest;
(c) In fines; and
(d) In penalties?
9. How many account holders in the cases have made partial payment?
10. Of the partial payments made:
(a) What was the largest amount;
(b) What was the smallest amount; and
(c) What was the average amount?
11. How many of the identified Canadians with bank accounts in Switzerland:
(a) Have had their account(s) audited;
(b) Have not had their accounts(s) audited;
(c) Have had their account(s) reassessed;
(d) Have not had their account(s) reassessed;
(e) Have been the subject of a compliance action; and
(f) Have not been the subject of a compliance action.
12. How many identified Canadians with accounts in Switzerland have availed themselves of the Voluntary Disclosure Program with the CRA?
13. How many tax evasion charges have been laid?
14. How many of the over 1700 Canadians found to have accounts in Switzerland have been charged with tax evasion?
May 1, 2012—With respect to possible tax evasion in Liechtenstein:
Four years ago, the Government of Germany provided the Canadian Government with a list of names of 106 Canadians with secret bank accounts in Liechtenstein. The information the Canada Revenue Agency was handed showed that the amounts in Canadian-held Liechtenstein bank accounts totalled over $100 million, ranging from a minimum of $500,000 — to one account with over $12 million.
Since then, there has been a lot of tough talk from this "tough on crime'' Government, but not much action. As of 2011, not one of those overseas tax cheats had been charged.
In light of this, would the Government of Canada please answer the following questions as of April 25, 2012:
1. Since receiving the names of 106 Canadians with accounts in Liechtenstein:
(a) Have any other Canadians been identified as having undeclared bank accounts in Liechtenstein;
(b) In total, how many Canadians have now been identified as having undeclared bank accounts in Liechtenstein?
2. How much money has the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) assessed as a result of investigating these secret bank accounts in Liechtenstein:
(a) In unpaid taxes;
(b) In interest;
(c) In fines; and
(d) In penalties?
3. How much of the money in (2) has been collected in unpaid taxes, interest, fines and penalties?
4. How many of the cases are under appeal?
5. How many cases remain open?
6. How many more cases does the CRA anticipate will be opened?
7. How many cases have been closed (i.e. the full amount of taxes, interest, fines and penalties have been collected)?
8. How much money has been collected from cases in (7):
(a) In unpaid taxes;
(b) In interest;
(c) In fines; and
(d) In penalties?
9. How many account holders in the cases have made partial payment?
10. Of the partial payments made:
(a) What was the largest amount;
(b) What was the smallest amount; and
(c) What was the average amount?
11. How many of the identified Canadians with bank accounts in Liechtenstein:
(a) Have had their account(s) audited;
(b) Have not had their accounts(s) audited;
(c) Have had their account(s) reassessed;
(d) Have not had their account(s) reassessed;
(e) Have been the subject of a compliance action; and
(f) Have not been the subject of a compliance action.
12. How many identified Canadians with accounts in Liechtenstein have availed themselves of the Voluntary Disclosure Program with the CRA?
13. How many tax evasion charges have been laid?
14. How many of the 106 Canadians found to have accounts in Liechtenstein have been charged?
May 1, 2012—With respect to tax information exchange agreements and answers to Written Questions tabled in the Senate:
For some time now, the Conservative Government has faced inquiries regarding its inaction on overseas tax evasion and has been totally unforthcoming in responses to questions asked in Parliament pertaining to 1700 Canadians with secret bank accounts in Switzerland discovered by the Government of France.
Questions about these overseas tax cheats with accounts in Switzerland have gone unanswered in Parliament, including this question asked in the Senate:
From the information received from the Government of France, would the Canadian Government provide the following:
How many identified Canadians with accounts outside of Canada have availed of the Voluntary Disclosure Program with the Canada Revenue Agency?
Revenue Minister Gail Shea tabled the following answer to my written question:
The Canada Revenue Agency has an obligation to follow confidentiality and privacy legislation closely. Information is often provided to the CRA from various sources on the basis that it cannot be further disclosed by the CRA. Where the CRA is at liberty to provide information it will endeavour to do so; in other instances, it will be limited in this ability.
In order to both respect confidentiality requirements and harmonious international relations, the CRA must adhere to the requirements that international tax treaties and agreements impose on the disclosure of information received from Canada's treaty partners.
In the preamble to the above-noted question, it asserts that the information was provided to Canada from the Government of France. The information to which the question refers was received by the Government of Canada via an international tax treaty. As such, the information is protected under both the Exchange of Information article of the relevant tax treaty (in this case, Article 26 of the Canada-France Income Tax Convention) and paragraph 19. (1)(a) of the Privacy Act.
Therefore, for the reasons cited above, the information as requested cannot be shared.
Remarkably, in a report about overseas tax evasion by Diana Swain on Thursday, April 5th, 2012, broadcast of CBC's The National, Swain reported that:
"National Revenue Minister Gail Shea's office, late today, said they dismiss that. . . They point to 19 agreements signed in the past two years with countries around the world to try to get rid of these tax schemes. And they say that since this list came out, 84 Canadians have ante'd up through Voluntary Disclosure - $18 million in unpaid taxes.''
Information that had been requested in Parliament, information that had been withheld for confidentiality, privacy, and diplomatic reasons, was suddenly made available by the Minister of National Revenue for the nightly news.
In light of this, would the Government of Canada please answer the following questions:
1. Why did provisions of the Canada-France Income Tax Convention preclude the Government from answering Written Questions on the Order Papers in Parliament regarding possible tax evasion in Switzerland, but the Agreement Between Canada and the Federal Republic of Germany for the Avoidance of Double Taxation With Respect to Taxes on Income and Certain Other Taxes, the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion and the Assistance in Tax Matters did not prevent the Government of Canada from answering nearly identical Written Questions on the Order Papers in Parliament regarding possible tax evasion in Liechtenstein?
2. Why did Revenue Minister Shea's office inform the CBC that 84 Canadians with accounts in Switzerland who thought they were likely on the list of names that CRA received from French authorities had voluntarily come forward to the Agency, but at the same time decline to answer the question "how many identified Canadians with accounts outside of Canada have availed of the Voluntary Disclosure Program with the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA)?'' that was part of a Written Question in the Senate regarding cases of possible tax evasion and the information the Government of Canada had obtained from French authorities regarding 1700 Canadians with secret bank accounts in Switzerland?
3. Why did the Government decide to keep Parliamentarians in the dark and refuse to answer questions, hiding behind tax treaties?
May 1, 2012—With respect to staffing at Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC):
According to figures provided by the government's Treasury Board Secretariat, federal government employment in Atlantic Canada shrank by 430 jobs between 2009 and 2011; and, yet, during that same time period, federal government employment increased by over 5% in the Ottawa area and 3% nationwide.
Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC), which has its headquarters in Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, plays an integral role in the economy of the province. In 2012, VAC had 1,339 full-time employees located on PEI and an annual payroll in the province of $100 million. The cuts announced in the recent budget will result in 800 lost jobs at Veterans Affairs Canada. By contrast, organizations like Royal Canadian Legion want Canada to follow the example set by the Obama administration in the United States by promising to make the Department of Veterans Affairs exempt from reductions in government spending. As President Obama said in an address to the American Legion on August 30, 2011:
"As a nation, we're facing some tough choices as we put our fiscal house in order. But I want to be absolutely clear: We cannot, we must not, we will not, balance the budget on the backs of our veterans. As Commander-in-Chief, I won't allow it.''
In light of this, would the Government of Canada please answer the following questions:
1. How many persons were employed by VAC in Prince Edward Island for the fiscal years 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011, broken down by:
(a) Full-time employees;
(b) Part-time employees;
(c) Term contract employees; and
(d) Student contract employees?
2. What is the breakdown showing the deployment of VAC staff (by percentage) in the Departmental Headquarters in Ottawa and Charlottetown, regional, sub-regional, and district offices across Canada?
3. What was the total remuneration for VAC employees in Prince Edward Island for the same periods in (1)?
