Order Paper and Notice Paper
The Senate of Canada
Order Paper and Notice Paper
Issue 98, Tuesday, November 18, 2003
Daily Routine of Business
1. Senators' Statements.2. Tabling of Documents.
3. Presentation of Reports from Standing or Special Committees.
4. Government Notices of Motions.
5. Introduction and First Reading of Government Bills.
6. Introduction and First Reading of Senate Public Bills.
7. First Reading of Commons Public Bills.
8. Reading of Petitions for Private Bills.
9. Introduction and First Reading of Private Bills.
10. Tabling of Reports from Inter-Parliamentary Delegations.
11. Notices of Motions.
12. Notices of Inquiries.
13. Presentation of Petitions.
14. Question Period.
15. Delayed Answers.
16. Orders of the Day.
17. Inquiries.
18. Motions.
ORDERS OF THE DAY
GOVERNMENT BUSINESS
Bills
No. 1.
October 27, 2003-Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Smith, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Léger, for the second reading of Bill C-49, An Act respecting the effective date of the representation order of 2003.
No. 2.
October 21, 2003-Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Carstairs, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C., for the second reading of Bill C-17, An Act to amend certain Acts of Canada, and to enact measures for implementing the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention, in order to enhance public safety.
No. 3.
November 5, 2003-Second reading of Bill C-23, An Act respecting the registration of information relating to sex offenders, to amend the Criminal Code and to make consequential amendments to other Acts.
No. 4.
November 5, 2003-Second reading of Bill C-46, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (capital markets fraud and evidence-gathering).
No. 5.
October 30, 2003-Second reading of Bill C-32, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and other Acts.
Inquiries
Nil
Motions
No. 1.
By the Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C.:
November 6, 2003-That when the Senate adjourns on Monday, November 10, 2003, it do stand adjourned until Wednesday, November 12, 2003, at 1:30 p.m.
No. 2.
By the Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C.:
November 6, 2003-That the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology be authorized to examine and report upon the documents entitled: "Banff Community Plan'', "Field Community Plan, Yoho National Park, July 1999'', "Jasper Community Land Use Plan, Jasper National Park of Canada, 2001'', "Lake Louise, Banff National Park of Canada, Community Plan, June 2001'', "Wasagaming Community Plan'', "Waterton Lakes National Park, 2000 Waterton Community Plan'', "Waskesiu Community Plan'' and "Order Amending Schedule 4 to the Canada National Parks Act'', tabled in the Senate on November 6, 2003 (Sessional Paper No. 2/37- 795), pursuant to the Canada National Parks Act, S.C. 2000, c. 32, sbs. 34(1).
Reports of Committees
No. 1.
April 30, 2003-Resuming debate on the consideration of the Eighth Report (Interim) of the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament entitled: Government Ethics Initiative, deposited with the Clerk of the Senate on April 10, 2003.
OTHER BUSINESS
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.
Senate Public Bills
No. 1. (one)
November 5, 2003-Third reading of Bill S-14, An Act to amend the National Anthem Act to reflect the linguistic duality of Canada.-(Honourable Senator Losier-Cool).
No. 2. (two)
October 29, 2003-Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Poy, seconded by the Honourable Senator Milne, for the third reading of Bill S-3, An Act to amend the National Anthem Act to include all Canadians.-(Honourable Senator Prud'homme, P.C.).
No. 3. (two)
November 4, 2003-Third reading of Bill S-11, An Act to amend the Official Languages Act (promotion of English and French).-(Honourable Senator Losier-Cool).
No. 4. (four)
October 29, 2003-Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Nolin, seconded by the Honourable Senator Prud'homme, P.C., for the second reading of Bill S-24, An Act to amend the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act (modernization of employment and labour relations).-(Honourable Senator Bryden).
No. 5. (six)
December 5, 2002-Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Stratton, seconded by the Honourable Senator Murray, P.C., for the second reading of Bill S-4, An Act to provide for increased transparency and objectivity in the selection of suitable individuals to be named to certain high public positions.-(Honourable Senator Cools).
No. 6. (seven)
March 20, 2003-Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Oliver, seconded by the Honourable Senator Stratton, for the second reading of Bill S-16, An Act to amend the Constitution Act, 1867 and the Parliament of Canada Act (Speakership of the Senate).-(Honourable Senator Cools).
No. 7. (nine)
December 5, 2002-Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Kinsella, seconded by the Honourable Senator Murray, P.C., for the second reading of S-6, An Act to assist in the prevention of wrongdoing in the Public Service by establishing a framework for education on ethical practices in the workplace, for dealing with allegations of wrongdoing and for protecting whistleblowers.-(Honourable Senator Kinsella).
No. 8. (thirteen)
September 24, 2003-Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Oliver, seconded by the Honourable Senator Nolin, for the second reading of Bill S-23, An Act to prevent unsolicited messages on the Internet.-(Honourable Senator Poulin).
No. 9. (thirteen)
September 24, 2003-Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Grafstein, seconded by the Honourable Senator Joyal, P.C., for the second reading of Bill S-22, An Act respecting America Day.-(Honourable Senator Eyton).
Commons Public Bills
No. 1. (one)
September 24, 2003-Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Joyal, P.C., seconded by the Honourable Senator Mahovlich, for the second reading of Bill C-250, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (hate propaganda).-(Honourable Senator Angus).
No. 2. (one)
November 5, 2003-Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Kenny, seconded by the Honourable Senator Spivak, for the second reading of Bill C-260, An Act to amend the Hazardous Products Act (fire- safe cigarettes). -(Honourable Senator Pépin).
Private Bills
Nil
Reports of Committees
No. 1.
November 5, 2003-Resuming debate on the consideration of the Seventh Report of the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights (fact-finding mission), tabled in the Senate on November 4, 2003.
No. 2.
November 3, 2003-Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Chalifoux, seconded by the Honourable Senator Milne:
That the Sixth Report of the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples be adopted and that, pursuant to Rule 131(2), the Senate request a complete and detailed response from the Government, with the Ministers of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, Justice, Human Resources Development, Canadian Heritage, Health, and Industry; the Solicitor General; and the Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-status Indians being identified as Ministers responsible for responding to the Report.-(Honourable Senator Johnson).
No. 3.
November 4, 2003-Consideration of the Eighth Report (Interim) of the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights entitled: A Hard Bed to Lie in: Matrimonial Real Property on Reserve, tabled in the Senate on November 4, 2003.-(Honourable Senator Maheu).
No. 4.
November 4, 2003-Consideration of the Eighteenth Report of the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence (study on veterans services and benefits), tabled in the Senate on November 4, 2003.-(Honourable Senator Meighen).
No. 5.
November 5, 2003-Consideration of the Fourteenth Report (Final) of the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology, entitled: Reforming Health Protection and Promotion in Canada: Time to Act, tabled in the Senate on November 5, 2003.-(Honourable Senator Kirby).
No. 6. (two)
March 25, 2003-Resuming debate on the consideration of the Seventh Report of the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology (document entitled: Santé en français - Pour un meilleur accès à des services de santé en français (French-Language Healthcare - Improving Access to French-Language Health Services)) tabled in the Senate on December 12, 2002.-(Honourable Senator Stratton).
No. 7. (two)
February 5, 2003-Resuming debate on the consideration of the Sixth Report of the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce entitled: Competition in the Public Interest: Large Bank Mergers in Canada, tabled in the Senate on December 12, 2002.-(Honourable Senator Lynch-Staunton).
No. 8. (five)
May 8, 2003-Resuming debate on the consideration of the Eighth Report (Interim) of the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence (Sub-committee on Veterans Affairs) entitled: Fixing the Canadian Forces' Method of Dealing with Death or Dismemberment, deposited with the Clerk of the Senate on April 10, 2003.-(Honourable Senator Meighen).
No. 9. (seven)
December 10, 2002-Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Kenny, seconded by the Honourable Senator Losier-Cool, for the adoption of the Second Report (Interim) of the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence, entitled: For an Extra 130 Bucks... Update on Canada's Military Financial Crisis, A View from the Bottom Up, deposited with the Clerk of the Senate on November 12, 2002. -(Honourable Senator Pépin).
No. 10. (ten)
June 19, 2003-Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Stollery, seconded by the Honourable Senator Cordy, for the adoption of the Fourth Report (Interim) of the Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs entitled: Uncertain Access: The Consequences of U.S. Security and Trade Actions for Canadian Trade Policy (Volume 1), tabled in the Senate on June 13, 2003.-(Honourable Senator Di Nino).
No. 11. (ten)
November 5, 2002-Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Kirby, seconded by the Honourable Senator Cook, for the adoption of the Third Report (Final) of the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology, entitled: The Health of Canadians - The Federal Role, Volume Six: Recommendations for Reform, tabled in the Senate on October 25, 2002.-(Honourable Senator LeBreton).
No. 12. (ten)
June 19, 2003-Consideration of the Fourteenth Report (Final) of the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence, entitled: Occupational Stress Injuries: The Need for Understanding, tabled in the Senate on June 19, 2003. -(Honourable Senator Meighen).
No. 13. (ten)
June 19, 2003-Consideration of the Twelfth Report (Interim) of the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce, entitled: Navigating through "The Perfect Storm'': Safeguards to Restore Investor Confidence, tabled in the Senate on June 19, 2003.-(Honourable Senator Kolber).
No. 14. (eleven)
June 5, 2003-Resuming debate on the consideration of the Fourth Report of the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights entitled: Enhancing Canada's Role in the OAS: Canadian Adherence to the American Convention on Human Rights, tabled in the Senate on May 28, 2003.-(Honourable Senator Andreychuk).
No. 15. (eleven)
April 3, 2003-Resuming debate on the consideration of the Fifth Report (Interim) of the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence, entitled: The Myth of Security at Canada's Airports, deposited with the Clerk of the Senate on January 21, 2003.-(Honourable Senator Atkins).
No. 16. (twelve)
June 16, 2003-Consideration of the Fifth Report of the Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans entitled: Straddling Fish Stocks in the Northwest Atlantic, tabled in the Senate on June 16, 2003.-(Honourable Senator Cook).
No. 17. (eleven)
June 18, 2003-Consideration of the Fifth Report (Interim) of the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, entitled: Climate Change: We are at Risk, tabled in the Senate on June 18, 2003.-(Honourable Senator Oliver).
No. 18.
November 6, 2003-Consideration of the Sixth Report (Final) of the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry entitled: Climate Change: We Are At Risk, tabled in the Senate on November 6, 2003.-(Honourable Senator Oliver).
No. 19.
November 6, 2003-Consideration of the Sixth Report (Interim) of the Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs entitled: The Rising Dollar: Explanation and Economic Impacts (Volume 2), tabled in the Senate on November 6, 2003. -(Honourable Senator Stollery).
No. 20.
November 6, 2003-Consideration of the Seventh Report of Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans (question of privilege raised by Senator Comeau) presented in the Senate on November 6, 2003.-(Honourable Senator Comeau).
No. 21.
November 6, 2003-Consideration of the Eighth Report (Interim) of Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans, entitled: Fish Habitat, tabled in the Senate on November 6, 2003.-(Honourable Senator Comeau).
No. 22.
November 7, 2003-Consideration of the Fifteenth Report (Revised) of the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce entitled: Debtors and Creditors Sharing the Burden: A Review of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act and the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act, tabled in the Senate on November 7, 2003.-(Honourable Senator Kroft).
Other
No. 146. (motion)
September 24, 2003-Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Roche, seconded by the Honourable Senator Plamondon:
That the Senate of Canada recommend that the Government of Canada refuse to participate in the U.S.-sponsored Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) system, because:
1. It will undermine Canada's longstanding policy on the non-weaponization of space by giving implicit, if not explicit, support to U.S. policies to develop and deploy weapons in space;
2. It will further integrate Canadian and American military forces and policy without meaningful Canadian input into the substance of those policies;
3. It will make the world, including Canada, not more secure but less secure.-(Honourable Senator Rompkey, P.C.).
No. 26. (one) (inquiry)
June 19, 2003-Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Moore calling the attention of the Senate to the matter of research funding in Canadian universities from federal sources.-(Honourable Senator Losier- Cool).
No. 14. (one) (inquiry)
March 20, 2003-Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Gauthier calling the attention of the Senate to the important role of culture in Canada and the image that we project abroad.-(Honourable Senator LaPierre).
No. 2. (one) (inquiry)
October 9, 2002-Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Nolin calling the attention of the Senate to the findings contained in the Report of the Special Committee of the Senate on Illegal Drugs entitled "Cannabis: Our Position for a Canadian Public Policy'', deposited with the Clerk of the Senate in the First Session of the Thirty-seventh Parliament, on September 3, 2002.-(Honourable Senator LaPierre).
No. 16. (one) (inquiry)
March 18, 2003-Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Gill calling the attention of the Senate to the issues of the common approach (negotiations) with the Innu (Montagnais) of Quebec, Quebec and Canada with respect to the current discussions.-(Honourable Senator Watt).
No. 115. (one) (motion)
June 3, 2003-Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Lynch-Staunton, seconded by the Honourable Senator Kinsella:
That the Senate resolve itself into Committee of the Whole in order to receive Jane Billings, from the Department of Public Works and Government Services, and Alan Williams, from the Department of National Defence, for a briefing on the procurement process for the Maritime Helicopter Project in light of developments since their appearance before Committee of the Whole on October 30, 2001.-(Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C.).
No. 148. (one) (motion)
October 28, 2003-Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Corbin, seconded by the Honourable Senator Banks:
That the Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs undertake the examination of Canada's policy regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and report no later than April 30th, 2004.-(Honourable Senator Stollery).
No. 6. (three) (inquiry)
November 6, 2002-Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Oliver calling the attention of the Senate to the findings contained in the report of the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry entitled Canadian Farmers at Risk, tabled in the Senate on June 13, 2002, during the First Session of the Thirty-seventh Parliament.-(Honourable Senator Gustafson).
No. 25. (five) (inquiry)
September 30, 2003-Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Callbeck calling the attention of the Senate to the crisis of increasing labour shortages in the skilled trades. -(Honourable Senator Hubley).
No. 15. (six) (inquiry)
February 11, 2003-Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator LeBreton calling the attention of the Senate to the legacy of waste during the Martin - Chrétien years. -(Honourable Senator Eyton).
No. 23. (seven) (inquiry)
September 24, 2003-Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Prud'homme, P.C., calling the attention of the Senate to the parliamentary associations, in particular their budgets and the very odd manner in which some of them, specifically the Inter-parliamentary Union, conduct their annual meetings.-(Honourable Senator Day).
No. 22. (eight) (inquiry)
May 6, 2003-Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Beaudoin calling the attention of the Senate to a possible new constitution for Iraq.-(Honourable Senator Stratton).
No. 66. (nine) (motion)
November 21, 2002-Resuming debate on the motion, as modified, of the Honourable Senator Grafstein, seconded by the Honourable Senator Joyal, P.C.:
That the following resolution, encapsulating the 2002 Berlin OSCE (PA) Resolution, be referred to the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights for consideration and report before December 31, 2003:
WHEREAS Canada is a founding member State of the Organization for Security and Economic Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and the 1975 Helsinki Accords;
WHEREAS all the participating member States to the Helsinki Accords affirmed respect for the right of persons belonging to national minorities to equality before the law and the full opportunity for the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms and further that the participating member States recognized that such respect was an essential factor for the peace, justice and well-being necessary to ensure the development of friendly relations and co-operation between themselves and among all member States;
WHEREAS the OSCE condemned anti-Semitism in the 1990 Copenhagen Concluding Document and undertook to take effective measures to protect individuals from anti-Semitic violence;
WHEREAS the 1996 Lisbon Concluding Document of the OSCE called for improved implementation of all commitments in the human dimension, in particular with respect to human rights and fundamental freedoms and urged participating member States to address the acute problem of anti-Semitism;
WHEREAS the 1999 Charter for European Security committed Canada and other participating members States to counter violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms, including freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief and manifestations of intolerance, aggressive nationalism, racism, chauvinism, xenophobia and anti-Semitism;
WHEREAS on July 8, 2002, at its Parliamentary Assembly held at the Reichstag in Berlin, Germany, the OSCE passed a unanimous resolution, as appended, condemning the current anti-Semitic violence throughout the OSCE space;
WHEREAS the 2002 Berlin Resolution urged all member States to make public statements recognizing violence against Jews and Jewish cultural properties as anti-Semitic and to issue strong, public declarations condemning the depredations;
WHEREAS the 2002 Berlin Resolution called on all participating member States to combat anti-Semitism by ensuring aggressive law enforcement by local and national authorities;
WHEREAS the 2002 Berlin Resolution urged participating members States to bolster the importance of combating anti-Semitism by exploring effective measures to prevent anti-Semitism and by ensuring that laws, regulations, practices and policies conform with relevant OSCE commitments on anti-Semitism;
WHEREAS the 2002 Berlin Resolution also encouraged all delegates to the Parliamentary Assembly to vocally and unconditionally condemn manifestations of anti-Semitic violence in their respective countries;
WHEREAS the alarming rise in anti-Semitic incidents and violence has been documented in Canada, as well as Europe and worldwide.
Appendix
RESOLUTION ON ANTI-SEMITIC VIOLENCE
IN THE OSCE REGION
Berlin, 6 - 10 July 2002
1. Recalling that the OSCE was among those organizations which publicly achieved international condemnation of anti-Semitism through the crafting of the 1990 Copenhagen Concluding Document;
2. Noting that all participating States, as stated in the Copenhagen Concluding Document, commit to "unequivocally condemn'' anti-Semitism and take effective measures to protect individuals from anti-Semitic violence;
3. Remembering the 1996 Lisbon Concluding Document, which highlights the OSCE's "comprehensive approach'' to security, calls for "improvement in the implementation of all commitments in the human dimension, in particular with respect to human rights and fundamental freedoms'', and urges participating States to address "acute problems'', such as anti-Semitism;
4. Reaffirming the 1999 Charter for European Security, committing participating States to "counter such threats to security as violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief and manifestations of intolerance, aggressive nationalism, racism, chauvinism, xenophobia and anti-Semitism'';
5. Recognizing that the scourge of anti-Semitism is not unique to any one country, and calls for steadfast perseverance by all participating States;
The OSCE Parliamentary Assembly:
6. Unequivocally condemns the alarming escalation of anti-Semitic violence throughout the OSCE region;
7. Voices deep concern over the recent escalation in anti-Semitic violence, as individuals of the Judaic faith and Jewish cultural properties have suffered attacks in many OSCE participating States;
8. Urges those States which undertake to return confiscated properties to rightful owners, or to provide alternative compensation to such owners, to ensure that their property restitution and compensation programmes are implemented in a non-discriminatory manner and according to the rule of law;
9. Recognizes the commendable efforts of many post-communist States to redress injustices inflicted by previous regimes based on religious heritage, considering that the interests of justice dictate that more work remains to be done in this regard, particularly with regard to individual and community property restitution compensation;
10. Recognizes the danger of anti-Semitic violence to European security, especially in light of the trend of increasing violence and attacks regions wide;
11. Declares that violence against Jews and other manifestations of intolerance will never be justified by international developments or political issues, and that it obstructs democracy, pluralism, and peace;
12. Urges all States to make public statements recognizing violence against Jews and Jewish cultural properties as anti-Semitic, as well as to issue strong, public declarations condemning the depredations;
13. Calls upon participating States to ensure aggressive law enforcement by local and national authorities, including thorough investigation of anti-Semitic criminal acts, apprehension of perpetrators, initiation of appropriate criminal prosecutions and judicial proceedings;
14. Urges participating States to bolster the importance of combating anti-Semitism by holding a follow-up seminar or human dimension meeting that explores effective measures to prevent anti-Semitism, and to ensure that their laws, regulations, practices and policies conform with relevant OSCE commitments on anti- Semitism; and
15. Encourages all delegates to the Parliamentary Assembly to vocally and unconditionally condemn manifestations of anti-Semitic violence in their respective countries and at all regional and international forums.-(Honourable Senator Prud'homme, P.C.).
No. 86. (thirteen) (motion)
April 3, 2003-Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Di Nino, seconded by the Honourable Senator Kinsella:
That the Senate urge the Government of Canada to reform the Canada Elections Act and other pertinent Acts to eliminate all donations to political parties and to replace them with a system of full public financing, and to establish an impartial, independent committee to direct and oversee the said system, including setting and enforcing standards and rules of conduct.-(Honourable Senator Di Nino).
No. 9. (thirteen) (inquiry)
December 12, 2002-Resuming debate on the inquiry of the Honourable Senator Prud'homme, P.C., calling the attention of the Senate to Canadian foreign policy on the Middle East. -(Honourable Senator Cools).
No. 130. (thirteen) (motion)
June 12, 2003-Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Cools, seconded by the Honourable Senator Watt:
That the Order of the Day for resuming debate on the motion for second reading of Bill S-15, An Act to remove certain doubts regarding the meaning of marriage, which dropped from the Order Paper on June 5, 2003, pursuant to Rule 27(3), be now restored to the Order Paper.-(Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C.).
NOTICE PAPER
INQUIRIES
No. 24. (nine)
By the Honourable Senator Hubley:
June 3, 2003-That she will call the attention of the Senate to the challenges and opportunities facing smaller airports in Atlantic Canada.
No. 27. (eight)
By the Honourable Senator Poulin:
September 16, 2003-That she will call the attention of the Senate to the fact that the 2001 census results, published in 2003, show that the Canadian population is decreasing in many regions across Canada and that this trend has short- and long-term socio-economic implications.
No. 28. (five)
By the Honourable Senator Kinsella:
September 30, 2003-That he will call the attention of the Senate to the failure of the Martin/Chrétien Government to provide adequate oversight in the management of human resources and public funds in certain federal agencies.
No. 29. (one)
By the Honourable Senator Callbeck:
October 29, 2003-That she will call the attention of the Senate to the findings contained in the Report of the Prime Minister's Task Force on Women Entrepreneurs.
MOTIONS
No. 131. (fourteen)
By the Honourable Senator Cools:
June 11, 2003-That the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs be authorized to examine and report on the law of marriage in Canada, in particular its historical and constitutional meaning as a voluntary union between a man and a woman, and the history and application of the law of marriage, and the Constitution Act, 1982 Charter of Rights, and the current constitutional challenges to the law of marriage in the courts of British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec, and the Minister of Justice's November 2002 discussion paper on marriage, and the current demands for different forms of marriage, and the public interest in the law of marriage; and
That the Committee submit its report no later than December 31, 2003.
No. 134. (twelve)
By the Honourable Senator Gauthier:
June 12, 2003-That the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages be authorized to examine and report, before November 28, 2003, on the official-languages commitments which federal departments were to undertake in terms of senior management accountability, language training, partnerships, and the right to work in the official language of one's choice.
No. 140. (nine)
By the Honourable Senator Gauthier:
June 18, 2003-That
WHEREAS section 43 of the Constitution Act, 1982 provides that an amendment to the Constitution of Canada may be made by proclamation issued by the Governor General under the Great Seal of Canada where so authorized by resolutions of the Senate and House of Commons and resolutions of the legislative assembly of each province to which the amendment applies;
NOW THEREFORE the Senate resolves that an amendment to the Constitution of Canada be authorized to be made by proclamation issued by Her Excellency the Governor General under the Great Seal of Canada in accordance with the schedule hereto.
SCHEDULE
AMENDMENT TO THE
CONSTITUTION OF CANADA
1. Section 16 of the Constitution Act, 1867 is replaced by the following:
"16. (1) Until the Queen otherwise directs, the seat of government of Canada shall be Ottawa.
(2) In the seat of government of Canada, any member of the public has the right to communicate with, and to receive available services from, the government of Ontario and the City of Ottawa in English or French.''
CITATION
2. This Amendment may be cited as the "Constitution Amendment, [year of proclamation] (Seat of government of Canada)''.
No. 144. (eight)
By the Honourable Senator Grafstein:
September 16, 2003-That the Senate urge the Government of Canada to join those parliaments and governments of other member countries of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe who are taking active steps, pursuant to OSCE resolutions to that effect, to restore or grant restitution for communal religious properties owned by Christian, Jewish and Muslim organizations confiscated during the fascist and communist periods in Central and Eastern European states.
No. 152. (three)
By the Honourable Senator Gauthier:
October 8, 2003-That the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament be authorized to study and report on, before November 28, 2003, the procedure that the Senate should adopt for following up on petitions tabled in the Senate Chamber.
No. 153. (three)
By the Honourable Senator Gauthier:
October 8, 2003-That the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs be authorized to study and report on, before November 28, 2003, the scope of section 16 of the Constitution Act, 1867, which designates Ottawa as the seat of government of Canada.
No. 155. (two)
By the Honourable Senator Morin:
October 9, 2003-That Standing Joint Committee on the Library of Parliament be authorized to permit coverage by electronic media of its public proceedings with the least possible disruption of its hearings.
No. 154. (two)
By the Honourable Senator Gauthier:
October 9, 2003-That the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament study the way in which Parliament's senior officials are appointed, with a view to standardizing the process so that such officials are appointed using an established procedure that has been approved by both Houses of Parliament;
That the necessary provisions be put in place for removing such officials from their positions for cause, by a joint resolution of the Senate and the House of Commons; and
That the Committee report no later than November 28, 2003.
No. 164. (one)
By the Honourable Senator Gauthier:
October 27, 2003-That the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs be authorized to examine, for the purposes of reporting by February 14, 2004, the order of reference to the effect that Ottawa, the capital of Canada, be declared bilingual under section 16 of the Constitution Act, 1867, et seq, as declared by the 12,000 signatories to the petition tabled in this Chamber.
No. 167. (one)
By the Honourable Senator Kirby:
October 29, 2003-That the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology have power to sit at 3:30 p.m. on Wednesday, November 5, 2003, even though the Senate may then be sitting, and that Rule 95(4) be suspended in relation thereto.
No. 168. (one)
By the Honourable Senator Gauthier:
October 29, 2003-That, pursuant to Rule 131(2), the Senate request the government to provide a detailed and comprehensive response to the Fourth Report of the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages, adopted on October 28, 2003.
No. 172.
By the Honourable Senator Kenny:
November 3, 2003-That the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence be empowered, in accordance with Rule 95(3)(a), to sit during the adjournment November 17, 2003 and November 24, 2003, even though the Senate may then be adjourned for a period exceeding one week.
No. 173.
By the Honourable Senator Kenny:
November 3, 2003-That the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence be permitted, not withstanding usual practices, to deposit an interim report on first responders that it may have ready during the adjournment, and that the report be deemed to have been tabled in the Chamber.
No. 174.
By the Honourable Senator Gauthier:
November 3, 2003-That the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages be authorized to examine and report on the measures that should be taken to encourage and promote delivery of, and access to, as wide a range as possible of French-language broadcasting in Canada's francophone minority communities; and
That the said Committee report to the Senate on or before February 16, 2004.
No. 175.
By the Honourable Senator Stollery:
November 4, 2003-That, not withstanding the Order of the Senate adopted on November 21, 2002, the date for the final report of the Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs regarding its study of the Canada - United States of America trade relationship and the Canada - Mexico trade relationship be extended from December 19, 2003 to March 31, 2004.
No. 176.
By the Honourable Senator Stollery:
November 4, 2003-That the Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs be permitted, not withstanding usual practices, to deposit its reports with the Clerk of the Senate, if the Senate is then not sitting; and that the reports be deemed to have been tabled in the Senate.
No. 177.
By the Honourable Senator Kenny:
November 4, 2003-That the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence be empowered, in accordance with Rule 95(3)(a), to sit on November 17, 2003 and November 24, 2003, even though the Senate may then be adjourned for a period exceeding one week.
No. 178.
By the Honourable Senator Kenny:
November 4, 2003-That the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence have power to sit at any time on Monday, November 17, 2003 and Monday, November 24, 2003, even though the Senate may then be sitting, and that Rule 95(4) be suspended in relation thereto.
No. 179.
By the Honourable Senator Kenny:
November 4, 2003-That the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence be permitted, in the event of an adjournment and notwithstanding the usual practices, to deposit with the Clerk of the Senate an interim report on first responders, and that the report be deemed to have been tabled in the Chamber.
No. 181.
By the Honourable Senator Tkachuk:
November 4, 2003-That it be an instruction to the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology, that it divide Bill C-36, An Act to establish the Library and Archives of Canada, to amend the Copyright Act and to amend certain Acts in consequence, in order that it may deal separately with the provisions relating to the creation of the Library and Archives of Canada and the provisions relating to the Copyright Act.
No. 182.
By the Honourable Senator Banks:
November 5, 2003-That it be an instruction to the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration that, with respect to the Supplementary Estimates 2003-2004, the Committee include in the Senate's request to Treasury Board an amount of $450,000 for Senate Committees; and with respect to the Main Estimates 2004-2005, the Committee include in the Senate's request to Treasury Board (i) an amount of $4,000,000 for Senate Committees and (ii) an amount of $400,000 for witnesses' expenses.
No. 183.
By the Honourable Senator Furey:
November 5, 2003-That, notwithstanding the Order of the Senate adopted on October 7, 2003, the date for the report of the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs regarding its study of the status of Legal Aid in Canada and the difficulties experienced by many low-income Canadians in acquiring adequate legal aid for both criminal and civil matters be extended from December 31, 2003 to March 31, 2004.
No. 184.
By the Honourable Senator Furey:
November 5, 2003-That, notwithstanding the Order of the Senate adopted on October 7, 2003, the date for the report of the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs regarding its study of the implications of including, in legislation, non-derogation clauses relating to existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada under s.35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 be extended from December 31, 2003 to March 31, 2004.
No. 185.
By the Honourable Senator Furey:
November 5, 2003-That the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs be permitted, notwithstanding usual practices, to deposit its report on the implications of including, in legislation, non-derogation clauses relating to existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada under s.35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 with the Clerk of the Senate, if the Senate is then not sitting; and that the report be deemed to have been tabled in the Senate.
No. 186.
By the Honourable Senator Furey:
November 5, 2003-That the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs be permitted, notwithstanding usual practices, to deposit its report on the status of Legal Aid in Canada and the difficulties experienced by many low-income Canadians in acquiring adequate legal aid for both criminal and civil matters with the Clerk of the Senate, if the Senate is then not sitting; and that the report be deemed to have been tabled in the Senate.
No. 187.
By the Honourable Senator Kenny:
November 5, 2003-That the Seventeenth Report (Interim) of the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence, entitled: Canada's Coastlines: The Longest Under-Defended Borders in the World, tabled in the Senate on October 28, 2003, be placed on the Orders of the Day for consideration at the next sitting.
QUESTIONS
No. 35.
By the Honourable Senator Kenny:
February 11, 2003-To the Department of Transport
1. Given that one of the objectives of the Alternative Fuels Act is to have the federal government take the lead in converting motor vehicles to run on less-polluting alternative transportation fuels including ethanol, methanol, propane, natural gas, hydrogen and electricity, and that the Act requires 75 per cent of all new vehicles purchased by the federal government be able to operate alternative fuels, is the Minister of Transport now driving an alternative fuel vehicle?
2. If the Minister is not driving an alternative fuel vehicle, please explain why this is so, given that the Alternative Fuels Act, which has been in force since 1997, anticipates government leadership and that the Minister has been asked this same question through the Order Paper in October 1997 and March 1998 and March 1999?
3. How many new vehicles has the Minister had since the Alternative Fuels Act was passed in 1995? How many of them have been alternative fuel vehicles? If any have not been alternative fuel vehicles please explain why.
4. When was the Minister's current vehicle purchased, what factors were taken into account in deciding which vehicle to purchase and when is it scheduled for replacement?
5. What type of alternative fuel vehicle is being considered when the replacement is purchased and what factors will be taken into account in reaching a decision?
6. Given the benefits to Canadian farmers and the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions that would result from increased use of ethanol fuel, and given that all gasoline fuel vehicles can burn ethanol-blended gasoline which is widely available in some areas, including stations within 5 kilometres of Parliament Hill, where an alternative fuel vehicle is not being used, has the Minister instructed his/her drivers to always use ethanol-blended gasoline when it is available, as required by Clause 4(2) of the Act?
7. If not, will the Minister make a commitment to issue such instructions and use ethanol-blended gasoline until he/ she begins driving an ATF vehicle?
8. Where ethanol-blended gasoline is available, what are logs showing about the use of this fuel?
9. If this information is not currently recorded, will the Minister make a commitment to instruct drivers and/or fleet managers to begin keeping a log of their use of ethanol-blended gasoline so that when this question is posed next year, information on compliance with this aspect of the Act will be available?
10. Of the vehicles that the Department of Transport operates that are not alternative fuel vehicles, how many operate within 10 kilometres of a service station that sells ethanol-blended gasoline? Are employees driving departmental vehicles told to use ethanol-blended gasoline when available and if not, why not?
11. If drivers are given such a directive, how is compliance monitored?
12. If it is not currently monitored, will the Department make a commitment to instruct drivers and/or fleet managers to begin keeping a log of their use of ethanol-blended gasoline so that when this question is posed next year, information on compliance with this aspect of the Act will be readily available?
13. What vehicles uses are so different in your Department that of the 67 vehicles purchased in fiscal year 2001-02, not one of them met the criteria for cost-effectiveness for alternative fuel use?
14. In light of the contribution that reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector is expected to make in helping Canada meet its Kyoto commitments, what is your Department doing to show leadership in the application of the Alternative Fuels Act?
No. 36.
By the Honourable Senator Kenny:
February 11, 2003-To the Department of Transport
1. Given that one of the objectives of the Alternative Fuels Act is to have the federal government take the lead in converting motor vehicles to run on less-polluting alternative transportation fuels including ethanol, methanol, propane, natural gas, hydrogen and electricity, and that the Act requires 75 per cent of all new vehicles purchased by the federal government be able to operate alternative fuels, is the Deputy Minister of Transport now driving an alternative fuel vehicle?
2. If the Deputy Minister is not driving an alternative fuel vehicle, please explain why this is so, given that the Alternative Fuels Act, which has been in force since 1997, anticipates government leadership and that the Minister has been asked this same question through the Order Paper in October 1997 and March 1998 and March 1999?
3. How many new vehicles has the Deputy Minister had since the Alternative Fuels Act was passed in 1995? How many of them have been alternative fuel vehicles? If any have not been alternative fuel vehicles please explain why.
4. When was the Deputy Minister's current vehicle purchased, what factors were taken into account in deciding which vehicle to purchase and when is it scheduled for replacement?
5. What type of alternative fuel vehicle is being considered when the replacement is purchased and what factors will be taken into account in reaching a decision?
6. Given the benefits to Canadian farmers and the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions that would result from increased use of ethanol fuel, and given that all gasoline fuel vehicles can burn ethanol-blended gasoline which is widely available in some areas, including stations within 5 kilometres of Parliament Hill, where an alternative fuel vehicle is not being used, has the Deputy Minister instructed his/her drivers to always use ethanol-blended gasoline when it is available, as required by Clause 4(2) of the Act?
7. If not, will the Deputy Minister make a commitment to issue such instructions and use ethanol-blended gasoline until he/she begins driving an ATF vehicle?
8. Where ethanol-blended gasoline is available, what are logs showing about the use of this fuel?
9. If this information is not currently recorded, will the Deputy Minister make a commitment to instruct drivers and/or fleet managers to begin keeping a log of their use of ethanol-blended gasoline so that when this question is posed next year, information on compliance with this aspect of the Act will be available?
No. 37.
By the Honourable Senator Kenny:
February 11, 2003-To the Department of Transport
1. Given that one of the objectives of the Alternative Fuels Act is to have the federal government take the lead in converting motor vehicles to run on less-polluting alternative transportation fuels including ethanol, methanol, propane, natural gas, hydrogen and electricity, and that the Act requires 75 per cent of all new vehicles purchased by the federal government be able to operate alternative fuels, is any other official given use of personal vehicles now driving an alternative fuel vehicle?
2. If any other official given use of personal vehicles is not driving an alternative fuel vehicle, please explain why this is so, given that theAlternative Fuels Act, which has been in force since 1997, anticipates government leadership and that the Minister has been asked this same question through the Order Paper in October 1997 and March 1998 and March 1999?
3. How many new vehicles has any other official given use of personal vehicles had since the Alternative Fuels Act was passed in 1995? How many of them have been alternative fuel vehicles? If any have not been alternative fuel vehicles please explain why.
4. When was the current vehicle of any other official given use of personal vehicles purchased, what factors were taken into account in deciding which vehicle to purchase and when is it scheduled for replacement?
5. What type of alternative fuel vehicle is being considered when the replacement is purchased and what factors will be taken into account in reaching a decision?
6. Given the benefits to Canadian farmers and the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions that would result from increased use of ethanol fuel, and given that all gasoline fuel vehicles can burn ethanol-blended gasoline which is widely available in some areas, including stations within 5 kilometres of Parliament Hill, where an alternative fuel vehicle is not being used, has any other official given use of personal vehicles instructed his/her drivers to always use ethanol- blended gasoline when it is available, as required by Clause 4(2) of the Act?
7. If not, will any other official given use of personal vehicles make a commitment to issue such instructions and use ethanol-blended gasoline until he/she begins driving an ATF vehicle?
8. Where ethanol-blended gasoline is available, what are logs showing about the use of this fuel?
9. If this information is not currently recorded, will any other official given use of personal vehicles make a commitment to instruct drivers and/or fleet managers to begin keeping a log of their use of ethanol-blended gasoline so that when this question is posed next year, information on compliance with this aspect of the Act will be available?
No. 38.
By the Honourable Senator Kenny:
February 11, 2003-To the Department of Intergovernmental Affairs
1. Given that one of the objectives of the Alternative Fuels Act is to have the federal government take the lead in converting motor vehicles to run on less-polluting alternative transportation fuels including ethanol, methanol, propane, natural gas, hydrogen and electricity, and that the Act requires 75 per cent of all new vehicles purchased by the federal government be able to operate alternative fuels, is the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs now driving an alternative fuel vehicle?
2. If the Minister is not driving an alternative fuel vehicle, please explain why this is so, given that the Alternative Fuels Act, which has been in force since 1997, anticipates government leadership and that the Minister has been asked this same question through the Order Paper in October 1997 and March 1998?
3. How many new vehicles has the Minister had since the Alternative Fuels Act was passed in 1995? How many of them have been alternative fuel vehicles? If any have not been alternative fuel vehicles please explain why.
4. When was the Minister's current vehicle purchased, what factors were taken into account in deciding which vehicle to purchase and when is it scheduled for replacement?
5. What type of alternative fuel vehicle is being considered when the replacement is purchased and what factors will be taken into account in reaching a decision?
6. Given the benefits to Canadian farmers and the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions that would result from increased use of ethanol fuel, and given that all gasoline fuel vehicles can burn ethanol-blended gasoline which is widely available in some areas, including stations within 5 kilometres of Parliament Hill, where an alternative fuel vehicle is not being used, has the Minister instructed his/her drivers to always use ethanol-blended gasoline when it is available, as required by Clause 4(2) of the Act?
7. If not, will the Minister make a commitment to issue such instructions and use ethanol-blended gasoline until he/ she begins driving an ATF vehicle?
8. Where ethanol-blended gasoline is available, what are logs showing about the use of this fuel?
9. If this information is not currently recorded, will the Minister make a commitment to instruct drivers and/or fleet managers to begin keeping a log of their use of ethanol-blended gasoline so that when this question is posed next year, information on compliance with this aspect of the Act will be available?
10. Of the vehicles that the Department of Intergovernmental Affairs operates that are not alternative fuel vehicles, how many operate within 10 kilometres of a service station that sells ethanol-blended gasoline? Are employees driving departmental vehicles told to use ethanol-blended gasoline when available and if not, why not?
11. If drivers are given such a directive, how is compliance monitored?
12. If it is not currently monitored, will the Department make a commitment to instruct drivers and/or fleet managers to begin keeping a log of their use of ethanol-blended gasoline so that when this question is posed next year, information on compliance with this aspect of the Act will be readily available?
13. In light of the contribution that reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector is expected to make in helping Canada meet its Kyoto commitments, what is your Department doing to show leadership in the application of the Alternative Fuels Act?
No. 39.
By the Honourable Senator Kenny:
February 11, 2003-To the Department of Intergovernmental Affairs
1. Given that one of the objectives of the Alternative Fuels Act is to have the federal government take the lead in converting motor vehicles to run on less-polluting alternative transportation fuels including ethanol, methanol, propane, natural gas, hydrogen and electricity, and that the Act requires 75 per cent of all new vehicles purchased by the federal government be able to operate alternative fuels, is the Deputy Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs now driving an alternative fuel vehicle?
2 If the Deputy Minister is not driving an alternative fuel vehicle, please explain why this is so, given that the Alternative Fuels Act, which has been in force since 1997, anticipates government leadership and that the Minister has been asked this same question through the Order Paper in October 1997 and March 1998?
3. How many new vehicles has the Deputy Minister had since the Alternative Fuels Act was passed in 1995? How many of them have been alternative fuel vehicles? If any have not been alternative fuel vehicles please explain why.
4. When was the Deputy Minister's current vehicle purchased, what factors were taken into account in deciding which vehicle to purchase and when is it scheduled for replacement?
5. What type of alternative fuel vehicle is being considered when the replacement is purchased and what factors will be taken into account in reaching a decision?
6. Given the benefits to Canadian farmers and the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions that would result from increased use of ethanol fuel, and given that all gasoline fuel vehicles can burn ethanol-blended gasoline which is widely available in some areas, including stations within 5 kilometres of Parliament Hill, where an alternative fuel vehicle is not being used, has the Deputy Minister instructed his/her drivers to always use ethanol-blended gasoline when it is available, as required by Clause 4(2) of the Act?
7. If not, will the Deputy Minister make a commitment to issue such instructions and use ethanol-blended gasoline until he/she begins driving an ATF vehicle?
8. Where ethanol-blended gasoline is available, what are logs showing about the use of this fuel?
9. If this information is not currently recorded, will the Deputy Minister make a commitment to instruct drivers and/or fleet managers to begin keeping a log of their use of ethanol-blended gasoline so that when this question is posed next year, information on compliance with this aspect of the Act will be available?
No. 40.
By the Honourable Senator Kenny:
February 11, 2003-To the Department of Intergovernmental Affairs
1. Given that one of the objectives of the Alternative Fuels Act is to have the federal government take the lead in converting motor vehicles to run on less-polluting alternative transportation fuels including ethanol, methanol, propane, natural gas, hydrogen and electricity, and that the Act requires 75 per cent of all new vehicles purchased by the federal government be able to operate alternative fuels, is any other official given use of personal vehicles now driving an alternative fuel vehicle?
2 If any other official given use of personal vehicles is not driving an alternative fuel vehicle, please explain why this is so, given that theAlternative Fuels Act, which has been in force since 1997, anticipates government leadership and that the Minister has been asked this same question through the Order Paper in October 1997 and March 1998?
3. How many new vehicles has any other official given use of personal vehicles had since the Alternative Fuels Act was passed in 1995? How many of them have been alternative fuel vehicles? If any have not been alternative fuel vehicles please explain why.
4. When was the current vehicle of any other official given use of personal vehicles purchased, what factors were taken into account in deciding which vehicle to purchase and when is it scheduled for replacement?
5. What type of alternative fuel vehicle is being considered when the replacement is purchased and what factors will be taken into account in reaching a decision?
6. Given the benefits to Canadian farmers and the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions that would result from increased use of ethanol fuel, and given that all gasoline fuel vehicles can burn ethanol-blended gasoline which is widely available in some areas, including stations within 5 kilometres of Parliament Hill, where an alternative fuel vehicle is not being used, has any other official given use of personal vehicles instructed his/her drivers to always use ethanol- blended gasoline when it is available, as required by Clause 4(2) of the Act?
7. If not, will any other official given use of personal vehicles make a commitment to issue such instructions and use ethanol-blended gasoline until he/she begins driving an ATF vehicle?
8. Where ethanol-blended gasoline is available, what are logs showing about the use of this fuel?
9. If this information is not currently recorded, will any other official given use of personal vehicles make a commitment to instruct drivers and/or fleet managers to begin keeping a log of their use of ethanol-blended gasoline so that when this question is posed next year, information on compliance with this aspect of the Act will be available?
No. 103.
By the Honourable Senator Kenny:
March 18, 2003-To the Privy Council Office
1. Given that one of the objectives of the Alternative Fuels Act is to have the federal government take the lead in converting motor vehicles to run on less-polluting alternative transportation fuels including ethanol, methanol, propane, natural gas, hydrogen and electricity, and that the Act requires 75 per cent of all new vehicles purchased by the federal government be able to operate alternative fuels, is the Clerk of the Privy Council now driving an alternative fuel vehicle?
2. If the Clerk is not driving an alternative fuel vehicle, please explain why this is so, given that the Alternative Fuels Act, which has been in force since 1997, anticipates government leadership?
3. How many new vehicles has the Clerk had since the Alternative Fuels Act was passed in 1995? How many of them have been alternative fuel vehicles? If any have not been alternative fuel vehicles please explain why.
4. When was the Clerk's current vehicle purchased, what factors were taken into account in deciding which vehicle to purchase and when is it scheduled for replacement?
5. What type of alternative fuel vehicle is being considered when the replacement is purchased and what factors will be taken into account in reaching a decision?
6. Given the benefits to Canadian farmers and the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions that would result from increased use of ethanol fuel, and given that all gasoline fuel vehicles can burn ethanol-blended gasoline which is widely available in some areas, including stations within 5 kilometres of Parliament Hill, where an alternative fuel vehicle is not being used, has the Clerk instructed his/her drivers to always use ethanol-blended gasoline when it is available, as required by Clause 4(2) of the Act?
7. If not, will the Clerk make a commitment to issue such instructions and use ethanol-blended gasoline until he/she begins driving an ATF vehicle?
8. Where ethanol-blended gasoline is available, what are logs showing about the use of this fuel?
9. If this information is not currently recorded, will the Clerk make a commitment to instruct drivers and/or fleet managers to begin keeping a log of their use of ethanol-blended gasoline so that when this question is posed next year, information on compliance with this aspect of the Act will be available?
10. Of the vehicles that the Privy Council Office operates that are not alternative fuel vehicles, how many operate within 10 kilometres of a service station that sells ethanol-blended gasoline? Are employees driving Privy Council Office vehicles told to use ethanol-blended gasoline when available and if not, why not?
11. If drivers are given such a directive, how is compliance monitored?
12. If it is not currently monitored, will the Privy Council Office make a commitment to instruct drivers and/or fleet managers to begin keeping a log of their use of ethanol-blended gasoline so that when this question is posed next year, information on compliance with this aspect of the Act will be readily available?
13. What vehicles' uses are so different in your Office that of the four vehicles purchased in fiscal year 2001-02 not one met the criteria for cost-effectiveness for alternative fuel use?
14. In light of the contribution that reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector is expected to make in helping Canada meet its Kyoto commitments, what is your Office doing to show leadership in the application of the Alternative Fuels Act?
No. 104.
By the Honourable Senator Kenny:
March 18, 2003-To the Privy Council Office
1. Given that one of the objectives of the Alternative Fuels Act is to have the federal government take the lead in converting motor vehicles to run on less-polluting alternative transportation fuels including ethanol, methanol, propane, natural gas, hydrogen and electricity, and that the Act requires 75 per cent of all new vehicles purchased by the federal government be able to operate alternative fuels, is any other official given use of personal vehicles now driving an alternative fuel vehicle?
2. If any other official given use of personal vehicles is not driving an alternative fuel vehicle, please explain why this is so, given that the Alternative Fuels Act, which has been in force since 1997, anticipates government leadership?
3. How many new vehicles has any other official given use of personal vehicles had since the Alternative Fuels Act was passed in 1995? How many of them have been alternative fuel vehicles? If any have not been alternative fuel vehicles please explain why.
4. When was the current vehicle of any other official given use of personal vehicles purchased, what factors were taken into account in deciding which vehicle to purchase and when is it scheduled for replacement?
5. What type of alternative fuel vehicle is being considered when the replacement is purchased and what factors will be taken into account in reaching a decision?
6. Given the benefits to Canadian farmers and the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions that would result from increased use of ethanol fuel, and given that all gasoline fuel vehicles can burn ethanol-blended gasoline which is widely available in some areas, including stations within 5 kilometres of Parliament Hill, where an alternative fuel vehicle is not being used, has any other official given use of personal vehicles instructed his/her drivers to always use ethanol- blended gasoline when it is available, as required by Clause 4(2) of the Act?
7. If not, will any other official given use of personal vehicles make a commitment to issue such instructions and use ethanol-blended gasoline until he/she begins driving an ATF vehicle?
8. Where ethanol-blended gasoline is available, what are logs showing about the use of this fuel?
9. If this information is not currently recorded, will any other official given use of personal vehicles make a commitment to instruct drivers and/or fleet managers to begin keeping a log of their use of ethanol-blended gasoline so that when this question is posed next year, information on compliance with this aspect of the Act will be available?
No. 126.
By the Honourable Senator Tkachuk:
September 16, 2003-With regard to the Commission on the Future of Health Care, headed by the Honourable Roy Romanow, and further to question No. 6 placed on the Order Paper and Notice Paper on February 4, 2003, and the response by the PMO and the PCO on June 9, 2003, which stated that the Commissioner's salary is within the range of $650 to $750 per diem, what was the total amount paid out in income and expenses to the Honourable Roy Romanow for his work as head of the Commission over the 21 month period from April 1, 2001 to December 31, 2002?
No. 127.
By the Honourable Senator Lynch-Staunton:
October 1, 2003-1. As of September 30, 2003, have any names been added to the ``List of Entities'' as provided in 83.05 of Bill C-36? If so: (a) What are the names of each listed entity? (b) Has any entity applied in writing to have its name removed as provided in 83.05(2)? (c) If yes to (b), what has been the response of the Solicitor General in each case?
2. As of September 30, 2003, have any orders been issued leading to investigative hearings as provided in 83.28 of Bill C-36? If so: (a) How many orders have been issued? (b) Where was each of these orders executed? (c) Have warrants for arrest been issued as provided in 83.29? If so, how many, and where?
3. As of September 30, 2003, have any arrests been made as provided in 83.3 of Bill C-36? If so: (a) How many arrests have been made? (b) Where were these arrests made? (c) How many of those arrested have been released? (d) How many are in detention and, in each case, since when and for what duration?
4. As of September 30, 2003, have any objections to the disclosure of information been made as provided in 37 of Bill C-36? If so: (a) How many such objections have been made? (b) Before which courts, including their locations, was each of these objections made? (c) What is the name and position of each individual who made an objection?
5. As of September 30, 2003, how many judges have been appointed pursuant to 95 of Bill C-36?