DOCSLIB.ORG

Thursday, October 21, 1999

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

CANADA VOLUME 136 S NUMBER 008 S 2nd SESSION S 36th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Thursday, October 21, 1999 Speaker: The Honourable Gilbert Parent CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) All parliamentary publications are available on the ``Parliamentary Internet Parlementaire'' at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 465 HOUSE OF COMMONS Thursday, October 21, 1999 The House met at 10 a.m. (Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed) _______________ * * * Prayers PETITIONS _______________ THE SENATE Mr. Nelson Riis (Kamloops, Thompson and Highland Val- ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS leys, NDP): Mr. Speaker, once again it is an honour and a pleasure for me to stand, pursuant to Standing Order 36, to present a petition on behalf of a number of my constituents. D (1000) They are very concerned about the fact that we have a Senate in [Translation] our country. They consider it to be undemocratic and composed of unelected members that are unaccountable to the people of Canada. GOVERNMENT RECORD OF ACHIEVEMENTS They point out the fact that there is a $50 million price tag attached Hon. Lucienne Robillard (President of the Treasury Board to this. They say that this is something from another era and should and Minister responsible for Infrastructure, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, not be taking place as we enter the 21st century. in order to provide hon. members and the people of Canada with an They also say that we need to modernize our parliamentary update on government achievements, I have the pleasure to table, institution, Mr. Speaker, which is something I know you feel in both official languages, a report entitled ‘‘Managing for Results strongly about. They are calling upon the parliament of Canada to 1999’’, along with performance reports from 82 departments and take whatever measures are necessary to abolish the Senate of agencies. Canada. * * * * * * D (1005 ) [Translation] [English] QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER CRIMINAL CODE Mr. Derek Lee (Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Ms. Alexa McDonough (Halifax, NDP) moved for leave to Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I ask introduce Bill C-259, an act to amend the Criminal Code (criminal that all questions be allowed to stand. liability of corporations, directors and officers). The Deputy Speaker: Is that agreed? She said: Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to have the opportunity Some hon. members: Agreed. today to reintroduce a bill that establishes the criminal liability of corporations, of their executives and officers, for criminal acts or _____________________________________________ omissions carried out knowingly by them which put the health and safety of their employees at risk. GOVERNMENT ORDERS This is a bill that arises out of a recommendation from the public inquiry into the disastrous Westray tragedy in Nova Scotia that [English] killed 26 miners unnecessarily. It will establish once and for all the public responsibility to protect employees in the country against WAYS AND MEANS any such disastrous outcome. NISGA’A FINAL AGREEMENT ACT The bill is long overdue. It is specifically a recommendation of the Westray inquiry and Canadians will benefit from such protec- Hon. Robert D. Nault (Minister of Indian Affairs and North- tion in the future. ern Development, Lib.) moved that a ways and means motion to 466 COMMONS DEBATES October 21, 1999 Government Orders implement certain provisions of the Nisga’a Final Agreement and Harb Harvard Harvey Herron the Nisga’a Nation Taxation Agreement, laid upon the table on Hubbard Iftody Tuesday, October 19, be concurred in. Jackson Jennings Jones Jordan The Deputy Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the Karetak-Lindell Keddy (South Shore) Keyes Kilger (Stormont—Dundas—Charlottenburgh) motion? Kilgour (Edmonton Southeast) Knutson Kraft Sloan Lalonde Some hon. members: Agreed. Lastewka Laurin Lavigne Lebel Some hon. members: No. Lee Leung Lill Limoges (Windsor—St. Clair) The Deputy Speaker: All those in favour of the motion will Lincoln Longfield please say yea. MacAulay MacKay (Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough) Mahoney Malhi Some hon. members: Yea. Maloney Mancini Manley Marceau The Deputy Speaker: All those opposed will please say nay. Marleau Martin (LaSalle—Émard) Matthews McCormick Some hon. members: Nay. McDonough McGuire McKay (Scarborough East) McLellan (Edmonton West) McTeague McWhinney The Deputy Speaker: In my opinion the yeas have it. Mercier Mifflin Mills (Broadview—Greenwood) Mitchell And more than five members having risen: Muise Murray Myers Nault The Deputy Speaker: Call in the members. Nystrom O’Brien (London—Fanshawe) O’Reilly Pagtakhan D (1055 ) Paradis Patry Peric Perron (The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the Peterson Pettigrew following division:) Phinney Picard (Drummond) Pillitteri Plamondon Pratt Price (Division No. 44) Proctor Proud Provenzano Redman YEAS Reed Richardson Riis Robillard Members Saada Scott (Fredericton) Adams Alcock Sekora Shepherd Anderson Assad Solomon Speller Assadourian Asselin St. Denis St-Hilaire Augustine Axworthy (Winnipeg South Centre) Bachand (Richmond—Arthabaska) Bachand (Saint-Jean) St-Jacques St-Julien Baker Bakopanos Steckle Stewart (Brant) Barnes Beaumier Stewart (Northumberland) Stoffer Bélair Bélanger Szabo Telegdi Bellemare Bennett Thibeault Torsney Bergeron Bernier (Bonaventure—Gaspé— Tremblay (Rimouski—Mitis) Turp Îles-de-la-Madeleine—Pabok) Bernier (Tobique—Mactaquac) Ur Valeri Bertrand Bevilacqua Vanclief Vautour Blaikie Blondin-Andrew Bonin Bonwick Volpe Wappel Borotsik Boudria Wayne Whelan Bradshaw Brison Wilfert—196 Brown Bryden Bulte Byrne Caccia Calder Cannis Canuel NAYS Caplan Cardin Carroll Casey Catterall Cauchon Members Chamberlain Chan Charbonneau Clouthier Coderre Collenette Ablonczy Anders Comuzzi Copps Bailey Benoit Crête Cullen Breitkreuz (Yellowhead) Breitkreuz (Yorkton—Melville) Davies de Savoye Cadman Casson Debien Desjarlais Duncan Elley Desrochers DeVillers Epp Forseth Dhaliwal Dion Doyle Dromisky Goldring Gouk Duceppe Duhamel Grewal Grey (Edmonton North) Dumas Earle Harris Hart Easter Eggleton Hill (Macleod) Hill (Prince George—Peace River) Finlay Folco Hilstrom Jaffer Fontana Gagliano Johnston Kenney (Calgary Southeast) Gagnon Gallaway Kerpan Konrad Gauthier Girard-Bujold Lowther Lunn Godfrey Godin (Acadie—Bathurst) Godin (Châteauguay) Goodale Mark Mayfield Graham Gray (Windsor West) McNally Meredith Grose Guarnieri Mills (Red Deer) Morrison Guay Guimond Penson Ramsay October 21, 1999 COMMONS DEBATES 467 Points of Order Reynolds Ritz When considering this point of order, Mr. Speaker, you must Schmidt Scott (Skeena) Solberg Stinson understand that we will stand up for the equal rights of all Strahl Thompson (Wild Rose) Vellacott White (Langley—Abbotsford) Canadians, including the Nisga’a. We will do our utmost to White (North Vancouver) —47 convince the Liberal government to reconsider its position and to inform Canadians of the very significant mistakes that are being made. PAIRED MEMBERS Hon. Don Boudria (Leader of the government in the House of Alarie Bellehumeur Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I rise on this point of order. The Brien Chrétien (Frontenac—Mégantic) Dalphond-Guiral Discepola hon. member of course has a right to feel very profoundly about Drouin Dubé (Lévis-et-Chutes-de-la-Chaudière) any issue, just as I have a right to disagree with him and any of us Fournier Fry Ianno Loubier who similarly feel about an issue. That is not what is before us Minna Normand today. It is whether or not the ways and means motions that was O’Brien (Labrador) Pickard (Chatham—Kent Essex) Rock Sauvageau just passed is in order or out of order. Serré Tremblay (Lac-Saint-Jean) Venne Wood D (1100 ) The Deputy Speaker: I declare the motion carried. First of all, the speech we just heard is actually a reflection upon * * * a vote in the House and I would say that in itself offends, at least in my view, our standing orders. The standing orders say that the adoption of the ways and means motion—and that ways and means motion has now been adopted—is an order of the House to bring in POINTS OF ORDER a bill based thereon. Therefore, this gives the minister the right, and some would say the obligation, to give first reading to the bill. WAYS AND MEANS MOTION NO. 1 The hon. member made a reference in his remarks with respect to issues that are before the courts and how we should refrain in Mr. Randy White (Langley—Abbotsford, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, debates from taking sides on issues when, at a criminal level, I rise on a point of order. The adoption of this ways and means charges have been laid, or at the civil level once an issue reaches motion which is the first step in implementing legislation in regard trial stage. That is meant to ensure that members in their remarks in to the Nisga’a agreement is out of order. the House do not prejudice the outcome. It does not have applica- tion to the adoption of a ways and means motion by this House. The entire House, I am sure, knows that. Therefore those points that Not only is this issue very controversial and will have a were raised are not valid. This motion is indeed in order and has in precedent setting impact on the entire country, the House should fact been passed in the House. I believe that now is the time to know this agreement is before the courts. Beauchesne’s sixth introduce the bill pursuant to the motion that we have now passed edition, citation 505 states: by a vote of this House, democratically held. Members are expected to refrain from discussing matters that are before the courts or tribunals which are courts of record. The purpose of this sub judice convention is to protect the parties in a case awaiting or undergoing trial and persons who stand to Mr. Peter MacKay (Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, be affected by the outcome of a judicial enquiry. PC): Mr. Speaker, in reviewing some of the sections of Beau- chesne’s one is hit square in the face with the fact that the sub The government should not be allowed to proceed any further judice convention deals specifically with debate, and that is not the with Nisga’a legislation since it affects one of our most fundamen- case with the matter that is before the House.
Recommended publications
  • Canadian Tax Journal Revue Fiscale Canadienne

    Canadian Tax Journal Revue Fiscale Canadienne

    2021 ■ VOLUME 69, No 1 CANADIAN TAX JOURNAL REVUE FISCALE CANADIENNE PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLES The Permissibility of Surplus Stripping: A Brief History and Recent Developments Eytan Dishy and Chris Anderson Vertical Sharing and Horizontal Distribution of Federal-Provincial Transfers in Canada, 1983-2018 Deepak Sethia POLICY FORUM Editors’ Introduction—The Canada Revenue Agency as a Benefits Administrator Frances Woolley, Alan Macnaughton, and Daniel Sandler Should the Canada Revenue Agency Also Be a Social Benefits Agency? Jennifer Robson and Saul Schwartz Re-Envisaging the Canada Revenue Agency— From Tax Collector to Benefit Delivery Agent Gillian Petit, Lindsay M. Tedds, David Green, and Jonathan Rhys Kesselman Improving the Canada Revenue Agency’s Delivery of Social Benefits—A Practitioner’s Perspective Hugh Neilson AWARDS Douglas J. Sherbaniuk Distinguished Writing Award / Prix d’excellence en rédaction Douglas J. Sherbaniuk Canadian Tax Foundation Regional Student-Paper Awards / Prix régionaux du meilleur article par un étudiant de la Fondation canadienne de fiscalité Best Newsletter Article by a Young Practitioner Award / Prix pour le meilleur article de bulletin par un jeune fiscaliste Canadian Tax Foundation Lifetime Contribution Award / Prix de la Fondation canadienne de fiscalité pour une contribution exceptionnelle (Continued on inside front cover) (Continued from outside front cover) FEATURES Finances of the Nation: Survey of Provincial and Territorial Budgets, 2020-21 David Lin Current Cases: (FCA) Mokrycke v. Canada (Attorney
  • 50Th Canadian Regional CPA Conference

    50Th Canadian Regional CPA Conference

    50th Canadian Regional CPA Conference Gary Levy The Fiftieth Conference of the Canadian Region, Commonwealth Parliamentary Association takes place in Québec City July 15-21, 2012. This article traces the evolution of the Canadian Region with particular emphasis on previous conferences organized by the Québec Branch. ccording to Ian Imrie, former Secretary- Many provincial branches of CPA existed in name Treasurer of the Canadian Region, the rationale only but the idea of a permanent Canadian association Afor a meeting of Canadian representatives appealed to Speaker Michener. within the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association We can, I think, strengthen the Canadian was partly to help legislators develop an understanding Federation by these conferences. I am sure that of the parliamentary process. Also, this meeting, though it brings all too few people from the western provinces to the Maritimes, If we are to have a united country it is important demonstrates the value of it. I am sure that that elected members from one part of the country the other members from the West, who have visit other areas and gain an appreciation of the not visited Halifax would say that today their problems and challenges of their fellow citizens. I understanding of the Canadian Federation do not think I ever attended a conference, would be greatly helped by conferences held including those in Ottawa, where there were first in the East, then in the West and the Centre.2 not a number of legislators visiting that part of the country for the first time. One should not Premier Stanfield wanted to know more about what underestimate the value of such experiences.1 was going on in other legislatures.
  • Le Mercredi 30 Septembre 1998

    Le Mercredi 30 Septembre 1998

    CANADA VOLUME 135 S NUMÉRO 129 S 1re SESSION S 36e LÉGISLATURE COMPTE RENDU OFFICIEL (HANSARD) Le mercredi 30 septembre 1998 Présidence de l’honorable Gilbert Parent TABLE DES MATIÈRES (La table des matières quotidienne des délibérations se trouve à la fin du présent numéro.) Toutes les publications parlementaires sont disponibles sur le réseau électronique «Parliamentary Internet Parlementaire» à l'adresse suivante: http://www.parl.gc.ca 8567 CHAMBRE DES COMMUNES Le mercredi 30 septembre 1998 La séance est ouverte à 14 heures. L’INDONÉSIE _______________ M. Inky Mark (Dauphin—Swan River, Réf.): Monsieur le Président, Associated Press nous apprend que même si la commu- Prière nauté chinoise ne représente que 4 p. 100 des 202 millions d’habi- tants de l’Indonésie, elle domine pourtant le commerce et l’indus- _______________ trie de ce pays. Il semble également que les Chinois servent souvent de bouc émissaire dans les moments difficiles. D (1400) La crise financière asiatique a de graves répercussions sur l’Indo- Le Président: Comme le veut l’usage le mercredi, nous chante- nésie et les Chinois qui y sont installés sont touchés encore plus rons Ô Canada sous la conduite de la députée de Dartmouth. durement. On dit par exemple que les femmes et les jeunes filles [Note de la rédaction: Les députés se lèvent et chantent Ô chinoises sont soumises à des viols collectifs. Les magasins et les Canada.] résidences de Chinois de souche sont pillés et incendiés. Bon nombre de Chinois sont assassinés. Certains avancent même que ce ______________________________________________ qui se passe en Indonésie tient de la purification ethnique.
  • Court File No.: CV-18-00605134-00CP ONTARIO

    Court File No.: CV-18-00605134-00CP ONTARIO

    Court File No.: CV-18-00605134-00CP ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN: MICKY GRANGER Plaintiff - and - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF THE PROVINCE OF ONTARIO Defendant Proceeding under the Class Proceedings Act, 1992 MOTION RECORD OF THE PLAINTIFF (CERTIFICATION) (Returnable November 27 & 28, 2019) VOLUME II of II March 18, 2019 GOLDBLATT PARTNERS LLP 20 Dundas Street West, Suite 1039 Toronto ON M5G 2C2 Jody Brown LS# 58844D Tel: 416-979-4251 / Fax: 416-591-7333 Email: [email protected] Geetha Philipupillai LS# 74741S Tel.: 416-979-4252 / Fax: 416-591-7333 Email: [email protected] Lawyers for the Plaintiff - 2 TO: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT - OF THE PROVINCE OF ONTARIO Crown Law Office – Civil Law 720 Bay Street, 8th Floor Toronto, ON, M5G 2K1 Amy Leamen LS#: 49351R Tel: 416.326.4153 / Fax: 416.326.4181 Lawyers for the Defendant TABLE OF CONTENTS TAB DESCRIPTION PG # 1. Notice of Motion (Returnable November 27 and 28, 2019) 1 A. Appendix “A” – List of Common Issues 6 2. Affidavit of Micky Granger (Unsworn) 8 3. Affidavit of Tanya Atherfold-Desilva sworn March 18, 2019 12 A. Exhibit “A”: Office of the Independent Police Review Director – 20 Systemic Review Report dated July 2016 B. Exhibit “B”: Office of the Independent Police Review Director - 126 Executive Summary and Recommendations dated July 2016 C. Exhibit “C”: Office of the Independent Police Review Director – Terms of 142 Reference as of March 2019 D. Exhibit “D”: Affidavit of David D.J. Truax sworn August 30, 2016 146 E. Exhibit “E”: Centre of Forensic Investigators & Submitters Technical 155 Information Sheets effective April 2, 2015 F.
  • Thursday, September 9, 1999

    Thursday, September 9, 1999

    CANADA 1st SESSION 36th PARLIAMENT VOLUME 137 NUMBER 155 OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Thursday, September 9, 1999 THE HONOURABLE GILDAS L. MOLGAT SPEAKER CONTENTS (Daily index of proceedings appears at back of this issue.) OFFICIAL REPORT CORRECTION Hon. Eymard G. Corbin: Honourable senators, I should like to make a correction to the Debates of the Senate for Wednesday, September 8, 1999, in the first column of page 3774, at the seventh line of my speech. I referred to Czechoslovakia. I should have said Croatia. I trust that Hansard will take this comment into account. Debates: Chambers Building, Room 943, Tel. 995-5805 Published by the Senate Available from Canada Communication Group — Publishing, Public Works and Government Services Canada, Ottawa K1A 0S9, Also available on the Internet: http://www.parl.gc.ca 3779 THE SENATE Thursday, September 9, 1999 The Senate met at 2:00 p.m., the Speaker in the Chair. There were grumblings in the other place that this senior minister was “hiding in the Senate.” However, his performance here Prayers. silenced the critics. Senate Question Period became a seminar on economic policy. THE LATE HONOURABLE Senator de Cotret was in his element, engaging in serious ROBERT RENÉ DE COTRET, P.C. dialogue with learned members opposite. Two days into the new TRIBUTES session, opposition senators were praising his full and informative replies to their questions. Hon. Lowell Murray: Honourable senators, it is my sad duty to say a few words in honour of the memory of former senator, [Translation] member of Parliament and minister, Robert René de Cotret, who died suddenly on July 9.
  • Giving Hockey's Past a Future: When Identity Meets Demography in Canadian Sports Jack Jedwab

    Giving Hockey's Past a Future: When Identity Meets Demography in Canadian Sports Jack Jedwab

    Document generated on 09/28/2021 12:27 a.m. International Journal of Canadian Studies Revue internationale d’études canadiennes Giving Hockey's Past a Future: When Identity Meets Demography in Canadian Sports Jack Jedwab Sport, Identity and Social Division in Canada Sport, identités et clivages sociaux au Canada Number 35, 2007 URI: https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/040770ar DOI: https://doi.org/10.7202/040770ar See table of contents Publisher(s) Conseil international d'études canadiennes ISSN 1180-3991 (print) 1923-5291 (digital) Explore this journal Cite this note Jedwab, J. (2007). Giving Hockey's Past a Future: When Identity Meets Demography in Canadian Sports. International Journal of Canadian Studies / Revue internationale d’études canadiennes, (35), 191–214. https://doi.org/10.7202/040770ar Tous droits réservés © Conseil international d'études canadiennes, 2007 This document is protected by copyright law. Use of the services of Érudit (including reproduction) is subject to its terms and conditions, which can be viewed online. https://apropos.erudit.org/en/users/policy-on-use/ This article is disseminated and preserved by Érudit. Érudit is a non-profit inter-university consortium of the Université de Montréal, Université Laval, and the Université du Québec à Montréal. Its mission is to promote and disseminate research. https://www.erudit.org/en/ JackJedwab Giving Hockey % Past a Future: When Identity Meets Demography in Canadian Sports Introduction The term "hockey nation" is being increasingly used to refer to Canada because hockey is widely regarded as a fundamental element of Canadian identity. As the principal architect of a motion to have hockey recognized as the country's official sport, federal Member of Parliament Nelson Riis remarked that: It is safe to say that hockey matters to all of us, in Quebec and the rest of Canada.
  • Wednesday, February 4, 1998

    Wednesday, February 4, 1998

    CANADA VOLUME 135 S NUMBER 052 S 1st SESSION S 36th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Wednesday, February 4, 1998 Speaker: The Honourable Gilbert Parent CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) All parliamentary publications are available on the ``Parliamentary Internet Parlementaire'' at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 3303 HOUSE OF COMMONS Wednesday, February 4, 1998 The House met at 2 p.m. Darren Ursel received a conditional sentence after abducting and sodomizing a young woman. Eric Robertson walked free after _______________ pleading guilty to 11 counts of indecent and sexual assault. Just last week a Montreal judge allowed two men to walk free after they Prayers were convicted of forcefully raping a teenage girl. _______________ In the face of this unacceptable use of conditional sentencing, what has our justice minister done? Absolutely nothing, except to D (1400) say ‘‘Leave it to the appeal courts’’. [English] We on this side of the House implore the justice minister to The Speaker: As is our practice on Wednesday we will now sing immediately amend the law and plug the loophole. Deny rapists O Canada, and we will be led by the hon. members for Beausé- and other violent offenders the benefit of this legal loophole. Make jour—Petitcodiac and Acadie—Bathurst. the amendment before respect for the law— [Editor’s Note: Members sang the national anthem] The Speaker: The hon. member for Etobicoke—Lakeshore. _____________________________________________ * * * STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS BLACK HISTORY MONTH Ms. Jean Augustine (Etobicoke—Lakeshore, Lib.): Mr. [English] Speaker, on December 14, 1995 the House of Commons declared February as Black history month.
  • Thursday, March 24, 1994

    Thursday, March 24, 1994

    VOLUME 133 NUMBER 044 1st SESSION 35th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Thursday, March 24, 1994 Speaker: The Honourable Gilbert Parent HOUSE OF COMMONS Thursday, March 24, 1994 The House met at 10 a.m. House thereon. This is clearly explained in Beauchesne 6th Edition, citation 26: _______________ (2) A question of privilege— is a question partly of fact and partly of law—the law of contempt of Parliament—and is a matter for the House to determine. The decision of the House on a question of privilege, like every other matter which the Prayers House has to decide, can be elicited only by a question put from the Chair by the Speaker and resolved either in the affirmative or in the negative, and this question is necessarily founded on a motion made by a Member. _______________ [Translation] [English] (3) It follows that though the Speaker can rule on a question of order, the Speaker cannot rule on a question of privilege. When a question of privilege is PRIVILEGE raised the Speaker’s function is limited to deciding whether the matter is of such a character as to entitle the motion, which the Member who has raised the question desires to move, to priority over the Orders of the Day. MEMBER FOR MARKHAM—WHITCHURCH—STOUFFVILLE—SPEAKER’S RULING [English] The Speaker: Yesterday the hon. member for Markham— In other words my duty as Speaker is to decide whether the Whitchurch—Stouffville rose in the House to address the ques- hon. member for Markham—Whitchurch—Stouffville has pres- tion of personal privilege which he previously raised on ented sufficient argument to convince me that debate on his February 15 and subsequently withdrew.
  • DSF White Paper 2--2013 Version Ek Ih As Ab.Indd

    DSF White Paper 2--2013 Version Ek Ih As Ab.Indd

    PAPER #2: The History of the Right to a Healthy Environment in Canada EXECUTIVE SUMMARY David R. Boyd The History of the Right to a Healthy Environment in Canada The omission of environmental provisions from Canada’s original Constitution, the British North America Act, 1867, should come as no surprise, since ecological concerns were far less urgent in the 19th century. The earliest constitutional references to the environment involved protecting natural landscapes and beauty (e.g., Italy 1948, Madagascar 1959). In the 1970s, environmental concerns began entering national constitutions with greater frequency. Pioneers included Switzerland (1971), Portugal (1976), and Spain (1978). Proposals to include the right to a healthy environment in the Canadian Constitution date back to 1969. Sparked by Pierre Trudeau’s proposals for constitutional reform, a Special Joint Committee of the Senate and the House of Commons on the Constitution of Canada (known as the Molgat-MacGuigan Committee) held hearings across Canada. Many experts and citizens urged the committee to recommend that environmental rights and extensive federal powers to protect the environment be incorporated in the new constitution. Law professor Noel Lyon of McGill University recommended that a new Constitution recognize environmental rights: The critical condition of many parts of our environment, and the growing pressures on it resulting from rapid growth of population and technology indicate a need for early recognition in our fundamental law of environmental rights. … We must somehow ensure that we establish a priority for [environmental] rights that is equal to that of the political and legal rights set out in the proposed Charter of Human Rights.

  • Thursday, March 19, 1998

    CANADA VOLUME 135 S NUMBER 077 S 1st SESSION S 36th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Thursday, March 19, 1998 Speaker: The Honourable Gilbert Parent CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) All parliamentary publications are available on the ``Parliamentary Internet Parlementaire'' at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 5091 HOUSE OF COMMONS Thursday, March 19, 1998 The House met at 10 a.m. (Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed) _______________ * * * Prayers SENATOR SELECTION ACT _______________ Mr. Bill Gilmour (Nanaimo—Alberni, Ref.) moved for leave to introduce Bill C-382, an act to allow the electors of a province to ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS express an opinion on who should be summoned to the Senate to represent the province. D (1000) He said: Mr. Speaker, as it presently stands, several provinces [English] have Senate selection acts. Alberta is going to use its this fall to elect senators in waiting. However, there is no requirement for the GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO PETITIONS Prime Minister to recognize that elected person. Mr. Peter Adams (Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the The purpose of my bill is to ensure that the Prime Minister looks Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, at the will of the people of the province and appoints to the Senate pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in those people duly elected by a province that has a selection act in both official languages, the government’s responses to three peti- place. tions. (Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed) * * * * * * SPECIAL IMPORT MEASURES ACT Hon.
  • Canadian Tax Journal, Vol. 69, No. 2, 2021

    Canadian Tax Journal, Vol. 69, No. 2, 2021

    2021 ■ VOLUME 69, No 2 CANADIAN TAX JOURNAL REVUE FISCALE CANADIENNE PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLES Corporate Income Shifting in an Era of Tax Multilateralism: The Impact of Exchange-of-Information Agreements Devan Mescall and Paul Nielsen India’s Goods and Services Tax: A Unique Experiment in Cooperative Federalism and a Constitutional Crisis in Waiting Ajitesh Kir POLICY FORUM Editors’ Introduction—The Changing Nature of Work Daniel Sandler, Frances Woolley, and Alan Macnaughton Sagaz at 20—Evaluating Employment and Independent Contractor Relationships in a Changing World Graham Purse Non-Standard Employment and Canada’s Initial Pandemic Response Wei Cui Write It Off (and Start Again)—Adapting Home Office Deductions for the Digital Era Bhuvana Rai Promoting Tax Compliance by Regulating the Digital Economy— Quebec’s Uber Initiative Michaël Robert-Angers and Luc Godbout Favoriser la conformité fiscale par l’encadrement de l’économie numérique — Initiative du Québec face à Uber Michaël Robert-Angers et Luc Godbout Tax, Social Security, and Employment Status—Removing the Distortions in the United Kingdom Judith Freedman Future Workforce Models—Enabling the Shift Guy Jason and Shivani Joshi (Continued on inside front cover) (Continued from outside front cover) FEATURES Finances of the Nation: Net Income Tax Rates and the Changing Progressivity of the Cash Tax/Transfer System Tahsin Mehdi and Brian Murphy International Tax Planning: The Preacquisition Surplus Election: More Than Meets the Eye? Tim Fraser and Jim Samuel Personal Tax Planning / Planification fiscale personnelle : Current Issues in Compensation / Les enjeux actuels de la rémunération Ana-Luiza Georgescu Selected US Tax Developments: Adams Challenge (UK) Limited: When Does a Treaty Provision Conflict with the Code? Michael J.
  • 07 0 2021 O05 OR Asset Condition Report

    07 0 2021 O05 OR Asset Condition Report

    Protected B Submission No. 2021-O05 To Board of Directors For INFORMATION Date 2021-06-23 Subject/Title • Official Residences of Canada Asset Portfolio Condition Report 2021 Purpose of the Submission • To provide an update to the Board of Directors on the state of the building assets in the Official Residences Portfolio, based on a thorough building condition review, summarized in the 2021 Asset Condition Report. Risk Summary • The 2021 Asset Condition Report (ACR) lays out in detail the current state of all six properties and their ancillary buildings under the stewardship of the National Capital Commission. This analysis was last completed and made public in October 2018. • The 2021 Report confirms that the overall condition of the Portfolio continues to deteriorate, with only 24% of the assets considered to be in “GOOD” condition, down from 34% in 2018. • Despite the investment of approximately $26M in capital funding since 2018, the Report concludes that the deferred maintenance deficit of the Portfolio grew by an estimated $6M over the period. • Because of these investments, 24 Sussex Drive is the only remaining main residence in the NCC’s Official Residences Portfolio to be both in “CRITICAL” condition and have an Asset Priority Index of “Very High”. • Without sustainable funding, the deferred maintenance deficit will continue to increase and the National Capital Commission (NCC) will be unable to fulfill its mandate or comply with new building codes and legislative requirements. Recommendation • For information only Submitted by: Greg Kenney, Vice-President, Official Residences Branch Name Signature Submission: 2021-O05 Page 1 of/de 5 Protected B Submission 1.