## Summary - This bill creates two new laws. One aims to ease trade and worker mobility within Canada. The other sets a faster path to approve big projects that are in the national interest. - It would treat goods, services, and some worker licenses that meet one province’s or territory’s rules as meeting comparable federal rules. - It would let the federal cabinet label certain large projects as “national interest projects” and bundle federal approvals into one document with conditions. - It adds public transparency, Indigenous consultation, and national security checks for these projects. - Some normal federal review steps would be shortened or replaced, with guardrails for safety, security, and the environment. - Parts of the law would be reviewed after five years. Key changes - Goods and services: If they meet a province’s or territory’s standards, they are treated as meeting comparable federal requirements for moving across provinces. - Workers: If you hold a provincial or territorial authorization for an occupation, a comparable federal authorization must be issued to you. - Overrides: If there is a conflict, these new trade and mobility rules would override other federal rules. - National interest projects: Cabinet can add projects to a public list after 30 days’ notice and consultation; consent is needed if the project is only under provincial or territorial powers. - Streamlined approvals: For listed projects, required federal determinations are deemed favourable. The minister must issue one document that sets all conditions and counts as the needed federal authorizations. - Safeguards: Nuclear and energy regulators must confirm safety and security. Indigenous peoples must be consulted with a public report. All studies, conditions, and reasons must be published before approval. Projects must start within five years or approvals expire. - Limits and oversight: Powers to add projects or make related regulations end after five years and can’t be used when Parliament is prorogued or dissolved. Annual independent reviews and public reports are required. ## What it means for you - Workers and professionals - Easier to work across Canada if your job also needs a federal authorization. Your provincial or territorial authorization would be recognized, and a comparable federal one must be issued. - Less duplicate testing or paperwork to get federal recognition. - Businesses selling across provinces - If your product or service meets rules in one province or territory, it would be treated as meeting comparable federal rules for moving it across Canada. - Less duplication of federal compliance steps tied to interprovincial trade. - Consumers - Potential for more choice and lower costs if products and services can move more easily across provinces. - Large project developers (energy, transport, corridors, Northern projects, etc.) - A faster, one-window federal process if your project is listed as in the national interest. - You must still meet requirements, pay fees, and follow conditions. All conditions will be public before approval. - You must start the project within five years or the authorization expires. - Indigenous peoples - Required consultation with a process for active and meaningful participation. - A public report on consultations must be posted within 60 days of approval. - Provinces and territories - The federal government must consult you before listing a project in your jurisdiction and obtain written consent if it falls in your exclusive powers. - Trade and mobility changes target federal barriers; provincial rules still apply. - Environment and safety - Some early planning steps in the federal impact assessment process would not apply to listed projects, but an impact assessment is still required. - Nuclear and energy projects cannot be approved through this process unless safety and security are confirmed by the relevant regulators. - Project studies, recommendations, and reasons for decisions must be published. ## Expenses No publicly available information. ## Proponents' View - Cuts red tape so goods, services, and workers can move more freely within Canada, helping the economy. - Speeds up critical national projects, boosting jobs, growth, trade corridors, and energy security. - Gives investors certainty through a clear, time-bound process and one federal authorization document. - Maintains protections: independent safety checks for nuclear and energy, public conditions and studies, national security reviews, and required Indigenous consultation. - Respects provincial roles by requiring consent for projects in areas that are only provincial or territorial. - Adds accountability with annual independent reviews and public reporting. ## Opponents' View - Centralizes power in cabinet and a minister, which could weaken the role of independent regulators and normal review steps. - “Deeming” favourable federal determinations may lower environmental or safety scrutiny, even with conditions attached. - Alters parts of the impact assessment process and could reduce early public participation, risking legal challenges. - Treating provincial standards as “comparable” to federal ones may cause uneven protection or a “race to the bottom.” - Indigenous consultation requirements may not equal consent, raising concerns about rights and project legitimacy. - Transparency and new offices or registries may still leave gaps, and shifting rules could create confusion for businesses and regulators.
Votes • Costas Menegakis
Division 34 · Agreed To · June 20, 2025
Division 33 · Agreed To · June 20, 2025
Division 32 · Agreed To · June 20, 2025
Division 31 · Negatived · June 20, 2025
Division 30 · Agreed To · June 20, 2025
Division 29 · Negatived · June 20, 2025
Division 28 · Negatived · June 20, 2025
Division 27 · Agreed To · June 20, 2025
Division 26 · Agreed To · June 20, 2025
Division 25 · Agreed To · June 20, 2025
Division 24 · Negatived · June 20, 2025
Division 23 · Negatived · June 20, 2025
Division 13 · Agreed To · June 16, 2025
## Summary This bill, the Clean Coasts Act, amends two federal laws to reduce marine pollution and derelict vessels. It tightens the ban on dumping at sea under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA), and adds a new offence under the Wrecked, Abandoned or Hazardous Vessels Act (WAHVA) to stop owners from offloading vessels to buyers who cannot maintain or safely dispose of them. - Expands who can be held responsible for dumping at sea by adding liability for a “ship” and for those who “allow the disposal” of substances in Canadian waters (CEPA s.125(1) amendment). - Creates a new offence: vessel owners cannot transfer a vessel if they know, or are reckless about whether, the buyer lacks the ability, resources, or intent to prevent it from becoming wrecked, abandoned, or hazardous (WAHVA new s.34.1). - Adds the new offence to WAHVA’s penalties section, making it enforceable with existing fines and other sanctions (WAHVA s.90(1)(a) amendment). - Applies in waters under Canadian jurisdiction listed in CEPA s.122(2)(a)-(e) (e.g., internal waters, territorial sea, exclusive economic zone) (CEPA s.125(1) amendment). ## What it means for you - Households (recreational boat owners and sellers) - If you sell a boat, you must not transfer it to someone who lacks the ability, resources, or intent to maintain, operate, or dispose of it safely; doing so becomes an offence if you know this or are reckless about it (WAHVA new s.34.1). - Practical implication: sellers may need to do basic due diligence (e.g., proof of moorage, insurance, competency) to avoid being “reckless.” The bill does not define specific documents (WAHVA new s.34.1). - Effective date: on Royal Assent, since the bill contains no delayed coming-into-force clause. Data unavailable on the exact date. - Workers (masters and crews of vessels) - “No person or ship shall dispose or allow the disposal” of substances in Canadian waters unless authorized; this broadens who can be held liable for dumping (CEPA s.125(1) amendment). - Practical implication: shipboard policies may need updates to ensure no unauthorized disposal occurs, including waste handled by contractors. - Businesses (commercial shipowners, marine brokers, lenders, marinas) - Increased liability risk for unauthorized dumping at sea, including for a ship that “allows” disposal; owners and operators may need stronger controls and recordkeeping (CEPA s.125(1) amendment). - Brokers and lenders may face higher due diligence expectations when arranging transfers, especially for older or end‑of‑life vessels, to avoid facilitating prohibited transfers (WAHVA new s.34.1). - Marinas and storage yards may see more inquiries about lawful end‑of‑life disposal options. Data unavailable on capacity impacts. - Local governments and coastal communities - Potential reduction in derelict and abandoned vessels if risky transfers decline (WAHVA new s.34.1). - Possible decrease in local cleanup requests or costs, but the bill provides no funding. Data unavailable on net fiscal impact. - Service users (fishers, recreational users) - Potential for cleaner waters and fewer hazards from derelict vessels and illegal dumping. Magnitude of change depends on enforcement and compliance. Data unavailable. ## Expenses Estimated net cost: Data unavailable. - No explicit appropriations or new fees in the bill text. Enforcement would use existing CEPA and WAHVA frameworks (Bill text; CEPA s.125(1) amendment; WAHVA new s.34.1; WAHVA s.90(1)(a) amendment). - Administrative and enforcement costs for Environment and Climate Change Canada and Transport Canada: Data unavailable. - Potential fine revenue from new or expanded offences: Data unavailable. - No official fiscal note identified: Data unavailable. ## Proponents' View - Closes a loophole that allowed owners to “dump by sale” by transferring problem vessels to buyers who cannot care for them, reducing abandoned and hazardous vessels (WAHVA new s.34.1). - Strengthens deterrence against marine dumping by making both persons and ships liable for disposing or allowing disposal at sea, improving accountability on board (CEPA s.125(1) amendment). - Uses existing enforcement structures and penalty provisions, limiting the need for new spending (WAHVA s.90(1)(a) amendment). - Protects sensitive marine areas under Canadian jurisdiction, supporting cleaner coasts and safer navigation (CEPA s.125(1) with reference to s.122(2)(a)-(e)). - May lower public cleanup burdens over time by preventing new derelict vessels; exact savings are not quantified (Data unavailable). ## Opponents' View - Creates uncertainty for private sellers: terms like “reckless” and assessing a buyer’s “ability, resources or intent” are not defined, raising risk of disputes and uneven enforcement (WAHVA new s.34.1). - Imposes due diligence costs on small boat owners and brokers, who may need to verify buyer capability without clear statutory guidelines (WAHVA new s.34.1). - Expands liability for shipowners and operators by penalizing those who “allow” disposal, potentially capturing actions by crew or contractors and increasing insurance and compliance costs (CEPA s.125(1) amendment; Data unavailable on costs). - Without added funding or guidance, enforcement capacity may not match the broader offences, limiting effectiveness and creating inconsistency across regions (Data unavailable). - The bill does not specify penalty levels in the amendments; stakeholders may find it hard to assess risk without accessible penalty guidance, even though s.90 applies (WAHVA s.90(1)(a) amendment; Data unavailable on penalty amounts).
Votes • Costas Menegakis
Division 73 · Agreed To · February 25, 2026
## Summary This bill is a broad public safety and immigration package. It aims to tighten border controls, speed up action against illegal drugs and money laundering, change parts of the asylum system, and update how agencies share information. - Requires airports, ports, bridges, and similar sites to give the border agency free space and access to inspect exports. - Lets Health add drug precursors (chemicals used to make illegal drugs) quickly and confirms police can be exempt from some drug‑crime rules during lawful undercover work. - Moves the Canadian Coast Guard to the Defence Minister and adds security and intelligence roles. - Expands information‑sharing by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) with other governments under written safeguards. - Changes asylum rules (ends the “safe country” list, adds new ineligibility rules, tighter timelines, and allows cases to be paused if the person is outside Canada). - Gives the federal cabinet power to pause, suspend, or end processing of certain immigration applications and to suspend or vary visas and permits in the public interest, with reports to Parliament. - Strengthens anti‑money‑laundering law with higher fines, mandatory compliance agreements and orders, and enrollment of more businesses with FINTRAC (the federal financial intelligence unit). - Updates the Sex Offender Registry to add reporting duties and allow CBSA to share border‑crossing data with police. ## What it means for you - Exporters, carriers, and port/airport operators - Border officers get more access to goods, warehouses, and export areas. Expect more inspections and the need to open packages on request. - Owners of international bridges, tunnels, railways, airports, wharves, and docks must provide CBSA facilities free of charge. - People seeking asylum in Canada - The old “designated countries of origin” system ends. - New ineligibility rules: if you entered after June 24, 2020 and wait more than one year to claim asylum, your claim can be ruled ineligible (with possible exceptions set by regulation). If you crossed the U.S.–Canada land border between official ports and miss the set time limit to claim, you can be ruled ineligible. - If you leave Canada while your claim or appeal is pending, it will be paused; if you voluntarily return to the country you fled before a decision, your claim or appeal is deemed abandoned. - You must give documents and information within set deadlines or risk your claim being deemed abandoned before it is even referred to the Refugee Board. - Immigrants, students, and temporary workers - The federal cabinet can, for public‑interest reasons (e.g., fraud, public health or security), order pauses on accepting certain applications, suspend or end processing of pending applications, or suspend/vary documents and impose conditions. Fees can be repaid without interest if processing is ended. - Officers can require you to answer questions and appear for an examination, including while outside Canada, to confirm you still meet visa or permit requirements. - Families and communities - The Coast Guard shifts under the Defence Minister and is given clearer security and intelligence roles. Expect closer coordination on marine security along with continued search‑and‑rescue and icebreaking. - The Sex Offender Registry adds details and deadlines (like reporting changes to vehicles) and allows CBSA to share travel in/out of Canada with law enforcement to help prevent and investigate sexual offences. - Businesses that handle money or value (banks, fintechs, money services, casinos, real estate, dealers in virtual currency, and others listed in law) - You may have to enroll with FINTRAC (even if not previously registered), keep risk‑based compliance programs, and meet stricter recordkeeping and reporting. - Penalties rise sharply, including potential fines tied to a percentage of global revenue. After a violation, you must enter a compliance agreement; ignoring a compliance order carries even higher penalties. - FINTRAC can share certain intelligence with the Commissioner of Canada Elections. - Police and public safety - Undercover officers, when acting lawfully under designated rules, can be exempted from “inchoate” drug offences (like conspiracy) during investigations. - Monthly public reports will show how many removal orders were enforced and reasons for delays. - Privacy and data sharing - IRCC can share personal information within the department and with other federal and provincial bodies under written agreements that set limits and purposes. Provinces cannot pass that info to foreign entities without the federal minister’s consent and safeguards. ## Expenses No publicly available information. ## Proponents' View - Strengthens border security by giving CBSA better access to export goods and facilities, helping stop guns, drugs, and other contraband from leaving or entering Canada. - Speeds action against illegal drugs by quickly controlling new precursors used to make substances like fentanyl, and by clarifying police powers for undercover operations. - Improves the asylum system by ending the “safe country” list, setting clearer deadlines, and reducing backlogs through abandonment/withdrawal rules and monthly removal reporting. - Gives government tools to quickly respond to fraud, surges, or health/security risks by pausing or adjusting immigration streams, while reporting these actions to Parliament. - Cracks down on money laundering and terrorist financing with higher penalties, mandatory compliance steps, and wider coverage of businesses, protecting Canada’s financial system. - Enhances safety through better sharing of sex offender travel data and more complete registry information to help prevent sexual crimes. - Moves the Coast Guard under Defence to better coordinate marine security while keeping essential services like search and rescue. ## Opponents' View - Grants broad executive power to pause, suspend, or end immigration processing and to suspend or vary visas, which critics say could harm fairness for applicants and create uncertainty for families and employers. - Adds new asylum ineligibility rules (late claims and irregular border entries beyond a time limit) that may bar people with real protection needs who face barriers to filing quickly. - Expands information‑sharing by IRCC and CBSA, raising privacy concerns about how personal data is used, stored, and shared across governments. - Increases inspections and obligations at export sites and warehouses, which could slow trade and add costs for exporters and operators. - Significantly raises compliance costs and legal risks for banks, fintechs, real estate, and other businesses; small firms may struggle with the burden and higher penalties. - Police exemptions during drug investigations and moving the Coast Guard under Defence may be seen as expanding security powers in ways that could affect civil liberties or “militarize” some services.
Votes • Costas Menegakis
Division 59 · Agreed To · December 11, 2025
Division 58 · Agreed To · December 11, 2025
Division 57 · Negatived · December 11, 2025
Division 56 · Negatived · December 11, 2025
## Summary This bill would amend the Canadian Multiculturalism Act so it does not apply in Quebec. The preamble states that Quebecers form a nation and have the tools to define their identity and protect shared values like the French language, state secularism, and gender equality (Preamble). The operative clause adds a one-line exemption: “This Act does not apply in Quebec” (Bill, after s.2). - Federal multiculturalism policy and duties would no longer apply “in Quebec” (Bill, after s.2). - Federal institutions operating in Quebec would not be bound by the Act’s requirements in Quebec; no change elsewhere in Canada (Bill, after s.2). - Community groups in Quebec that rely on federal multiculturalism authorities may see program rules or funding authority change; details are not in the bill (Data unavailable). - The bill does not change other federal laws, the Charter, or Quebec laws; it only amends the Canadian Multiculturalism Act (Bill, title and clause). - Would take effect when it becomes law (no delayed coming-into-force clause in the bill). ## What it means for you - Households in Quebec: - Federal services delivered in Quebec would no longer follow the Canadian Multiculturalism Act’s policy framework in Quebec once in force (Bill, after s.2). - Other rights and laws remain unchanged because the bill only amends the Canadian Multiculturalism Act (Bill, title and clause). - Community and cultural organizations in Quebec: - Federal multiculturalism program activities that rely on the Act as legal authority may be changed, replaced, or ended in Quebec after the bill takes effect. The bill does not specify which programs or timelines (Data unavailable; Bill, after s.2). - You may need to rely more on Quebec programs or other federal authorities if departments shift their legal basis for grants or services (Data unavailable). - Federal employees and institutions in Quebec: - You would no longer have statutory duties under the Canadian Multiculturalism Act for activities “in Quebec,” such as implementing the federal multiculturalism policy framework there (Bill, after s.2; Canadian Multiculturalism Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. 24 (4th Supp.), policy and implementation provisions). - Internal policies, training, outreach, and reporting tied to the Act may be revised for Quebec operations. The bill gives no transition rules or guidance (Data unavailable). - Quebec provincial government: - The exemption would remove the federal multiculturalism statute from applying in Quebec, aligning with the preamble’s view that Quebec defines its own approach to language and secularism (Preamble; Bill, after s.2). - Any federal–provincial collaboration on diversity or integration would need bases other than the Canadian Multiculturalism Act in Quebec (Data unavailable). - Residents outside Quebec: - No change. The Canadian Multiculturalism Act would continue to apply in all other provinces and territories (Bill, after s.2). - Timing: - Effect starts on Royal Assent, since the bill has no delayed coming-into-force clause (Bill, text contains no such clause). ## Expenses Estimated net cost: Data unavailable. - The bill contains no appropriations, new taxes, or fees; it is a one-line exemption (Bill, after s.2). - No federal fiscal note identified. Potential changes to federal multiculturalism spending in Quebec are not specified (Data unavailable). - Administrative adjustments for federal institutions operating in Quebec are possible; no estimates provided (Data unavailable). ## Proponents' View - Respects Quebec’s nation status and its capacity to define identity, protect French, uphold state secularism, and ensure gender equality, without a federal multiculturalism statute applying in Quebec (Preamble). - Avoids policy overlap by removing the federal multiculturalism framework “in Quebec,” letting Quebec’s own frameworks lead there (Bill, after s.2). - Clarifies that federal institutions need not implement the Canadian Multiculturalism Act in Quebec, reducing duplication with Quebec’s policy model (Bill, after s.2). - Keeps the Act fully in force elsewhere, preserving the existing federal approach in other provinces and territories (Bill, after s.2). ## Opponents' View - Could reduce or end federal multiculturalism-driven supports in Quebec by removing the Act’s framework there, affecting community groups and newcomers that relied on it (Bill, after s.2; impact scale: Data unavailable). - Creates uneven federal obligations across Canada, which may lead to inconsistent service standards and confusion for clients and staff when programs operate both inside and outside Quebec (Bill, after s.2). - Provides no transition plan or guidance for ongoing grants, reporting, or outreach, raising implementation risks for federal departments and funded organizations (Bill is silent on transition). - May weaken federal capacity to promote and report on multiculturalism outcomes in Quebec because statutory duties would no longer apply there (Canadian Multiculturalism Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. 24 (4th Supp.), policy and implementation provisions; Bill, after s.2).
Votes • Costas Menegakis
Division 65 · Negatived · February 4, 2026
## Summary This bill approves extra funding for the federal government for the 2025–26 fiscal year. It authorizes up to $8.58 billion from the federal government’s main bank account (the Consolidated Revenue Fund) to cover costs not already approved. Most of the money goes to National Defence and the Communications Security Establishment (CSE). The authority takes effect as of April 1, 2025. - Total new funding: about $8.58 billion based on the first in‑year update to the budget plan (called Supplementary Estimates A). - Department of National Defence: about $8.21 billion for operations, equipment, and grants/contributions. - Communications Security Establishment (Canada’s signals intelligence and cyber security agency): about $370 million for program costs. - Defence can enter into long‑term contracts up to about $86.76 billion, with roughly $52.95 billion expected to be paid in future years. - Defence and CSE can re‑spend revenue they earn from their own operations this year to offset their costs. - Allows routine accounting adjustments after year‑end to close the books, without new cash payments. ## What it means for you - General public - No direct change to taxes or personal benefits. This is a funding bill to keep approved federal activities running. - More resources for national defence and cyber security, which can affect safety, military readiness, and protection of government systems. - Military members and families - More funding for operations, training, and support activities. Specific programs are not listed here, but the money covers day‑to‑day operating costs and some equipment purchases. - Businesses and organizations - Potential opportunities for contracts or contributions tied to defence equipment, services, supplies, or facilities. - Some agreements may span multiple years, since the bill lets Defence commit to long‑term contracts, with many payments due later. - Transparency and timing - Spending is tied to items listed in the government’s in‑year estimates and must follow any conditions set there. - Some non‑cash accounting entries can be finalized after the fiscal year ends, which helps ensure accurate public accounts. ## Expenses Estimated annual cost: about CAD $8.58 billion. - Department of National Defence: about $8.21 billion - Operating costs: about $3.97 billion - Capital (equipment and infrastructure): about $0.80 billion - Grants and contributions (including support related to defence equipment, services, supplies, or facilities): about $3.44 billion - Communications Security Establishment: about $370 million for program expenditures - Additional authority: Defence may enter into contracts up to about $86.76 billion in total commitments for this cycle, with an estimated $52.95 billion to be paid in future years. This is permission to commit, not extra cash this year. ## Proponents' View - Ensures the military and cyber security agencies have the funds they need to operate and respond to threats. - Updates the budget mid‑year to reflect new needs and timing changes, which keeps services running smoothly. - Allows long‑term contracts so Defence can plan major projects and upgrades over several years. - Lets departments re‑spend revenue they earn from operations in the same year, improving efficiency. - Includes standard controls: money must be used only for the stated purposes and follow conditions in the estimates. ## Opponents' View - Adds a large amount of in‑year spending, which could strain the budget if not offset elsewhere. - Much of the money is grouped under broad votes, which can make it hard for the public to see project‑level details. - Authority to make large future commitments may limit flexibility for future budgets. - Increased funding for intelligence and cyber agencies may raise transparency and privacy concerns for some, even if oversight rules are unchanged. - Risk that long‑term defence projects face delays or cost overruns, reducing value for money.
Votes • Costas Menegakis
Division 22 · Agreed To · June 17, 2025
Division 21 · Agreed To · June 17, 2025
Division 20 · Agreed To · June 17, 2025
## Summary This is a routine federal “supply” bill. It gives the Government of Canada permission to spend up to about $149.8 billion on departments, agencies, and Crown corporations for the fiscal year that ends March 31, 2026. It covers the parts of government spending that require an annual vote by Parliament. Key points: - Sets an overall spending limit of about $149.8 billion, effective April 1, 2025. - Lists funding for most departments and agencies (health, housing, defence, veterans, Indigenous services, transport, and more). - Gives two big revenue agencies (Canada Revenue Agency and Canada Border Services Agency) funding that can be used over two years (to March 31, 2027). - Cleans the books for old student debts by writing off about $197 million in uncollectable student and apprentice loans. - Includes central funds for emergencies and routine adjustments (for example, a $1 billion contingency fund and carry-forward authorities). ## What it means for you - General public - Government services keep running. Offices stay open, call centres answer, inspections happen, and programs are delivered. - Health protection work continues (food and product safety, disease prevention) through Health Canada and the Public Health Agency of Canada. - Policing and public safety receive ongoing support (RCMP, emergency preparedness). - Travelers and flyers - Airport screening and security continue (Canadian Air Transport Security Authority). - Border services remain staffed and equipped (CBSA funding spans two years to manage large projects and staffing). - Support for VIA Rail and the Windsor–Detroit bridge helps maintain travel options and infrastructure. - Families, renters, and homeowners - Housing programs and community infrastructure receive funding through the Department of Housing, Infrastructure and Communities. - The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation is reimbursed for loans forgiven and other costs tied to housing programs. - Students and apprentices - About $197 million in long-overdue student and apprentice loans are written off, tidying up accounts. This does not change current loan rules, but it clears debts the government cannot collect. - Indigenous communities - Large operating and contribution funds flow to Indigenous Services and Crown–Indigenous Relations for health, infrastructure, services, and agreements with communities. - Veterans - Veterans Affairs receives funding for benefits administration and services. - Workers and businesses - Canada Revenue Agency and Employment and Social Development get operating funds to administer benefits and tax services. - Innovation, research, and tourism agencies, as well as regional development agencies, receive contributions that support jobs and investment. - CBC/Radio‑Canada, Canada Post, and cultural institutions receive operating and capital support. ## Expenses Estimated total authorized spending in this bill: about CAD $149.8 billion for 2025–26. - Examples of notable allocations in this Act (amounts authorized by this bill): - National Defence: operating, capital, and related grants/contributions totaling over $23 billion. - Indigenous Services Canada: over $15 billion (operating and contributions combined). - Health Canada and the Public Health Agency of Canada: several billion for operating, capital, and contributions. - Housing, Infrastructure and Communities: about $5.3 billion in contributions plus operating and capital. - Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation: about $4.8 billion to reimburse housing-related costs. - Veterans Affairs: several billion for operations and contributions. - CBC/Radio‑Canada: just over $1.0 billion (operating and capital). - Canada Revenue Agency (two-year authority): about $3.5 billion operating and $51 million capital. - Canada Border Services Agency (two-year authority): about $1.9 billion operating and $133 million capital. - Central votes managed by the Treasury Board Secretariat include: - $1.0 billion for contingencies (urgent or unforeseen needs). - Up to $3.0 billion for operating budget carry-forward and $750 million for capital carry-forward from the prior year. - $600 million for pay-related pressures (parental leave, severance, etc.). - About $1.9 billion toward public service insurance and benefits. - Unused funds generally expire (“lapse”) at year-end. For the two-year items (CBSA and CRA), funds can be spent up to March 31, 2027. - This bill does not change tax rates or most legislated benefit payments (those are set by other laws). It authorizes the “voted” spending needed to run programs and services. ## Proponents' View - Keeps essential services running across the country by giving departments the funds they need on time. - Supports priorities like health protection, housing, infrastructure, Indigenous services, defence, and veterans’ care. - Provides stability for big service agencies (CRA, CBSA) by allowing two-year funding for complex projects and staffing. - Includes prudent tools like a contingency fund and carry-forwards to handle emergencies and routine budget timing. - Writes off long-uncollectable student debts to keep the government’s books accurate and transparent. - Sets clear limits and lapsing rules, which help control costs and improve accountability. ## Opponents' View - The overall amount is very large, adding to total government spending; critics worry about pressure on deficits and debt. - Central funds (contingencies and carry-forwards) give flexibility but reduce line-by-line detail at the time of approval. - The bill’s size and complexity make thorough scrutiny hard; some items were already advanced by special warrants before Parliament voted. - Two-year spending for some agencies may lessen annual oversight. - Some allocations to Crown corporations (for example, CBC/Radio‑Canada, Canada Post, VIA Rail) or international contributions may be seen as too high or not targeted enough. - The bill authorizes spending but does not spell out outcomes, so results will depend on later implementation and oversight.
Votes • Costas Menegakis
Division 18 · Agreed To · June 17, 2025
Division 17 · Agreed To · June 17, 2025
Division 16 · Agreed To · June 17, 2025
## Summary This bill would put into force a new trade deal between Canada and Indonesia. Its goal is to lower tariffs (import taxes), set clear trade rules, and support fair labour and environmental standards. It also creates ways to solve disputes and check on how the deal is working over time. - Approves the Canada–Indonesia Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement and makes it part of Canadian law. - Creates an “Indonesia Tariff” that cuts or removes tariffs on most goods from Indonesia, many right away and others over 5, 10, or up to 15 years. Some sensitive goods are excluded. - Updates customs, trade tribunal, and other laws so businesses can claim the new tariff and follow the deal’s rules of origin and paperwork. - Lets the government use temporary “safeguards” if a surge of Indonesian imports harms Canadian producers, including pausing tariff cuts or adding short-term duties after an inquiry. - Requires the Trade Minister to make sure Canadian companies in Indonesia follow responsible business conduct principles, set up a public complaints process, and publish a yearly report. - Commits both countries to protect labour rights and the environment, recognizes Indigenous participation in trade, protects cultural industries, and states the deal does not apply to water. - The law will take effect on a date set by the federal government. ## What it means for you - Consumers - Many everyday items from Indonesia could get cheaper over time as tariffs fall, such as clothing, some footwear, household goods, and certain foods. - Some items may stay the same price if they are excluded or if cuts take many years. - Workers and domestic producers - Some sectors may face more competition from Indonesian imports. If this causes serious injury to Canadian producers, industry can ask the trade tribunal to investigate. The government can pause tariff cuts or add temporary duties. - Clearer, more predictable rules for exporting to Indonesia may help businesses grow sales abroad. - Small and medium-sized businesses - Lower tariffs and simpler paperwork can make importing from and exporting to Indonesia easier. - The agreement aims to help smaller firms take part in trade. However, firms must still meet rules of origin and keep records. - Importers and exporters - A new “Indonesia Tariff” is available for goods that “originate” in Indonesia. Importers, exporters, or producers can certify origin using prescribed forms and must keep supporting documents. - Many tariff cuts begin at once; others phase in over 5, 10, or up to 15 years, depending on the product. - Some goods are excluded from preferences and will not get the Indonesia Tariff. - Investors and service providers - More stable, transparent rules for investment and services. There is a process to resolve disputes under the agreement. - Communities and civil society - The deal includes chapters on labour rights and the environment and encourages strong corporate social responsibility. - Anyone can file a complaint with the Trade Minister about a Canadian company’s conduct in Indonesia. The Minister must respond and report annually. - Indigenous Peoples and cultural sectors - The agreement recognizes the importance of Indigenous participation in trade. - Cultural industries remain protected. ## Expenses No publicly available information. ## Proponents' View - Will lower costs for consumers and help Canadian exporters reach a fast‑growing market of over 270 million people. - Diversifies trade in the Indo‑Pacific, reducing reliance on a few partners and making Canada’s economy more resilient. - Gives small businesses clearer rules, simpler origin certification, and new opportunities as tariffs drop. - Includes labour and environmental commitments, plus a new complaints process for responsible business conduct by Canadian firms abroad. - Builds a predictable framework for services and investment, which can attract new projects and jobs in Canada. - Includes transparent review every three years so Parliament can assess impacts and recommend changes. ## Opponents' View - Some Canadian farmers, food processors, and manufacturers could face tougher import competition, risking jobs in vulnerable sectors. - Labour and environmental promises may be hard to enforce in practice; oversight of company conduct could lack strong penalties. - Investor‑state or arbitration features may give foreign investors special avenues to challenge public policies. - The government can change how some laws apply to Indonesia by order, which critics say reduces parliamentary oversight. - Smaller firms may find rules of origin and paperwork burdensome despite tariff cuts. - Tariff reductions could lower federal customs revenue, while administration of committees, panels, and reporting adds costs.
Votes • Costas Menegakis
Division 62 · Agreed To · February 2, 2026
## Summary This is the federal government’s first Budget 2025 implementation bill. It changes many tax rules, launches or expands clean‑economy incentives, sets up “open banking,” creates a new rulebook for stablecoins, and funds housing and other priorities. It also ends the federal underused housing tax and the luxury tax on private boats and aircraft. Key highlights - Raises the Lifetime Capital Gains Exemption to $1.25 million and adds a new break for selling to employee ownership trusts or worker co‑ops (up to $10 million tax‑free). - Adds a Personal Support Workers Tax Credit and expands what disability support expenses can be claimed. - Creates a new, refundable Clean Electricity Investment Tax Credit; extends and expands other clean economy credits (clean technology, clean hydrogen, CCUS). - Ends the Underused Housing Tax after 2024; speeds up rental construction with faster write‑offs and a 10% accelerated CCA for new purpose‑built rentals. - Repeals the Digital Services Tax; ends the luxury tax on aircraft and vessels; keeps the GST rental rebate expansion for co‑ops and student housing. - Launches consumer‑driven banking (open banking) with Bank of Canada oversight; sets strong consent, security, and liability rules. - Regulates fiat‑backed stablecoins: redemption at par, full reserves, approved custodians, and no interest to holders; Bank of Canada supervision and penalties. - Enables a High‑Speed Rail project between Quebec and Ontario; gives Canada Post power to set postage; boosts housing delivery (Build Canada Homes) and raises the Canada Infrastructure Bank’s capital room. ## What it means for you - Households - Higher Lifetime Capital Gains Exemption (up to $1.25 million) lowers taxes when selling a qualifying farm, fishing, or small business. - Disability support expenses list gets longer. More items can be claimed. - Canada Disability Benefit is not counted as income for tax. - Large donations made after Nov. 14, 2024 can count toward 2024 taxes if given before March 2025. - A National School Food Program Act sets a vision and annual reporting, but no direct benefit is payable to families in this bill. - Renters, builders, and landlords - Faster write‑offs for new purpose‑built rental buildings (10% accelerated CCA) and broader accelerated expensing help projects pencil out sooner. - Ending the Underused Housing Tax after 2024 removes annual filing and payments for affected owners. - GST Enhanced Rental Rebate extends to co‑op housing projects and student residences built by public institutions. - Workers and caregivers - New Personal Support Workers Tax Credit (up to $1,100 a year; 5% of eligible wages) starting with 2026 tax year. - More disability‑related items eligible under the Disability Supports Deduction. - Small businesses and entrepreneurs - Simpler rollovers for small business shares; bigger SR&ED support (including some capital costs and, for the first time, eligible Canadian public companies). - New tax break if you sell your business to an employee ownership trust or a worker co‑op (up to $10 million in gains tax‑free if conditions are met). - Carbon rebates for small businesses are updated; immediate expensing is reinstated for productivity‑boosting assets. - Homeowners with cottages or secondary properties - Underused Housing Tax ends for 2025 onward; no filing or payment for future years. - Boat and plane buyers - Luxury tax on large boats and private aircraft ends for taxes that would arise after Nov. 4, 2025. - Bank customers and fintech users - Open banking: You can direct your bank to share your data safely with accredited apps and services (no fees for sharing; strict consent; dashboards; you can withdraw consent anytime; clear liability if data is misused). - Banks must add fraud‑prevention plans, give fast notices about account capability changes, and let you set transaction limits. - Crypto users and firms - Fiat‑backed stablecoins must be redeemable at par, fully reserved, and held with qualified custodians; no interest to holders. Issuers face Bank of Canada oversight, reporting, and penalties. - Indigenous communities - New opt‑in authority for Indigenous governments to levy value‑added taxes on fuel, alcohol, cannabis, tobacco and vaping on their lands. - Certain Indigenous trusts are exempted from the Alternative Minimum Tax. - Mailers and small e‑commerce - Canada Post will set its own postage rates and terms (must be fair and reasonable overall), rather than through federal regulations. - Regions along the Quebec–Ontario corridor - High‑Speed Rail Network Act clears federal approvals, sets land tools (right of first refusal, limited work prohibitions), and applies environmental assessment segment‑by‑segment. ## Expenses Estimated annual cost: No single number. This bill mixes new spending, new and expanded tax credits, and revenue reductions. - Housing and infrastructure - Build Canada Homes: up to $11.5 billion authorized (amount and timing depend on future plans). - Canada Lands Company: up to $1.515 billion in capital support. - Canada Infrastructure Bank: capital room increased to $45 billion (not an immediate outlay). - Clean economy credits (refundable in many cases) - New Clean Electricity Investment Tax Credit (refundable); expanded clean technology, clean hydrogen and CCUS credits; extension to 2035 for full CCUS rates. These lower future federal revenues and increase outlays as projects claim them. - Revenue reductions - Ending the Underused Housing Tax after 2024 lowers revenue. - Ending the luxury tax on aircraft and vessels lowers revenue. - Raising the Lifetime Capital Gains Exemption and adding seller relief for employee ownership/worker co‑ops reduces revenue. - Repealing the Digital Services Tax removes a planned revenue source (with refunds if any amounts were paid). - Tax measures for people and firms - Personal Support Workers Tax Credit, disability changes, SR&ED enhancements and accelerated expensing all reduce revenues over time. - Borrowing authority - Federal borrowing limit raised to $2.541 trillion. This is capacity, not immediate spending. Exact annual fiscal impacts depend on take‑up, timing of projects, and future budgets. No consolidated public total is provided in the bill text. ## Proponents’ View - Helps families and workers by expanding disability supports, creating a PSW credit, and setting a national vision for school food. - Makes it easier to pass down or sell Canadian businesses, including to employees, and fosters employee ownership and co‑ops. - Pushes clean electricity and clean tech investment with strong, long‑term credits, giving certainty to build grids, storage, hydrogen and carbon capture. - Speeds up rental housing with faster tax write‑offs and extends GST relief to co‑ops and student residences. - Cuts red tape and modernizes banking: Open banking empowers consumers, improves competition, and sets strong privacy and liability rules. - Stablecoin rules protect consumers and financial stability while allowing innovation with clear, Bank of Canada oversight. - Ends the underused housing tax burden and a flawed luxury tax on boats and planes that had low yield and high complexity. - Enables big nation‑building projects (high‑speed rail) and streamlines Canada Post, while boosting housing delivery capacity (Build Canada Homes). ## Opponents’ View - Cost and revenue loss: Expanded credits, higher capital gains exemption, tax breaks for business sales, UHT and luxury tax repeals reduce revenues; large clean‑economy credits could be expensive. - Housing impact: Ending the Underused Housing Tax may remove a tool against vacant homes; rental CCA changes help supply but do not directly lower rents. - Climate mix: Allowing credits for some gas‑fired power with carbon capture may lock in fossil assets; critics may call it a subsidy. - Complexity and compliance: Many detailed tax and regulatory changes add complexity for taxpayers, accountants, and small businesses. - Open banking and stablecoins: Despite safeguards, risks remain around fraud, data breaches and scams; some worry about consumer protection and financial stability. - Canada Post rate‑setting and high‑speed rail powers: Concerns about accountability, affordability of postage, land use, and expropriation processes. - Borrowing limit increase: Raises concerns about long‑term debt capacity and fiscal room without clear offsets.
Votes • Costas Menegakis
Division 53 · Negatived · December 8, 2025
## Summary This bill aims to lower everyday costs for Canadians. It cuts the lowest federal income tax rate, adds a large temporary GST/HST rebate for first-time buyers of new homes, ends the federal fuel charge (carbon tax on fuels), and sets national privacy rules for federal political parties. - Lowers the federal tax rate on the first bracket to 14.5% in 2025 and 14% from 2026 onward. - Creates a temporary, extra GST/HST new‑housing rebate for first‑time home buyers, worth up to $50,000, with price caps and timelines. - Repeals Part 1 of the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act (the federal fuel charge on gasoline, home heating fuel, etc.) and related regulations, starting in 2025, on a set schedule. - Keeps industrial carbon pricing (for large emitters) in place; the repeal targets the fuel charge only. - Requires federal political parties to have and follow a public, plain‑language privacy policy, with a named privacy officer, and creates a national, exclusive privacy regime for parties that overrides provincial privacy laws. - Requires the Finance Minister to publish a report on how the low‑rate tax cut affects tax credits. ## What it means for you - Workers and other taxpayers - You will pay a lower federal tax rate on the first slice of your taxable income starting in 2025, with a further drop in 2026. This means slightly more take‑home pay for most people. - First‑time home buyers (new construction) - If you buy a newly built home or condo and are a first‑time buyer, you can get an extra GST/HST rebate up to $50,000. - Full amounts apply up to about $1,000,000 (building‑only/co‑op variants use slightly different caps); the rebate phases out and ends near $1,500,000. Caps are a bit higher in HST provinces. - You must be 18+, a Canadian citizen or permanent resident, and plan to live in the home as your main residence. - You and your spouse/common‑law partner must both meet the first‑time buyer test (neither owned and lived in a home during the past four years). - Applies to agreements signed after March 19, 2025 and before 2031. Construction must start before 2031 and be substantially finished before 2036. Transfer of ownership (or possession, depending on the case) must happen before 2036. - Only one person in a couple can claim this rebate. You cannot claim it twice as a couple. - Also covers co‑op housing shares, “building‑only” purchases, and owner‑built homes under set rules. - Drivers, households, and small businesses that buy fuel - The federal fuel charge (carbon tax on fuels) will be repealed, starting April 2025 with further dates later in 2025 and 2035 for some pieces. - If your province was under the federal fuel charge, you may see lower prices for gasoline, diesel, propane, and natural gas once repeal takes effect. Provinces could have their own policies. - The bill does not address existing household carbon rebates. - Voters and party volunteers - Federal political parties must publish and follow a privacy policy in plain language and name a privacy officer. - Parties and those acting for them must follow the party’s policy, but they are not required to follow provincial or territorial privacy laws for these activities. - The law states Canadians do not have a right to access or correct personal information held by parties under provincial rules. Any handling of your data is governed by the party’s own policy and federal election law. - Elections Canada must hold at least one meeting each year on protecting personal information by parties. ## Expenses No publicly available information. ## Proponents' View - Taxes on low and middle incomes go down, leaving more money in people’s pockets. - A big, time‑limited rebate helps first‑time buyers bridge the gap to new home ownership and supports new housing construction. - Ending the federal fuel charge lowers costs for driving, home heating, and shipping, easing pressure on family budgets. - A single, national privacy framework for political parties provides clarity and consistency and reduces red tape from different provincial rules. - Strong anti‑avoidance rules stop people from gaming the housing rebate. ## Opponents' View - Cutting the tax rate and adding a large rebate reduces federal revenues and could increase the deficit or pressure public services. - The new‑home rebate may boost demand and push prices higher, and it mainly helps buyers of new — often higher‑priced — homes, not resale buyers or renters. - Repealing the fuel charge weakens climate policy and may increase emissions by removing the price signal to pollute; households could also lose offsetting carbon rebate payments, though the bill does not say. - The privacy changes shield political parties from stricter provincial privacy laws and give Canadians no right to access or correct party‑held data, relying instead on each party’s own policy.
Votes • Costas Menegakis
Division 8 · Agreed To · June 12, 2025
## Summary This bill directs the federal government to create a national strategy to improve how Canada forecasts floods and droughts. The goal is to give provinces, cities, Indigenous communities, farmers, insurers, and others better, earlier information so they can prepare and reduce damage. It sets who must be consulted, what the plan must cover, and when reports must be shared with Parliament and the public. - Orders the Minister of the Environment, working with four other federal ministers, to develop the strategy. - Requires consultations with provinces, municipalities, Indigenous governing bodies, universities, civil society groups, and industry, including insurers. - Calls for assessments of the need for national coordination, new investments, and new technologies in forecasting. - Looks at modeling to identify properties and infrastructure at flood risk and to improve floodplain maps. - Calls for a proposal to build a shared national water-forecasting service with provinces, based on the existing National Hydrological Service. - Requires the strategy to be tabled in Parliament within two years and posted online; after five years, the government must report on how well the strategy worked. ## What it means for you - Residents and homeowners - No immediate changes. If the strategy leads to better maps and alerts, you may get clearer risk information before storms or spring melts. - More precise risk data could help with home planning and preparedness. It could also influence insurance availability and pricing over time. - Farmers and rural communities - Better drought and flood forecasts could help plan planting, irrigation, and herd management. - Earlier warnings may reduce crop losses and help protect equipment and roads. - Local governments and emergency managers - A national system could offer shared tools, data, and models to plan evacuations, protect infrastructure, and guide zoning. - Clearer floodplain maps could support decisions on building and repairs. - Indigenous communities - Required consultations give a voice in shaping the strategy and data needs. - Improved local forecasts can support community safety, land-use planning, and cultural practices tied to water. - Insurers and businesses - More consistent risk information can improve underwriting, pricing, and business continuity planning. - Industries that depend on water (energy, mining, transport) may get better short- and long-term outlooks. - Researchers and universities - The strategy may draw on Canadian models and expertise, helping translate research into public tools and services. ## Expenses No publicly available information. ## Proponents' View - Canada faces more severe floods and droughts; better forecasts can save lives, homes, farms, and public infrastructure. - Provinces now forecast on their own. A national approach can reduce gaps, share data, and avoid duplication. - Canada already has strong university models and technical know-how; a strategy would put these to work at scale. - Farmers, towns, and Indigenous communities would get earlier warnings and clearer maps to prepare. - Insurers and businesses would have more reliable risk data, which can stabilize coverage and guide investments. - Public reporting timelines add accountability and keep the plan focused on results. ## Opponents' View - Water management is often a provincial role; a federal strategy could overlap with or duplicate provincial systems. - Building advanced models and computing capacity could be expensive, with unclear ongoing costs. - Property-level risk mapping may raise insurance premiums or affect home values in high-risk areas. - A two-year window to produce the strategy means benefits may take time to show, while urgent needs persist. - A national system might overlook local knowledge or unique regional conditions if not designed carefully.
Votes • Costas Menegakis
Division 52 · Agreed To · December 3, 2025
## Summary This bill changes the federal Fisheries Act to set common rules for Atlantic recreational groundfish fishing and to improve reporting and monitoring. It requires harmonized “close times” (periods when fishing is not allowed) across Atlantic provinces for recreational groundfish and ties those closures to spawning seasons only. It adds new reporting powers, mandates advance online notice for closures and quotas, and orders the Minister to build a catch monitoring system within one year. - Harmonizes recreational groundfish close times across NL, NS, NB, and PEI (Bill: new s.43(1.1)). - Limits recreational close times to each species’ spawning period (Bill: new s.43(1.1)). - Requires at least 2 months’ public notice online before close times or quotas take effect (Bill: publication clause under s.43). - Expands record-keeping powers to include number of fish caught per day and per season (Bill: s.61(2)(e.1)). - Orders a monitoring system to record species, number, time, and place of catch within 1 year of coming into force (Bill: Monitoring System s.(1)-(2)). - Adds “stability and predictability for recreational groundfishers” as a decision-making factor (Bill: s.2.5(g.1)). - Keeps an annual report to Parliament on administration and enforcement (Bill: s.42.1(1)). ## What it means for you - Households and recreational anglers - Recreational groundfish seasons will match across Atlantic provinces. Expect the same open and close dates in NL, NS, NB, and PEI once regulations are updated (Bill: new s.43(1.1)). - Closure dates can only be set to cover the species’ spawning period. Closures for other reasons will not be used for recreational groundfish close times (Bill: new s.43(1.1)). - You may be required to report how many fish you catch each day and your total for the season, by species. This could be via logbook, app, or other system set by the Minister (Bill: s.61(2)(e.1); Monitoring System s.(1)). - The Department must give at least 2 months’ notice online before new closures or quota changes take effect. You will have more lead time to plan trips (Bill: publication clause under s.43). - Charter operators and tourism businesses - Uniform seasons across provinces may simplify booking and marketing across borders in Atlantic Canada (Bill: new s.43(1.1)). - You may face new reporting steps for clients’ catches, including species, counts, time, and location, depending on how the system is designed (Bill: s.61(2)(e.1); Monitoring System s.(1)-(2)). - Advance online notice of closures and quotas (2 months minimum) can reduce last-minute cancellations (Bill: publication clause under s.43). - Commercial fishers - Any fishing quota or closure set or varied by regulation or variation order must be posted online at least 2 months before it starts. This affects commercial quotas as well (Bill: publication clause under s.43). - The bill does not create new commercial catch reporting here, but some operational timelines may shift due to the 2‑month notice rule (Bill: publication clause under s.43). - Provinces and territories (Atlantic) - Federal regulations will harmonize recreational groundfish close times across Atlantic provinces. Provincial coordination with DFO may be needed to align communications and enforcement (Bill: new s.43(1.1)). - Indigenous communities and rights-holders - The bill does not change Indigenous rights. It adds federal monitoring and notice requirements that could affect timing of regulations in shared waters (Bill: publication clause under s.43; Monitoring System s.(1)). - Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) - Must publish any close times or quota changes at least 2 months before they take effect (Bill: publication clause under s.43). - Must develop, within 1 year of the Act coming into force, a monitoring system that records species, number, time, and place of catch; consider funding it with existing fees and penalties; and add incentives for timely reporting (Bill: Monitoring System s.(1)-(2)). - Must continue annual reporting to Parliament on administration and enforcement (Bill: s.42.1(1)). ## Expenses Estimated net cost: Data unavailable. - No fiscal note or appropriation is included in the bill text. Data unavailable. - Required activities with potential costs: - Design and implement a monitoring system within 1 year, including stakeholder consultation (Bill: Monitoring System s.(1)-(2)). Data unavailable. - Expand public communications to meet the 2‑month online posting rule for closures and quotas (Bill: publication clause under s.43). Data unavailable. - Administer added record-keeping and reporting requirements (Bill: s.61(2)(e.1)). Data unavailable. - Potential cost recovery: - The Minister must examine covering administrative costs through existing fees and penalties and consider fee reductions as reporting incentives (Bill: Monitoring System s.(2)(b)-(c)). Data unavailable. ## Proponents' View - Harmonized seasons make rules clear for anglers and businesses across the Atlantic region, improving planning and compliance (Bill: new s.43(1.1)). - Tying closures to spawning protects reproduction while keeping other times open, which backers say balances conservation with access (Bill: new s.43(1.1)). - A 2‑month online notice reduces surprise changes, supports trip planning and bookings, and may improve compliance and safety (Bill: publication clause under s.43). - Expanded reporting powers and a modern monitoring system will give better data on recreational removals by species, time, and place, improving stock assessments (Bill: s.61(2)(e.1); Monitoring System s.(1)). - Examining use of existing fees and penalties to fund the system could limit new costs to taxpayers, while fee reductions can reward timely reporting (Bill: Monitoring System s.(2)(b)-(c)). - Adding “stability and predictability” as a factor ensures recreational fishers’ interests are considered alongside other objectives (Bill: s.2.5(g.1)). ## Opponents' View - Limiting recreational close times to spawning periods could reduce flexibility to address other risks, such as poor stock status, bycatch, or ecosystem stress outside spawning windows (Bill: new s.43(1.1)). - The 2‑month advance notice may hinder rapid response to unforeseen events (e.g., sudden stock declines or gear conflicts), delaying needed management actions (Bill: publication clause under s.43). - New reporting duties could burden anglers and charter operators and may face low compliance without strong outreach and simple tools (Bill: s.61(2)(e.1); Monitoring System s.(1)-(2)). - The bill mandates a monitoring system but gives no budget; shifting costs to fees and penalties could raise costs for participants, while fee reductions as incentives may reduce revenue (Bill: Monitoring System s.(2)(b)-(c)). Data unavailable. - The bill does not specify privacy safeguards for time-and-location catch data; opponents may seek clear limits on data use and retention in regulations (Bill: Monitoring System s.(1)-(2)). - Harmonizing seasons across provinces may ignore local ecological differences and community needs, reducing room for region-specific management (Bill: new s.43(1.1)).
Votes • Costas Menegakis
Division 74 · Negatived · February 25, 2026
## Summary This bill would require the federal government to share more information with Parliament and the public before Canada approves (ratifies) most international treaties. It sets a standard review period, spells out what must be disclosed, and adds a special review step for “major treaties.” It also allows emergency exceptions, with reasons given after the fact, and sets deadlines to publish treaties once approved. - Before Canada ratifies a treaty, the Foreign Affairs Minister must table the treaty in the House of Commons at least 21 sitting days in advance, with a plain-language memo on its contents, costs, and effects. - Changes to an existing treaty must also be tabled in advance, with an explanation of what is changing and why. - “Major treaties” (including trade deals, tax-raising treaties, those with big costs, sanctions, borders, territory, or transfers of powers to international bodies) must be reviewed by a House committee, and the Minister must seek the House’s advice before ratifying. - In exceptional circumstances, the federal cabinet can let the Minister skip the advance tabling, but the documents and written reasons must be tabled as soon as possible afterward. - After ratification, the government must quickly publish the treaty and any late changes in the Canada Gazette, on the department’s website, and in the Canada Treaty Series. ## What it means for you - General public - More advance notice of new treaties that could affect daily life, jobs, prices, privacy, travel, borders, or sanctions. - Easier to read what a treaty would do, how much it might cost, and what Canada must do to follow it. - A set window (at least 21 sitting days) to contact your MP or submit views before Canada is bound. - Workers and businesses - Earlier warning about trade and investment treaties that may change market access, rules, or competition. - A chance to provide input to a House committee on “major treaties.” - Some agreements may take longer to finalize because of the review period. - Provinces, territories, Indigenous organizations, unions, and industry groups - The government must include a record of consultations with interested parties (other than foreign governments), which can highlight your views on the public record. - Clearer visibility into planned obligations and costs that could affect shared or local responsibilities. - People following defense, sanctions, and borders - Treaties that impose sanctions, change territorial jurisdiction (land, sea, airspace), or affect Canada’s participation in international bodies would face a formal committee review and House advice. - Transparency and access - Final texts and explanations of last-minute changes must be posted online within days and printed in official publications within set timelines. - Limits and exceptions - In urgent cases, the government can approve a treaty without advance tabling, but must table the documents and explain why afterward. - The House’s role is to give advice. The bill does not require a binding vote to approve a treaty. ## Expenses No publicly available information. ## Proponents' View - Gives elected MPs a clear role before Canada makes binding international promises, improving democratic oversight. - Improves transparency by requiring plain-language summaries, cost estimates, Canada’s obligations, and any “opt-out” options to be disclosed up front. - Helps Canadians, including provinces, Indigenous groups, businesses, and unions, prepare and speak up before decisions are final. - Reduces surprises and unintended costs by forcing a public review of “major treaties.” - Locks current practice into law so all future governments must follow the same transparency rules. ## Opponents' View - Could slow down foreign policy and reduce flexibility, especially during fast-moving crises, even with the emergency exception. - May complicate sensitive negotiations or expose positions too early, risking worse outcomes or failed talks. - Adds red tape and committee workload, while the House’s “advice” is not binding and might create confusion about who decides. - Duplicates much of the existing policy that already requires tabling treaties before ratification, with unclear added benefit. - The 21-sitting-day timeline may be too short for deep analysis of complex treaties, or too long when quick action is needed.
Votes • Costas Menegakis
Division 61 · Negatived · January 28, 2026
## Summary This bill orders the federal government to create a national strategy on housing for young Canadians (ages 17–34). It sets consultation, conference, and reporting rules to assess housing needs and propose measures. The bill does not create programs or funding; it focuses on planning and accountability. - Defines “young Canadian” as 17–34 years old (Definitions). - Requires a designated Minister to develop the strategy with provinces, municipalities, youth, and housing organizations (National strategy (1)). - The strategy must assess rental, student housing, and entry-level home ownership, and list measures that can be taken to improve access (Content (2)(a)–(e)). - Mandates at least one conference with stakeholders (Conference (4)). - Requires a strategy report within 18 months of the Act coming into force, and an effectiveness report within 4 years after that report (Tabling of national strategy (1); Report (1)). - Requires both reports to be published online within 10 days after tabling in Parliament (Publication (2)). ## What it means for you - Households (young Canadians 17–34) - No direct changes to rent, mortgages, or benefits from this bill. It creates a plan, not programs (Content (2)). - You may be invited to consultations or a conference during strategy development (National strategy (1); Conference (4)). - The strategy must consider supports for renters and first-time buyers, but any new benefits would need separate action later (Content (2)(a)–(c), (e)). - Timeline: a public strategy within 18 months after the Act takes effect; a public effectiveness report within 4 years after the first report (Tabling of national strategy (1); Report (1)). - Students - The strategy must assess access to student housing and consider ways to promote it (Content (2)). - No immediate new student housing or subsidies are created by this bill (Content (2)). - Renters (17–34) - The strategy must include measures that can be taken to improve access to affordable and secure rental housing (Content (2)(a)). - No rent caps or rental assistance are created by this bill (Content (2)). - First-time homebuyers (17–34) - The strategy must include measures that can be taken to support first-time buyers and promote housing affordable to them (Content (2)(b), (c)). - No new grants, tax credits, or loans are created by this bill (Content (2)). - Housing providers, co-ops, builders, and landlords - The strategy will look at promoting construction of rental, student, and co-operative housing (Content (2)(c)). - You may be consulted and can share data and ideas; the bill encourages knowledge-sharing among governments (Content (2)(d); National strategy (1)). - Municipalities and provinces/territories - Must be consulted; the strategy must consider your existing housing initiatives (National strategy (1); Considerations (3)). - At least one conference will include you (Conference (4)). - No new mandates or funding flows are created by this bill (Content (2); Considerations (3)). - General public - Greater transparency through two public reports and set timelines (Tabling of national strategy (1); Report (1); Publication (2)). ## Expenses Estimated net cost: Data unavailable. - No explicit appropriations, taxes, or fees appear in the bill text (entire bill). - Administrative costs for consultations, a conference, drafting, and tabling reports are not stated. Data unavailable. - Reporting deadlines: - Strategy report within 18 months after the Act comes into force (Tabling of national strategy (1)). - Effectiveness report within 4 years after the strategy report is tabled (Report (1)). ## Proponents' View - Focuses federal effort on a group facing high housing barriers, with a clear definition of “young Canadian” (Definitions). - Builds an evidence base by requiring an assessment of affordability and availability in rental, student housing, and entry-level home ownership (Content (2)). - Directs the strategy to list concrete measures that can be taken to improve rental access, support first-time buyers, and promote construction, including co-ops (Content (2)(a)–(c)). - Encourages coordination and knowledge-sharing across federal, provincial, municipal, and community partners, which proponents say can reduce duplication (Content (2)(d); Considerations (3)). - Ensures youth and youth-serving groups have a voice through mandated consultations and at least one conference (National strategy (1); Conference (4)). - Adds accountability with firm timelines for public reports to Parliament and online publication (Tabling of national strategy (1)–(2); Report (1)–(2)). ## Opponents' View - Creates a strategy but no binding targets, funding, or programs; may not deliver units or lower costs on its own (Content (2)). - Could duplicate or fragment work under existing federal and provincial housing strategies; “consideration” may not prevent overlap (Considerations (3)). - Delays action: up to 18 months before a strategy is published, plus years before an effectiveness review (Tabling of national strategy (1); Report (1)). - Adds administrative and consultation costs without stated budgets or cost caps. Data unavailable. - Jurisdiction concerns: housing is shared among governments; a federal strategy could complicate roles even if the bill is consultative (National strategy (1); Considerations (3)). - Age cut-off (17–34) may exclude under-17 youth in need and older first-time buyers, raising equity questions (Definitions).
Votes • Costas Menegakis
Division 68 · Agreed To · February 12, 2026
## Summary This bill makes September “Ukrainian Heritage Month” across Canada every year. It is a commemorative designation. It does not create programs, funding, or legal obligations. The preamble notes the size of the Ukrainian-Canadian community and its contributions to Canada. - Names September as Ukrainian Heritage Month nationwide each year (Bill Section 2). - Recognizes the history and contributions of more than 1.3 million Ukrainian-Canadians (Preamble). - Creates an annual opportunity to remember, celebrate, and educate about Ukrainian heritage (Preamble). - Does not mandate events, curricula, funding, or regulations (Bill Sections 1–2). - Takes effect on Royal Assent and recurs annually. ## What it means for you - Households and communities: September will be an officially recognized month to mark Ukrainian culture and history. Participation in events, if any, is voluntary. No new benefits or duties start (Bill Section 2). - Schools and cultural organizations: There is no requirement to teach new content or hold events. Any activities would be optional and based on existing plans or resources (Bill Section 2). - Businesses: No compliance duties, reporting, or costs are created. Businesses may choose to acknowledge the month in their communications, but the bill does not require it (Bill Section 2). - Federal, provincial, and municipal governments: No mandated programs, spending, or reporting. Public institutions may choose to issue statements or host events at their discretion (Bill Section 2). - Service users: The bill does not change access to services, immigration rules, or funding. Daily services continue as before (Bill Sections 1–2). ## Expenses Estimated net cost: Data unavailable; the bill includes no appropriations, fees, or mandated spending (Bill Sections 1–2). - Direct appropriations in the bill: None (Bill text). - New taxes or fees: None (Bill text). - Mandated activities for departments or agencies: None (Bill text). - Discretionary communications or event costs by institutions: Data unavailable. ## Proponents' View - Formal recognition honors the history and ongoing contributions of over 1.3 million Ukrainian-Canadians to Canada’s social, economic, political, and cultural life (Preamble). - September is historically significant as the first recorded arrival month of Ukrainians to Canada over 125 years ago, making the timing meaningful (Preamble). - A national designation creates a clear, recurring opportunity to celebrate and educate the public about Ukrainian heritage in communities across the country (Preamble; Bill Section 2). - The measure is low-cost because it sets a designation only and does not require new programs or spending (Bill Sections 1–2). - The act aligns with Canadian commitments to human rights, democracy, and international law, reinforcing shared values (Preamble). ## Opponents' View - The bill is symbolic only; it creates no enforceable rights, programs, or funding, so outcomes depend entirely on voluntary actions (Bill Sections 1–2). - Without a coordinating body, standards, or reporting, observance may be uneven across institutions and regions, and impact will be hard to measure (Bill Section 2). - Public bodies could face small, discretionary communications or event costs if they choose to participate, with no guidance on scope or priorities; potential opportunity costs are unknown (Data unavailable). - Legislative time spent on commemorative designations may not address immediate service or policy needs; the bill includes no provisions that change services, benefits, or regulations (Bill Sections 1–2).
Votes • Costas Menegakis
Division 69 · Agreed To · February 12, 2026
## Summary This bill amends Canada’s Criminal Code to create specific offences for intimate partner violence, raise some penalties, and change procedures for arrest, bail, and seized property. It also classifies all murders of an intimate partner as first-degree murder. - Creates intimate partner–specific offences for criminal harassment, uttering threats, assault, assault with a weapon/causing bodily harm (including choking), and aggravated assault, with higher maximum penalties than general offences (added after ss. 264, 264.1, 266, 267, 268). - Makes murder of an intimate partner first-degree murder, regardless of planning or deliberation (s. 231(3.1)). - Bars police from releasing a person arrested for an intimate partner offence if they have a prior intimate partner conviction within 5 years or are already on release for an intimate partner offence (added after s. 499). - Lets courts order up to 7 days of custody for a risk-of-reoffending assessment at any stage of proceedings (added after s. 523). - Extends default detention of seized property from 3 months to 1 year, allows extensions up to 2 years, requires notice of the right to challenge, and allows some hearings without notice and in private (s. 490(2)-(3.3)). ## What it means for you - Households and intimate partners - More charges tailored to intimate partner violence, with higher maximum prison terms, including up to 10 years for criminal harassment and assault, 12 years for assault with a weapon/causing bodily harm, and 14 years for aggravated assault (added after ss. 264, 266, 267, 268). - All murders of an intimate partner treated as first-degree murder, which carries life imprisonment with 25 years before parole eligibility under existing law (s. 231(3.1)). - Judges may order a 7-day custody assessment to evaluate reoffending risk when deciding bail and conditions (added after s. 523). - Accused persons in intimate partner cases - New intimate partner–specific charges with higher maximum penalties than general offences (added after ss. 264, 264.1, 266, 267, 268). - Police cannot release you after arrest if you had an intimate partner conviction in the past 5 years or were already on release for an intimate partner offence; you must appear before a justice for a bail decision (added after s. 499). - You may be detained up to 7 days for a risk-of-reoffending assessment at any stage, on a judge’s motion, or on request by the prosecutor or the alleged victim (added after s. 523). - Police and prosecutors - Must hold certain suspects for a bail hearing in intimate partner cases with recent prior convictions or current release status (added after s. 499). - Must give notice within 30 days to the owner of seized property about the right to challenge detention (s. 490(3.2)). - May seek to extend detention of seized items up to 2 years and, if notice would jeopardize an investigation, may proceed without notice and in camera (s. 490(2)-(3.3)). - Courts - Will handle more bail hearings in intimate partner cases due to limits on police release (added after s. 499). - May order risk-of-reoffending assessments with up to 7 days of custody and must bring the accused back “as soon as practicable” after completion (added after s. 523). - Will process longer default detention and extension orders for seized property and may proceed without notice and in private where justified (s. 490(2)-(3.3)). - People whose property is seized - Default detention of seized items increases from 3 months to 1 year; total extensions may reach 2 years, subject to court orders (s. 490(2)-(3)). - You should receive notice within 30 days about your right to challenge, but notice can be skipped if it would jeopardize an investigation; a judge can then hear the matter without you and in private (s. 490(3.2)-(3.3)). ## Expenses Estimated net cost: Data unavailable. - Data unavailable. - The bill contains no explicit appropriations or fees. - Procedural changes could affect costs: - Added 7-day risk-of-reoffending assessments may increase custody days and assessment workload (added after s. 523). - Limits on police release may increase bail hearings and short-term detention (added after s. 499). - Higher maximum penalties could affect sentence lengths, but the bill sets maximums, not mandatory minimums (added after ss. 264, 264.1, 266, 267, 268). - Longer detention of seized property may increase storage and handling periods (s. 490(2)-(3)). ## Proponents' View - Strengthens accountability for intimate partner violence by creating tailored offences with higher maximum penalties, signaling greater seriousness (added after ss. 264, 264.1, 266, 267, 268). - Ensures the most serious penalty framework for intimate partner murder by classifying it as first-degree in all cases (s. 231(3.1)). - Enhances victim safety by preventing police release of higher-risk accused (recent conviction or already on release), ensuring a prompt judicial bail review (added after s. 499). - Improves bail decisions through evidence-based risk-of-reoffending assessments, available at any stage and on request by the prosecutor or the intimate partner (added after s. 523). - Supports effective investigations by allowing seized property to be held longer when needed, while preserving owners’ rights through a 30-day notice of the right to challenge (s. 490(2)-(3.2)). ## Opponents' View - Duplicates existing offences (criminal harassment, uttering threats, assault) and mainly raises maximum penalties, which may add complexity without clear impact on sentencing outcomes (compare existing ss. 264–268 with new intimate partner–specific provisions added after those sections). - Classifying all intimate partner murders as first-degree removes case-by-case assessment of planning and deliberation and guarantees 25-year parole ineligibility, even where facts might otherwise support second-degree (s. 231(3.1)). - Mandatory hold for some accused after arrest could increase pre-trial detention and court workload for bail hearings without a demonstrated safety benefit in all cases (added after s. 499). - Up to 7 days of detention for risk assessments at any stage may extend custody for people not yet convicted and strain assessment capacity, potentially delaying proceedings (added after s. 523). - Extending default detention of seized property to 1 year (and up to 2 years total) and allowing ex parte, in camera hearings can reduce transparency and delay property return, even to lawful owners (s. 490(2)-(3.3)).
Votes • Costas Menegakis
Division 51 · Agreed To · December 3, 2025
## Summary This bill changes the Employment Insurance Act and the Canada Labour Code to protect parents who lose a child during maternity or parental leave. It keeps Employment Insurance (EI) maternity/parental benefits and federally regulated job-protected leave in place until the original end date, even if the child dies. It also removes the need to file new paperwork to keep benefits going. - EI maternity/parental benefits continue until the planned end of the benefit period after a child dies (Employment Insurance Act s.23(2.1); s.152.05(2.1)). - No new EI claim or report is required to keep getting those benefits (Employment Insurance Act s.23(2.2); s.152.05(2.2)). - An exception stops this EI protection if the parent is convicted of an offence that caused the child’s death (Employment Insurance Act s.23(2.3); s.152.05(2.3)). - For federally regulated workers, maternity or parental leave remains in place until the original end date even if the child dies (Canada Labour Code s.206(4); s.206.1(2.01)). - The bill does not extend leave or benefits beyond the original period; it preserves the remainder only (same sections). ## What it means for you - Households - If you are on EI maternity or parental benefits and your child dies during your claim, EI continues paying you until your original benefit period ends. You do not need to file a new claim or report to prove eligibility (Employment Insurance Act s.23(2.1)-(2.2); s.152.05(2.1)-(2.2)). - This applies whether the child was born to you or placed with you for adoption (Employment Insurance Act s.23(1); s.152.05(1)). - Workers (employees) - If you work in a federally regulated workplace and are on maternity or parental leave, your leave continues until the original end date even if your child dies (Canada Labour Code s.206(4); s.206.1(2.01)). - The Canada Labour Code change covers federal sectors only. Provincial and territorial employment standards are not changed by this bill. - Self‑employed persons (participating in EI special benefits) - If you opted into EI special benefits and are receiving parental benefits, you remain eligible to keep getting them until the end of the original period even if the child dies. No new claim or report is required (Employment Insurance Act s.152.05(2.1)-(2.2)). - Employers (federally regulated) - You must continue to hold the employee’s job for the rest of the originally approved maternity or parental leave period, even if the child dies (Canada Labour Code s.206(4); s.206.1(2.01)). - The bill does not require you to make any payments. It concerns leave entitlements and EI program benefits. - Legal exception - The EI continuation does not apply if the parent is convicted of an offence that caused the child’s death (Employment Insurance Act s.23(2.3); s.152.05(2.3)). The Canada Labour Code amendment does not include a similar exception. ## Expenses Estimated net cost: Data unavailable. - No fiscal note is included in the bill text. Data unavailable. - No explicit appropriation or new fee is set out in the bill. The text changes eligibility rules and administration for EI benefits and leave. - Program effect: EI continues to pay maternity/parental benefits for the remainder of the original benefit period after the child’s death, for both employees and participating self‑employed (Employment Insurance Act s.23(2.1); s.152.05(2.1)). - Employer finances: The bill creates no employer payment obligation; it preserves job‑protected leave under the Canada Labour Code for its original duration (Canada Labour Code s.206(4); s.206.1(2.01)). ## Proponents' View - Reduces administrative burden during a crisis by removing the need for a new EI claim or report to keep benefits flowing (Employment Insurance Act s.23(2.2); s.152.05(2.2)). - Protects income stability by ensuring EI maternity/parental benefits continue for the remaining weeks of the approved period after a child’s death (Employment Insurance Act s.23(2.1); s.152.05(2.1)). - Maintains job protection for the rest of the planned leave, giving time to recover before returning to work (Canada Labour Code s.206(4); s.206.1(2.01)). - Limits scope to the original entitlement period; it does not extend or add weeks beyond what was already approved (Employment Insurance Act s.23(2.1); Canada Labour Code s.206(4)). - Includes a safeguard that denies EI continuation if the parent is convicted of an offence that caused the child’s death (Employment Insurance Act s.23(2.3); s.152.05(2.3)). ## Opponents' View - Increased EI outlays: Paying benefits for the remainder of the period after a child’s death could raise EI program costs versus current practice; no public cost estimate is provided. Data unavailable. - Uneven coverage: The leave protection change applies only to federally regulated workplaces. Most workers under provincial or territorial laws would not see their leave rules change unless those governments act separately. - Administrative complexity: The EI exception hinges on a criminal conviction. If a case is pending, benefits may be paid before the outcome, which could create overpayment and recovery issues. The bill does not address timing or recovery processes. Data unavailable. - Employer planning: Federally regulated employers must hold positions for the full, original leave even after a child’s death, which can affect scheduling and staffing. The bill does not provide transition or guidance for such cases. Data unavailable.
Votes • Costas Menegakis
Division 64 · Agreed To · February 4, 2026
## Summary This bill changes who is a Canadian citizen by descent and fixes past gaps that left some people without citizenship. It also sets a clear test for future children and adoptees born or adopted outside Canada and restores citizenship to many “lost Canadians.” - Makes people born outside Canada before the law takes effect citizens if they had a Canadian parent. - For future births abroad, allows citizenship after the first generation if the Canadian parent spent about three years in Canada before the child’s birth. - Extends similar rules to children adopted outside Canada. - Restores citizenship to people who lost it under old “retention” rules. - Lets people who gain citizenship under this bill use a simpler process to give it up if they do not want it. - Confirms citizenship even if a qualifying parent (or grandparent) died before the law took effect. - Start date will be set later by the federal government. ## What it means for you - Canadians born abroad before the law starts - If you were born outside Canada before the law takes effect and had at least one Canadian parent, you become a Canadian automatically from birth. - You would still need to apply for a citizenship certificate (proof of citizenship) to get a passport. - Canadians having children abroad after the law starts - If you are a Canadian who was born outside Canada and you have a child abroad in the future, your child can be a citizen if you were physically in Canada for at least 1,095 days (about three years) before the child’s birth. - If you do not meet the three‑year presence in Canada, your child would not be a citizen by descent and would need another pathway to come to Canada. - Canadians adopting children from abroad - If you adopted a child outside Canada before the law takes effect and you were a Canadian at that time, your child can be granted citizenship. - For future adoptions abroad, your adopted child can be granted citizenship if the Canadian adoptive parent spent at least three years in Canada before the adoption. - People who lost citizenship under old rules - If you lost your citizenship because you did not apply to “retain” it by a deadline under old laws, this bill restores your citizenship automatically. - If you once became a citizen and later renounced it, this bill does not give it back automatically. - Families where a parent died earlier - If your qualifying Canadian parent (or grandparent) died before this bill takes effect, you can still be recognized as a citizen if they would have been Canadian under these new rules. - People who do not want Canadian citizenship - If you become a citizen because of this bill and prefer not to be one, there will be a simpler process to renounce (formally give up) citizenship. ## Expenses No publicly available information. ## Proponents' View - Fixes long‑standing gaps that left “lost Canadians” without status even though they had a Canadian parent. - Keeps a real link to Canada for future generations by requiring about three years’ presence in Canada for parents who pass on citizenship from abroad. - Provides clear, simple rules for both births and adoptions outside Canada, reducing confusion. - Respects personal choice by offering a simplified way to renounce citizenship for those who gain it automatically. - Could reduce court cases and administrative headaches by clarifying who is a citizen from birth. ## Opponents' View - Retroactively adding citizens may strain processing systems and increase passport and certificate backlogs. - The three‑year presence test may be too strict for Canadians who build careers abroad, including aid workers, business people, and students. - Different treatment for children born before versus after the law’s start date could be seen as unfair or confusing. - Implementation may be complex, with many edge cases (for example, counting physical presence days), which could lead to delays or disputes.
Votes • Costas Menegakis
Division 47 · Agreed To · November 5, 2025
Division 45 · Agreed To · November 3, 2025
Division 44 · Agreed To · November 3, 2025
Division 36 · Agreed To · September 22, 2025
Division 60
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jan 28, 2026
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 55
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Dec 9, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 54
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Dec 9, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 50
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Nov 17, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 49
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Nov 7, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 48
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Nov 6, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 46
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Nov 4, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 43
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 28, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 42
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 28, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 41
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Oct 20, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 40
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Oct 6, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 39
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Oct 1, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 38
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Sep 24, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 37
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Sep 23, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 35
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Sep 22, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 19
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 17, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 15
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 17, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 14
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 17, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 12
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 16, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 11
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 16, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 10
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 16, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 9
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 16, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 7
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 11, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 6
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 11, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 5
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 10, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 4
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 5, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 3
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 2, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 2
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 2, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 1
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 29, 2025
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 467
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 18, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 466
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 18, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 465
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 18, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 464
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 17, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 463
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 17, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 462
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 17, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 461
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 17, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 460
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 17, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 459
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 17, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 458
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 17, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 457
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 17, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 456
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 16, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 455
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 15, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 454
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 15, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 453
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 15, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 450
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 15, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 449
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 15, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 448
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 10, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 447
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 10, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 445
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 10, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 444
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 10, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 443
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 10, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 442
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 10, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 441
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 10, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 440
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 10, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 439
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 10, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 438
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 10, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 437
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 10, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 436
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 10, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 434
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 9, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 435
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 9, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 433
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 8, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 432
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 8, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 431
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 8, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 430
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 8, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 429
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 8, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 428
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 8, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 427
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 8, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 426
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 8, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 425
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 8, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 424
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 8, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 423
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 8, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 422
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 8, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 421
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 8, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 420
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 3, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 419
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 3, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 418
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 3, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 417
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 3, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 416
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 3, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 413
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 2, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 414
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 2, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 412
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 2, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 411
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 2, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 410
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 1, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 409
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 28, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 407
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 26, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 406
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 25, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 405
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 25, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 404
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 14, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 403
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 13, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 402
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 12, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 401
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 12, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 399
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 7, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 398
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 6, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 397
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 6, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 396
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 6, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 395
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 6, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 394
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 6, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 393
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 4, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 392
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 4, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 391
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 4, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 390
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Apr 30, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 389
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Apr 30, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 387
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Apr 30, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 386
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Apr 30, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 385
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Apr 29, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 384
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Apr 29, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 383
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Apr 29, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 382
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Apr 29, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 381
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Apr 28, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 380
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Apr 28, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 379
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Apr 27, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 378
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Apr 22, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 377
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Apr 22, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 376
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Apr 20, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 375
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Apr 20, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 374
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Apr 1, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 373
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Apr 1, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 372
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Apr 1, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 371
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Apr 1, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 369
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 31, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 368
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 30, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 367
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Mar 30, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 366
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 30, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 365
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 25, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 364
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Mar 25, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 363
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 25, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 362
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 24, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 361
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 24, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 360
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 24, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 359
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 24, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 358
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 24, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 357
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 24, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 356
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 24, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 355
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 24, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 354
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 24, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 353
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 23, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 350
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 11, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 349
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Mar 11, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 348
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 11, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 347
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 11, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 344
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Mar 9, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 343
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 9, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 341
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Feb 25, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 340
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 24, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 339
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Feb 23, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 337
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 23, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 336
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Feb 19, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 335
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Feb 19, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 334
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 16, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 333
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Feb 16, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 332
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 16, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 331
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 16, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 330
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Feb 16, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 329
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Feb 4, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 328
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Feb 4, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 327
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 4, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 326
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Feb 4, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 325
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Feb 4, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 324
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Feb 4, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 323
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 4, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 322
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Feb 4, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 321
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Feb 4, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 320
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 3, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 319
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Feb 2, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 318
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 2, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 314
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jan 28, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 317
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jan 28, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 316
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jan 28, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 315
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jan 28, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 313
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jan 28, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 312
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jan 28, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 311
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jan 26, 2015
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 310
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Dec 10, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 309
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Dec 10, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 308
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Dec 10, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 307
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Dec 10, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 306
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Dec 10, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 305
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Dec 10, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 301
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Dec 4, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 299
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Dec 3, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 298
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Dec 3, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 297
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Dec 3, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 291
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Dec 3, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 296
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Dec 3, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 295
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Dec 3, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 294
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Dec 3, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 292
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Dec 3, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 290
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Dec 1, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 289
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Nov 26, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 288
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Nov 26, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 287
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Nov 26, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 286
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Nov 25, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 285
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Nov 24, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 284
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Nov 24, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 279
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Nov 19, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 282
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Nov 19, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 278
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Nov 19, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 277
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Nov 19, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 281
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Nov 19, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 280
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Nov 19, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 276
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Nov 19, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 274
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Nov 17, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 273
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Nov 17, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 272
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Nov 17, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 271
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Nov 5, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 270
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Nov 5, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 269
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Nov 4, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 268
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Nov 3, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 267
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Nov 3, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 266
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 30, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 265
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 29, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 264
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 29, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 263
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 29, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 262
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 29, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 261
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 29, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 260
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Oct 29, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 259
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 29, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 258
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Oct 29, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 256
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 23, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 255
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 20, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 254
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Oct 20, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 253
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 8, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 252
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 7, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 250
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 7, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 249
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 6, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 248
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 1, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 247
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 1, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 246
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Oct 1, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 245
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 1, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 242
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 1, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 244
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 1, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 243
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Oct 1, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 241
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Oct 1, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 240
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Oct 1, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 239
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 1, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 238
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Sep 30, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 237
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Sep 30, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 236
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Sep 29, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 235
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Sep 29, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 234
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Sep 25, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 233
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Sep 25, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 232
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Sep 24, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 231
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Sep 24, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 230
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Sep 24, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 229
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Sep 24, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 228
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Sep 24, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 227
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Sep 24, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 226
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Sep 19, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 225
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Sep 18, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 224
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 19, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 223
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 19, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 222
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 19, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 221
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 19, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 220
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 18, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 219
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 18, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 218
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 18, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 217
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 18, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 216
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 17, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 215
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 17, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 214
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 17, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 213
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 17, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 212
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 16, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 211
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 16, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 210
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 16, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 209
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 16, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 208
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 12, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 206
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 12, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 207
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 12, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 205
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 12, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 204
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 12, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 203
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 11, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 202
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 11, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 201
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 10, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 200
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 10, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 199
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 10, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 198
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 10, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 194
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 10, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 190
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 10, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 197
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 10, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 196
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 10, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 193
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 10, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 192
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 10, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 188
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 9, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 187
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 9, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 186
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 9, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 185
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 9, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 184
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 9, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 183
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 9, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 182
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 9, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 181
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 9, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 180
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 9, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 178
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 9, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 177
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 9, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 175
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 9, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 174
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 9, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 173
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 9, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 179
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 9, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 172
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 9, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 171
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 9, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 170
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 9, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 169
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 9, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 167
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 5, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 166
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 4, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 165
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 4, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 164
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 4, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 163
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 4, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 162
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 3, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 161
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 3, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 160
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jun 3, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 159
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jun 2, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 158
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 29, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 157
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 29, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 156
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 29, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 155
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 29, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 154
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 28, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 153
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 28, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 151
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 28, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 150
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 28, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 149
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 28, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 148
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 28, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 146
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 27, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 144
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 26, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 142
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 14, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 141
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 14, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 140
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 14, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 139
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 13, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 138
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 13, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 137
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 12, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 136
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 12, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 135
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 12, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 133
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 12, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 132
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 12, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 131
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 12, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 130
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 12, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 129
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 12, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 128
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 12, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 127
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 12, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 126
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 12, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 125
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 12, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 124
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 12, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 123
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 12, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 122
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 12, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 121
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 8, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 120
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 8, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 115
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 7, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 119
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 7, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 118
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 7, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 117
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 7, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 116
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 7, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 112
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 7, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 111
Outcome: Negatived
Date
May 6, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 110
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 5, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 109
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
May 1, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 108
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Apr 30, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 107
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Apr 30, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 105
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Apr 28, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 102
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Apr 9, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 101
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Apr 9, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 100
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Apr 9, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 99
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Apr 8, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 98
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Apr 8, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 97
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Apr 3, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 96
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Apr 2, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 94
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Apr 1, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 93
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 31, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 92
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 26, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 91
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 26, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 90
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 26, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 89
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 26, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 88
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 24, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 87
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 24, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 86
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 24, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 85
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 24, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 84
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 24, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 83
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 24, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 82
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 24, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 81
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 24, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 80
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Mar 24, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 79
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 6, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 78
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 6, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 77
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 5, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 76
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 5, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 75
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Mar 4, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 74
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Mar 4, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 73
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Mar 4, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 72
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Mar 4, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 71
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 26, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 70
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 26, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 69
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 26, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 68
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 26, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 67
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Feb 26, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 66
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Feb 26, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 65
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 25, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 64
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 25, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 63
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 24, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 62
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Feb 12, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 61
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 12, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 60
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Feb 12, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 58
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 12, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 57
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Feb 10, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 56
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Feb 6, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 54
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 6, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 53
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 5, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 52
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 5, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 51
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 5, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 49
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 4, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 48
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 4, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 47
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Feb 3, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 46
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jan 29, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 45
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jan 29, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 44
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jan 29, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 43
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Jan 29, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 42
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Jan 28, 2014
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 41
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Dec 9, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 40
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Dec 9, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 39
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Dec 9, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 38
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Dec 9, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 37
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Dec 9, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 36
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Dec 9, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 35
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Dec 4, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 34
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Dec 3, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 33
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Dec 3, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 32
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Dec 3, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 31
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Dec 3, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 30
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Dec 3, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 29
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Dec 3, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 28
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Dec 3, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 27
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Dec 3, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 26
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Dec 3, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 25
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Dec 3, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 24
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Dec 3, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 23
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Dec 3, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 21
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Dec 3, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 20
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Dec 3, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 19
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Dec 3, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 17
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Nov 26, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 16
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Nov 26, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 15
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Nov 26, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 14
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Nov 20, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 13
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Nov 20, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 12
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Nov 20, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 11
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Nov 19, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 10
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Nov 6, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 9
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Nov 6, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 8
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Nov 6, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 7
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 29, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 5
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 24, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 4
Outcome: Negatived
Date
Oct 23, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Nay
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 3
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 21, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 2
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 21, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.
Division 1
Outcome: Agreed To
Date
Oct 21, 2013
Chamber
lower
Representative vote
Yea
Party
Conservative
Constituency
Richmond Hill
Motion summary
No motion summary available.