It shall be calculated by dividing the forecast number of total en route service units for the relevant year into the algebraic sum of the following elements:

(Return tabled) Question No. 244 Hon. Irwin Cotler: With regard to Bill C-10, An Act to enact the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act and to amend the State Immunity Act, the Criminal Code, the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, the Youth Criminal Justice Act, the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and other Acts: (a) what is the total projected cost of all measures contained in Bill C-10; (b) how long will it take to fully implement all proposed changes to the criminal justice system and its associated institutions, including, but not limited to, penal, policing and judiciary institut ...[+++]ions; (c) how will the total funding be divided annually to meet the timeframe offered in response to (b) with regard to changes to the criminal justice system and its associated institutions; (d) what is the projected distribution of the total projected cost of Bill C-10 across each of its nine subsections; (e) what federal or provincial programs currently in effect in relation to the criminal justice system will be discontinued to support Bill C-10, and what federal and provincial programs will lose funding to support Bill C-10; (f) how much funding will be lost by each of the programs identified in (e); (g) how will the total projected cost of Bill C-10, as well as the projected cost of each of the nine individual subsections, be divided between the federal government and each province or territory; (h) what methodologies were used to determine projections and estimates provided in response to (a) through (g); (i) what supporting documentation does the government plan to make public to validate the provided projections and estimates; and (j) will the documentation and methodology used to determine these estimates be made public, and, if not, will they be disclosed to the Parliamentary Budget Officer?

Question No. 848 Hon. Stéphane Dion: With regard the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program, since the beginning of Canada’s participation: (a) what was the first evaluation of the acquisition cost-per-plane Canada would pay, (i) when was that evaluation made, (ii) based on what information was it made, (iii) who provided the government with that information, (iv) via what medium (e.g., conference, personal discussion,briefing note, etc.), (v) what is the name of the government document containing that evaluation, (vi) what is the topic o ...[+++]f that document, (vii) which government members were provided with information; (b) for every subsequent re-evaluation of the acquisition cost-per-plane that Canada would pay and up to the government's current evaluation, (i) what was the new evaluation (ii) when was that evaluation made, (iii) based on what information was it made, (iv) who provided the government with that information, (v) via what medium (e.g., conference, personal discussion, briefing note, etc.), (vi) what is the name of the government document containing that evaluation, (vii) what is the topic of that document, (viii) which government members were provided with that information, (ix) as precisely as possible, what new information prompted the re-evaluation; (c) what was the first evaluation of the maintenance and repair cost-per-plane Canada would have to incur, (i) when was that evaluation made, (ii) based on what information was it made, (iii) who provided the government with that information, (iv) via what medium (e.g., conference, personal discussion, briefing note, etc.), (v) what is the name of the government document containing that evaluation, (vi) what is the topic of that document, (vii) which government members were provided with that information; (d) for every subsequent re-evaluation of the maintenance and repair cost-per-plane that Canada would have to incur and up to the government's current evaluation, (i) what was the new evaluation, (ii) when ...

4. The Commission shall adopt the amendments to the multi-annual and annual programmes and the decisions referred to in paragraph 3 where they do not comprise substantial changes to the nature of the original programmes and actions and, as regards the financial element, where they do not exceed 20 % of the total amount allocated for the programme or action in question, subject to a limit of EUR 4 million.

2. Decisions amending Decisions referred to in Article 10(1) shall be adopted by the Commission where they do not comprise substantial changes to the nature of the programmes referred to in the said paragraph and, as regards the financial element, where they do not exceed 20 % of the total amount allocated for the programme in question, subject to a limit of EUR 4 million.

In the light of these fundamental considerations, and reflecting the debate in Council, COREPER should urgently scrutinise all the elements of the Commission Proposal and should take note in its examination of the following points in particular: - the proposed aggregate capacity reduction rates are generally considered to be too high; - the appropriate relationship should be ensured between the scientific recommendations and proposed reductions; - the need to address the issue of technical progress; - the scope for ...[+++]deployment by Member States at national level of effort management schemes as an alternative or complement to capacity reductions, based on a fully transparent approach; - the permanency, or otherwise, of activity reductions; - the need to ensure sufficient flexibility in fleet segmentation so as to reflect the varying situations in Member States, including the treatment of multi-purpose fleets targeting several stocks and the need for appropriate weightings; - the agreed scope for widening the specific treatment of small-scale fishery; - the need for the specific treatment of static gear to be non- discriminatory vis-à-vis towed gear, fully transparent and properly monitored; - the need to ensure that the principle of relative stability is fully observed".