Agreed.

[Editor's Note: The above-mentioned questions are as follows:]

In 1987, did the Canadian National Railway Company transport Hydro-Quebec transformers by special train No. 581, via Faribault, from Matagami to Varennes, in the province of Quebec, and, if so (a) what was the total cost involved (b) through which subdivisions was that train routed (c) what was the duration in hours of that special trip?

Hon. Benoit Bouchard (Minister of TVansport):

The

Canadian National Railway Company advises as follows:

Yes, on October 23, 1987.

(a) The total cost of the movement is of a proprietary nature and the Canadian National Railway Company believes it should not be made public for competitive reasons.

(b) Via the Chapais Subdivision between Franquet and Faribault.

(c) Approximately 13 days in total. Because of the large dimensions of the load, the routing of the train was limited to the rail line that provided the necessary width and height clearance.

For (a) 1984 (b) 1985 (c) 1986 (d) 1987 (e) 1988, did any foreign-owned corporation claim tax deductions for interest arising from domestic borrowing to finance foreign activities and, if so, (i) what number (ii) what is the net revenue cost to the government of those deductions?

Hon. Otto Jelinek (Minister of National Revenue):

The

requested data is not ascertainable from the financial statements and tax returns required to be filed with the Department and accordingly is not readily available to the Department.

In order to obtain this information the Department would have to audit the books and records of each foreign-owned corporation.

1. For (a) 1984 (b) 1985 (c) 1986 (d) 1987 (e) 1988, did any corporations claim tax deductions for interest arising from borrowing money and, if so, (i) in what numbers (ii) what is the net revenue cost to the government of those deductions?

2. For (a) 1984 (b) 1985 (c) 1986 (d) 1987 (e) 1988, did any corporations claim tax deductions for interest arising from borrowing money to finance corporate restructuring, purchases of other corporations or corporate mergers and, if so, (i) in what numbers (ii) for each such claim, what is the net revenue cost to the government of those deductions?

Hon. Otto Jelinek (Minister of National Revenue):

The

requested data is not ascertainable from the financial statements and tax returns required to be filed with the Department and accordingly is not readily available to the Department.

In order to obtain this information the Department would have to audit the books and records of each corporation claiming expenses against income.

For (a) 1980 (b) 1981 (c) 1982 (d) 1983 (e) 1984 (f) 1985 (g) 1986 (h) 1987, did any individual tax filers claim a dividend tax credit for shares held in a corporation which paid no corporate income tax, and, if so, (i) in what numbers (ii) what was the total net revenue cost?

The Hon. Otto Jelinek (Minister of National Revenue):

The requested data is not captured by the Department and is not required to be reported in the financial statements and tax returns filed with the Department by individuals and corporations.

To obtain this information the Department would have to conduct a manual search for the corporate tax return of each payor; if the corporation's year-end was not the same as that of the payee, taxpayer contact would have

May 24, 1989

to be made to determine the years to which the dividends related.

TAX DEDUCTIONS FOR ADVERTISING EXPENSES *

For each year since 1984, did any (a) individuals (b) corporations claim tax deductions for advertising expenses and, if so, (i) what numbers (ii) what is the total net revenue cost to the government?

Hon. Otto Jelinek (Minister of National Revenue):

The

requested data is not ascertainable from the financial statements and tax returns required to be filed with the Department.

In order to obtain this information the Department would have to audit the books and records of each taxpayer claiming expenses against income.

TAX DEDUCTIONS CLAIMED BY INDIVIDUALS *

For each year since 1984, did any individuals claim tax deductions for (a) bribes (b) kickbacks (c) fines for other offences and, if so, (i) in what numbers (ii) what is the net revenue cost to the government of those deductions?

Hon. Otto Jelinek (Minister of National Revenue):

The

requested information is not ascertainable from the financial statements and tax returns required to be filed with the Department and accordingly is not readily available for analysis by the Department.

In order to obtain this information the Department would have to audit the books and records of each taxpayer claiming expenses against income.

REVIEW OF UI REGIONAL BOUNDARIES *

1. During the last four years, did the government conduct or commission any review of the regional boundaries used in determining eligibility for unemployment insurance and, if so, in each case (a) on what dates (b) were consultants hired and, if so, what are their names (c) at what total cost?

2. Has the government analysed the potential effects on (a) unemployment insurance recipients (b) the Treasury of changing the regional boundaries used in determining unemployment insurance eligibility?

Hon. Barbara McDougall (Minister of Employment and Immigration):

1. (a) In September, 1988, the Commission approved a change to the boundaries of the Outaouais region in Quebec. The review was conducted by officials of the Department of Employment and Immigration and the expenses were met from within the existing departmental budget.

The only comprehensive review of the boundaries of UI regions which this government has initiated in the last four years is the one which was announced last August by the Minister of State (Employment and Immigration), a review which is still ongoing.

(b)-(c) This review is also being conducted by officials of the department and the expenses will be met from within the existing departmental budget.

2. (a)-(b) The impacts on UI recipients are not known at the present time because the project has not yet reached that stage.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Champagne):

Starred questions Nos. 4, 8,11,12,13,14 and 29 have been answered. Shall the remaining questions be allowed to stand?