Evidence of meeting #66 for Foreign Affairs and International Development in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:40 a.m.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
I have a point of order. I think that part of the amendment has been defeated.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Garnett Genuis
While true, that's not a point of order. We're on part (a).
Can I make a suggestion? This is an amendment we received today, and I think people are getting some new information. Can I suggest a brief suspension to facilitate some discussion about the remaining provision?
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
This is really a point of order to clarify that the subamendment—
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
It's been adopted, so part (b), which is on the definition of “entity”, has been struck.
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
The reason I raised a point of order was relevance, because Mr. Epp was talking about “entity”, which I think is gone. I think where we are now is on part (a). My sense is that we may have a consensus on part (a). We may be able to live with that without a suspension.
I just want to ask the officials if there are any unintended consequences that we as parliamentarians don't know about.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Garnett Genuis
I will give you the floor to ask that question, even though you didn't have it. We'll go to you and then we can determine after that whether a suspension is necessary.
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
Are there any unintended consequences of changing “country” to “foreign state”? We've reversed the order of them to “entity or person”. Essentially the change is to change “country” to “foreign state”. I know it's not in concordance with the other acts, but is there anything you think we're making a mistake on by doing that?
11:45 a.m.
Director General, Immigration Policy and External Review, Canada Border Services Agency
Thank you for your question.
In our view, “foreign state” includes “country”, so there is no unintended consequence with that.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Garnett Genuis
I think it's generally advisable to allow these things during clause-by-clause, but we can limit it to five minutes. It will be a real five minutes.
The meeting is suspended.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Garnett Genuis
Colleagues, we have resumed.
Is there further debate on the amendment as subamended?
Mr. Oliphant.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
We would be in favour of part (a) of the now existing amendment. That's all.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Garnett Genuis
Is there any further debate?
(Amendment as amended agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Clause 6 as amended agreed to)
If there is agreement from the committee, we will deal with clauses 7 through 22 all at once.
Is there any objection to proceeding in this fashion? I am seeing none.
(Clauses 7 to 22 inclusive agreed to)
Amendment NDP-2 can now be moved.
Ms. McPherson, go ahead, please.
11:50 a.m.
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Thank you.
The reason we're bringing forward NDP-2 is that it sets a legislative review of the bill after three years. We did hear from a number of witnesses at this committee—the Canadian Bar Association, the Refugee Centre, the Bellissimo Law Group—who had concerns with how this legislation may affect innocent people, including refugee claimants. I think it's important that we have an opportunity to do a legislative review of this to deal with any negative consequences that may unintentionally come as a result of this bill and to make sure that those are addressed and remedied.
Basically, it's a simple amendment. We're just asking that there be a legislative review.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
If this is placing a burden only on my successor, I am very happy to support it.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Garnett Genuis
I'm glad to know you're so pessimistic about the upcoming election, Mr. Oliphant.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
11:50 a.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Dave Epp Conservative Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON
Is it specifically on the amendment or Mr. Oliphant's future?
The amendment we can support.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Garnett Genuis
We'll stay on topic-ish. I know I deviated a little bit there.
Shall amendment NDP-2 carry?
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Shall clause 23 carry?