Evidence of meeting #50 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle

We have a reduced quorum, I would imagine, Mr. Clerk, so I guess we'll get moving and see if we can get through a number of motions that we have here.

Are you ready, Ms. Chow, for our first motion?

3:35 p.m.

NDP

Olivia Chow NDP Trinity—Spadina, ON

Yes.

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle

It reads:

That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the Committee recommend the government immediately serve notice and then proceed to abrogate the Safe Third Country Agreement with the United States of America.

I'll pass it over to you, Ms. Chow, to present your motion and your debate.

3:35 p.m.

NDP

Olivia Chow NDP Trinity—Spadina, ON

Mr. Chair, thank you for allowing me to talk about this motion.

We in Canada have an independent foreign policy. It should be. We are a sovereign country. Our points of view and who we believe are or are not refugees really should be determined by our country and our Parliament, which is why the motion in front of you makes a lot of sense.

What is happening is that refugee claimants coming from places like Colombia or Haiti go past the U.S., and because they come through the U.S., because of this agreement, they are not allowed to claim refugee status in the States.

Some of these folks are desperate. They do not want to be deported back to their home country for one reason or another. They then come across the border in an illegal fashion and claim refugee status in Canada. The UNHCR has said that when we made this agreement.... The agreement was put together by the former Liberal government, and at that time they already said this was something that was not supportable. The Council for Refugees also said we must not have this agreement. In fact, the Federal Court also agreed with us and said that refugees really need to have the right for a proper hearing; that is why they deserve to be allowed a chance to submit an application outside of Canada in the States.

I put this matter in front of you hoping to avoid incurring a huge cost right now. The government is in the middle of appealing the Federal Court decision. Both sides are spending a lot of money on lawyers, and it is not a good way to proceed, so we really should support this motion and say that this agreement really should not proceed.

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle

Thank you, Ms. Chow.

Is there further debate?

Go ahead, Mr. Komarnicki.

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK

Mr. Chair, the motion asks us to serve notice to proceed to abrogate the safe third country agreement when in fact an application is before the courts. It's been appealed to the courts. A decision has not been rendered, and in fact certain questions have been posed for the court to decide upon with respect to the very subject matter of this motion.

It would seem to me that since we have left this in abeyance for this time, it would only make sense to either leave it in abeyance or vote against it until the decision of the court is rendered. With the subject matter of this thing, it shouldn't be something that we as a committee should be undertaking without the benefit of that judgment. So I would say that we should all oppose this motion.

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle

Is it your wish to proceed with the motion, Ms. Chow?

It is the member's wish to proceed, and I see no other debate on it.

(Motion negatived)

3:35 p.m.

NDP

Olivia Chow NDP Trinity—Spadina, ON

Is Mr. Carrier here for the vote? I think he just had a phone call.

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle

Let's proceed with our second motion.

I think we will leave the second motion alone, will we not? Mr. Karygiannis is not here to present his motion.

The next motion and the one after that and the one after that will be just held. Does anybody have any idea of Mr. Karygiannis' presence or absence today?

We will go to Mr. St-Cyr.

Mr. St-Cyr has indicated that he is going to further postpone his motion.

So we will go to Mr. Telegdi's motion:

That, when the House returns from the summer adjournment, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the Committee study the government's system for determining if applicants under the provision for the federal skilled worker class will be able to become economically established in Canada, and that, as part of the study, the Committee travel to Australia and New Zealand to examine the analogous systems in those countries.

Mr. Telegdi, please.

3:35 p.m.

Liberal

Andrew Telegdi Liberal Kitchener—Waterloo, ON

Basically, Mr. Chair, it's an issue that the committee has talked about over the years--

3:35 p.m.

Some hon. members

[Inaudible--Editor]

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle

Order, please.

Mr. Telegdi.

3:35 p.m.

Liberal

Andrew Telegdi Liberal Kitchener—Waterloo, ON

We have made references to Australia's model of dealing with this. Both Australia and New Zealand seem to be doing it a lot better than we are, so I think it's an issue that we should have on the agenda, and, time permitting, we should make a commitment to check on some of these places, particularly when they're doing it better than we are doing it.

3:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle

That's a good point.

Is there any further discussion on the motion?

Mr. Komarnicki.

3:40 p.m.

Conservative

Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK

The first point I want to raise is that we still have some unfinished business from this session when we come back. We must not forget Bill C-17. It needs to be completed--we're part way into it--before any study starts.

To speak to the motion itself, there's probably some agreement on the committee's part that the point system should be looked at or studied. Indeed, Mr. Telegdi brought a person before the committee not that long ago to point out some of what could be considered the issues or concerns related to the point system. There's no problem with dealing with the point system, but whether one needs to travel to Australia and New Zealand to be able to deal with the point system is another matter.

It would seem to me that the problems or issues we have with the point system can be studied here. We can certainly get the people who are knowledgeable of the Australian system here either by teleconference or by actually having them come here, as one or two persons, as opposed to having the whole committee, and everything that goes with it, going there.

So I would proposed an amendment to that motion that deletes the words “and that, as part of the study, the Committee travel to Australia and New Zealand to examine the analogous systems in those countries”. I would so move.

3:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle

Mr. Telegdi.

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

Andrew Telegdi Liberal Kitchener—Waterloo, ON

I will speak against the motion, Mr. Chair.

We're not ward councillors here. This is something the committee has talked about over the years. We never did have a satisfactory situation in which we could even get the Australian embassy to come in here to talk to us on various issues. Australia has been held up as the model of a system that functions efficiently, and it would serve us well to make that journey. We're a national parliament. We're competing with other countries, particularly Australia, for immigrants. It wouldn't be satisfactory to make a half-hearted effort on this. It's something we should really seriously undertake, and I think we would be serving Canadians well by so doing.

So I'm against the motion.

3:40 p.m.

Conservative

Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK

It's the amendment.

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

Andrew Telegdi Liberal Kitchener—Waterloo, ON

I'm against the amendment.

3:40 p.m.

NDP

Olivia Chow NDP Trinity—Spadina, ON

Can I hear the amendment?

3:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle

You have Mr. Telegdi's motion before you. It's the last one in your package.

The amendment would be to delete in the last three lines of Mr. Telegdi's motion “and that, as part of the study, the Committee travel to Australia and New Zealand to examine the analogous systems in these countries”.

The question is on the amendment.

(Amendment negatived)

3:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle

We will now go to the main motion.

(Motion agreed to)

3:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle

We can now go back to Mr. Karygiannis' motions.

I would call your attention to the first motion.

Are you ready for your motions, Mr. Karygiannis?

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

Jim Karygiannis Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON

I sure am, Mr. Chair.

3:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle

The first one reads:

That this committee undertake a study of the effectiveness of the Foreign Credentials Referral Office, call witnesses from the Department...stakeholders, immigration practitioners, lawyers, community organizations, and professional organizations and groups; that a report be compiled; and that the chair present it in the House of Commons.