Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Oct. 3rd, 2012

[The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims (Newton—North Delta, NDP)), NDP, Jinny Sims]

I'd like to call the meeting to order.

We are here for the ongoing study on ensuring that Canada's immigration system is secure.

Today we have two segments. During the first segment we'll have Benjamin Muller, professor of political science from King's University; followed by Dr. Mark Tyndall, professor and head, division of infectious diseases, at the University of Ottawa. You will each have 10 minutes to speak, and then we will have a series of questions.

I want to remind everybody that this is televised, just so everyone is aware.

Yes, Député Dykstra.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

I have a couple of questions specifically to you, Chair, and it has to do with both of the individuals here, who, as I understand it, were your witnesses. These are witnesses you submitted to the clerk?

[The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims), NDP, Jinny Sims]

I believe.....

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Or it may have been Mr. Lamoureux. Both of them?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Yes, I believe they both are.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Okay. Then the set-up is fine, because my questions are about process and how we're going to handle it this afternoon.

I certainly, obviously, want to thank witnesses who come to committee to present on behalf of their perspective on the issues we are dealing with.

I do have a question for Mr. Lamoureux, and that is that while Dr. Tyndall obviously has a great deal of background and research and understanding of issues pertaining to the health and welfare of those in our communities, I'm not sure—and I'd like to make sure and get your specific understanding on this—how his presentation is going to relate to the study of the security of our borders here in Canada.

[The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims), NDP, Jinny Sims]

Député Lamoureux.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I do find it a little bit surprising. Last Monday we were sitting here and we had a presenter. I believe it was a possible Conservative presenter who came forward and made his presentation based on multiculturalism. It was, I thought, fairly well received in terms of the members.

I would suggest to you that this particular witness you're referring to has a great deal of background knowledge. There are many refugees who come to Canada who might have issues surrounding health. I think it is appropriate. I would suggest we just continue on and listen to the presentations, and then go forward from there.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Through you, Chair, I want to be fair to Dr. Tyndall. I don't have an issue with him presenting here today, but as you know, we did lay out as a subcommittee, which was later verified and agreed to by the committee, that we would be specific around the security issues relating to immigration. If you recall, this was one of the suggestions you made to have this study based on your readings of the Auditor General's report.

So if Dr. Tyndall is here today to speak to the issues of security as they relate to refugees and the perspective he has on that issue, I obviously have no problem with that whatsoever.

I just want to make sure that in fact it does relate to the security of those who are in this country and those who want to come to this country.

[The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims), NDP, Jinny Sims]

As chair, I want to say that areas of study that are included—just so we are all aware, because I know it has been awhile since we reviewed those—are biometrics, war criminals, security clearance checks, border security, visas, detention, and removal.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

If his presentation is pertaining to those issues, then I would like to hear what both Mr. Muller and Dr. Tyndall have to say this afternoon.

[The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims), NDP, Jinny Sims]

Back to Député Lamoureux.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Chair, I do appreciate the comments from the minister, and I do appreciate your comments as chair, but I think it's important to recognize that all political parties have the opportunity to invite guests.

You cannot tell me that the health and well-being of refugees is not relevant to this particular committee. Many refugees who come to our country are in need of health care services.

I don't want to, in any way, tell a witness what he can or cannot present. I'm sure he would have been made aware of what the committee is dealing with. I'm not going to censure his comments. I think we should just continue. It's a 10-minute presentation. When we had a witness here on Monday who only talked about multiculturalism, I didn't say, “On a point of order, let's be relevant”, and then dictate exactly what the chair just finished dictating. In fact, if we forced every presenter to adhere to what the chair just dictated, I suspect there would have been numerous points of order.

I don't think Mr. Tyndall should be singled out in any fashion whatsoever. He should be allowed to make his presentation. If you don't believe it's relevant and important to ask questions, I'll be more than happy to take the Conservatives' questions. We have two witnesses here. You don't even have to ask your questions of that particular witness.

I would suggest that it is in order and that we continue.

[The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims), NDP, Jinny Sims]

As chair, I was trying to show that there is an overarching—it's not just a very narrow definition of who appears as witnesses. At no time was I trying to narrow the field. From the chair's perspective, I do not see an issue with the witness, because he is going to be talking about one aspect of security.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

My intentions are not to do anything of the sort that Mr. Lamoureux is suggesting. I'm merely pointing out that we need to be fair to witnesses who come here. When they're making a presentation, if they aren't aware of or understand how it relates to the overarching security issue we're studying at committee, it puts them in an awkward position. It also puts me in an awkward position, as parliamentary secretary and lead on this side, to continually interrupt, or to question whether the discussion we're having is relevant to the study we're working through.

Rather than just be quiet and go through that process as he's presenting or as someone's asking questions, I thought it would be more polite to lay it out before the actual presentation started, so he would be aware, and also that I could, in all fairness, relate my concern to you. Obviously, you don't think it's a problem, so I'm going to assume it won't be.

[The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims), NDP, Jinny Sims]

Okay.

I've got a speakers' list and I want to stop this two-way dialogue, important as it is. You can maybe have that on your own later or get in line.

I have two other speakers, and I'm going to Député Menegakis first.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would add my voice to what Mr. Dykstra said. I believe we need to stick with the terms of reference as they relate to the specific subject we are studying, which is security. If the witnesses, no matter who they are, were kind enough to appear before us and are testifying in accordance with the terms of reference in the invitation—I think that's what Mr. Dykstra was trying to bring up—we certainly have no problem.

[The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims), NDP, Jinny Sims]

Thank you.

Député Groguhé, go ahead.

[Sadia Groguhé, NDP, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I have a point of order. It's important for us to be able to begin asking the witnesses questions. That being said, we all receive the list of witnesses, as many as we are. I think that, in good conscience, we invite our witnesses based on what we have to study. So far, I don't think I have noted any discrepancies between the testimonies of our guests and the study we are carrying out in committee.

This is just a point of order to accelerate the process and begin asking our witnesses questions. Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims), NDP, Jinny Sims]

Député Lamoureux, go ahead.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I want to emphasize a couple of points. When we ask witnesses to come before the committee...it's important to recognize that you have 12 members of Parliament sitting in a very formal room. That, itself, can be somewhat intimidating to some witnesses. I'm not suggesting that Mr. Tyndall or other witnesses are intimidated per se by it, but it's something we should at least be aware of.

I don't believe that it is in fact appropriate for us to start every meeting dictating what we expect witnesses to be providing comment on.

If there's a government policy that has been made that in essence takes away health care services, for example, from refugees, does that have any sort of a risk factor? I would suggest to you that it could be a risk factor.

I don't want to tell a presenter what he or she can or cannot present. We're affording the people the opportunity to present before this committee on what they believe is important to them in relation to immigration and citizenship. In this particular case we're studying, as has been pointed out, we're hoping for a detailed report to be able to provide recommendations to the minister.

At the end of the day, if we believe there is a need to have a recommendation that says that reinstating health care services or anything of that nature will ultimately be better and improve the security of Canada, then we need to talk about it. If you have people who are denied the opportunity to be able to get some sort of medical treatment, for example, and they end up falling on the other side of the law as a direct result of that, I think that is something that is worthy of being able to talk about.

I'll leave it at that. I would hope—

[The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims), NDP, Jinny Sims]

I'm going to take a point of order. I just want to say that I think I've heard a fair bit of debate. I'm going to take the point of order, and then I'm going to make a ruling.

A point of order.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

My point of order is that I think we really need to go in camera on this. My colleague across the way, Mr. Lamoureux, is talking about policies that we're not discussing in this particular session of our committee on security. I think if he needs to air that, it does not need to be done in front of the witnesses, who are here to speak to this committee.

So I'm going to put a motion forward that we go in camera to allow Mr. Lamoureux to continue talking about the other issues he has.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair (Ms. Jinny Jogindera Sims), NDP, Jinny Sims]

I'm trying to seek some guidance, because in the world I've lived in, I didn't know a point of order could lead to a motion to go in camera.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

It's a dilatory motion.