Evidence of meeting #89 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal
I call the meeting to order. We are in public.
As Ms. Kwan earlier asked for her question to be in public, I'll give her the floor.
Ms. Kwan, go ahead, please.
4:45 p.m.
NDP
Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
We're getting towards the end of the year, so we're trying to tie up some unfinished business. Committee members will recall that—
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Greg McLean Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
On a point of order, Mr. Chair, I'd like to make sure I'm on the speakers list so we don't end the meeting right after Ms. Kwan's motion.
Thank you.
4:45 p.m.
NDP
Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I was saying that we're moving towards the end of the year. There's some unfinished business that I would like to wrap up with respect to this committee.
Committee members will remember that, back before the summer recess, we were actually embarking on the process of the study around international students who were being cheated and subjected to exploitation by bad actors.
The committee agreed with respect to a motion that I had made related to that, and a subsequent press release was to be issued. The former chair—not you, Mr. Chair—did follow through on that. However, the press release that was issued did not actually reflect the will of the committee and was done without the consent of the committee. I took great offence, not just for myself but because, given the way we operate with the work we do here, it has to reflect the will of the committee.
A motion I had put on the table at that time was debated but it was not resolved. That was back on June 19, 2023.
To that end, Mr. Chair, I'd like to bring this motion back up. I would like to move:
That the committee report to the House of Commons the potential breach of privilege resulting from the issuance of a press release by the committee on June 14, 2023 which altered the language that was adopted in the motion unanimously on June 7, 2023 by editorializing the content of the motion, adding additional information that was not part of the original motion, and outright omitting information, including the specific call to waive inadmissibility on the basis of misrepresentation; the motion specifically instructed the committee to issue a news release to “condemn the actions of these fraudulent 'ghost consultants' and call on the Canada Border Services Agency to immediately stay pending deportations of affected international students, waive inadmissibility on the basis of misrepresentation and provide an alternate pathway to permanent status for those impacted, such as the Humanitarian and Compassionate application process or a broad regularization program” and this was not accurately reflected in the content of the issued press release.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal
Thank you.
It is exactly the same motion as was brought forward, so I'm going to ask the committee if it's the will of the committee to resume the debate on this motion.
I have three options. One is to proceed at the chair's discretion; the second is to proceed by consensus of the committee; and the third is to take a vote. That's what I'm asking the committee, because it is exactly the same motion that was brought forward earlier. To resume the debate, I need to have the will of the committee.
Is it the will of the committee to resume the debate on this?
We will take a vote on this one.
4:50 p.m.
Bloc
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
Mr. Chair, I think we are voting to resume debate. Is that correct?
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal
Just so every member is clear, since Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe asked, this vote is on whether or not to resume the debate on the motion presented by Ms. Kwan.
(Motion agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0)
Mr. Drouin, you had your hand up. Is there anything you want to add?
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
Francis Drouin Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Mr. Chair, I'm not a regular member of this committee, but I recognize that Ms. Kwan has raised an issue with regard to a press release.
I've been a member for eight years. Normally, members will look at a press release and they'll comment perhaps on certain language, but oftentimes we don't necessarily comment. I know you weren't in the chair at the time, as stated by the member. I'm not sure if the clerk was the clerk at the time.
I'm just seeking clarification. Perhaps the clerk could provide some information to this committee before we get down this pathway of a breach of privilege. I don't know if that sounds procedurally correct, to say that this is a breach privilege on a press release. It may be a communication error, but I'd like to seek some clarification because, obviously, I can't enter into this debate without the proper information.
I have enough experience to understand how committees work, and on a press release it seems a bit too much to say this is a breach of privilege.
I'd love to seek some clarification. Perhaps the clerk can provide some information to this committee.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal
Thank you, Mr. Drouin.
This is not the place for the clerk to get in, because I chair the meeting, and I'll take the lead on this one. Your motion is already on the floor. I will leave it to the members to debate.
I will not ask the clerk to come forward at this point in time, even though he was the clerk at that time. That is my decision.
Mr. El-Khoury.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
Fayçal El-Khoury Liberal Laval—Les Îles, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Regarding this motion on the floor from Ms. Kwan, I would like to know some details from our colleague, Ms. Kwan.
What are the points that you're not satisfied with, and why do you think the privilege is breached? We would like to be convinced in order to have a good judgment when it comes to voting.
4:50 p.m.
NDP
Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I'm happy to respond. If the committee members actually go back and look at the press release that was issued by the chair on behalf of this committee, all the items that I had laid out in my motion are where the significant differences are. At the time I moved the motion for the press release to be released to incorporate that information, the committee was very specific.
In this committee, what we have done in the past is that when a press release is issued, literally the words of the committee's motion are adopted into that press release. This wasn't done here. There was deliberate omission of information and alteration of the content.
To me, that is entirely disrespecting the will of the committee. That should not be accepted. We're all honourable members. I understand there's a process through which we have to go. We have to get support from committee members to get the majority to move things forward. I understand that. I understand that I'm one voice around this table, and I don't always get my way.
However, in that instance the motion did pass, and the committee did pass it. However, the outcome did not reflect that. I believe that is a breach of my privilege. This is why I think it should be reported to the House. It should be investigated and looked into. It's important not only just for this moment in time, not just for me as a member of Parliament. It could happen to any of us. It could happen in any other committee as well. There are rules that we need to follow, and there are processes that we need to respect.
That's why I'm putting this forward at this point in time. It's unfinished business from this year, something that bothered me a lot at the time. However, in the interest of getting on with the work that we needed to get through, I did not bring this back up. I waited until we had a moment, and now we do actually have a moment to do that. That's why I'm bringing it forward again.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal
I hear that some of the members might not have the exact wording of the motion. I would ask, Mr. Clerk, if I can suspend the meeting for a few minutes so that you can distribute that wording in both languages, please.
We're suspended.
5 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal
We'll resume.
The floor is open for debate on the motion.
Ms. Kayabaga, go ahead, please.
5 p.m.
Liberal
Arielle Kayabaga Liberal London West, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
It took me a while to remember this motion. I think I remember it. If I'm correct, I remember the previous chair, MP Zahid—the chair at the time—explaining there was no malicious intent to remove any points in the original motion that was moved by our colleague MP Kwan. I was under the impression that we had moved on from that. We had conversations, and the explanation was accepted by the committee. I could be wrong. I would love to be corrected if I'm wrong, but it's my understanding that the chair made the press release, and a couple of points were missed in it. She was given an opportunity to explain her error and I think she, at the time, apologized.
Can we get some information on that particular conversation? I don't even know if we have any meeting notes on that meeting. There are a lot of new people on this committee who don't know what transpired. It's been a while and we've forgotten what transpired. Can we get a bit more information on what happened? Perhaps you can pull up some meeting notes on specific conversations or whatever decision was made, and on how we moved forward.
I don't remember how we dealt with the situation, and I think refreshing our memories with how we dealt with it will help us move forward.
Thank you.
5 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal
Thank you.
I have a list of speakers. I have Mr. Chiang, Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe, Ms. Kwan, Mr. Ali and Mr. El-Khoury. I also have Mr. Drouin.
Mr. Drouin, I will put you just before Mr. El-Khoury, if that's okay. I just noticed you were on.
Before I go to the members, I'm going to ask the clerk, now, to explain the facts of the motions that were presented. Please pay attention. Once the members are ready, I will ask the clerk to update us, not on the discussions but just on the facts of what happened.
Mr. Clerk, go ahead. The floor is yours.
5 p.m.
The Clerk of the Committee Mr. Keelan Buck
These are the facts related to the public record and the Minutes of Proceedings of June 19, 2023.
During the meeting of the committee, “[Ms.] Kwan raised a potential question of privilege regarding the committee's issuing of a news release that altered the language of the motion adopted by the committee on Wednesday, June 7, 2023.” The chair ruled that the matter, in her opinion, did not relate to privilege. The decision of the chair was appealed. On a recorded division, the decision was overturned. As such, the chair invited the member to move an appropriate motion. Ms. Kwan moved that motion, which is the one on which debate resumes today. Debate arose. Then, on motion, that debate was adjourned and the meeting continued with witnesses.
5 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal
Thank you, Mr. Clerk.
Before I go to members, Ms. Kayabaga, do you have a question for the clerk on what he said to make clarification?
5 p.m.
Liberal
Arielle Kayabaga Liberal London West, ON
I posed a question about refreshing our memories of what happened, so we can all remember.
Mr. Chair, if you will allow me—
5 p.m.
Liberal
Arielle Kayabaga Liberal London West, ON
Thank you.
Can you go back to what you just read, the motion part? There was a part I missed, because people were speaking at the same time. At the beginning, did you say who wrote the press release? Can you read the first part of what you just read? I missed that part.
5:05 p.m.
The Clerk
For sure. It begins with, “[Ms.] Kwan raised a potential question of privilege regarding the committee’s issuing of a news release that altered the language of the motion adopted by the committee on Wednesday, June 7, 2023.” It was then ruled by the chair that, in her opinion, the matter did not relate to privilege. That decision was appealed, and it was overturned on a recorded division.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
Arielle Kayabaga Liberal London West, ON
Going back to that, does this mean that a motion to resume that debate, which has already been voted on...? Is this standard procedure? I don't know. I just want to understand.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal
Ms. Kayabaga, could you please elaborate? What do you mean by “standard”?
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
Arielle Kayabaga Liberal London West, ON
We're debating something we've already voted on and moved on from. My understanding, when we resumed debate, was that this was not ruled on, not voted on, and that there was no decision made, which is why I was open to resuming the debate. Now it sounds as if we've made a decision.
Does that mean we can't resume this debate, or does that mean we can go back and rehash the conversation and vote again? I'm not sure what.... I feel as if we've already made a decision, and I'm not sure what the standard procedure is right now to be able to do that.