Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 1-15 of 45
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I think your phrase “mixed signals” is right. I would agree with that. I think what we're getting is mixed signals. What I would encourage the government to do is to give a consistent signal, with everything moving in the same direction.

May 1st, 2012Committee meeting

David Matas

Citizenship and Immigration committee  In Manitoba the refugee or any immigration detainee is put in the general population, because there isn't a specific.... In smaller centres, that's the rule. In terms of constitutionality, well, I haven't really talked about that, but I am a lawyer. In fact I was a judge in a m

May 1st, 2012Committee meeting

David Matas

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I wouldn't quite put it that way.

May 1st, 2012Committee meeting

David Matas

Citizenship and Immigration committee  What I feel is that it's inconsistent. As I say, the government has been quite good on human rights in Sri Lanka. It's just that this bill does not carry forward that message consistently. It's at cross-purposes with other things. Also, in terms of regional resettlement or region

May 1st, 2012Committee meeting

David Matas

Citizenship and Immigration committee  If I may react to your various comments, first of all, in terms of the minister, I do not mean my comments to be a personal attack on the minister. There are many things he has done and said that I admire and endorse completely. It's just that I don't agree with everything he doe

May 1st, 2012Committee meeting

David Matas

May 1st, 2012Committee meeting

David Matas

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I have no problem with that.

May 1st, 2012Committee meeting

David Matas

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I think the issue is just around privacy concerns. But as long as they are protected, the actual identification shouldn't be an issue.

May 1st, 2012Committee meeting

David Matas

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I'm happy to answer your question. I'm going to try to answer the previous question because to a certain extent they're similar questions. What message do we convey, and what happens when we do these things? The message we convey is that it's okay to violate human rights. We're

May 1st, 2012Committee meeting

David Matas

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Because we're not respecting the human rights of Sri Lankans who come here. That's the problem.

May 1st, 2012Committee meeting

David Matas

Citizenship and Immigration committee  We're detaining them for lengthy periods of time without judicial review. We're denying them family reunification. We're putting children in detention. We are denying the possibility of error correction. We are mistreating refugees.

May 1st, 2012Committee meeting

David Matas

May 1st, 2012Committee meeting

David Matas

Citizenship and Immigration committee  The fact that people and their children are better here in detention, and they don't get an appeal and they are still better off than in Sri Lanka, to me, is not a justification for the legislation.

May 1st, 2012Committee meeting

David Matas

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I'm not saying the legislation is justified. I'm not arguing that.

May 1st, 2012Committee meeting

David Matas

Citizenship and Immigration committee  If you say to people who are refugees from a country, who are fleeing human rights violations, “We don't want to protect you, we don't want you here, and we're trying to discourage you from coming”, that's saying we don't care about the violations in the country they come from.

May 1st, 2012Committee meeting

David Matas