Canadian Heritage Committee on June 5th, 2023

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Personally, I would have voted in favour of this motion. I don't know how my Conservative colleagues would have voted. I just want to make sure that the motion would have been defeated for real.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Well, we can call for the vote if you wish. We're here and we have six or seven minutes.

Go ahead, Madam Clerk, if you don't mind. Call for the vote.

(Motion negatived: nays 8; yeas 2 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

We will not meet as a committee on Friday, June 9.

The other one is that everyone on the committee got a note today about Judge Aquilina. She is available to come, but only on Monday, June 19. Last Thursday, we set aside...that we would give Gabrielle the instructions for safe sport so she can work over the summer on a report.

Are you willing to bring Judge Aquilina for one hour on the 19th, which is the Monday?

Are there any comments from the committee on that?

Mrs. Thomas.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

I have a point of clarification. She would be coming for the first half of that meeting, and then the second half of that meeting would be to give some instructions with regard to drafting the report. Is that correct?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

That's correct.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Okay.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Is everyone fine with that?

That will set you up, Clerk, to invite Judge Aquilina for the first hour on Monday, June 19, from 11 to noon. In the second hour, we'll talk about the drafting instructions for the analysts.

Are there any other questions?

Go ahead, Ms. Thomas.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Is that topic wrapped up?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

That topic is gone.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

I do have a motion that I attempted to move the other day, but I was filibustered by the party opposite. I'll bring that back to the table now.

That motion had to do with the changes that have been made to the Canadian passport. As is known, Canadians weren't consulted on that decision, and my hope would be that the committee could look at this more closely.

My motion reads as follows:

That the committee immediately undertake a study regarding the recently announced changes to the Canadian passport; in particular the decision by the government to remove images that reflected Canadian culture and history; that the Minister of Heritage be invited to appear as part of this study; that this study consist of three meetings; that witness lists be due within five days of the adoption of this motion; and that the committee report its findings and recommendations to the House.

I think it should be noted again that the changes made to the passport were done without any public consultation whatsoever. Things like Quebec City were removed from the passport, and also Terry Fox, who was diagnosed with cancer and then, determined to take on the battle, ran more than halfway across our country—with one leg, I should add—in wanting to draw attention to cancer and cancer research. Of course, his legacy lives on.

Vimy Ridge has been removed from our passport, which, of course, is of our dear veterans, who fought a fierce battle. They made history, which is something that our country traditionally has been very proud of. We wear a poppy every November, and the reason we do so is in honour of those who have fought, those who have fallen and the loved ones, of course, who have been left behind. Why we would remove this image from our passport is beyond me. I know that many veterans are hurt by this decision and have some significant questions that they would like to ask with regard to it.

Another notable change to the passport would be that the first member of Parliament who was female, Nellie McClung, was also removed. Again, for a feminist government to make that decision seems quite rich. Also, I think there's something there to be said with regard to our history and the celebration of such an achievement and such an incredible woman. Again, this was done without consultation and, really, without any due reason.

Ultimately, it comes down to our history and whether or not it is going to be preserved; I believe a choice was made by this government to begin erasing it. That's a sad day, and many Canadians are quite discouraged by this decision, if not outright angry and altogether frustrated.

Because folks might be curious, I should add what those historic pieces were replaced with. They were replaced with a man raking leaves. They were replaced with a boy jumping into a lake. They were replaced with a squirrel eating a nut. These are the types of images that have replaced the historic moments of history in our country, the cities of tremendous value and the people of remarkable character who have fought good fights.

With that, given that there has been such substantial change made to such an integral document within our country and that is held dearly by the citizens of this nation, I would ask that we study it at committee.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

I have a point of order.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

I have Mr. Bittle with a point of order.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

I have a question about this being within the jurisdiction of the committee.

Passports are under Citizenship and Immigration. The items that we discuss, heritage and sport, do not venture into this. I know there's a similar motion before the immigration committee. It's within their realm of debate. I don't believe it's within our realm of debate. That it's not a receivable motion is ultimately my objection.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

I'm going to ask the clerk.

Geneviève?

She actually needs a few minutes to look at the mandate properly, so we'll suspend for a couple of minutes.

We have until 1:15, everyone, so it's not a hard stop at 1:00, but it is a hard stop at 1:15. We have some time, and we'll just ask Geneviève about what Chris was talking about.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Okay, we're back.

Under “Citizenship and Immigration Canada”, it states here, “In July 2013, responsibility for certain areas of Passport Canada's activities were transferred from the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada. The committee has been empowered to undertake studies on these matters since that date.”

The other issue that we could have is the mandate; that's the mandate from immigration.

If I had anything to say—I'm sitting in the chair—unfortunately, I would rule that it would fall under immigration.

Yes, Mrs. Thomas.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

I'm hoping that this doesn't have to be an official challenge.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

It can be. I'm up for it.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

The motion that has been moved is with regard to a decision to remove historical pieces from the passport, which has everything to do with heritage. This is not about the procedure of its production, which, of course, was passed on to IRCC. This has to do with its content, which is the history of our nation, which has been largely erased.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Give me 20 seconds. We're just bringing up the page for Canadian Heritage.

You are correct. The Department of Canadian Heritage could study historical significance, so I'll give you that.

I'm looking for a ruling from around the table.

Ms. Zarrillo.

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I think many Canadians share equal disappointment about losing some of those historic figures on the passport.

Certainly, in my community, in Coquitlam.... It is where Terry Fox trained, where he lived in the community of Port Coquitlam. I know that his family has asked—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

I'm going to rule because we looked at the symbols here. It will be admissible.

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

—for his name not to be politicized. I just put that comment on the table because, obviously, Terry Fox and his family deserve a lot of respect.

At the same time, Minister Gould was at the HUMA committee just last week, where she talked about how this is a security project along with IRCC. I do think this is important, that they could potentially do some study on it, but that it should go to IRCC. Although there may be a heritage component to this, it's national security at the forefront on the passports.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Thank you for those comments.

Mr. Martel.

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

This is an interesting topic. The image of the Château Frontenac in the Quebec City skyline was also removed. It would be good to know why it's no longer in the passport. We need more information on that.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Okay.

Mrs. Thomas, I would rule your motion here admissible, only because of the symbols.

Is there anything else you would like to add to this, then?

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Just that we return to the proper speaking list.