Evidence of meeting #45 for Finance in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was clause.
A recording is available from Parliament.
10:35 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield
We'll have the clerk do that.
(Amendment negatived: nays 4; yeas 3; abstentions 3)
(Clause 117 agreed to: yeas 4; nays 3; abstentions 3)
10:40 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield
Can we apply that to clauses 118 and 119?
Would you like to speak to clause 118? Go ahead and speak to it. The floor is yours.
(On clause 118)
10:40 a.m.
NDP
Olivia Chow NDP Trinity—Spadina, ON
Mr. Chair, if you read it very carefully, this section allows the minister to take applications that have been received after the end of February of this year and decide if, in the opinion of the minister...the minister would have an opportunity to either move people to the front of the line or the end of the line, or to not accept the application. It could also set the number of applications or requests to be processed in any year.
Now, paragraph 118(3)(d) is very interesting. It says, “providing for the disposition of applications”, meaning you could apply and be waiting for a year, and then you would be notified that we've changed the rules on you retroactively and we are no longer going to process your application. We're not even going to consider your application. We're not even going to open the file and read your application. This is after you have applied, after you thought you qualified, and they're going to throw out your application. That is the Conservative government's way of dealing with the backlog.
It also says that the instruction will be published in the Canada Gazette. This is after the information has been implemented. It means there will be no opportunity for consultation, because after it's published, that's it, the law is applied. In the past, they would publish the information, allow a period of time for consultation, and then the regulations would be passed or discussed. This means that all of this information, all of these kinds of decisions, will not come through Parliament. They will not come through the immigration and citizenship committee. They will not be debated publicly. They will not be transparent. They will simply be whatever the minister has decided.
You will notice, Mr. Chair, that across Canada many groups have said this is a policy they do not support, and it does irreversible damage to many of the different immigrant communities. That is why you have in front of you some members who have said it is an area they do not support.
This also claims to deal with the backlog. But, Mr. Chair, I want to point out to you that the immigration committee--and you asked for their opinion--said very clearly in a letter to you and to this committee that these changes have nothing to do with the backlog; the 925,000 applicants in the backlog right now will not be affected. So it has nothing to do with the backlog. It is all about having a kind of sweeping power to pick the winners and losers.
If we are moving people to the head of the line, there will be people at the back of the line.
On top of that, much has been said about our need to take the kinds of skilled immigrants we need. In 2002, the PC/DR, which was the Alliance and the Reform Party coalition, had dissenting reports. These reports actually said--and this is from Inky Mark, the critic of--
10:45 a.m.
NDP
10:45 a.m.
NDP
Olivia Chow NDP Trinity—Spadina, ON
There's a huge disconnect between what Liberals say and what they do. They want to be known as the party that supports immigrants.
It's too bad you don't want me to finish it.
10:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield
Thank you very much. Your time has gone.
There is no amendment, so the question is on the motion, and I understand it's a recorded vote.
Mr. Dykstra.
10:45 a.m.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
We each get five minutes. I'm not going to take my five minutes. I'm going to simply state that Ms. Chow didn't come to any of the briefings, and the comments she has made are completely off base and certainly not factual and according to the bill.
I want to make sure that's on the record.
10:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield
Thank you.
We'll now move to a recorded vote on clause 118.
(Clause 118 agreed to: yeas 4; nays 3; abstentions 3)
10:45 a.m.
Conservative
10:45 a.m.
An hon. member
Yes.
10:45 a.m.
Bloc
10:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield
Yes.
(Clauses 119 and 120 agreed to on division: yeas 4; nays 3; abstentions 3)
(On clause 121--Enactment of Act)
10:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield
Now we're into clause 121, and we have a significant number of amendments that have just arrived. I will go through these and identify them by the number. You have them in front of you.
We'll take amendment 3514746 as the first one. I deem that one to be out of order.
Ms. Chow.
10:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield
We are at 3514746. It's a separate package that you just gave us. Do you not have it?
It's three pages.
10:45 a.m.
Bloc
Paul Crête Bloc Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
It is not in the same order. It is second.
10:45 a.m.
Conservative
10:45 a.m.
NDP
Olivia Chow NDP Trinity—Spadina, ON
Sure. I will move the first one, which is on page 99. That, I believe, is on clause....
10:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield
It's 3514746, on the third page, on clause 121. Are you interested in moving it?
10:45 a.m.
NDP