Citizenship and Immigration Committee on June 19th, 2006

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

So I guess that's out of the question. Fair enough.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

So Madam Faille will go ahead with her meetings, and maybe we can do it on Wednesday.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

That's fine. I want to bring that to the attention of the committee.

For the second point, I know that when the issue was raised by Mr. Siksay with respect to the three motions, I had filed some of my written arguments respecting that. I want to make certain they would apply to the motion that was discussed here. I'll refile the arguments with the chair to be sure—

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

This is for the third motion?

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Right, with respect to the third motion.

Finally, in the discussion of the.... First of all, we left it to the committee to decide what issues were going to come before this committee in the next session. I think we had some 17 or 18 different suggestions or ideas, and so on. The subcommittee came forward today with six of those motions. I'm not saying those are necessarily the priorities I've chosen, but they are areas we were all looking at.

The one I noticed, which we had mentioned, is not on there. It's the provincial nominee program, which somewhat ties in with the undocumented workers. It was one of the 17 issues or whatever we had on there. It's certainly a program that's being utilized by some, but not all, of the provinces. Maybe it's something we want to consider in some fashion when we're looking at the six—either as a subheading of one of the six, or as an addition to the six. I don't know what the subcommittee's views were—whether they actually looked at that particular issue or not, or whether they simply picked six and it didn't happen to be one of them.

I think it would be appropriate for us to have a larger discussion about whether that particular one should be on the agenda somewhere. It seems relevant to what we're discussing in one fashion or another.

So I'd like to get some direction from the committee or the chair as to whether or not they're open to that additional point.

[Blair Wilson, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Mr. Chair, I understand the member of interest wants to put something else on the agenda. But I would go back to the process we put forward at the very beginning to say, here are the different issues we're all interested in, we laundry-listed 18-plus different issues, and we all submitted our rankings. Then it was up to the steering committee to come up with their top rankings from one to eighteen. I'm assuming this is just one to six, and that there is seven to eighteen in some other format, but let's just work through one to six in the time we have.

[Jennifer Wispinski, Committee Researcher]

Yes, I tabulated per the committee's agreement as to the procedure for prioritizing what the future business would be. I took all of the rankings I had received and tabulated them according to which of these alternatives got the most points, from highest to lowest. So the first six priorities on there are the ones that got the most points, from highest to lowest. The provincial nominee program came in as number nine.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

So when we deal with these six, maybe at some point the provincial nominee program will get on to some of these other agenda items.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Mr. Chair, I want to make the point here. Obviously whether we do the provincial nominee program or not is something that can be decided, and anything that's decided by the steering committee comes back before the larger committee. It's quite appropriate for the larger committee to discuss what the steering committee puts forward. If they wish to add to, amend, or overrule it, that's the way it works. The subcommittee gets its authorization from the committee in the main, so it's not inappropriate to do that. I think we need to be aware of that.

[Blair Wilson, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

I just want to be clear that we're very happy with the way the process has been going, and that we've got a chairman who runs our committee here—

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

And you're not asking for a vote on this?

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

No. I just wanted to say that what we could do is this. It would not be inappropriate for me to amend that by asking that it be added to the list and be defeated by this committee, and that would be quite appropriate—

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

It is on the list. It'll be number nine on the list, according to the points. Everyone was asked to submit their priorities, and they were given a ranking based on the numbers of people who voted for what.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

On a point of order--

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

The steering committee met. We came up with these six because of the points that had been assigned.

Bill.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

On a point of order, Chair, a few minutes ago you called for consensus on the recommendation, and you received it, so we're actually out of order at this point, unless you want to go back to reconsider.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Actually, I received consensus on one and two, and I never brought up three.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

But you did raise three, and then you asked for consensus before you moved on to Mr. Komarnicki.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

You can't get consensus by assuming you might; it has to actually be put. It's not an issue I'm prepared to move an amendment to.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Okay, we'll hear Mr. Telegdi, and then we'll try to close off.

[Andrew Telegdi, Liberal, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Mr. Chair, I think before we close it would be a good thing to figure this out.

Normally, the process is that when somebody raises an objection on procedural grounds, you, as chair, confer with the clerk and then you come a timely decision. I think, from my experience on the committee and sitting in your chair, the motion that was moved is definitely in order, and I hope—

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Are you talking about Mr. Siksay's motion?

[Andrew Telegdi, Liberal, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

That's right.

I hope that in the future you'll make a timely decision around it just by consulting with the clerk. Otherwise, it can seriously impede the work of the committee.

I wish to say to the parliamentary secretary that we've got the chair, we've got two vice-chairs, and you are the parliamentary secretary, and I was parliamentary secretary before. Normally the parliamentary secretaries bring the views of the department; they're there for clarification, but it was never meant to supercede the role of the chair, and I think that's important.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Let me comment on that, because I think it's important, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Okay, this is the last comment and then I'm adjourning the meeting.