Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Jan. 30th, 2007

[Jim Karygiannis, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

I want to warn you that there's a challenge in that ruling, as I want to challenge the ruling that you made with me on a point of privilege.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

I haven't made a ruling on this yet. Thank you for your contribution.

Mr. Siksay.

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

Thank you, Chair.

I think Mr. Wilson has asked an important question. I don't think it goes to the nomination process. I think it goes to the screening process, which is separate from the nomination process. So I'm very interested in the answer to the question that Mr. Wilson has proposed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Okay.

I guess we'll get one from this side as well.

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

I just want to add a point. When you look at why the candidates are here today, the basis for which they're here was Mr. Karygiannis' motion, to begin with, under Standing Order 110 or 111. That's why they're here.

If you look at Standing Order 111, it will say that the committee specified shall, if it deems appropriate, “call the so named appointee or nominee to appear before it” and “shall examine the qualifications and competence of the appointee or nominee to perform the duties of the post to which he or she has been appointed or nominated.”

It's not a process issue, and I think we've gotten off on that somewhat. The question is, what are the duties of the post, which Judge Simard has outlined. You can ask questions under those particular sections as to the qualifications and competence, but not the process that may have got them there, because that's an event that has already happened and it's a done issue. So I think your ruling relating to any questions relating to something other than qualifications to perform duties is entirely in order, and we should respect that, not only here but with all other people who appear before this committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Mr. Wilson.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would draw people's attention to the briefing notes prepared for today's meeting from the parliamentary library, which discuss in detail the initial screening process and even propose as a suggested question “Please describe the interview you went through as part of the screening process”. So I'm sure that it has been vetted to be appropriate, if it has gone through the Library of Parliament.

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

If you read the section in the Standing Orders, it's quite clear.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

The advice I'm getting here from the clerk, which I depend on quite heavily, is that the nomination process is one that we wouldn't go into, but the screening process and general questions about the screening process would not apply in this particular instance. So I can't see anything in the Standing Orders that would prevent us from asking some general questions on the screening process. This is what I'm advised by the clerk here.

So, Mr. Gill, if you feel like answering that question but not get into the nomination process or the political end of it....

Originally, in regard to Mr. Karygiannis, it was because I felt that he was wandering into the area of political affiliation.

[Jim Karygiannis, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

It was, and I do want to challenge your ruling.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

That's fine. There's a process to do that.

Judge Simard.

[Michel Simard]

Through you, Mr. Chair, to answer the question, when we had a change of government, the process was declared to be under review. The people here were not subjected to the screening process. I think I addressed that question with Mr. Siksay.

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

Could I ask for verification of that? I think that information is different from what I understood Judge Simard to have said before.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

I think Blair is on the floor now. If you wish to raise that as a point of order, Mr. Siksay, I'd be happy to entertain it. In the meantime, I'll go back to Mr. Wilson.

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

I just wanted to clarify whether it was with the change in government or the change in minister. We recently had a change in minister, and that's what I understood from your previous answer, Judge.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

I think it was the change of government.

[Michel Simard]

It was with the change of government.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Okay.

Mr. Wilson.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Clearly we have the answer that the four appointees here are a result of a change in the process. None of them went through the normal screening process that the government has had up to date. The new Conservative government brought in a new process that circumvented the previous screening process that we had before.

The next question I have that also shocks and angers me as much as that is the inaction or incompetence of this government to deal with the shortages. We talked about football, and I played hockey, but it looks like you've been playing short-handed here for the last 12 months. I'm wondering whether it is incompetence in the Conservative government that accounts for the fact that we have a shortfall of nine out of 28 judges. Thirty percent of our judges' positions have not been filled in the last 12 months. Is that incompetence, or is it a lack of political will to deal with the process, thus increasing the backlog and keeping immigrants from coming to Canada?

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Mr. Wilson, I would have to rule that irrelevant to the qualifications of the individuals who are here before us today. I think we're placing the witnesses in an unfair position to ask them to comment upon the competence of the government. Whether it's a Tory government or a Liberal government, regardless of political stripe, I think it's totally out of order to ask witnesses, especially witnesses of this calibre, to comment.

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

Let me carry on then, Mr. Chair.

[Michel Simard]

Mr. Chairman, I would like to clarify something for the sake of fairness. I have been at the helm of the commission for three years. I've seen three governments, and I can tell you that the shortage of judges or the fact that we were dealing with delays is not necessarily confined to only one of them. To tell you the truth, without giving a pat on the back to the current one, we have seen progress in terms of the number of judges we have been able to appoint over the last six or seven months. In order to keep the record straight, it would be irresponsible on my part to let the committee believe that the shortage of the judges is the appanage of only one government. I think the responsibility could be shared. I can tell you that we are now heading in the right direction.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

I've been in the hands of the committee here from the moment we sat down to examine the various people before us. My hands are tied here, but we have to confine our questions to the ability and qualifications of the individuals. I could have interrupted a lot of questioning here today because we got outside of that. I was trying to establish certain parameters so that we didn't wander into the political area.

Again, let me remind members, I didn't write the Standing Orders, but the Standing Orders are here for the committee to follow. I've read them on several occasions to state what the parameters are. I would ask members in their questioning to remain within these parameters. Process is not part of it. The nomination process is not part of it. The political affiliation is not part of it. Simply, the qualifications, competency, and ability of the individuals to perform their roles are what this hearing is about today.

I think I should give you a bit of extra time, Mr. Wilson, because of the various interventions I and others have made.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I wasn't getting into the political aspects of it. What I was trying to deal with was the Conservatives' circumvention of the screening process for these candidates. What I was trying to deal with was the merit of the candidates, irrespective of their public service. I believe for anybody who has public service--provincial, federal, or municipal, with whichever party--it's going to be a beneficial aspect to their résumé going forward. The more community service we have, the better.

What I was trying to get at was whether the screening process that we've always used to choose judges is the one that was used with these four people. The answer was clear--

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

I could rule that out of order if we want to stick strictly to the Standing Orders, because you're wandering outside of the qualifications and the abilities of the individuals to perform their duties.

Anyway, I'll allow a comment, Mr. Simard, if you wanted to comment on what Mr. Wilson said.