Evidence of meeting #40 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 39th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was next.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Bloc
The Vice-Chair Bloc Meili Faille
If there are no further comments on the motion, I will call the question.
Liberal
Conservative
Rahim Jaffer Conservative Edmonton Strathcona, AB
I thought we were still dealing with an amendment.
Liberal
Blair Wilson Liberal West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC
On a point of order, Madam Chair, while he's writing that out, I think we have some other people here at the table. Should we take this opportunity to question them as to whether or not they have leaked the information that was—
Bloc
The Vice-Chair Bloc Meili Faille
Members are here to finish what they started at the beginning of the week.
Can the motion be read again?
The Clerk
The motion as amended reads:
That the committee invite Mr. Jean-Guy Fleury, Chairperson of the Immigration and Refugee Board, to appear before the committee at an extra meeting of the committee in the week of March 19, and that the committee receive testimony from other witnesses, should it be necessary.
Liberal
Jim Karygiannis Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
As arisen by the testimony of Mr. Jean-Guy Fleury.
Liberal
Bloc
Liberal
Andrew Telegdi Liberal Kitchener—Waterloo, ON
Madam Chair, in speaking to the motion, the Immigration and Refugee Board is not that old. I think we really rejoiced when we finally had a board where the people appointed to make very difficult decisions--life and death decisions--were as free from political influence as possible in the appointment of members. As a member of the Liberal caucus, I lobbied hard for that to happen. We finally came to a point where we were going to be able to deal with the cases in a reasonable timeframe and we were going to make sure that our backlogs came down. While I'm still disappointed that the RAD is not in, I think we have gone a long way.
Quite frankly, if you want to see abuses, moving backwards, I invite members of the committee to pick up a copy of On the Take: Crime, Corruption and Greed in the Mulroney Years and read the chapter, “Yes, Prime Minister”, where it outlines the appointment of people to the IRB. I think everybody will find it shocking and I think everybody would be very much against it.
I'm really sad to see Mr. Fleury put in a position where he had to resign, because more than anyone else in this country, Mr. Fleury exemplified the reforms that were made that took politics out of appointing members to the IRB. I think that's a critical step backwards. I really hope the government will reconsider. But we will have to have Mr. Fleury in to let us know the circumstances surrounding his departure.
Conservative
Rahim Jaffer Conservative Edmonton Strathcona, AB
I'm going to vote against this motion for a couple of reasons.
First, I really like this committee and I think the personalities are great, but adding an extra meeting will be difficult on my part. We've had a whole bunch of extra meetings, especially during the week of the budget. Maybe other people are not so busy, but there's a lot happening.
I know Mr. Telegdi talks about the sudden departure. It seems to me Mr. Fleury had been around for 42 years. If a fellow decides he wants to retire after that sort of involvement in public service, it doesn't surprise me that he may want to retire. He served his government well and I think he deserves that judgment.
It wasn't that long ago, and maybe the clerk can refresh my memory on when Mr. Fleury last appeared in front of the committee. It was only about a month ago, if I'm not mistaken. We had the chance to hear pretty good testimony from Mr. Fleury on a host of issues relating to the IRB and what his feelings were. Even at that time, the appointments he had...he seemed to be quite happy about those particular appointments. I think we're premature in calling Mr. Fleury, who is going to be a private citizen. He's going to be retired by the time our committee next meets.
If my colleague has a problem with the process, then maybe he should wait to see who the new appointment will be before he starts saying there are all these problems and there's political interference. We don't even know who the appointment is going to be.
I'm going to vote against this.
Bloc