Obviously we'll oppose the motion in respect of the error that was made; whether this committee wishes to have the minister respond following the evidence is another question.
It was clear that the minister deferred the question to the deputy minister, and in his letter he's quite clear. He said:
During the February 19, 2007, meeting of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, we were asked about the extent to which the Department had made use of newspaper advertising to inform potentially affected Canadians of the retention rule. I replied that we had advertised but did not know exactly when or where because it took place a couple of years ago.
I wish to inform you that this particular answer was not correct. While the Department did conduct an awareness campaign via posters and various types of notices in our offices in Canada abroad, as well as some outreach with communities and stakeholders such as the Mennonites, it did not run commercial advertisements. More generally on the same subject, I would confirm that since 1980, all people born abroad who were subject to the retention rules received a letter to that effect when they were registered by their parents. On January 1, 2007, in keeping with the 2005 Citizenship and Immigration Standing Committee recommendation, Citizenship and Immigration Canada added an expiry date on the citizenship certificates of individuals affected by the retention rules, as further notification.
It clearly sets out all of what happened. It is a narrow point. I don't think for that reason we should call people back in. It's not necessary; the point's made.
I would say this motion should be opposed. If you want to come up with another motion or request for the minister to attend, that's another issue. It's separate from this one.