Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Nov. 20th, 2007

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

I would simply like to make a comment to assist the committee in its work. We need to make a decision sometime in the next two meetings, but the committee's agenda has yet to be set. I was wondering if we could prepare some specific questions so that the government could advise us of its position.

I have nothing against hearing from witnesses and persons concerned, given that the situation is serious enough. However, details of the war in Iraq, which countries were involved and the broad implications of a political decision down the road are also serious considerations. I'm wondering if it would be possible to have questions, or legal opinions of sorts, that could be explained to us by representatives and officials.

Mr. Chairman, several different concepts have been floated, including that of an illegal, illegitimate war. A series of events occurred resulting in Canada's decision not to take part and in the United States deciding unilaterally to send troops to participate in the conflict. This is what I'm alluding to. There is also the issue of the presence of troops in Iraq. We know that approximately 168,000 American soldiers took part in the war in Iraq, along with troops from Great Britain, Poland, Australia and South Korea. If we are to develop a policy, we need to take into account all of the countries that were involved in the conflict in Iraq.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

The point I was going to make is that the committee is the master of its own agenda. We do have a steering committee meeting coming up right after this meeting, so I don't know if it would be right for me to say, yes, we should do that, or whether we should refer it to the steering committee, or if you want to deal with it right here. I mean, we're master of our own agenda.

I'll go to Ms. Chow, and then Mr. Bevilacqua.

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

May I clarify? I know this committee will need to deal with the estimates. When I said to defer motions for two meetings, it does not necessarily have to be that it would come back next Tuesday. If we have to do the estimates, then we will have to do the estimates, because it's coming to the House of Commons.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

You say to defer the motion for two meetings—

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

In order to obtain hearings from witnesses, I did not say that it has to come back on November 27. I assume that we'll have to do the estimates, after which we will have the hearings.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Okay.

Mr. Bevilacqua, Mr. Karygiannis, and then Mr. Komarnicki.

[Maurizio Bevilacqua, Liberal, Vaughan, ON]

In reference to the process, you're hearing this, and then, as soon as we finish this meeting, you will bring those items and sort it out.

So in regard to peoples' names and the organizations, we will be forwarding those to you, right?

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Okay.

Mr. Karygiannis, did you have a point? Your motion that's coming up next is very much like this one.

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

My motion is certainly in the same vein and on the same page, and as I've heard from Madame Faille, not only do we have in question the individuals from the United States, but there are other countries that we must consider.

If a country has mandatory service and that country tomorrow were to decide to go into Iraq, and the people from that country decided, for whatever reason, enough is enough, they're not going to stick around to go there, as we had the draft dodgers from the Vietnam war, and they're going to go to Canada and seek refuge, we also have to consider that perspective.

So I would agree that we should consult stakeholders, individuals and groups—the Quakers, for example. I've had a lot of representations, and I've had a lot of representations from individuals. So the steering committee should certainly consider this, but by the same token, there are other issues that we were dealing with in the past that cannot afford to be put on the back burner.

There's a letter I've sent to you that I would like to address.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Yes, I have it.

Mr. Telegdi.

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

Mr. Chair, given the timeframe we have for committee meetings and quite a number of agenda items to get through, and even though we normally end our committees at 5:30, it would be possible for us to attach another couple of hours to that and get an extra meeting in to clear up some of the issues—particularly on a Tuesday night, since we're here on Tuesday.

Now, Thursday might be a problem, because some members are departing on Thursday evening. In those cases, when we do that, we can perhaps have supper, because we know that the parliamentary secretary is much better to deal with when he gets to eat.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

When he has a full tummy.

Mr. Komarnicki.

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

If I'm hearing this right, the idea is to defer the motion to a later date and refer the issue of calling witnesses on the motion to the subcommittee to deal with in light of the total agenda they have to deal with.

Is that right?

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

We will be dealing with it in the next 10 minutes, hopefully. Okay?

Is that it?

[Maurizio Bevilacqua, Liberal, Vaughan, ON]

But also, in fairness to the individuals involved, some are potentially facing removal from Canada, so that has to be factored in as well.

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

The committee will have to make a decision whether or not to proceed and when, based on everything else before them.

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

Chair, I think the steering committee has certainly heard clearly our wish to hear it, and certainly we'll be dealing with this.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Ms. Chow, are you happy with that?

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

Can I hear the actual end wording? I'm hearing that we are deferring the motion for two meetings, for hearings from witnesses and stakeholders....

No? Was there an amendment?

So we're deferring the motion for two meetings, and the question of whether we are hearing from witnesses or stakeholders will come up later.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

It will be taken up at the subcommittee meeting immediately following this meeting; there seems to be a desire to do just that.

[Maurizio Bevilacqua, Liberal, Vaughan, ON]

I would imagine, Ms. Chow, that you would probably agree with me that the motion, obviously, should be dealt with after we have the hearings, right?

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

Yes, I would make that assumption.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

So it depends on how we technically work that out at our subcommittee meeting when we meet in a few minutes.

In effect, the motion will be deferred to a later date, pending, of course, hearings bringing forth witnesses, with the technical part of it to be worked out at our subcommittee meetings.

Is that fair?

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

I have a friendly amendment, just to clarify this. How about deferring the motion to no later than December 13, or before the end of this session? If not, we can be back here because then we are looking at next year or a year later, when all of them could have been deported by the time we come to it.

So can we say that it would come prior to the Christmas break? That would be fair because that would give us a total of a month and a half.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Okay. Well, I think there is consensus to do just that.