Evidence of meeting #27 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 39th Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was consultants.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
--but it seems to me we're getting into the realm of Bill C-50 again.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
It's going to cause some problems on the committee. We will have points of order and points of privilege coming out of our ears here.
Liberal
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
Would you please wait, Mr. Telegdi, until I'm finished speaking--and you also, Mr. Karygiannis? Please wait while I finish.
We made the ruling a few minutes ago that we won't get into Bill C-50, that Bill C-50 will be the subject of hearings. I'm simply asking members to police themselves on this.
I'm reluctant to take points of order that will interfere with members' times, but we are saying that Bill C-50 is the subject of a different set of hearings. We agreed to this prior to coming on the road: we are here to examine three different items. I would caution members to take that into consideration.
I go back again to Mr. Karygiannis....
Mr. Telegdi has a point of order.
Liberal
Andrew Telegdi Liberal Kitchener—Waterloo, ON
Mr. Chair, my point of order is simply that we're dealing with three topics while the elephant in the room is Bill C-50. I made this same point when we started off the tour. At that time we said we weren't going to talk about it, but since then, Mr. Komarnicki has also filed the motion that he wants Bill C-50 to go to committee and to have the committee issue a report after about three meetings.
Now, Mr. Chair, I'm not sure how we can meet those kinds of deadlines, but I do know that if--
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
Order, please.
I'd ask the member to get to his point of order. Get to your point of order, please.
Liberal
Andrew Telegdi Liberal Kitchener—Waterloo, ON
My point is that there was agreement around the table from all the groups to deal with Bill C-50 when we have people in front of us. As I said, it was the parliamentary secretary who raised this issue.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
Order, please.
We are not dealing with Bill C-50 at this meeting. We are dealing with temporary and undocumented workers, immigration consultants, and Iraqi refugees. The order from the House of Commons was for the committee to deal with these three different items. I have the order here in front of me. It's the order from the House of Commons that we deal with these three items. In the meantime, we have had agreement among members of the committee that we will be holding hearings on Bill C-50.
Again, I'm cautioning members to stay within the realm of these three items that we're talking about and have been mandated by the House of Commons to hear evidence on.
Mr. Karygiannis, back to your questions, please.
Liberal
Jim Karygiannis Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
Thank you. And if you'll allow me, Chair, to finish my question, you will see that this is very relevant.
When consultations were done about the creation of CSIC, the minister at the time consulted--not consulted, but they got hold of you, talked to you--and everything else. Are the consultations happening now versus the consultations that happened back then different? Have you been consulted about changes now? If you have been consulted about changes now, how does that differ from the consultations that were done then? Did the consultations then fail? If they failed then, and you have CSIC today, or if it didn't fail then, how do the consultations that are happening today on Bill C-50 mirror those consultations? And where to you see Bill C-50 going?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
Again, we are not going to entertain....
Mr. Karygiannis, I will move on to the next questioner.
Liberal
Jim Karygiannis Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
My question was about the consultations now versus then. How do they see the consultations then on CSIC? The consultations then and now, how do they differ, and how did they fail, if they failed back then?
Liberal
Bloc
Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
Mr. Chairman, even though I am not always of the same view as Mr. Karygiannis, I believe he has a right to speak and to ask the questions he wants to ask of the witnesses. That moreover is what we agreed on at the start of the trip.
However, it seems to me that the faster the time to put this question to a vote approaches, the more picky we become. And yet we had agreed at the start of the trip that members would be free to select the subjects they wanted to address. We agreed to say that the onus was on citizens to judge whether members were off topic or irrelevant.
We are all entitled to ask the questions we want to ask during the seven minutes allotted to us. That's what we agreed upon. If anyone wishes to proceed differently, that should be debated. I would like us to let people answer the questions that Mr. Karygiannis wishes to ask them.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
There are no different rules. We have an order from the House of Commons that we are obliged to comply with.
The chair has been quite lenient in allowing certain.... You know, we've had leeway with members mentioning Bill C-50. But if we're getting into specific questions on Bill C-50, which we already have some time set aside to deal with, then we're getting away from the intent of the committee in travelling.
Mr. Karygiannis, one moment, please.
We're getting away from what our original intent was, which was to study temporary and undocumented workers, immigration consultants, and Iraqi refugees. We have that order from the House of Commons, which we are obliged to comply with. It simply says:
By unanimous consent, it is ordered,--That, in relation to its studies on Iraqi refugees, temporary foreign workers and undocumented workers, and immigration consultants, 12 members of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration be authorized to travel to Vancouver, British Columbia, Edmonton, Alberta, Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan, and Winnipeg, Manitoba, from March 31 to April 3, 2008...
to hear references to these particular items.
Liberal
Jim Karygiannis Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
I have a point of personal privilege, Mr. Chair.
When it comes to the people to the right of you, when it comes to the Conservatives, the party you belong to, you allowed a lot of leeway yesterday, and I mentioned that to you yesterday.
Liberal
Jim Karygiannis Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
Let me finish, please. It's a point of personal privilege, and you, sir, are obliged to hear me out. Allow me to finish, please.
Yesterday you allowed a lot of leeway. Questions were asked, and I pointed this out to you a few times. Leeway was allowed. I don't see what the difference is today. On a point of personal privilege, sir, you also allowed Mr. Komarnicki to table a motion, to grandstand in this committee, when he wanted to say that Bill C-50 should be sent to this committee. Bill C-50 originally was something that we were not supposed to speak on, but you, sir, have allowed a lot of leeway.
I don't understand what makes it different now versus yesterday. Is it because the press is in this room and because the minister made comments yesterday that you do not like to hear?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
That is not a matter of privilege. The reason the chair allowed leeway is that we had an air of cooperation among all members yesterday on this particular issue.
Now we're eating into the time of the witnesses.
Liberal
Conservative
Liberal