Yes.
Evidence of meeting #37 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.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #37 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.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
Andrew Telegdi Liberal Kitchener—Waterloo, ON
That's the one that talks about May 9, so that's the one we want. That is the one I think we should deal with.
I'm not sure how extensively we can report by May 9, but it seems to me that we probably want to schedule some extra meetings and do what we can do and have a preliminary report anyway. The committee can also keep hearing--
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
That gives us eleven days. We might be able to do something in that time.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
Andrew Telegdi Liberal Kitchener—Waterloo, ON
But the report has to be in by May 9, so you have to have--
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
Andrew Telegdi Liberal Kitchener—Waterloo, ON
That's right.
It would seem to me that we're going to have to take time today to draw up a list of witnesses and start with that. We can add witnesses the next time we meet as well. But we're going to need some extra hearings, and we're going to have to sit as a committee, as we were prepared to sit before, and we'll see what we can accomplish to get a report in.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
Andrew Telegdi Liberal Kitchener—Waterloo, ON
It might not be the final report; it can be a preliminary report to the finance committee.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
Yes, okay.
I think I saw Mr. Bevilacqua's hand first, and then I have Mr. Siksay.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Maurizio Bevilacqua Liberal Vaughan, ON
Basically, as long as the finance committee understands that with this time limitation the product is not necessarily going to be what they—
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Maurizio Bevilacqua Liberal Vaughan, ON
Exactly.
Essentially, in situations like this, what you will be left with is our report to them of the pros and cons of this bill as we've heard them. That's the only thing you can do. As researchers, we won't really be able to get into the subject matter as much as we'd like.
4:55 p.m.
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
Thank you, Chair.
Chair, I'm a little concerned that the finance committee is setting a deadline for us on an immigration matter, and part of that problem is that the government introduced an important immigration change in a finance bill. I understand that the committee is working under certain constrictions and wants to get on with its work related to finance, but I don't think that should throw us off trying to do due diligence on an important immigration issue that has certainly raised very, very serious concerns all across the country with many, many people.
So I have real difficulty with sticking to their deadline of Friday, May 9, just as others have said they want to do a good a job at any work done on this, given its importance. If we are going to consider this request—and everybody wants to study it, so I don't think that's in doubt—the timeline is a problem, and I think we need to extend it so that we can hear from the appropriate people.
I also think that given the concern that exists across the country on this—and I know the committee is just back from travelling—it would be important to hear from people in various cities across Canada. This is a major change—
4:55 p.m.
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
—to ask this of people who've just done that. But if it were in the context of a joint tour, perhaps, with the Standing Committee on Finance, it would give other people the opportunity to do that travelling and to hear the important concerns about this particular provision in Bill C-50.
So that's another important addition that we need to consider when we're looking at the plan for whatever motion eventually comes before this committee.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
Yes, okay.
Mr. Karygiannis, and Mr. Komarnicki, and that's all the time I have. Then we have to do something.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Jim Karygiannis Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
Mr. Chair, to have a friendly amendment that would cover this, I would say that Mr. Komarnicki has a motion on the floor mirroring Mr. Bevilacqua's motion, which mirrors something that I put forward and that Ms. Chow put forward.
So I was wondering if we could take Wajid Khan's motion and Mr. Komarnicki's motion and on the fifth line say something to the effect of “...and convey its preliminary recommendations to the Standing Committee on Finance no later than Friday, May 9”, and then have the essence of what we have in here about hearing evidence from stakeholders, the Library of Parliament. Then where it says “transmitted to this committee”, we should say “and, should further study be done, the committee undertakes to do so”.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
Okay, that sounds like a very—
Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. Komarnicki, go right ahead.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
I have two points.
Number one, we have made reports to the House without hearing any witnesses; we didn't call for anyone other than submitting the report. The report will be what the report is. So my sense is, as a preliminary, we should have Mr. Khan's motion go forward and vote on it. Win or lose, it will determine everything else. However, if we're going to combine in what Mr. Karygiannis says, I would not want to call it a preliminary or have any kind of limitations on it. It is a report to the House based on the evidence. It is what it is.
On reflection, I think we ought to put Mr. Khan's motion to a vote and have it decided. If we choose to proceed in the manner one, two, three, four, five, six, as I had and Mr. Bevilacqua had, that's open to us. But there is no need to limit it; what the committee wishes to do is fine. The fact of the matter is that it's a report to the House on the evidence heard—and at least there's some evidence heard.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative