Evidence of meeting #23 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was clause.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
There is no further debate, so shall amendment BQ-5.01 carry?
(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]
Shall amendment BQ-5.1 carry?
(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]
That will be a new section. You will make that a new section, those two sections.
I will say it again. I think I have already said that. I'll just repeat what I've said: amendment BQ-5.1 has been adopted, so this vote will apply to amendment G-2.1 and amendment G-2.3.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
Just for clarification, Chair, what you are saying then is that both government amendment G-2.1 and government amendment G-2.3 are automatically carried.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
I will just repeat it again. Amendment G-2 can't be moved.
Okay, I am clear now. Amendment BQ-5.01 will be a new clause and will be renumbered when the clerks do this, so amendment BQ-5.1 will be the new clause 12.
Shall clause 12 as amended carry?
(Clause 12 as amended agreed to)
(On Clause 13)
We are now on to clause 13.
Ms. Chow, we are on to some amendments to clause 13 for you. The others we have dealt with.
NDP
Olivia Chow NDP Trinity—Spadina, ON
Thank you.
I'm going to deal with NDP-6.1, NDP-6.2, and NDP-6.3 together.
On what I was originally pushing for--and that includes NDP-7--when there is an appeal situation in front of the Refugee Appeal Division, there really shouldn't be any limit to what can be submitted as information. However, if that were the case there would be rehashing of all the previous arguments, which is not necessary, and then, what about new information?
The existing bill says that “...the person who is the subject of the appeal may present only evidence that arose after the rejection of their claim or that was not reasonably available”. I was concerned as to what “reasonably available” means. Sometimes it means that person would not have the financial means to obtain it, or perhaps they're worried that if they get the information, their family back home would be put in jail because they were testifying against their own government.
I've been persuaded that what is reasonable will protect those situations, and therefore we do not need to eliminate the words “that the person could not reasonably have been expected in the circumstances to have presented, at the time of the rejection”.
I am not moving these amendments, because it seems to me there are enough safeguards to protect the applicants, so they are able to present information without a lot of barriers.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
Thank you.
G-2.1 was adopted under BQ-5.1, so clause 13 has been amended.
(Clause 13 as amended agreed to)
(On clause 14)
We are now on clause 14. Monsieur St-Cyr.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
My mistake--it's the government. Mr. Dykstra has the floor.
We're on clause 14, and there is amendment G-2.2.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
There are a couple of BQ amendments as well, Chair, but if you want me to go first....
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
If you're following along in the order paper, maybe it's not there. There's a new clause 14.1, which will have the Bloc amendments and other amendments.
This is clause 14, on which there is just G-2.2. So you're the only one on that.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
I move amendment G-2.2.
(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]
NDP
Olivia Chow NDP Trinity—Spadina, ON
Mr. Chair, hang on a second. I have to withdraw amendment NDP-8. I had an amendment earlier, and I was worried that if the situation in a certain country--
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
Excuse me. I only have one amendment here, and that's the government amendment. We're not on new clause 14.1 yet.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
I'm going to be asking for amendments to new clause 14.1. We're now voting on clause 14.
(Clause 14 as amended agreed to)
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
Okay, we got over that blip.
On new clause 14.1, I have amendment BQ-7.
Bloc
Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
Mr. Chairman, I'm going to withdraw amendment BQ-7. In my opinion, in view of the previously adopted amendments, including an appeal division for everyone, it is no longer necessary.
NDP
Olivia Chow NDP Trinity—Spadina, ON
It's similar. I was worried that if people are just about to be deported, if the situation changes, there should be a reopening of their case, whether it's through RAD or PRRA. However, now that RAD is available for everyone, for all claimants, I no longer need to move this motion.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
Okay.
Government amendment G-2.3 was already adopted, so new clause 14.1 has already been created.
Are we following along? Okay. We're on to amendment G-3.