Citizenship and Immigration Committee on April 1st, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Young.

[Terence Young, Conservative, Oakville, ON]

Well, I do know a little bit about the printing business. I've done business with people in the printing business, and represented a printing company over the years. You can't just do a second and third printing. The artwork is completely done. You're talking about redesigning the guide. The cost to that, and the time to do it, would be very high. So it's not just a matter of changing second and third printing.

Also, with regard to your comments on gay history, it could be determined very broadly or it could be determined very narrowly. I don't think we're in a position to start talking about that today, either. For instance, you said “the rights of gays and lesbians”. They have the same rights as everybody else. It's in the guide. That's quite clear in the guide.

So I couldn't support the motion for those reasons.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Calandra.

[Paul Calandra, Conservative, Oak Ridges—Markham, ON]

It's more of a point of order or clarification than debate; I'm not sure where we're at.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

We're in debate.

[Paul Calandra, Conservative, Oak Ridges—Markham, ON]

I know, but whose motion are we dealing with? Who has amended what?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

We're dealing with Ms. Chow's motion.

[Paul Calandra, Conservative, Oak Ridges—Markham, ON]

So we're dealing with the amended motion first, and not--

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Those words are gone, Mr. Calandra. The words “removed” and “restored” are gone.

[Paul Calandra, Conservative, Oak Ridges—Markham, ON]

So before we get anywhere, then, we would deal with the amended motion and then get back to the motion—

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

No, we have one motion on the floor.

[Paul Calandra, Conservative, Oak Ridges—Markham, ON]

We do? We don't have two?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

No, we don't. We have one motion on the floor.

[Paul Calandra, Conservative, Oak Ridges—Markham, ON]

We're not going to vote on the changes to the motion?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Monsieur St-Cyr.

[An hon. member]

I'm at a loss.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Can we have some order, please? Monsieur St-Cyr is speaking.

[Thierry St-Cyr, Bloc, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

I wanted to know if we could agree on wording that everyone finds acceptable. I do not think that is possible. I think Ms. Chow's amendments are worthwhile. We could move quickly on that.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Monsieur Bevilacqua.

[Maurizio Bevilacqua, Liberal, Vaughan, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I first of all want to get a sense from the committee on where we're heading. This motion that Madam Chow has forwarded is actually a follow-up to a series of questions that I asked of the minister when he appeared in front of committee. Prior to pronouncing my decision on this particular motion, I'm still awaiting the response from the minister. Based on that, I will have the necessary material to basically state whether or not one can endorse this motion.

I say this because I just sense that it's going to be a long conversation this afternoon. I tend to prescribe to a method of operation that speaks to efficiency of a committee rather than grandstanding.

We know that gay rights and gay history were part of initial discussions that took place, and drafts that took place, that were produced, in the process of creating the guide. We all know that. It's been reported. People understand that it's a very unique feature of Canada as it relates to human rights. People understand that same-sex marriage is very much part of our essence as a country as it relates to human rights as well.

We can go around and around, but we all understand what this motion is about.

I would have been a lot happier if I'd received the answers to those questions. There were some interruptions, as you may recall, to the question that related specifically to gay rights and gay history.

Now, I don't know, and I don't think anybody knows here, how many of these copies have been produced.

[An hon. member]

Half a million copies.

[Maurizio Bevilacqua, Liberal, Vaughan, ON]

Half a million copies: I'm not putting a price on the protection of human rights, because really there is no price--human rights are very important--but it's also, in my view, with a sense of responsibility on our part that we also begin to understand that half a million copies of this have already been produced.

There are ways of dealing with this in a production and procedural manner. That is, you can start talking about addendums to the actual document, which would mean the insertion of a page or a note that would include that. In fairness, though, that particular guide has already been criticized to the point that it requires revision anyway, not just on this issue but other issues.

In fairness to the people who put the guide together, which was a prestigious group of individuals, this citizenship guide is also not a history book. It's a guide that gives you more or less a sense of country.

Is it a political document? Some people have said it's political document. But my sense is that we have to find a middle ground that can address the concerns that I cited, and that now Olivia Chow, the member for Trinity—Spadina, has cited, and move forward on that. We have to take all things into consideration.

If the minister had said to me that he would in fact consider the insertion of gay rights and gay history in the next edition, and that in essence he and his department would have considered it a serious omission, then I would be quite willing to accept the minister and his department at his word.

Are we happy about the fact that no reference was made? Of course not. A lot of Canadians are not happy about that. But these things do occur. Edits in reports do occur. Unfortunately, this is a serious omission, but it is a revision that has occurred after many years of having the same document. Errors are going to occur.

As a good Liberal, I'm kind of in the middle ground here. I do have a fiscally responsible attitude toward taxation and expenditure--which sometimes the NDP do not understand, unfortunately--but by the same token, I'm not happy about the fact that gay rights and gay history were omitted.

So this is where I'm at. Since I kind of do hold the balance of power, both parties need to kind of come to me with a compromise. Otherwise, they won't get what either of them wants. Usually the Liberal position is the one that is the most moderate and centric, and this needs to be respected, because we are trying to bridge this obvious divide between the right and the left.

Mr. Chairman, I wish I could conclude, but I do think that there has to be a way to address this.

I understand what the member for Trinity—Spadina is attempting to do--a bit late, because I got to it earlier--but there's no question about the fact that we expressed concerns about that omission. We are on the record as expressing concern about that omission.

We also want to give the opportunity, to whomever will revise this citizenship guide in the future, that he or she--or both, I'm sure—should actually begin to take note of the dissatisfaction expressed by various groups in reference to the production of what I think is a very good guide in many ways, but one that falls short in others.

As I said, this is the first major revision made in a long time. The group of individuals, historians, and academics who worked on this should actually be thanked by all members of Parliament, on both sides of the House. But it is of concern.

I don't know how you want to work this, Mr. Chairman. I am caught between two extreme points on the spectrum that have to find ways to compromise to bring a resolution to this issue. I have a feeling that we'll be talking about this until 5:30 p.m. If that happens, it will have to be brought to the next meeting.

The point I am making is essentially the following: that we either clearly come up with a resolution to address this issue, or this meeting, as I can tell by the posturing that is already taking place, will go on for a long time. I certainly don't support that behaviour--

[An hon. member]

That's what you're doing.

[Maurizio Bevilacqua, Liberal, Vaughan, ON]

--because we've worked very hard as a committee to cooperate at this level.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Bevilacqua, you still have the floor, but I just wanted to respond to you.

I work at the direction of the committee. Now, we have an opportunity to continue debate here today--we can go until 5:30 p.m.--but if committee members wish to discuss this between themselves, mainly the critics and the...and Mr. Dykstra, either over the break or after the break, you could make a motion to adjourn the debate.

Other than that, I'm at the direction of the committee. We can keep on debating; I have one more speaker here.

But I don't make those decisions. I do what you tell me to do.