Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Sept. 26th, 2012

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Well, I would say this much. If Ms. Sims is saying that these witnesses actually believe in what she has just said.... You are questioning the credibility of an individual. If you're saying that the quotes they use for stories they write or that the research they do is fundamental to what they believe.... Is that what you are suggesting?

As far as I know, in Canada you can do interviews with those you don't agree with, often to show how good or stupid those ideas are. If you are suggesting that the individual who is going to be the witness believes what you've just said, you are going to have to provide factual evidence of that to this committee, because you are dragging someone's name through the mud. To take it to that level.... If that's what you want to do, that's fine, but you'd better be damn well sure that you have the right evidence in front of you.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Go ahead, Mr. Lamoureux.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Chair, I'm not really 100% confident regarding the process. I know I share many of the concerns that members of the community would have regarding who should or should not be able to appear before committee.

I have trust and faith that when the committee asks me to provide names of individuals, I have a sense of the people and a reason or rationale for choosing that individual or organization before coming to committee. That said, if individuals express concerns after I submit names, I would welcome their input and ultimately determine whether I would like to keep them witnesses that I have personally called to come before the committee.

If the Conservative Party is confident that this individual has something to contribute to the committee, I don't have a problem listening. I'm not going to try to censor who the government calls before the committee, as I hope they wouldn't censor me and the individuals I'm suggesting come before us, whether today or in the future. The concern I have is that the government, now having been made aware of some very serious concerns, be confident about having this person or group appear before the committee.

I put that as a flag that's at least worthy of notice. We might even take a couple minutes' recess so they can reflect on whether they deem it appropriate.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Go ahead, Ms. Sims.

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

I would draw members' attention to a website, www.cireport.ca. This isn't going on to look at things second- and third-hand. What we looked at is what is posted on this website. On the Canadian Immigration Report's home page they link to an upcoming documentary called Multicult T.O., which claims Toronto is shifting away from traditional European sources of immigration in favour of the Parkdale gypsies and the Chinese colony in Markham. They go on to make other comments as well.

In an article posted by the Canadian Immigration Report entitled “CIR response to 'Milwaukee Sikh Temple Tragedy: White Supremacism, Nazism & Islam are Same Murderous Ideologies'”, they offer a defence of the Nazi National Socialism ideology. They go on to say, “This hate on National Socialism is completely misguided” and “ ...there is nothing inherently wrong with it at all.”

In defence of white nationalism, this is what they write: “'White Nationalist' seems to be the more frequently used terminology, which implies a form of ethnic-identity nationalism not unlike Israel, Kosovo or South Sudan. Never have I read of a White Nationalist murdering someone or otherwise engaging in ill behaviour outside their home nation. This again is very different from Islamists, many of whom see the whole planet as a battleground.”

Chair, I'm not talking about a link to one article that could be questionable. I will tell you that when I found this last night, I was very upset. Look, we know in Canada we have diverse points of view. I'm not trying to shut down freedom of speech, but what I am questioning is parliamentarians having this person or group—I don't know if it's a person, but I'm talking about a group that has this on its website—as representatives before us today. That's what I'm questioning.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Okay. I think we've had a lot of debate from all sides on this point of order. I have listened to the arguments on all sides. I'm going to rule that it is not a point of order. My job is to ensure that the rules of the Standing Orders of this place are maintained. I don't see how this point of order fits in or that this violates the Standing Orders of this committee or, indeed, of the House. I therefore rule that it is not a point of order.

Go ahead, Mr. Lamoureux.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Chair, at this point in time, I would like to move a motion:

The Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration requests that a study of the cuts to the Interim Federal Health program commence immediately, and that the witnesses list include, but not be limited to: Canadian Council for Refugees, Canadian Doctors for Refugee Care, Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers, Canadian Medical Association, Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, The College of Family Physicians of Canada, Canadian Association of Social Workers, Canadian Dental Association, Canadian Association of Optometrists, Canadian Nurses Association, Canadian Pharmacists Association, Citizenship and Immigration Deputy Minister Neil Yeates, and officials from the Provincial Ministries of Health from Quebec and Ontario.

The committee also requests that the Department of Citizenship and Immigration provide it with all studies, consultations and briefing notes provided to the Minister with regard to the policy decision to cut interim health care benefits and that this information be provided within five business days and that the Committee report its findings to the House of Commons.

If I can speak to my motion, Mr. Chair—

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Lamoureux, the motion is certainly in order. I spoke to you privately and said that I had agreed to put this on the agenda as item number 3, which is on the agenda. It is in order, and it is in order to debate it now, unless someone makes a motion that we return to the regular items on the agenda. If no one makes that motion, Mr. Lamoureux, you may speak.

Go ahead, Madam Groguhé.

[Sadia Groguhé, NDP, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Mr. Chair, in light of what my colleague Jinny Jogindera Sims just told us, obviously....

[The Clerk]

We are now discussing the motion.

[Sadia Groguhé, NDP, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Oh, my apologies. I can come back to this later. It's okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

We're now with Mr. Lamoureux.

I don't see any motion, so Mr. Lamoureux, you may proceed.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chairperson.

I know that members of the committee have received correspondence from different organizations and from health care professional organizations in particular. I have in my hand one dated July 5, 2012, but that is not necessarily the primary reason I bring it forward right now.

More recently, on September 25—

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Go ahead, Ms. James, on a point of order.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

I apologize for interrupting, but when Madame Groguhé was speaking, there was no English interpretation coming through. The buttons were not working until after the fact. Then the English started coming in, and I missed what was originally said and what you're also saying, because I can't hear both at the same time. I'm not sure what Madame Groguhé actually said.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I think she withdrew her comments anyway. They had to do with Ms. Sims' point of order.

[Sadia Groguhé, NDP, Saint-Lambert, QC]

What I was saying had nothing to do with the motion. So I prefer to stop here.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thank you. I apologize.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. James, I was referring to the motion with regard to the interim federal health program, and I would argue it is critically important that we as a committee deal with this immediately.

I'm sure members have received correspondence and possibly talked to constituents. More importantly, I suspect this issue has been weighing heavily on all our minds as members of the citizenship and immigration committee. I know it has for me personally. The purpose of this amendment is to try to deal with what I believe is a critically important issue affecting the lives and health of a good number of refugees.

We have a letter in support of the motion that was just recently brought forward from the president of the College of Family Physicians of Canada, who was aware that this motion was going to be coming forward and, I believe, wanted to provide encouragement for us as a committee to deal with this letter.

I wanted to be able to share with committee members that numerous organizations have appealed to the committee, indirectly if not directly. I'm talking about the associations in large part that I've listed in the motion, but it also would include, and I would reinforce, the Canadian Association of Optometrists, the Canadian Association of Social Workers, the Canadian Dental Association, the Canadian Medical Association, the Canadian Nurses Association, the Canadian Pharmacists Association, the College of Family Physicians of Canada, and the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada.

Literally hundreds if not thousands of other health care workers from across this country—many different stakeholders, very strong advocates, some presenting as professionals—see that what has taken place earlier this year is going to have a very profound impact on many lives. What they really want to see, and I fully support, is for our committee to look at the consequences of the decision that has been made with the idea of coming back to the government with some recommendations as to where we go from here.

I think that as a committee we have the resources to be able to gauge the impact, most importantly by having these professionals contribute presentations before us so we could get an assessment of the impact of the decision. If we do not do that, my fear is we could have cases in which lives would be threatened and we could see an increase in health care expenditures going forward because individuals are not getting the required treatment. There is a valid argument for us as a committee at this point, given our current study is not as time sensitive as this particular policy initiative, that it would be in our best interest and in the best interest ultimately of the refugees we're taking into our country to not only debate this particular motion, but to see this motion passed.

What you'll find, I believe, is wide support outside the committee for our committee to deal with the issue. It's a personal appeal from me. I'm hoping other members of the committee might want to contribute as to why they feel this is an issue we should be debating. Whatever could be done to accommodate it, I'm more than happy to.

Mr. Chairperson, I know you and I have had a discussion with regard to it. After weighing the most recent information that I've been provided, I think this is of the utmost concern for our committee, and we could really do well by looking at it, listening to those presentations, and coming up with some recommendations as to how we can minimize the effect or improve the current policy with regard to providing health services for refugees.

We're talking about, in good part, the most vulnerable individuals in our society.

It's a personal appeal. I'm hoping that members are hearing it and I'd be interested in hearing what your thoughts are on dealing with this today.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you, Mr. Lamoureux.

Go ahead, Ms. Sims.

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

I would like to move a motion, if I may.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

We're dealing with a motion that Mr. Lamoureux has made.

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

I will wait until that has been addressed.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Okay.

Is there debate?

All those in favour?

Opposed?

(Motion negatived)

Go head, Ms. Sims—

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Chair, could I have a recorded vote?