Citizenship and Immigration Committee on June 13th, 2013

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for your clarity in that ruling. I will continue to speak on the fact that we do not need to extend study time of this bill for another 30 days beyond the 60 days we've already had here in this committee.

Mr. Chair, I will outline a few themes to you right now, and then go through them with examples as to why this debate has already occurred and the debate does not need to be extended.

Mr. Dykstra, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Immigration, had said he would like to study this bill further over the next 30 days and invite further witnesses and have debate on possible amendments. I will demonstrate to you that we've had many witnesses come to this committee already, and these witnesses have already made clear arguments on—

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Just to be clear, I don't see that in the motion.

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

Yes, Mr. Chair, it's not written in the motion, but when Mr. Dykstra spoke earlier today, he said that is his will, which means the will of the government, which means the will of the committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Go ahead, sorry.

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

Thank you. The topics I have identified from my experience of being here with the witnesses and looking through some of the Hansard reports—and I haven't had an opportunity to go through all of them, but going through some of them—are, first of all, the mention of “acts of war” in the bill itself and how we've had a plethora of witnesses speak to us about that topic; second—

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

A point of order, Ms. James.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

We're not actually here debating acts of war or what's in the actual bill or the amendments themselves. We're just asking for the extension. That's what the conversation is supposed to be related to.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Very correct.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

She's correct.

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

Mr. Chair, I must respectfully submit to you that I'm making the case that we do not need to hear further from witnesses on this first topic that I've mentioned—acts of war—because we have already heard from witnesses. We do not need to extend our time of study on the bill.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Ms. Sitsabaiesan, I'm not going to get into witnesses. Mr. Dykstra may or may not have made those comments. I'm looking at the motion that's before us. The motion that's before us simply requests an extension of 30 sitting days.

I don't want to get into witnesses or anything else, or any possible reasons as to why this would take place. There are some reasons given in the preamble. There it stands. Anything else is irrelevant.

So I don't want to get into that.

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

Did I hear you correctly, Mr. Chair, that you don't want to hear reasons as to why it should not be extended?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

No, I didn't say that. I said that I don't want to hear comments about witnesses with respect to acts of war. That is more appropriately with respect to matters that...when we debate the bill.

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

Mr. Chair, respectfully, once again, if I may, I must prove to you, or demonstrate to you, that the debate has already occurred, and hence the debate does not need to continue. In order for me to demonstrate or prove that to you, then factual evidence can only be brought forward from the debate or the discussion that has already happened.

So in order for me to prove that, I do need to provide you with testimony or with proof, evidence, that we have had this discussion already and that the discussion does not need to continue.

Seeing that there is no—

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

We haven't had a debate on the bill. If you had something last week, that was on this motion.

We haven't had a debate on the bill, because the matter hasn't even come for debate. We haven't even had clause by clause, so how could we possibly have had debate on the bill?

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

We've had many witnesses appear before this committee—

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Those were witnesses; those weren't debates.

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

—speaking to the bill.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Those were not debates; those were witnesses.

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Those are not debates.

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

No.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Witnesses appearing are not debates.

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

No.