Evidence of meeting #84 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
Ms. Sims, you can continue on with your debate on the main motion.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
I'm going to say it one more time and then I'm not going to say it any more. If you start talking about it, I'm going to move on.
There were never any amendments to Bill C-425 formally made to this committee—never.
That's my position. If you keep talking about it, I'm going to move on.
NDP
Jinny Sims NDP Newton—North Delta, BC
I just want a clarification before I carry on. I'm not going to pursue it beyond seeking that clarification. What I'm hearing is that at no time at committee did anybody say that the amendments that were being circulated were outside of the scope. Is that what I just heard?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
Ms. Sims, for—I don't know—the sixth time, no amendments were ever made to this committee—never. That's it.
Let's move on to the next topic, or we're going to move on to the next speaker.
NDP
Jinny Sims NDP Newton—North Delta, BC
No, no, I will carry on talking, because I have a lot to say on this, and I will be asking for the blues of the committee as to exactly what happened around that time.
Let me say....
Conservative
NDP
Jinny Sims NDP Newton—North Delta, BC
Thank you.
Something happened at the committee—and it was a majority vote—to move a motion that we seek an expansion of scope for the bill. That does not mean that the committee could not have carried on dealing with Mr. Shory's bill. In respect of the private member's bill, that could have gone through all the cycles. If there were no amendments, there would have been no need for clause-by-clause. We could have just carried on, and all this would have been over a long time ago.
But the fact is, we are here, and the government, through this committee, is trying to commandeer—get—an extension to the House so they can change the scope of the bill. That's the reason we are here.
If the government is trying to change the scope, it means that the amendments they brought forward informally, and then somebody from the front desk looked at them, that being where it may.... So what we're here today—
NDP
Jinny Sims NDP Newton—North Delta, BC
Okay. What we're here for today, then, is to take a look at whether there should be an extension to allow for an expansion of scope. That's what concerns me greatly—
Conservative
Conservative
John Weston Conservative West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC
I'm just a simple constitutional lawyer, but I heard earlier that we were going to avoid repetition, and I've been hearing this again and again.