Citizenship and Immigration Committee on June 13th, 2013

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

I'm kind of unclear. Is Ms. Sims speaking to a point of order, or is she speaking to the amendment?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I think she's speaking to the question being put. I think she's concerned that people haven't had sufficient time to debate, and therefore what she is saying is in order.

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

If I'm confused about whether or not she is speaking to her point of order or whether she's speaking to the amendment, I'd like to think that she'd speak to the point of order versus touching on the amendment. We're going to vote on that shortly.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

You're right. I'm giving her a bit of leeway. The issue is, Ms. Sims, should the question be put? I appreciate that you've given some reasons why that question should be voted against. Just remember, we are not talking about the amendment; we are talking about whether the question should be put. Obviously you need to refer to the amendment to some degree, but you don't need to debate the amendment.

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

I will be very careful not to actually debate the amendment itself but to raise concerns during my speaking slot, so to speak, on the particular issue of why I'm opposed to the question being put on the amendment.

Chair, as I said previously, it's very difficult to sometimes remove the process from the substance. So I do have to talk about the process. I'm not making a point of order. This is part of my concern and part of my expression of why I am opposed to this particular motion that's on the floor.

The reason I am opposed—

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

That's not a point of order.

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

I am not making a point of order. I am trying to speak, and I would like to be able to continue.

For me the critical part here is that a question has been put. The chair has been overruled, and that's all fact.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Should the question be put, yes or no? That's what I want to hear. I don't want to hear this other stuff. I want to hear whether the question should be put or not put.

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

Chair, it's not a simple—

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Opitz, on a point of order.

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair, I'm unclear as to what Ms. Sims is actually doing because she's speaking, expressing, and doing this and doing that, and not making a point of order, and not answering a question.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

You're right.

Again, I repeat, Ms. Sims, the issue is, should the question be put, yes or no? I'm interested in debate on that, otherwise we're going to move on to the next speaker.

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

I'm opposed to the question being put because I believe the rules are being circumvented here to bring us to this point.

Chair, I think that whenever you talk about whether a question should be put or not, it is very difficult to stay away from some of the substance. It's because of the substance that one argues whether a question should be put or not or whether substantive debate has taken place.

In my opinion, on the amendment, substantive debate has not taken place. As a matter of fact, if you look at the amendment—

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

On a point of order, that is debate, because in my mind I'm already having an argument with Ms. Sims that what she is saying is untrue. So how can that not be debate?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Carry on.

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

What I'm trying to say here, Mr. Chair, once again, is that the reason I cannot support this motion to have a vote on the amendment right now is that there has been no substantive debate on the amendment. That is one of the rules that guides us when we look at a question having to be put.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Ms. Sims, I've made a number of notes on your comments. You are repeating yourself and you can't do that, or we're going to move on.

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

I will say that another reason I am opposed is that what this amendment did—and I have to mention the amendment—was to actually put into operation what the government rules already say. I would say that we need further time to discuss this and what it means. The only way we can do that is if debate is allowed to continue.

I would like to ask at this time, as part of my speech, how many people have actually spoken on the amendment, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I don't know. Carry on with your—

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

May we ask the clerk?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

You were here last week. You were the chairman—

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

I would say—

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

—and I assume you kept notes. I have no idea, and I'd like you to continue, or we're going to move on. You're getting into areas that have absolutely nothing to do with whether or not the question should be put. Asking me a question of who has had a debate and who hasn't had a debate....

I want you to stick to the issue before us.

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

I apologize if I overstepped my line, Mr. Chair, but I was only trying to point out that there has not been more than a handful, I would say two or three speakers, on the amendment itself. So that would add to the fact that the debate has not been substantive.