Citizenship and Immigration Committee on June 13th, 2013

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

So we have had no debates.

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

Further—

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

And we're not going to have debates until we actually get into clause by clause.

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

What I'm submitting to you, then, Mr. Chair, is that we've heard a considerable amount of witness testimony on the subject.

I actually haven't even outlined the themes to you yet. I've only mentioned the first one, that we've had testimony presented to our committee—

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

A point of order, Ms. Sims.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

It's Ms. James.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I'm sorry, I keep calling you....

I'm interchanging your names.

Ms. James.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

On a point of order, I keep hearing this member talk about witnesses before committee. Not one witness came to this committee and said anything about an extension of 30 sitting days, yes or no, either way.

I'd like to just bring it back to the topic of the actual motion itself, and hopefully we can get back on track.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

You know, I'm not sure where you're going, but you can continue on and we'll see how it goes.

I mean, as far as I'm concerned, the debate on private members' bills takes place in clause-by-clause. It doesn't take place before.

Witnesses come and give testimony. We have the right to ask questions and do ask questions. That may happen again. It may not happen again. Witnesses may come back, they may not come back. We don't know from this motion. That will have to be decided another time, not now.

The sole issue that's before us is whether or not an extension of 30 days should be given to this committee. That's it.

So I want to hear arguments for and against whether or not there should be an extension of the 30 sitting days. I don't want to hear about witnesses. I don't want to hear about debates.

In the case of debates, it hasn't happened, and it won't happen, not in this matter before us.

With respect to witnesses, we may or may not have heard all the witnesses. That will be for another day to determine witnesses—if this motion carries.

You may proceed.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I do believe that the considerations we've had to date on this bill have been thorough and that we don't need further time to study this bill. The—

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

You've already said that, Ms. Sitsabaiesan. I don't want to hear it any more. You have said that we've spent sufficient time. As to whether or not we need further time, there are only so many times you can say that.

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

The member himself who moved the bill had mentioned in his opening remarks that—

[An hon. member]

[Inaudible—Editor]

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Order.

Mr. Clarke, I need some order.

Go ahead, Ms. Sitsabaiesan.

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

The member who introduced this private member's bill mentioned that “pathways to integration” is a very important piece of the reason why he's introducing this bill. I agree that ensuring there are more pathways to integration is important, but we've heard the statistics and facts of what actually occurs, which have shown us that the proposed changes in this bill won't actually—

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Okay. You're going to have one more chance. We're arguing this back and forth. The issue is the argument as to whether or not there should be an extension of 30 sitting days. You're getting into matters that go beyond that. We'll give you another chance. Otherwise, we'll move on to the next speaker.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It's pretty evident that we've spent much time on this bill, more than any other private member's bill gets in committee, more than the allotted time.... What they're trying to do is provide more than the allotted time for this private member's business in committee. I find it a little odd and a little unfair that the government, through the government members on this committee, seems to feel that this specific private member's bill is somehow extremely special, more special than other private members' bills or motions, and that this private member's bill—

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

On point of order, Mr. Chair—

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Opitz.

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

—repetition and relevance, sir.

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

Sir, I don't remember making this point at all, not once before—

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

It's more of the same, more of the same....

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

We'll go on a little bit longer, but you're getting close to that third strike.

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

What.... You keep saying “third strike”—

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Third strike means that we're going to move on because you're repeating things over and over, and if you keep doing it, we're moving on. I can't be more clear, can I?