Citizenship and Immigration Committee on June 13th, 2013

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Ms. Sims, you just can't go on and then every once in a while mention an extension of 30 sitting days.

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

I'm relating it—

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Ms. Sims, you just can't go on and mention in the motion “extension of 30 sitting days” and convince me that this makes what you're talking about relevant. It does not. You can't go on and on and then all of a sudden refer to that phrase. That does not make it relevant. That does not stop repetition.

I point that out to you because you seem to have been doing that a number of times.

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

Thank you, Chair.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

I have a point or order, Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Harris.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

I think the whole issue of relevance has to do with the relevance of the extension. The reason the extension shouldn't be considered or asked for surely is relevant. What I'm hearing the member talk about is why she doesn't think it's a good idea to have the extension. If that's not relevant to the issue of the extension, I don't know what it.

[An hon. member]

Hear, hear!

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

With all due respect, I don't think you can say that arguing whether there ought or ought not to be an extension is not relevant to the issue of whether or not it should be requested.

[An hon. member]

Exactly.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Menegakis.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It's not only irrelevant; it is repetitive. There are no new reasons coming from Ms. Sims. They've exhausted all the reasons. For a week they've been speaking. They had one stint last week where they spoke eight hours and 40 minutes straight. Every argument has been exhausted. Now they're coming up with ideas and saying it's relevant to talk about, as if it's fresh and new and has never been discussed before. With all due respect to Mr. Harris, he hasn't been here from day one, so he hasn't had an opportunity to listen to this over and over. Perhaps he can read the blues.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you.

Ms. Sims, I did listen to what Mr. Harris said, and I mentioned the issue of relevance and the issue of repetition. I did that as a caution to Ms. Sims.

I suppose Ms. Sims is getting into the topic of how the extension—I think this was Mr. Harris' point, at least I believe it was, and he'll correct me if it wasn't—could affect the other business of the committee and that, therefore, she's free to talk about that.

That may be a new point. We have discussed it to some degree, but some of the issues that you're getting into are new and probably are, therefore, relevant.

My purpose for interjecting, Ms. Sims and Mr. Harris, was just to caution that that issue may be relevant—how the motion may affect other business of the committee—but I just don't want you to get into repetitive matters.

But I do rule that if that's where you're going, it is relevant.

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

Thank you very much, Chair.

Now to proceed, what I want to discuss here and state for the record is that this extension will not exist in isolation because it will have a direct impact on the work of the committee. As I was saying earlier, private members' business has the 60 allocated days, so this will actually interfere with the ongoing work of the committee. That, specifically, Mr. Chair, relates to the issue of relevance here: it becomes very relevant.

As you know, a committee is one of the very few places in the House where we actually get to debate issues in a fulsome way, where we get to have witnesses come forward. We even manage to persuade each other to change our views on some issues, based on the testimony or debate that we hear.

The impact of the changes that have occurred in the area of immigration is beginning to be felt in the greater community. We're hearing more and more concerns about how imperative it is that we discuss some of these issues, so that is why—

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Point of order, Mr. Dykstra.

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

I have no idea how conjecturing about what the committee may or may not study in the future, or the past for that matter, has anything to do with the issue at hand.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Well, Mr. Dykstra, I believe that it is relevant to talk about whether or not.... And I'm not saying it does or it doesn't. I think it is relevant that the committee discuss whether or not this motion, if it were passed, could affect the future business of the committee, or even the current business of the committee.

We have discussed it to a certain degree, which is why I interrupted Ms. Sims in the past. There is a study that's under way. I think we've had a meeting with the staff on it. But Ms. Sims is saying that it may affect other business. In my opinion that's probably relevant, as long as she doesn't go on and on.

I think it's relevant and you may proceed.

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

Mr. Chair, I really have to state once again that I know that my colleagues across the way have a majority, and I know that even to get a study done, we need to have consensus. I've also heard my colleague across the way announce over and over again that a study that we just started, and had but one session on, is over.

He has the right to say that, but I want to stress that I take my elected responsibilities very seriously. I take my role on this committee and as vice-chair very seriously. I look at the myriad of issues that constituents and people across Canada are raising with me. I get endless number of letters raising concerns, as I'm sure every other MP does. I'm not unique.

Yesterday, we had a prime example with the doctors and the front-line caregivers who are raising concerns about the—

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

A point of order?

Yes, Ms. James.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

What does that have to do with a 30-day extension?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Well, I've already said—

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

It's some issue that's not related to this particular bill.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Ms. James, I've said this several times. As I understand it, Ms. Sims is making submissions that this motion may or may not affect future business of the committee that may be imminent, that may not be imminent.

I've ruled that as long as she doesn't repeat herself, she's free to continue on in that line of debate....

Yes, Ms. James? Is that on a new point?

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

She's referring to something that we already debated and we already went through committee on. She's going back in time.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I'm going to allow her to proceed. I've warned her about repetition, and I'm sure she knows all about that.