Essentially this amendment proposes a five-year review clause. It would add a five-year review clause to trigger a parliamentary review five years after the coming into force. The text of the clause is before you, but I would like to read it.
At the start of the fifth year after the day on which this Act receives royal assent, the provisions enacted by this Act are to be referred to the committee of the Senate, of the House of Commons or of both Houses of Parliament that may be designated or established for the purpose of reviewing the provisions.
Proposed subclause 26.1(2) says:
The committee to which the provisions are referred is to review them and submit a report to the House or Houses of Parliament of which it is a committee, including a statement setting out any changes to the provisions that the committee recommends.
Mr. Chairman, I believe it's reasonable that this committee review the progress and the state of this legislation from time to time. Asking for this sunset type of clause is not unusual. Five-year review clauses are not uncommon here or in other committees. It seems that this is an appropriate piece of legislation to contain one. Our immigration patterns over the past quarter of a century have shifted, and that shifting is unlikely to change. It seems prudent, Mr. Chairman, to include a five-year review clause to monitor the health of one of Canada's most precious commodities, and that is our citizenship.
Bill C-6 is making some substantial changes to the law, and I think it's fair, Mr. Chairman, that we need to monitor. We've heard witnesses make some submissions. The committee hasn't agreed with some of them; we've agreed with others. I think it's prudent that this committee pass this proposed new clause to give us an opportunity in five years' time to review what we have done.