I have just two points, Mr. Chairman.
My colleague doesn't like the word “illegal”. I'm just going to quote again the question I asked the minister at one of our former meetings. It was the question on border crossing from the United States: You've used the word “irregular” but almost everyone else uses the word “illegal”. Mr. Cormier, Ms. Alleslev, and others have used the word “illegal”.
The minister responded by saying:
I'm happy to use “illegal”....
I responded with:
...because it is illegal.
In fact, a sign put up by the government on Roxham Road states:
Stop
It is illegal to cross the border here or any place other than a Port of Entry.
You will be arrested and detained if you cross here.
I don't know what else.... Again, I'm repeating what Ms. Rempel said. I think you're trying to soften the seriousness of this whole issue. It's incredibly serious. We're concerned about the safety of our border. We're concerned about a whole slew of things. We also want to assist people who are waiting in refugee camps around the planet, who are facing persecution in dangerous places around the world and who must wait longer as more and more resources are spent processing people crossing into Canada from the United States.
This committee went over to Africa because we were concerned about the camps there. Well, we're continuing to work on that study, but this issue is taking away from the work that the government can be doing in other areas.
As far as the word is concerned, my colleague says, oh, we have a plan. Again, Ms. Rempel has adequately described that. There clearly is no plan other than spending money, and even in terms of spending money, it's not being spent. Premier Ford has asked for $72 million to deal with the influx of asylum seekers. Mayors in other cities are worried about whether asylum seekers are going to be shipped to their municipalities. My mayor in Orangeville, with a population of 30,000, is concerned about whether the Town of Orangeville will be asked to house some of these asylum seekers.
The issue is clearly out of control. I'm opposed to the amendment, because it's clearly watering down the motion put by Ms. Rempel. I think the amendment should be defeated.