Evidence of meeting #7 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was c-6.
A video is available from Parliament.
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
Shaun Chen Liberal Scarborough North, ON
I attempted to, and then the chair ruled that it was out of order and proceeded with the subamendment.
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
Shaun Chen Liberal Scarborough North, ON
How could you vote on an amendment when there is no original motion—
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Borys Wrzesnewskyj
Before we get into a cross-table debate, do we have a record of exactly...? I believe that Mr. Chen did not remove his motion.
1:15 p.m.
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
I must be hearing things, because he withdrew his motion.
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Borys Wrzesnewskyj
Can we clarify that point?
It was ruled out of order because Ms. Kwan's subamendment was before the committee at that point in time.
1:15 p.m.
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
I am sorry, Mr. Chair. My recollection is that Mr. Chen clearly withdrew his motion as a result of Ms. Kwan making a subamendment.
He withdrew his motion. If he is going to deny that, I'd like to hear him deny that.
He withdrew his motion. There is no question.
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
Shaun Chen Liberal Scarborough North, ON
Mr. Chair, I did request to withdraw the motion, and you indicated no to me. My understanding is that around the table we just voted on an amendment to my original motion. If members of this committee believe that the original motion was not on the floor, why did they just vote on an amendment to a non-existent motion?
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
1:15 p.m.
Conservative
Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB
Just as a point of clarification, Mr. Chen's motion would result in no opposition members getting to speak to the witnesses with the 15-minute extension of the meeting?
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Borys Wrzesnewskyj
It would, in fact, provide Mr. Chen with his three and a half minutes to complete, and then it would provide the Conservative Party and the Liberal Party a five-minute round.
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
Randeep Sarai Liberal Surrey Centre, BC
Mr. Chair, on behalf of the whole committee, I want to apologize to the witness for this kangaroo circus over here. I wish this had never happened. Your time is very valuable and this should never happen again. I hope our chair and the clerk make a point to ensure this never happens again.
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Borys Wrzesnewskyj
I see no more debate, so I am calling the vote on the original motion to extend the meeting by 15 minutes.
(Motion agreed to)
Mr. Chen.
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
Shaun Chen Liberal Scarborough North, ON
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I would also like to apologize to the witnesses that they had to endure the proceedings that just unfolded with respect to the various nonsensical points of order.
Mr. Bissett, I know you were interrupted. I will ask you another question.
You mentioned in your submission to the committee that there are 130 Canadians abroad with ties to ISIS and that 80 of them have returned to Canada.
Could you elaborate and provide the committee with details of your assertion?
1:20 p.m.
Former Ambassador, As an Individual
This is a 2014 report by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service in which they make that statement.
1:20 p.m.
Liberal
Shaun Chen Liberal Scarborough North, ON
With respect to that statement, and in light of your other comments around Bill C-6, there was an article dated March 1, 2010, by Mr. James Bissett stating that the charter had in effect undermined Canadian sovereignty. This article also asserted that all prospective immigrants of Muslim faith should be interviewed to determine if they hold extremist views.
Could you indicate whether you are the same Mr. James Bissett? If you are, do you hold those same views that were written in this article?
1:20 p.m.
Former Ambassador, As an Individual
I don't remember saying that it is what undermined the charter.
I have argued, indeed before this committee, that all immigrants should be interviewed before coming to Canada. All immigrants used to be, but now in the digital age, people can submit their application. It's forwarded to Ottawa, an immigration officer peruses it, and if the paper is all in order, the visa is issued. Immigrants are coming to Canada without being seen or without being interviewed.
In relation to the security side, I thought this should apply particularly to countries where we know there are terrorists. Most of those countries are, at the moment, Muslim countries. It was unwise and a threat to Canadian security to let people in without the visa officer seeing them first, interviewing them, and establishing whether they think the individual could come to Canada, adapt quickly to our laws, and be qualified to apply for citizenship.
The other side of it is, of course, can you imagine any Canadian employer hiring anyone in their organization without first seeing them, and interviewing them?
That's going on today and we're getting 300,000 newcomers into Canada, very few of whom are seen or interviewed before they get here. If you're in Bangladesh and you want to come to Canada, you submit an application with all your credentials. They may be reliable, they may not be.
You can buy your police certificate in Dhaka for a certain number of rubles, attach it to the application, and send it to Ottawa. If everything looks in order, it is stamped, and the visa is sent. The next day you board a plane to Toronto or Montreal.
I think that's dangerous and silly. I've said that before this committee before and I will repeat it.
1:20 p.m.
Liberal
April 14th, 2016 / 1:20 p.m.
Conservative
Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My apologies to witnesses. This happens from time to time when we're checking out the routine motions, and whatnot, in a committee.
Mr. Gardee, I want to thank you for your time here today and for your comments.
Ms. Douglas, I want to thank you for the work you do with newcomers to Canada in ensuring they have a successful experience here and they overcome obstacles they may face in terms of social inclusion. Sometimes we get caught up in the heat of legislation, but at the end of the day, regardless of political strife, that is something we all seek to maintain. When we ask questions about how to do that best, sometimes that's with legislation and sometimes that's with programming. Certainly I appreciate it. At some later point in time, I'd like a meeting with you to discuss that.
I also want to thank Mr. Bissett for his time here today.
On that, Mr. Chair, I move:
That pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the Committee study the 2016 Immigration Levels Plan; that the study include an examination of planned reductions to the Caregiver Class; that the study investigate whether or not these reductions will result in increased backlogs; that this study be comprised of no less than two meetings to be held prior to May 1, 2016; that departmental officials be in attendance for at least one meeting, and that the Committee report its findings to the House.
I think this is a very important study to look at, given the changes to Bill C-6. We've heard over and over again of the backlogs that certain classes of applicants to Canada come into, especially the spousal sponsorship stream.
I think this study is important. The immigration levels report that was tabled significantly reduces the amount of caregiver class spots available in Canada. We've heard a lot of concern about this. I don't think there was a lot of consultation done, and I think this would be a study that is completely worthy of the committee's time. I also think it would be of interest to a lot of people, including those in the spousal sponsorship class.
1:25 p.m.
Liberal
Salma Zahid Liberal Scarborough Centre, ON
I think we should suspend debate and vote on this motion because of the time constraint.
I'm calling for a vote on this motion.