Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Oct. 20th, 2020

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Surrey—Newton, BC]

There's no translation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Is the interpretation back? Okay. We are good now.

Ms. Martinez Ferrada, could you please repeat?

[Soraya Martinez Ferrada, Liberal, Hochelaga, QC]

I just wanted to make sure that the wording for the number of meetings reads “no more than eight” in English, not

“at least eight”. We're talking about not more than eight.

I just want to make sure the wording is accurate.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Unless I'm mistaken, I said “un maximum de huit” in French.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Yes. We passed the subamendment proposed by Mr. Dhaliwal that it would not be more than eight.

We have Ms. Kwan on the list. Ms. Kwan, go ahead, please.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

I'm fine. That was the point of clarification, that it was “up to” eight meetings. I think we've clarified that. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Now we have the amendment proposed by Ms. Normandin, as amended by Mr. Dhaliwal. Do we have unanimous agreement on this amendment? I see that we do.

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

We are now back to the motion proposed by Ms. Dancho, as amended by the amendment proposed by Ms. Normandin.

Go ahead, Ms. Dancho.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

I just want to add, Madam Chair, that I hope all members of the committee will support this motion, and it sounds as though we can. Then we can get to work very quickly, as soon as next Tuesday, for the folks who are separated from their families, and work on many other issues we've outlined in the motion. It's very critical that we commence these studies soon. I would very much appreciate the support of the committee.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you, Ms. Dancho.

Ms. Martinez Ferrada is next.

[Soraya Martinez Ferrada, Liberal, Hochelaga, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I know we discussed the motion quickly, but I just wanted to draw attention to the important issues, particularly, family reunification.

I don't think we're voting just yet, but I do want to make sure that, once the motion receives what I hope will be the committee's unanimous support, we get right to work and talk about potential witnesses for the study.

I know a lot of people have taken an interest in family reunification. A petition calling on the House to address the issue was even presented. It poses numerous challenges that need to be dealt with carefully and swiftly. You certainly have my full support in advancing the issue, which is hugely important to me.

As for the lottery system for the parents and grandparents program, or PGP, I want to point out that no program is perfect. A program is always a work in progress, so I'm delighted that the committee is going to examine the matter. Hopefully, we'll be able to improve it as much as possible for all of those who depend on it.

On the matter of visas and international students, it's clear that the challenges posed by the border can't be overcome quickly with the second wave of the pandemic under way. We'll be dealing with it for months to come, so it's in our best interest to find solutions for universities and international students post-haste. We've already done a lot, and the minister can definitely speak to that when he's here. This is an issue of national concern not just from an economic and educational standpoint, but also from an economic recovery standpoint. I fully support the motion in that regard, as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you, Ms. Martinez Ferrada.

Seeing no further speakers on this motion, I will wait for the clerk to incorporate into the motion the amendment that has been moved before we go to the vote.

I will now read the amended motion:

That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee commence a study to examine the impact of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic on Canada's immigration system, and this study evaluate, review and examine issues relevant to the situation including the following:

a. application backlogs and processing times for the different streams of family reunification and the barriers preventing the timely reunification of loved ones, such as denials of temporary resident visas because of section 179(b) of the Immigration and Refugees Protection Regulations and the ongoing closures of Visa Application Centres;

b. examine the government's decision to reintroduce a lottery system for the reunification of parents and grandparents; to compare it to previous iterations of application processes for this stream of family reunification, including a review of processing time and the criteria required for the successful sponsorship;

c. temporary resident visa TRV processing delays faced by international students in securing TRVs, particularly in francophone Africa, authorization to travel to Canada by individuals with an expired confirmation of permanent residency, use of expired security, medical and background checks for permanent immigration;

that this study begin no later than October 27, 2020, and that the committee hold no more than eight meetings to hear from witnesses; that the witnesses called as part of this study be allowed to testify on one or more of the issues in this motion; that the evidence gathered during this study be deemed to have also been given during subsequent studies to be held during this Parliament, provided that the subsequent studies deal with issues similar to those in this motion; that the committee report its findings to the House; and that pursuant to Standing Order 109, the government table a comprehensive response thereto.

Can we please go to the recorded vote?

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Surrey—Newton, BC]

Madam Chair, could you ask if there's unanimous consent?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Clerk, can we ask for unanimous consent on this motion?

Great. We do have unanimous consent.

(Motion as amended agreed to)

Go ahead, Ms. Martinez Ferrada.

[Soraya Martinez Ferrada, Liberal, Hochelaga, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Again, I apologize for my lack of committee experience.

Knowing that the committee is going to study the motion as of next week, I was wondering whether we could go into subcommittee now to discuss the motion and the witness list. We could do it with the clerk in the hour we have left.

Is that something I can propose formally to the committee members?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

The motion has passed.

[Soraya Martinez Ferrada, Liberal, Hochelaga, QC]

Yes, I understand that, Madam Chair, but I'm asking whether, once the motion is adopted, I can propose that the committee be adjourned and that we go into subcommittee to examine the motion that was just adopted. I'd like to propose that formally. Can I do that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Can I ask the clerk to clarify what Ms. Martinez Ferrada has proposed?

[The Clerk]

I think I understand what the member is asking.

Usually, a notice of meeting has to be issued before a subcommittee meeting is convened. A standing committee meeting doesn't usually turn into a subcommittee meeting. I can ask the technical team, though.

It may be possible to adjourn the meeting and give notice to convene a subcommittee meeting for the remainder of today's time. According to the order and procedure adopted by the whips, the committee can hold a subcommittee meeting, but the order has to be respected. We have the hour that's left today and October 27 to hold such a meeting.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Madam Chair, on a point of order, generally speaking, we always hear—and I may have said it on occasion—that committees are the masters of their own house. I don't know if there would be unanimous consent for this, but in the event that there were unanimous consent, would those difficulties still apply?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

My proposal to all the committee members is that we have moved the motion and we have to start the study on that motion as of October 27.

As I said in the opening remarks, the clerk can be in touch with the IRCC officials to kick-start the first meeting, and we can submit the list of the witnesses to the clerk no later than 4 p.m. on Monday, October 26, provided that everyone can send them in. We can start the study with the officials on October 27.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Madam Chair, on my point of order, what I'm really saying is that Madam Martinez Ferrada has proposed that the committee adjourn and that there immediately be a meeting of the subcommittee on agenda for those members who are on it to work out some of these details.

My question is this: Is that not possible with unanimous consent, or does it require a very short time—I assume perhaps five minutes—to give the notice to the members officially? I would have thought that you could do this by unanimous consent, but what do I know about such matters?

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West, ON]

Madam Chair, I don't always agree with my Liberal colleagues, but I would agree with Geoff on this one.

Very clearly, you could go into subcommittee if that's what the committee decides, if everyone's okay with it and you have unanimous consent. I would suggest that in order to not burn another meeting date—because we're limited with our meetings—the subcommittee have a chance to have a conversation now to try to organize the thought process for us and get things started.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Ms. Kwan is next.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I don't have a problem with going to a subcommittee. However, I was hoping to move one additional motion. It was a motion that in the last meeting, with the larger motion that has now been adjourned, was incorporated into a potential study.

This is a motion with respect to having the committee study the safe haven for the people of Hong Kong facing persecution under the national security law. I was hoping to move that motion so that we can put it into the mix.