Citizenship and Immigration Committee on June 9th, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Good morning, everybody. I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting 28 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration.

Given the ongoing pandemic situation and in light of the recommendations from health authorities, as well as the directive of the Board of Internal Economy on Thursday, November 25, 2021, to remain healthy and safe all those attending the meeting in person are to maintain two metres of physical distancing and must wear a non-medical mask when circulating in the room. It is highly recommended that the mask be worn at all times, including when seated and that you maintain proper hand hygiene by using the provided hand sanitizer in the room. You must refrain from coming to the room if you are symptomatic.

I will remind you that all comments should be addressed through the chair. When you are not speaking, your microphone should be on mute and your camera must be on.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, May 4, 2022, we will resume consideration of Bill C-242, an act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, regarding temporary resident visas for parents and grandparents.

First, I would like to welcome the sponsor of the bill, Mr. Kyle Seeback.

I don't see him here.

Okay, that's not a problem. We are joined by officials from the Department of Citizenship and Immigration: Michèle Kingsley, director general, immigration; Alexis Graham, director, social and discretionary policy and programs; James Seyler, director, immigration program guidance; and Ben Mitchell, counsel.

We are also joined by the legislative clerks today to provide us advice.

Thanks for joining us.

We are ready to start clause-by-clause consideration. I want to inform the members of some instructions that we need to follow as we go through the clause-by-clause consideration. This is the first one we are having in this session.

As the name indicates, this is an examination of all the clauses in the order in which they appear in the bill. I will call each clause successively. Each clause is subject to debate and a vote.

If there are amendments to the clause in question, I will recognize the member who is proposing the amendment and who may explain that amendment. The amendment will then be open for debate. When no further members wish to intervene, the amendment will be voted on. Amendments will be considered in the order in which they appear in the bill or in the package each member received from the clerk of the committee. Members should note that amendments must be submitted in writing to the clerk of the committee.

I will try to go slowly so that I allow all the members to follow the proceedings properly. If there are any questions, please raise your hand and get my attention. Amendments have been given an alphanumeric number in the top-right corner to indicate which party submitted the amendment. There is no need for a seconder to move an amendment. Once moved, you will need unanimous consent to withdraw that amendment.

During debate on an amendment, members are permitted to move subamendments. These subamendments must be submitted in writing. They do not require the approval of the mover of the amendment. Only one subamendment at a time may be considered. When a subamendment to an amendment is moved, it is voted on first. Another subamendment may be moved, or the committee may consider the main amendment and vote on it.

Once every clause has been voted on, the committee will vote on the title and the bill itself, and an order to reprint the bill may be required if amendments are adopted so that the House has a proper copy for use at report stage. Finally, the committee will have to order the chair to report the bill to the House. The report contains only the text of any adopted amendments as well as an indication of any deleted clauses.

Are there any questions? Is everyone clear? Does anyone need clarification before we begin the process?

Okay.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, May 4, 2022, we will begin clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-242, an act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, temporary resident visas for parents and grandparents.

Pursuant to Standing Order 75(1), consideration of clause 1, the short title, is postponed.

We will begin with amendment NDP-1, numbered 11777709, which proposes new clause 1.1. This is on page 1 of the package.

Would the member like to move this?

Yes, Ms. Kwan.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much.

Madam Chair, I'd like to move the amendment. Should I read the amendment into the record? Do I need to do that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Yes, you can read that.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

All right.

I move to amend Bill C-242 by adding, before line 5 on page 1, the following new clause:

1.1 Subsection 14(2) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act is amended by adding the following after paragraph (c):

(c.1) special circumstances to be taken into account in the processing of temporary resident visa applications;

(c.2) a review process for decisions made in relation to temporary resident visa applications;

Madam Chair, the reason I'd like to move this amendment is so that there could be an appeal process in place for rejections. As we know, oftentimes people are not able to have their application reviewed after it's been rejected. The process that's available to them is extremely onerous, and in many cases effectively not available.

We know that there are extenuating circumstances that happen in people's lives. I cited during committee, with witnesses, examples such as applicants whose applications are rejected because their financial situation changes at the last minute and for the short term, but their entire application is ultimately rejected as a result.

I'm moving for an appeal system to be established and for special circumstances to be allowed to be taken into consideration. The amendment does not spell out what that appeal process would look like. It would be left to the government to make that determination and set up that structure. However, the call for an appeal process to be established is what this is about, and for special circumstances to be taken into consideration.

I hope members will consider this.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you, Ms. Kwan.

I will have to give a ruling on this amendment. The amendment that Ms. Kwan just moved seeks to amend subsection 14(2) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which deals with regulations related to requirements and selection. The amendment also seeks to introduce a review process that is not contemplated by Bill C-242.

House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, states the following on page 771:

...an amendment is inadmissible if it proposes to amend a statute that is not before the committee or a section of the parent Act, unless the latter is specifically amended by a clause of the bill.

Since section 14 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act is not being amended by Bill C-242, and also because the introduction of a review process is a new concept, this amendment goes beyond the scope of the bill. Therefore, it is the opinion of the chair that the amendment is inadmissible.

This ruling is non-debatable.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'd like to challenge your ruling.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Shall the ruling be sustained?

We have seven yeas and four nays, so the ruling of the chair is sustained.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Chair, on a point of order, I think there was some confusion among some of the members about the vote. It's not going to change the result, but out of respect for members, so that their votes can be on the record as they want them, it sounds as though there's a consensus to retake the vote to allow members to clarify their vote so that there's no—

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

We have already had a recorded vote, and I made it clear that we were voting on whether the chair's ruling should be sustained. That's what we were voting on, and the vote has already been conducted.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Is there unanimous consent to allow any members who want to change their vote to do so?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

No, we don't have unanimous consent.

The ruling of the chair has been sustained.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Can we suspend for a minute, Madam Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

We can. The meeting is suspended for a few minutes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I call the meeting back to order.

We voted on whether the ruling of the chair should be sustained. That was the vote. The members who voted yes were Mr. Ali, Mr. Dhaliwal, Mr. El-Khoury, Ms. Kayabaga, Ms. Lalonde, Mr. Benzen and Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe. Those who voted nay were Mr. Genuis, Mr. Hallan, Mr. Redekopp and Ms. Kwan.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

On a point of order, we were seeking the unanimous consent of the committee—

Okay, I'll let someone else propose it, then, if that will be better received.

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

Your main concern was that she should be able to change her vote.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

All conversations should be addressed through the chair. There should be no direct conversations.

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

We are only seeing if Ms. Kwan could change her vote.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Is there unanimous consent to allow members who wish to change their vote to do so?

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

I would bring in that Madam Kwan should be the one who should be allowed to change the vote. Do we have—

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

But nobody else should?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Wait one second....

Is there unanimous consent to allow the members to change their vote?

Go ahead, Mr. Benzen.

[Bob Benzen, Conservative, Calgary Heritage, AB]

I didn't exactly understand what I was voting on. I inappropriately voted yes, and I should have voted no, so I would like to change my vote to no, if that's possible.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Okay, so Mr. Benzen's vote is changed to nay.

(Ruling of the chair sustained: yeas 6; nays 5)

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Now we will move to amendment G-1.

Please, attention, order.

We have amendment G-1, number 11814366. It's on page 2 of the package that was provided.

Ms. Lalonde, would you like to move the amendment?