Citizenship and Immigration Committee on May 8th, 2023

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Yes, that's what I was wondering about. That is the proper procedure, then, for having this motion come forward. I agree with Ms. Kwan that it would be valuable to have that in our hands, particularly before the witness comes at the next meeting, hopefully. My colleague Ms. Rempel Garner indicated the imperativeness of that in her discussions earlier this afternoon in saying that it not be put off and that it be as soon as we can—at the next meeting, if at all possible.

That was the reason I raised this issue in the first place. It was just to have proper procedures and protocol in regard to it. I have no problem with taking the time to do the proper translation and to get that out to us in such a manner. I think we could proceed with that.

I just want to ask a question as well, Madam Chair, while I have the floor. I think some of us have other commitments at 5:30. Was it your intention to hold that today at the meeting? What's the procedure there?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

We started at 3:45, so we can go on until 5:45.

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

Let's get this passed.

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

Motion adopted and meeting adjourned.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

The next speaker I have is Mr. Redekopp.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

My question has been answered. Thank you.

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

On a point of order, I think you'd find unanimous consent if you—

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

One second. Let Mr. Redekopp finish.

Yes, Mr. Redekopp.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

My question has been answered. I'm good.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Okay. Thank you.

Go ahead, Mr. Genuis.

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

I think you'd find unanimous consent to deem the motion adopted and the meeting adjourned.

[A voice]

No.

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

No?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

We don't have unanimous consent.

Ms. Kwan has raised her hand.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

I'm sorry. That was just to say no.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Okay.

We have the motion moved by Ms. Kwan. Seeing no further debate, we will take the vote.

Go ahead, Mr. Genuis.

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

Madam Chair, could you just clarify how long it would take to translate the email before its distribution? Would it be here in time for...?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Let me confer with the clerk about how long it will take.

As per the clerk, to answer the question raised by Mr. Genuis, it can take from one to two days to get this translated into French.

Go ahead, Mr. Genuis.

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

Your expectation is that it will be distributed before Wednesday's meeting. I guess that's two days.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

The clerk is saying that it will be one to two days. Today is Monday. It cannot be distributed until it is translated. We will have to wait for the translation before this email is circulated to all the members.

Is that clear to everyone?

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

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Okay. We can proceed to the vote.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

The motion moved by Ms. Kwan is adopted. We will get this translated into French. Once the translation is done, the document will be circulated to all members of the committee.

Go ahead, Ms. Rempel Garner.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Thank you.

I'd like to move another motion in the vein of my colleague Ms. Kwan's.

I think there is probably a bit more discovery we need to do around this matter. Obviously, I hope we will find out, through testimony and having the opportunity to question this witness, how they came to be in possession of this type of information. I think part of the exercise in making the determination on privilege on behalf of the committee—but also trying to look at a potential remedy, because that would be part of a motion as well I believe—is trying to find out what that chain of distribution was. Certainly, if censure needs to happen, censure can then be issued. Also, we can make sure it doesn't happen again.

What I would like to do is move that, if there exists any correspondence between members or members' staff and this individual wherein the amendments were distributed, that correspondence be tabled with the committee for consideration.

I'm open to suggestions on wording, but the intent here would be this: If there was indeed a forwarding of this to somebody, we give the opportunity for that person to perhaps table it with the committee for consideration, so we're not just spinning our wheels when this person comes to committee.

I hate to be a stickler on this stuff, but again, we're not considering a minor amendment to this legislation. To reiterate, what happened was this. We had this bill at a certain stage. There was a special motion that happened in the House of Commons, with debate in the House of Commons, to expand the scope of what we would be considering at this committee. We have been receiving, essentially, very complex and technical table-dropped amendments, and we've been forced to look at them on the floor on behalf of—I'm looking down the table here—the about 500,000 people we represent alone.

I'm not sure how many people my colleague Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe—

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

It's 100,000.