Citizenship and Immigration Committee on May 8th, 2023

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Thank you.

Thank you for that, but I have another tweak that I would like to make to this motion. It has to do with the part that refers to Bill S-245. We talked about that a bit. I believe we need to change it so that we are referring to the potential breach of privilege rather than to Bill S-245 so that we don't have any problems with.... We have to be careful with our motions, because privilege motions take precedence over this, and I want to make sure that is done.

My amendment would be as follows. Replace where it currently says “current study of” with the wording from my original motion, which is “potential breach of privilege resulting from the premature distribution of notices of amendments to”, and then it carries on. It would read as follows: “That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee invite Randall Emery to appear on the potential breach of privilege resulting from the premature distribution of notices of amendments to Bill S-245, An Act to amend the Citizenship Act (granting citizenship to certain Canadians)”. Then add my previous amendment, which I think was “by Wednesday” or “at the next meeting”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Okay.

I will ask the clerk to circulate this in both official languages to all members of the committee. I will suspend the meeting for a few minutes so everyone has that in both official languages. Then we will proceed.

The meeting is suspended.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I call the meeting back to order. I hope that all members have received, in both official languages, the amendment moved by Mr. Redekopp.

Go ahead, Mr. Dhaliwal.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

First of all, I'd like to thank my Quebec friend Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe for his thoughtfulness. I would also like to support Mr. Redekopp's motion. I think there is consensus in the room. Let's pass that amendment and the main motion as amended and carry on with our business.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you, Mr. Dhaliwal.

Mr. Redekopp, go ahead.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I appreciate that—

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

I'm sorry, Madam Chair, but I have my hand up.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Yes, Ms. Kwan.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I have Mr. Redekopp and then you.

Mr. Redekopp, go ahead.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Oh, I see. Okay. I was speaking to the amendment.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Just so we are clear, this also relates to timing. It's to make sure it's clear that this is not about Bill S-245 per se; it's more about the privilege piece. That's why this clarification needed to be made. It's also good for the witness to understand why he is coming to committee and for him to be clear that it's not so much about Bill S-245 as it is about this potential issue of privilege, so that he too is aware of why the committee is calling him. I think it's important to be fair to him so that when he comes he isn't blindsided by questions he wasn't expecting.

That's the reason I'm trying to clarify this. I think it's important that we are clear because, as has been said by others, it is a very significant issue. We need to get the best testimony we can so that, depending on where it goes past this committee, we have good information for those who will look at it afterwards to determine and make assessments about where this is going.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you, Mr. Redekopp.

Next I have Ms. Kwan.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

On the language of the motion, I want to be sure that “notices of amendments” is referring to the clerk's package that has been distributed. Am I correct?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Ms. Kwan, could you please repeat that?

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

The amendment that was sent to us includes the words “notices of amendments”. I will just read the whole thing so that everybody knows what we are talking about:

That the motion be amended by replacing the words “current study of” with the following: “potential breach of privilege resulting from the premature distribution of notices of amendment to”.

The words “notices of amendment to” are referring to the amendments package that has been sent out by the clerk. Am I correct in my understanding of that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Could I ask Mr. Redekopp to please clarify that what you are saying in your amendment relates to the amendments package indicated by Ms. Kwan?

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

The short answer is yes. When the clerk released the different amendments.... We all submitted our amendments to the clerk. The clerk compiled them and submitted them back to us. That's the point at which the numbers are assigned to them and they are sequentially put in order. I believe that's the process. The putting them in order part is related also to the sequence the amendments follow in the bill itself—section 1, section 2, section 3, etc.

Those amendments are put in that order. They're numbered by the clerk and then they're sent out to those of us on the committee, and that's the point at which they are still confidential and are not something that can be shared outside of members of the committee. That's what's being referred to by “notices of amendments”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you, Mr. Redekopp.

I have Ms. Kwan.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

If I can finish, then, I'm fine with this amendment as long as we're clear to say that what we're talking about here is the package the clerk distributed after each party submitted their proposed amendments to the clerk for distribution to committee members.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you, Ms. Kwan.

Go ahead, Mr. Redekopp.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Yes, I think that's the idea here, so I think we should be okay with it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Go ahead, Ms. Rempel Garner.

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

On this point, what I want to know.... Just hearkening back to what our colleague Mr. Kmiec disclosed at the last meeting, there were specific numbers that would have been related to the amendments as they were presented. To my colleague Ms. Kwan, I think that's what we're getting at here. Somebody doesn't come up with numbers like that with a crystal ball. They came from somewhere, and I think that's what we're trying to get at with this.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you.

Seeing no further debate, we will take the vote on the amendment moved by Mr. Redekopp.

(Amendment agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0)

The amendment has been adopted. Now we have before us the motion moved by Mr. Dhaliwal, as amended.

Go ahead, Ms. Kwan.