Evidence of meeting #70 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:10 p.m.
Conservative
Ziad Aboultaif Conservative Edmonton Manning, AB
Based on historical records, do we know how often the minister interferes or intervenes in these circumstances? What's the percentage of cases versus regular cases that exist on an annual basis?
If you have those figures, I think they would be helpful to the conversation. Thank you.
9:10 p.m.
Director General, Citizenship Policy, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Madam Chair, I don't currently have statistics before me on the number of requests for accommodation on compassionate grounds. I would have to check what data the department has and provide what is available to this committee at the earliest opportunity.
Thank you.
9:10 p.m.
Liberal
9:10 p.m.
Bloc
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Girard, I have a brief question for you.
The wording of the amendment we are now discussing mentions compassionate grounds. According to the proposed description, would officials be able to clearly understand what constitutes compassionate grounds and make appropriate decisions? From the legislative standpoint, can the concept of compassionate grounds be applicable to different situations? If not, it would be totally arbitrary or abstract.
9:10 p.m.
Director General, Citizenship Policy, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Guidelines would indeed be necessary for the people who would be reviewing applications, in order to give them parameters and prevent any arbitrary application of this provision.
We need to ask whether compassionate grounds might include instances in which certain people need flexibility because of financial limitations or other factors. Health problems could also be considered on compassionate grounds. For example, could people who have cancer have an exemption, while others with different health problems would not? Determining who is entitled to flexibility and an exemption is a difficult process, and we would like to avoid requiring officials to rule on these. The application of this provision needs to be more consistent if people are to have ready access to the flexibility they need, for all kinds of reasons. It should include financial or other considerations in addition to health constraints.
That's precisely why the regulatory proposal was put forward: to give applicants the opportunity to take part in their citizenship ceremony in accordance with current procedures, or to do so online at a later date.
9:10 p.m.
Bloc
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
For example, compassionate grounds might include parental reasons, such as someone who is the head of a single-parent family, who does not necessarily—
9:10 p.m.
Director General, Citizenship Policy, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Definitely. That's right.
9:10 p.m.
Bloc
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
So the scope of compassionate grounds would be broadened.
In fact, if we were to adopt the amendment as it is currently worded, there is a risk of creating all kinds of problems, and in particular leaving us quite some distance from achieving the main objective of Bill S‑245, which is to grant citizenship to people who should never have lost it in the first place.
June 5th, 2023 / 9:10 p.m.
Director General, Citizenship Policy, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Yes, we have a long way to go.
9:10 p.m.
Bloc
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
We have a really long way to go.
I always get a kick out of my Conservative friends, and especially this evening. I understand what they're up to, and it's altogether legitimate. We're allowed to do this in committee as part of the parliamentary process. However, I'm just wondering about something, and I'd like to ask Ms. Girard about it.
I'd like to report that the messages keep coming into my Twitter account. There are all kinds of people watching us this evening, at 9:15 p.m. I would imagine, Ms. Girard, that your husband is there too. All kinds of people watching us this evening are wondering what the heck we're up to at the moment. At this point, there should be just one amendment left to look at, amendment G‑10, and then we'd be done with the amendments, I think—
9:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
I'm sorry for interrupting, Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe.
Please keep your comments to the amendment we have on the floor. It's amendment CPC-8.
If you can, please keep your comments to the amendment.
9:15 p.m.
Bloc
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
Of course, Madam Chair. My comments will continue to be about amendment CPC‑8, which concerns compassionate grounds. In fact I believe we will all be needing them this evening.
So, many of the people watching this evening are wondering why we are now discussing amendment CPC‑8, which I can read to you once more:
24 (5) Should a person be unable—
9:15 p.m.
Conservative
Brad Redekopp Conservative Saskatoon West, SK
Madam Chair, you've been trying to make sure that we don't repeat ourselves, and I think we've been trying not to do that. I think Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe did just raise this very same issue in his prior intervention.
9:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
We are getting into a debate.
Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe, if you can avoid repetition, please go ahead.
9:15 p.m.
Bloc
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
Yes, but I hadn't yet read the amendment. I have the right to do that, because it's the first time I am doing so. I will therefore read the amendment:
24 (5) Should a person be unable to attend an in‑person citizenship ceremony, the Minister may waive this requirement only on compassionate grounds and a virtual option should be offered in those circumstances as requested.
The wording uses the conditional, and says “should be offered in those circumstances”.
Is it possible to have an amendment that would completely change the bill and conditionally have force of law when it uses the wording “should be”? Have you seen that often? I'm asking you the question.
9:15 p.m.
Director General, Citizenship Policy, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
I'm not aware of all the precedents, but it's up to Parliament to legislate. We, the officials, are there to implement the law faithfully, as the expression goes.
My understanding of the proposed amendment Is that the conditional wording pertains to the applicant's request. That's my assumption.
9:15 p.m.
Bloc
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
I asked because I don't really know how I'm going to vote on this amendment.
On the one hand, I'm wondering how compassionate grounds would be applied, as we discussed earlier, and whose scope is extremely broad. On the other, how will an amendment like this be applied if a conditional verb is attached to it?
I will now ask the legislative clerks. Is the wording different in French and English? In French, the conditional is used. I may be mistaken.
9:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
Thank you, Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe. I will clarify with the legislative clerk and get back to you.
Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe, I've checked with the legislative clerk. The language that has been used can be used.
9:15 p.m.
Bloc
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
Okay, good.
I have a final question about the amendment, Madam Chair.
9:15 p.m.
Bloc
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
Currently, the act allows someone who makes the request to participate in the citizenship ceremony virtually. If this change is made to the bill and it is incorporated into the act, what difference would it make?
9:15 p.m.
Director General, Citizenship Policy, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Here's what would change. The committee provided statistics that were obtained for the 2022 year—
9:15 p.m.
Bloc
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
Excuse me, Madam Chair, but I'm having trouble hearing, because people in the room are talking a lot.