Evidence of meeting #91 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 amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal
We'll continue our meeting in public to discuss committee business.
Last time, we adjourned debate on the motion of Mr. McLean and the amendment moved by Mr. Kmiec on February 5.
Is there consensus in the committee to resume the motion? I see a yes.
I'm going to make my decision, then. As there is consensus in the committee, we will resume the debate on the motion that was adjourned.
Mr. Kmiec, go ahead please.
February 12th, 2024 / 11:30 a.m.
Conservative
Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB
As to where we left off, I just want to make it clear that this is an IRCC issue.
I have the Hong Kong Watch report. Some $1.5 billion is managed by Canadian insurance companies, which is equivalent to $69 million in management fees that these companies are making. The issue is related to Hong Kongers who are Canadian citizens and Canadian permanent residents who came to Canada on the BNO passport, which was a valid document to travel here.
Hong Kong Watch notes this about the MPFA, which is a Hong Kong-based organization:
...the MPFA released a statement on 10 March 2021 saying that because the British National (Overseas) (BNO) passport was no longer recognised by the Hong Kong government as a valid travel document as well as proof of identity as of the end of January 2021, those trying to withdraw their MPFs early—
Those are the pension fund monies of these Hong Kongers, who are Canadians citizens or permanent residents.
—(before retirement) cannot rely on the BNO passport as evidence in support [of] an application for early MPF withdrawal.
These are pension funds of Canadians who are originally from Hong Kong or are permanent residents of Canada. When they apply, the agents of these Canadian insurance companies, who are in Hong Kong, are not allowing the transfer.
Some employees—at least in one case with, I think, Sun Life—have been arrested in Hong Kong for trying to facilitate this. This is a form of transnational repression, where the Beijing government is directing the Hong Kong government to go after these Canadian Hong Kongers and permanent residents. It's a form of the extraterritorial reach of the CCP against our people.
What I want is for us to pass this motion with the amendments in order for us to call these insurance companies to testify and explain why they are doing this, why they are facilitating this and why they continue operating in Hong Kong under these conditions.
The second part is about the IRCC issuing the PR card. For those who aren't Canadian citizens yet, when a PR card is issued, the first three letters indicate which travel document you used when you originally entered Canada. For Hong Kongers who used the BNO passport, this is shown on the card, so it's a very easy and quick way for MPF managers in Hong Kong and Hong Kong government administrators to identify them. Because of this quirk in how we do our PR cards, we're facilitating the identification of people being targeted by Beijing.
I'd like this motion to pass. It's for just one meeting, so we can call these people to testify and explain themselves.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal
Thank you, Mr. Kmiec.
Are there any more speakers?
Go ahead, Madam Kwan.
NDP
Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC
Just for clarity on the amendment, can we be sure that the amendment is also to invite the Minister of Finance or representatives of the Minister of Finance to the committee?
I just want to be clear on what the amendment is, because I moved a subamendment.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal
I will ask the clerk to read the motion as amended.
Actually, Madam Kwan, if you are talking about your subamendment, then we will debate the motion as subamended.
Go ahead, Madam Kwan.
NDP
Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC
I think the proper procedure would be to vote on the subamendment, then the amendments and then the amended motion.
I just want to make sure that we don't skip that step because I think the Minister of Finance has a role to play.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal
So that committee members are aware, at the end of the meeting on February 5, Madam Kwan said that she would like to propose a subamendment, but we never had time to discuss this with the adjournment of the meeting.
The subamendment must directly modify the amendment, which was not the case. We should vote on the amendment and then she can propose another amendment, unless there is unanimous consent of the committee.
Do we have unanimous consent?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal
(Subamendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We are on the motion by Mr. McLean, amended by Mr. Kmiec and subamended by Madam Kwan.
Is there any more discussion on that before we take a vote?
Go ahead, Madam Zahid.
Liberal
Salma Zahid Liberal Scarborough Centre, ON
Thank you, Chair.
Is it the subamendment we will be dealing with first?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal
Yes, because there's unanimous consent from the committee. The motion was presented by Mr. McLean, amended by Mr. Kmiec and subamended by Madam Kwan.
Liberal
Salma Zahid Liberal Scarborough Centre, ON
Can the clerk please read out the complete motion as amended and subamended?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal
Sure. We'll do that.
Mr. Clerk, are you okay there, or do you want to suspend for a second?
The Clerk of the Committee Mr. Rémi Bourgault
That's okay.
You would like to hear the entire motion, including the amendment and subamendment.
Liberal
Bloc
Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Bloc Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
That's what I was going to say. It's important to understand that some of the people listening to us, including Bloc Québécois employees, are unilingual francophones. If people are discussing things in English and their microphones are not on, the interpreters can't do their job, and that's a lack of respect. I would like everyone to be mindful of that.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal
That is an excellent point by Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe. As I always stress, there should be no cross-conversations. Only one person should be speaking. Please respect that.
I'll give the floor to Madam Kayabaga.
Liberal
Arielle Kayabaga Liberal London West, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I just want to understand this. We just passed a subamendment. We're now on the amendment that our colleague made, as subamended. Then it will be up for a discussion and up for a vote. Is that correct?
Liberal
Liberal
Arielle Kayabaga Liberal London West, ON
No, we're on the amendment as subamended, not the motion. It's the amendment.
Liberal
Arielle Kayabaga Liberal London West, ON
Our colleague moved an amendment and then our other colleague subamended it, so we're debating the amendment, not the motion.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal
Exactly.
I'll now give the floor to the clerk, so let him speak.
Thank you, Mr. Clerk.