Evidence of meeting #92 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 employers.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Tomoya Obokata  Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Slavery, United Nations, As an Individual

11:45 a.m.

Conservative

Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB

Thank you, Chair, for that.

That was an unnecessary interruption.

As I was saying, I was looking more closely at the testimony from that committee meeting. I quoted to you what Mr. Anson said, and I can't help but come to understand that either there was an attempt at misdirection or he was very ill-informed on that date, February 7. It was February 23 when there were major operations going on in Canada that The Globe and Mail was reporting on.

My motion is very simple. The minister needs to return, because he is the main person responsible for who gets to be on the eTA system and who does not get to be on the eTA system.

We now have data from Statistics Canada proving that between 25% and 33% of those with Mexican national travel documents who are landing in Canada are making claims at the IRB. The only way they could be doing that is because they've secured an eTA for the purpose of travel to Canada. The article then goes on to say that some people are exploiting this “lawful ability” to travel to Canada on behalf of organized crime.

We need officials from IRCC to return, and we also need the Canada Border Services Agency to come before the committee. Mr. Anson specifically needs to come back and explain both to myself and to Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe why the testimony does not match with reality.

Thank you.

11:45 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal

Thank you, Mr. Kmiec.

I have a speaking list here. I have Mr. Redekopp, Ms. Kwan, Ms. Kayabaga and Mr. Chiang.

I'll go to Mr. Redekopp. Please go ahead.

11:50 a.m.

Conservative

Brad Redekopp Conservative Saskatoon West, SK

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I just want to support this motion. We tackled the issue of human smuggling before in the study that we did on asylum seekers at Roxham Road. In that study, Conservative members put forward some strong recommendations to strengthen our anti-trafficking laws. This motion gets right at the heart of that, too, because we have problems in our country with the trafficking of people, with the smuggling of people, and, of course, we know that when trafficked people are brought into our country, they often end up doing things that are illegal. They often end up in things like prostitution.

These are things that exploit people. These are ways that people are exploited by the traffickers. It's bad for everybody. It's bad for our country, and it's certainly bad for the people who are involved, oftentimes without their consent. It's not something they sought to do. It's something they ended up in because they're exploited by cartels, by organized crime and things like that. That's exactly what this article is referring to.

We all recognize that crime in our country has increased significantly. Crime is also partly driven by some of the relaxations that the Liberals have done in terms of the laws, in terms of house arrest, for example, in terms of the relaxation of jail time requirements on some very critical crimes—crimes with firearms, gang crimes. Oftentimes, now, these kinds of criminals, rather than being put in jail, are actually released on bail. It can happen over and over again that a criminal commits a crime, gets arrested, and then, after doing the paperwork at the police station, is just released back out into the population.

Unfortunately, a growing number of these criminals reoffend. They come back. They're arrested again for the next crime. It's the same process. They do their paperwork, and out they go. We have this revolving door of criminality. In the worst case, sometimes there's a house arrest. Well, house arrest isn't much of a penalty either.

What's happened in our culture now, because of these changes made by the Liberal government in terms of the penalties for crimes, is that there's less of a disincentive to commit these crimes, so a person who's looking at—

11:50 a.m.

Liberal

Shafqat Ali Liberal Brampton Centre, ON

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

11:50 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal

Mr. Ali, if you have a genuine point of order, I'll give you the floor.

11:50 a.m.

Liberal

Shafqat Ali Liberal Brampton Centre, ON

Chair, I always have a genuine reason when I speak.

I don't see the relevance of the point. It seems to me that it's a filibuster. We want to have witnesses, but when we have witnesses here, we waste their time and don't give them a chance to speak—

11:50 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal

Mr. Ali, you can have your spot. I will give the floor to Mr. Redekopp.

Mr. Redekopp, go ahead, please.

11:50 a.m.

Conservative

Brad Redekopp Conservative Saskatoon West, SK

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I know that it's sometimes difficult for certain members to see the relevance of why we might want to put criminals in jail and why not doing that can lead to the exploitation of women, in particular, but it's something that we Conservatives really want to make sure we get right in our country so that we can reduce the crime we are seeing in our country—the car thefts and the home invasions. There are so many things happening that shouldn't be happening now.

As I was saying, criminals do not have to worry about going to jail, because either they just get released back out into the general population or, in the worst case, maybe they have a house arrest. What's happening now—and this is where we have to be very careful about cartels and gangs—is that gangs recognize this. They are able to go to a vulnerable youth and say, “Hey, we want you to help us commit these crimes, but don't worry; nothing can happen. You might get a record, but that's it. You won't ever go to jail. There are no consequences for your actions.”

At the same time that this is going on, we have a cost of living crisis in our country, so that same youth might be having difficulty finding a place to live, or he might be living with 10 other people in a one-bedroom apartment. That youth, then, is likely struggling to buy groceries, and so—

11:50 a.m.

Bloc

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

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

I think the discussion will continue beyond the six minutes the witness has left. Out of courtesy, we should thank the witness for being here before we let him leave. I don't think our conversation will be over in the next six minutes.

11:50 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal

Thank you very much, Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe.

I have quite a speaking list. After Mr. Redekopp, I have Ms. Kwan, Ms. Kayabaga, Mr. Chiang, Mr. Maguire and then Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe. If there are any other members, I have to entertain them. It seems like a long list, but it's up to the members whether they want to continue with the debate on this motion, which is all in order, and to relieve the special rapporteur.

It's your call. I, as the chair, am here to facilitate.

Ms. Kwan.

11:55 a.m.

NDP

Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC

On that point, Mr. Chair, after this, we have one hour in which we can discuss committee business, including our instructions to the analysts for our report. I would suggest that we pause this so that we can actually have the witness.... We tried, Mr. Chair, as you know, on several occasions to get him to join the committee.

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal

Ms. Kwan, to facilitate this, I can suspend the meeting for two minutes. You can go and talk with the honourable members. If you have consensus, I will do that. Otherwise, I will give the floor to Mr. Redekopp.

11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Brad Redekopp Conservative Saskatoon West, SK

I would like to continue.

I'm okay with excusing the witness, if the committee would like to do that. Otherwise, I'll continue.

11:55 a.m.

NDP

Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC

Maybe, Mr. Chair—

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal

There's no consensus.

11:55 a.m.

NDP

Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC

Maybe we can ask whether or not our witness can stay longer. Hopefully this will wrap up soon, so that we may be able to finish our rounds of questions with this very important witness.

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal

I can ask that question.

Mr. Obokata, would you be able to stay longer?

11:55 a.m.

Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Slavery, United Nations, As an Individual

Tomoya Obokata

Yes. It depends on how much longer. That is the question, I suppose.

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal

I can't dictate that, because it's up to the members. If there's no adjournment of the debate, as the chair, I have to respect the honourable members.

I have quite a speaking list. I already see another member. Ms. Zahid is on the speaking list as well. I can't say for how long a member is going to speak.

Here we go. It's an open-ended question.

I'm going to Mr. Redekopp. The floor is yours.

11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Brad Redekopp Conservative Saskatoon West, SK

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I just want to continue with my line of thinking here. Because of some of the things that are happening in our country—you can go all the way back to things like the cost of living, the terrible inflation we have and the difficulty people are having in finding houses—we have youth in our country who sometimes don't have a lot of options for how to feed themselves, and they are vulnerable. Then, at the same time, we have laws that have been relaxed, making them less onerous, I guess. We're making it easier to commit crimes without fear of consequences. These are things that have been done by the current government.

Then, we have cartels and gangs that see an opportunity. In the case of this story, the allegation is that Mexicans are coming to Canada and then getting smuggled back into the U.S.A. Cartels are all about making money; that's their primary goal. They don't care how they do it, and they don't care whom they hurt in the process. That's not their concern. What they see here, then, is the lack of rules or the slackening of our rules. The loopholes that this government has created in our rules have created vulnerabilities in our country. The cartels are very creative when they look at how they can best make money, so they see these loopholes. They see the lessening of laws as an opportunity for them to exploit people.

We have to remember that there's no love lost for cartels here. The terrible part, the tragedy in this, is the people who get unwittingly involved in this, the youth and others who are involved in the crimes.

Oftentimes, as I've said before, it can be women and girls who are trafficked into all kinds of slavery and prostitution. It's not that they went looking for it. It's not something they even wanted, but they end up there because we allow cartels and gangs to have this power. We've neglected to put proper laws in place and proper consequences to breaking the law.

That's what we're hearing from this article, and that's why we think it's important that we hear from the minister on this and get his take. As my colleague pointed out, there are some very troubling inconsistencies in the testimony we heard from the government itself and from what was said when the minister was here with the officials versus what we're reading in this article. There are questions we need to ask. Maybe, as was said by my colleague, they were just mistakes or inadvertent things said in error. I'm not sure, but we need to find out. Were there actual reports? Is there proper documentation of this?

The article is not necessarily naming a specific cartel, but—and this is from the article—“members of organized crime groups have been identified as being involved.” This is something that's very serious. It's something we need to look at, I think, urgently at the committee. It doesn't have to take a long time, as is pointed out in this motion.

We always talk about having the minister here, but we also need officials, because we need to understand at a deeper level what's being done and get to the truth. The most important thing here is that we have a conflict between what was told to this committee and what we're reading here. I think that's something that we as committee members should be very concerned about.

Mr. Chair, you should be concerned about this as well, because we want to protect the integrity of the committee here in that we get information that allows us to understand the situation and make good decisions. When that's in question, that's not good for anybody. It's not just bad for our committee; it's bad for all committees. We need to make sure that the information we're getting here is accurate.

That's why I think that this is an important motion and an important, quick study we can do, and I give my support to my colleague in doing this.

With that, I will end.

Noon

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal

Thank you.

Now we will go to Ms. Kwan.

Ms. Kwan, you are next on the speaking list.

February 26th, 2024 / noon

NDP

Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I have to say how disappointed I am for this committee to be at this juncture, where we have a very special witness, the special rapporteur, whom we've been trying to get to this committee for some time now. We had to cancel previously because of technical difficulties, and we finally have him here on this very important study on exploitation, which is not too far from the whole issue of human trafficking. When people are exploited in their work environment, that is something we should take seriously. If the immigration system facilitates that process, we should be hearing witnesses on this issue and on how to address it. We have a special rapporteur who's come to Canada to study this issue and is willing to offer his expertise and his learnings to this committee so that we can better address these issues.

We now have a situation where the Conservatives are moving a motion in the middle of the special witness's presentation and discussion with us. I think that's not courteous, to say the very least, especially in light of the fact that after this first hour, we will have time to do exactly that. I can't tell you how disappointed I am, and disgusted, frankly, with this tactic and this approach.

That's not to say that the issue under discussion with this motion is not an important one. I would even be willing to consider it, but not at this time. We need to cede this time to the rapporteur so that we can get this work done. We need to hear his expertise and complete that work, so that we can get on with the report and make the necessary recommendations to the government.

Noon

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal

Thank you, Ms. Kwan.

Ms. Kayabaga, go ahead, please.

Noon

Liberal

Arielle Kayabaga Liberal London West, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I just want to echo my colleague's comments. I'm not going to weigh in on what our colleague is moving forward, because it's also a really important study to do, but as my colleague said, we've waited weeks and months to get the special rapporteur here in our committee. We're now wasting the time that we could be using to speak with him with another motion that we could talk about later. We would have much better conversations on this motion if we moved it later. Right now, I think we should finish our committee.

Earlier, my colleague Mr. Redekopp was talking about the fact that we have so many things on the go and are unable to actually get anything done. This is one example of why we're unable to move forward.

Mr. Chair, I move that we adjourn debate on this. We can come back to this later, after we finish with the special rapporteur. We've invited him twice, and he's taken the time to be here. I think this is important.

Noon

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sukh Dhaliwal

The motion is on the floor. There is no debate.

Madam Clerk, I will ask you to conduct a vote on the motion to adjourn debate.

The vote is tied.

The motion is in order. I would carry on debate on this motion. I vote for no adjournment, basically.

(Motion negatived: nays 6; yeas 5)