Mr. Speaker, I would like to indicate at the beginning that I will be splitting my 20 minutes with the hon. member for Vancouver East.
I am pleased to be able to speak to the bill today. I know that the member from Winnipeg Centre, our critic in this area, has already expressed the views and some of the concerns of our party on some aspects of bill, for instance with respect to the language requirements, et cetera.
I would like to pick up on the debate that has been going on in the House about citizenship and immigration because they are inextricably linked. I do not think we can talk about one without talking about the other.
The points of order being expressed by the government are themselves out of order and show just how sensitive the government is. It is funny for me, as was said earlier by a colleague, to listen to the Liberal Party accuse other parties of being anti-immigration when it is the party that brought in the $1,500 head tax and refused, against all advice to the contrary, to change that head tax. Any self-righteousness on the part of Liberals in this respect is quite out of order.
I also think it was quite out of order, and I say out of order politically, not procedurally, for the member to suggest that people who are immigrants to this country somehow should not be critical of particular aspects of the immigration policy.
It is partly what is wrong with debate about immigration in this country and, for that matter, about a lot of the other debates we have in this place. When people want to criticize a particular aspect of something, their motives are impugned and they are painted with a broad brush in some negative way. It is high time that people were able to express concerns about particular aspects of the refugee and immigration system in this country and not be accused of racism and of being anti-immigrant.
We clearly see that the government can do this. The member who just spoke from the government side expressed concerns about criminals getting into the country and sent a warning to them. When she does that it is okay, but when others are concerned about that it is somehow not okay. That is part of the problem. I too am concerned about what is happening to Canadian citizenship like so many other members of parliament.
I have people come into my constituency office. They have very painful tales to tell about members of their families who have been left in other countries of the world and cannot come to Canada because of various technicalities in the Immigration Act. There are daughters who turned 19 before they came or who married not knowing that it would harm their chances. There are families whose family circles are broken. They have daughters and sons or sisters and brothers in other countries who are the last remaining members of their families in the country of origin. It makes perfect sense to me that they should be able to reunite with their families, and they cannot do it.
This is where I want to talk about citizenship. Yet if they have enough money they can get into this country any time they like. I have an ad which appeared in the Latin Trade Magazine . This Latin Trade Magazine is published out of Miami, Florida. It caters to an elite business readership of approximately 86,000, over 40,000 from Latin American and Caribbean countries and 40,000 from the U.S. It is distributed on many Latin American airline routes. It is distributed by the American chambers of commerce, world trade centres and other trade organizations through Latin America and can be found at upscale hotel chains.
What do these ads say? They say “Guaranteed immigration to Canada”—just wait for the punch line—“with the purchase of a fleet rent a car franchise, a total investment of $50,000 Canadian/approximately $30,000 U.S. you are guaranteed”—and guaranteed is underlined—“immigration to Canada, even with a criminal record”.
I am sorry if being concerned about this makes me a racist but I do not think it does. I am concerned that there can be ads in these kinds of magazines saying “You put enough money down on the table and you can get into this country no matter who you are”. It is a problem I have had with the investor immigrant program for a long time. It has cheapened the notion of Canadian citizenship, that people can buy their way into this country.
I find this ad particularly offensive and it is why I entered into the debate today. It says “For information write 5950 Bathurst Street, Suite 1009, Toronto, Ontario”, and it gives a fax number, et cetera. This is precisely one of the things that is wrong with our immigration policy. I do not think Canadian citizenship is something that should be able to be bought.
We all should be concerned about any aspects of our immigration and refugee policy, particularly our immigration policy, which if it is not functioning properly does allow people who are undesirable to become Canadian citizens. I do not see anything wrong with being concerned about that. I think a lot of my constituents are concerned about it.
I make this point to the government. The government has said there is action on immigration coming and it is somehow inappropriate for us to talk about immigration in the context of this Citizenship Act. I do not think it is. I think it is an opportunity for us to express some of the concerns that our constituents have. Certainly the constituent who brought this ad to me was very, very concerned that Canadian citizenship should be for sale in this particular way.
I just wanted to register my opposition to this particular notion of Canadian citizenship as something that can be bought and sold in the marketplace like any other commodity. I do not believe that being a Canadian is a commodity. I do not think it is something that can be bought. There are a lot of people out there who want to be reunited with their families who should be given first consideration instead of people who can put $50,000 Canadian down for buying some kind of fleet of rent a cars.