<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<Hansard xml:lang="EN" id="1971785">
	<StartPageNumber>1</StartPageNumber>
	<DocumentTitle>
		<DocumentName>EVIDENCE</DocumentName>
	</DocumentTitle>
	<ExtractedInformation>
		<ExtractedItem Name="InstitutionDebate">Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="Number">NUMBER 043</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="Session">1st SESSION</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="Parliament">39th PARLIAMENT</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="Date">Thursday, March 22, 2007</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="DateOtherLang">Le jeudi 22 mars 2007</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="Institution">Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="Country">CANADA</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="RecordingNote">[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="HeaderTitle">EVIDENCE</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="HeaderDate">March 22, 2007</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="MetaDocumentCategory">Committee</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="MetaTitle">Edited Evidence * Table of Contents * Number 043 (Official Version)</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="MetaTitleEn">Official Report * Table of Contents * Number 043 (Official Version)</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="MetaTitleFr">Témoignages * Table des matières * Numéro 043 (Version officielle)</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="MetaNumberNumber">43</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="MetaDateNumDay">22</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="MetaDateNumMonth">03</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="MetaDateNumYear">2007</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="MetaCreationTime">2007/03/22 11:10:00</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="MetaInstitution">House of Commons</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="InstitutionDebateFr">Comité permanent de la citoyenneté et de l'immigration</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="InstitutionDebateEn">Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="Acronyme">CIMM</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="SpeakerTitle">Chair</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="SpeakerName">Mr. Norman Doyle</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="ParliamentNumber">39</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="SessionNumber">1</ExtractedItem>
		<ExtractedItem Name="InCameraNote">PUBLIC PART ONLY - PARTIE PUBLIQUE SEULEMENT</ExtractedItem></ExtractedInformation>
	<HansardBody>
		<OrderOfBusiness><CatchLine></CatchLine><SubjectOfBusiness><SubjectOfBusinessContent><Timestamp Hr="12" Mn="30">(1230)</Timestamp><FloorLanguage language="EN">[<I>English</I>]</FloorLanguage>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" id="1973072" ToCText=""><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair (Mr. Norman Doyle (St. John's East, CPC))</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514297">Order, please. </ParaText><ParaText id="514298"> The subcommittee on agenda and procedure met a couple of days ago. We agreed on the following report, the sixth report, and to place it before you for your consideration. </ParaText><ParaText id="514299">On Tuesday, March 27, we would adopt the draft report on the study on detention centres and security certificates. We would then go into <Document DbId="2159677" Type="4">Bill C-280,</Document> which you have before you, and receive testimony from departmental officials on Bill C-280. We would move to clause-by-clause on <Document DbId="2159677" Type="4">Bill C-280</Document> on Thursday, March 29. </ParaText><ParaText id="514300">On Monday, April 16, we'll have the draft report on the loss of Canadian citizenship.</ParaText><ParaText id="514301">On Tuesday, April 17, and Thursday, April 19, it will be immigration issues and the IRB appointment process. We'll hear testimony from Jean-Guy Fleury, the former chair of the IRB. </ParaText><ParaText id="514302">I won't go through it all. You can go through it to see that this is what we're recommending and what we agreed to at the subcommittee meeting. </ParaText><ParaText id="514303">On Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday, we'll again have the draft report on refugee issues, and the <Affiliation DbId="105834" Type="73">Minister of Citizenship and Immigration</Affiliation> will be invited to present on the main estimates. </ParaText><ParaText id="514304">Are there any comments on the report?</ParaText><ParaText id="514305">Ms. Faille. </ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<FloorLanguage language="FR">[<I>Translation</I>]</FloorLanguage><Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" id="1973090"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102626" Type="40">Ms. Meili Faille (Vaudreuil-Soulanges, BQ)</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514306">As for Québec law society, the association of lawyers for immigration is called Québec Immigration Lawyers Association or AQAADI.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<FloorLanguage language="EN">[<I>English</I>]</FloorLanguage><Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973098"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514307">Okay. Are there any other comments on the report? </ParaText><ParaText id="514308">Mr. Komarnicki. </ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" id="1973101" ToCText=""><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="101812" Type="47">Mr. Ed Komarnicki (Souris—Moose Mountain, CPC)</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514309">I'm going through it for a minute. I have a point I want to make. </ParaText><ParaText id="514310">I notice that <Document DbId="2159677" Type="4">Bill C-280</Document> is set for Tuesday of next week, with respect to evidence from departmental officials.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973111"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514311">Yes, it's Tuesday and Thursday. </ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973112"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="101812" Type="47">Mr. Ed Komarnicki</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514312"> Is there any reason the committee is not prepared to allow some witnesses to be called? I'm thinking of someone like the present or acting chair of the IRB. </ParaText><ParaText id="514313">I obviously haven't discussed it with the chair or departmental officials for implementation or otherwise, but we usually call some witnesses. I see there is no provision for witnesses here. Why aren't you calling witnesses? Can we think about that to see if we want to call them?</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973131"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514314">Yes, for Tuesday, we say “receive testimony from departmental officials”. </ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973136"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="101812" Type="47">Mr. Ed Komarnicki</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514315">Yes, and then you're going into clause-by-clause. But do we not want to allow the opportunity for witnesses?</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973137"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514316">Do you want more individuals?</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" id="1973141" ToCText=""><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="106193" Type="47">Mr. Omar Alghabra (Mississauga—Erindale, Lib.)</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514317">How many more witnesses, Chair?</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973142"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="101812" Type="47">Mr. Ed Komarnicki</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514318">There will probably be couple of witnesses anyway. This was not put on the agenda until now.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973143"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514319">Okay. Mr. Siksay has a point to make on that. </ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" id="1973149" ToCText=""><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="99638" Type="47">Mr. Bill Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas, NDP)</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514320">Chair, we discussed it at the steering committee. We'd just come from hearings on refugee issues, where one of the main topics of the hearings was the Refugee Appeal Division. </ParaText><ParaText id="514321">I think our opinion was generally shared at the meeting that we'd heard lots of witnesses on this topic. We were more concerned about hearing from the department on any technical problems with the bill. Otherwise, we were prepared to go ahead to try to deal with this as expeditiously as possible, given all of the work we've already done on the issue. </ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Timestamp Hr="12" Mn="35">(1235)</Timestamp><Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973164"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514322">Okay.</ParaText><ParaText id="514323">Mr. Telegdi, and then back you, Ed. </ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" id="1973165" ToCText=""><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102625" Type="40">Hon. Andrew Telegdi (Kitchener—Waterloo, Lib.)</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514324">For that meeting, perhaps it would be very useful, Mr. Kitching, if you could get us a summary of all the witnesses related to the RAD, which you're getting for us anyway. </ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" id="1974223"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="99295" Type="26">Mr. Andrew Kitching (Committee Researcher)</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514325">That's right.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Debate" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1974229"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102625" Type="47">Hon. Andrew Telegdi</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514326">We could have it for the meeting and members could have it as a backgrounder.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Debate" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1974000"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514327">Oh, I'm sorry. </ParaText><ParaText id="514328">Mr. Komarnicki. </ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973170"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="101812" Type="47">Mr. Ed Komarnicki</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514329"> There is no question there were witnesses called on the overall refugee issues, and that was a perspective it's coming from. But we're dealing with a specific piece of legislation, a private member's bill that just came through the House. It may or may not have necessarily made it to the House, but it's here before the committee now, and I'm not taking away from any of the witnesses that were called. Certainly, their testimony could be incorporated.</ParaText><ParaText id="514330">But far be it from me or from anyone to say that you can't call some witnesses who may give a different perspective or have a different point of view on this issue, particularly when we've taken all the time we've taken, for instance, as we have on the lost Canadians. No one has been barred from testifying on that issue. We've gone the extra mile. We've incorporated four meetings, a great number of witnesses, and have been as cautious as one can be when we're dealing with something as significant as we are here.</ParaText><ParaText id="514331">I know that somewhere along the way there was some potential raised that we may want to streamline the operation of the Refugee Appeal Division and how the cases are handled, even by one of the former critics of this committee. There may be ways—I'll finish, and then you can make your comments—to improve upon the refugee process within the implementation of RAD. If we're going to implement it, let's not be short-sighted about it. There may be a way we can do it that is good for everyone in this room, refugees in particular, and it can be an enhancement to the system.</ParaText><ParaText id="514332">I don't think we necessarily want to—I'm getting there—not allow witnesses who would bring that perspective to the table. Certainly not too many, but I'm thinking of at least two or maybe three witnesses who could be brought before the committee to look beyond just where the bill is with the potential for constructive amendments perhaps. If we don't go there, that's fair enough, but I don't think we should take it away from this committee. I know it has not been implemented for some time, and I know that a number of ministers have not gone that way, but there may be a place where we can actually make things work better. </ParaText><ParaText id="514333">I know we're looking at the lost Canadians.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973202"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514334">Is there any...?</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973203"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="101812" Type="47">Mr. Ed Komarnicki</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514335">The point I'm making is just building the case for why we shouldn't push something through when it's been around for years under various ministers. Allowing two or three witnesses to come before this committee is hardly being unreasonable.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973210"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514336">That's the point I was going to make myself. Is there any problem with bringing a couple of extra witnesses before the committee if it is deemed appropriate? I'm hearing that there is a problem.</ParaText><ParaText id="514337">Mr. Wilson.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" id="1973212" ToCText=""><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="99846" Type="47">Mr. Blair Wilson (West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, Lib.)</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514338">I would just like to say, Mr. Chair, that Mr. Komarnicki has raised the point twice or three times on the same issue. Go around the table and hear other people's points of view, because we have a steering committee to deal with issues like this. This is not a committee of the whole that's going to decide we're going to do this, this, this, and this. </ParaText><ParaText id="514339">This discussion has already been taken. We're hearing it a second, third, or fourth time. It's wasting valuable time.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973219"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514340">Okay.</ParaText><ParaText id="514341">Ms. Faille.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<FloorLanguage language="FR">[<I>Translation</I>]</FloorLanguage><Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973220"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102626" Type="40">Ms. Meili Faille</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514342">I have been a member of the Committee since 2004. During that time, the Department has had many opportunities to do so. Ministers succeeded to Ministers. And they also had many opportunities to come before the Committee to express their vision. There is absolutely nothing new in Bill C-280 if you compare to the present legislation. All we are asking is to implement the provisions. You had one year to do so.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<FloorLanguage language="EN">[<I>English</I>]</FloorLanguage><Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973228"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514343">Thank you, Ms. Faille. </ParaText><ParaText id="514344">Mr. Siksay, Mr. Karygiannis, and Mr. Telegdi. </ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973232"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="99638" Type="47">Mr. Bill Siksay</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514345">Mr. Chair, given the fact that this bill was so spectacularly simple in its intent and content, to dedicate more time to it.... We can't fiddle much with it, because the scope of the bill is to implement the current law. We can't talk about how else to do it. All it says is implement the law that's currently on the books. Any amendment outside of that is going to be out of order in any case, I suspect. I don't agree at all that we need to hear other witnesses. </ParaText><ParaText id="514346">I think we need to hear from the department if there's a problem with the technical aspect of the bill, on whether this bill will cause the implementation of the provisions of IRPA or not, and then we go from there.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Timestamp Hr="12" Mn="40">(1240)</Timestamp><Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973236"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514347">Mr. Karygiannis.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" id="1973237" ToCText=""><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="99845" Type="47">Hon. Jim Karygiannis (Scarborough—Agincourt, Lib.)</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514348">Thank you, Chair.</ParaText><ParaText id="514349">Certainly, we've been on this issue for quite a long time. We've heard from different witnesses. If there's a compelling reason why we should bring one or two witnesses that Mr. Komarnicki is thinking about, like a specific witness who can add or shed some light, then certainly the committee should be able to hear this particular...if you want to make an argument. If not, I would suggest that we move on, for the simple reason that we've been at this ad nauseam.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973243"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514350"> I have to hear the people who have had their hands up.</ParaText><ParaText id="514351">Mr. Telegdi, you're next.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973244"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102625" Type="40">Hon. Andrew Telegdi</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514352">Thank you very much.</ParaText><ParaText id="514353">I just want to assure <Affiliation DbId="101812" Type="47">Mr. Komarnicki</Affiliation> that the Honourable <Affiliation DbId="101811" Type="47">Rahim Jaffer</Affiliation> is a very able representative on the steering committee.</ParaText><ParaText id="514354">Certainly, it's one of the good demonstrations of why you should try to keep lawyers out of policy-making and have them work on implementing the policy. It does show that there is a dungeon in the bowels of the department, where they take people in for training and they say that if all else is lost, then delay, delay, delay. This has been delayed, delayed, delayed since 2001. Since I've been on this committee, we probably haven't heard as many witnesses on any issue as we have heard on the RAD. </ParaText><ParaText id="514355">I think we should implement the law the way it is. We didn't write it. The bureaucrats wrote it and Parliament passed it. To do anything else is really to undermine Parliament. Parliament passed the law, and we have been delaying the will of Parliament for a long period of time.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973269"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514356">The able Mr. Jaffer is next.</ParaText><ParaText id="514357"><B>An hon. member:</B> Most able.</ParaText><ParaText id="514358"><B>The Chair:</B> Most able.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" id="1973270" ToCText=""><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="101811" Type="47">Mr. Rahim Jaffer (Edmonton—Strathcona, CPC)</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514359">Just on that, on the basis of it being a simple bill, as <Affiliation DbId="99638" Type="47">Mr. Siksay</Affiliation> puts it, I think that's always open to interpretation. When you look at the Senate reform bill going through the Liberal Senate right now, it's two paragraphs long and it's been over ten months that they've been studying that bill.</ParaText><ParaText id="514360">I don't think it's necessarily that I'm disagreeing with him that we couldn't look at this and expedite the bill. I think there's goodwill to do that. But on <Affiliation DbId="99845" Type="47">Mr. Karygiannis</Affiliation>' point, I think it's incumbent on <Affiliation DbId="101812" Type="47">Mr. Komarnicki</Affiliation> or anyone else that if there is a reason that they suggest there be one or two witnesses....</ParaText><ParaText id="514361">I'm not saying anyone would agree to drag this out. I did raise that during the steering committee. We were going to go through this even without getting officials, and then we said we should have officials. I said there might be one or two other witnesses who might come to mind and that we shouldn't restrict it. I'm not saying to drag it out, but I did agree that we should try to expedite it. Now I think the onus is on anyone on this committee. If they do say there's someone urgent from whom they think we should hear, I don't think I would say no to that.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973288"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514362">Mr. Alghabra.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973289"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="106193" Type="47">Mr. Omar Alghabra</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514363">I'm just curious. Do you have a list of people? Besides the officials, who do you have in mind?</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973293"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="101812" Type="47">Mr. Ed Komarnicki</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514364">I actually do have somebody in mind, just to address what—</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973930"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514365">Mr. Komarnicki.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Debate" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973934"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="101812" Type="47">Mr. Ed Komarnicki</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514366">Is it my turn? It isn't.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Debate" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973943"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514367">It's not your turn, but if Mr. Alghabra is asking you the question, do you want to answer it before I move on to the next one?</ParaText><ParaText id="514368"><B>An hon. member:</B> Could we hear the witnesses Mr. Komarnicki is proposing?</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Debate" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973945"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="101812" Type="47">Mr. Ed Komarnicki</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514369">Only if you allow me, Mr. Chair.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Debate" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973294"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514370">Please go ahead.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973955"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="101812" Type="47">Mr. Ed Komarnicki</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514371">I appreciate that Mr. <Affiliation DbId="101811" Type="47">Rahim Jaffer</Affiliation> ably represents the steering committee, but the reason you bring it back to the whole committee is so that it can have some input.</ParaText><ParaText id="514372">The particular person I had in mind was actually the IRB acting chair, who would be acting, albeit, in replacing Mr. Fleury, who was here—</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Debate" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973957"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102626" Type="47">Ms. Meili Faille</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514373">Are you sure you want to bring him in?</ParaText><ParaText id="514374"><B>Some hon. members:</B> Oh, oh!</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Debate" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973296"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="101812" Type="47">Mr. Ed Komarnicki</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514375">We might want to hear from him, so that's one potential person.</ParaText><ParaText id="514376"> I thought another person might be a professor who deals with refugee issues, and that would be it.</ParaText><ParaText id="514377">You make a fair point, but I think it's not unreasonable to call a witness, and someone who would be affected by our decision in a practical way. If there's going to be an immediate implementation, it would be his office that would be instrumental in the implementation, would it not?</ParaText><ParaText id="514378">So if you're agreeable to having him come forward, we'll have a look at that.</ParaText><ParaText id="514379"><B>Some hon. members:</B> Sure.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Timestamp Hr="12" Mn="45">(1245)</Timestamp><Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973308"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514380">I sense that an agreement has been reached on that. Is there any need to pursue it further?</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973311"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="106193" Type="47">Mr. Omar Alghabra</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514381">He's coming on April 17 anyway.</ParaText><ParaText id="514382"><B>An hon. member:</B> Is he coming?</ParaText><ParaText id="514383"><B>Mr. Omar Alghabra:</B> It's not confirmed yet.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973312"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514384">Order.</ParaText><ParaText id="514385">Mr. Siksay.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973973"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="99638" Type="47">Mr. Bill Siksay</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514386">Mr. Chair, have we agreed to invite the acting chair?</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Debate" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973976"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514387">Yes, we have.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Debate" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973313"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="99638" Type="47">Mr. Bill Siksay</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514388">Okay.</ParaText><ParaText id="514389"> And if Mr. Komarnicki wants to add one other witness and we have a panel of the two witnesses the government wants to put forward, along with the officials from the department in that first meeting, I'd be happy to support that. </ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973888"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514390"> Okay. I detect support for your recommendation, Mr. Komarnicki. </ParaText><ParaText id="514391">I would ask now for a motion to adopt the sixth report. All in favour?</ParaText><ParaText id="514392">(Motion agreed to)</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Debate" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973318"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514393">Okay. We will now move to the next item on the agenda, which is a notice of the motion from the Honourable Jim Karygiannis: </ParaText><ParaText id="514394"><Quote><QuotePara Align="Left" IndentFirst="2" IndentRest="2">That the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration ask the Minister, the Deputy Minister, and other appropriate officials from the Department of Citizenship and Immigration to appear before the Committee to further discuss the issue of Lost Canadians and the measures the Government is taking to notify potentially affected Canadians of the retention rule, with regard to the letter from Deputy Minister Richard B. Fadden, dated February 23, 2007, which reads: </QuotePara></Quote></ParaText><ParaText id="514395"> Mr. Karygiannis, I'm told by the committee clerk that the motion is out of order. I'm told that the motion is inadmissible in its current form because of the letter that is included in the text, so I have to rule that the motion is inadmissible. </ParaText><ParaText id="514396">Quoting from Marleau and Montpetit, chapter 12, pages 449 and 450:</ParaText><ParaText id="514397">
								<Quote><QuotePara Align="Left" IndentFirst="2" IndentRest="2">A motion should not contain any objectionable or irregular wording. It should not be argumentative or written in the style of a speech. </QuotePara></Quote></ParaText><ParaText id="514398">Further on it says:</ParaText><ParaText id="514399">
								<Quote><QuotePara Align="Left" IndentRest="2" IndentFirst="2">As a general rule, every question that is debatable is amendable. ... They are amendable and must be drafted in such a way as to enable the House to express agreement or disagreement with what is proposed.</QuotePara></Quote></ParaText>
							<ParaText id="514400">In short, a motion should be decidable and amendable by the committee.</ParaText><ParaText id="514401">However, the letter is not a decision of the committee, and its inclusion in the motion is irrelevant to the decision to invite the minister and others from the department, because the letter is attached.</ParaText><ParaText id="514402"> Can you resubmit? </ParaText><ParaText id="514403"><B>A voice:</B> He doesn't have to resubmit.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973367"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514404">He doesn't have to resubmit? Well, maybe you can help us.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973368"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="99846" Type="47">Mr. Blair Wilson</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514405">On a point of order, Mr. Chair, I wonder if you could specify exactly where in Marleau and Montpetit, what section, you are referring to. You read the whole—</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973369"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514406">It's chapter 12, pages 449 and 450.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973374"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="99846" Type="47">Mr. Blair Wilson</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514407">What specific sentence in that allows you to say that this is inadmissible?</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973376"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514408">It's where it says:</ParaText><ParaText id="514409"><Quote><QuotePara Align="Left" IndentRest="2" IndentFirst="2">A motion should not contain any objectionable or irregular wording. It should not be argumentative or written in the style of a speech. </QuotePara></Quote></ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973381"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="99845" Type="47">Hon. Jim Karygiannis</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514410">Mr. Chair, would you point out where it's argumentative?</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973382"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514411">Well, I'm only quoting what I've been given here by Marleau and Montpetit, which is that it should not be “written in the style of a speech”. </ParaText><ParaText id="514412">It says:</ParaText><ParaText id="514413"><Quote><QuotePara Align="Left" IndentFirst="2" IndentRest="2">They are amendable and must be drafted in such a way as to enable the House to express agreement or disagreement with what is proposed. </QuotePara></Quote></ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973388"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="99845" Type="47">Hon. Jim Karygiannis</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514414">All right. I would like to amend it and drop the letter, please, instead of saying “dated February 23, 2007, which reads”, and it's attached.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973393"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514415">With regard to the letter, no, I don't think you can do it that way, can you?</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" id="1973402"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="106281" Type="27">The Clerk of the Committee</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514416">You have the option of “dated February 23, 2007, and that the letter be appended to the committee evidence”.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Timestamp Hr="12" Mn="50">(1250)</Timestamp><Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973988"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514417">Okay. Is it agreeable that the motion read that way? </ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Debate" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973991"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="99845" Type="47">Hon. Jim Karygiannis</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514418">Sure.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Debate" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973406"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514419">Mr. Karygiannis is resubmitting the motion.</ParaText><ParaText id="514420">Do you want debate on that motion? Of course you do.</ParaText><ParaText id="514421">Mr. Karygiannis, do you have something to add to it?</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973418"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="99845" Type="47">Hon. Jim Karygiannis</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514422">Mr. Chair, I want to thank you. </ParaText><ParaText id="514423">The minister was invited to come. The minister was escorted by officials. The question was put straightforwardly: had they advertised? They said they had. The question, again, went back to them, in what major newspapers? They assured us that it was done widely. A couple of days later we received a letter that said no advertising had been done except through some posters.</ParaText><ParaText id="514424"> A judge reading our minutes, or somebody presenting, certainly needs to know the facts and what has happened, and we need to make sure we get to the bottom of the comments that were made by the deputy minister on record, in order to make sure that we ask the department to aggressively go after advertising, should there be any other Canadians out there who are lost Canadians and who don't know about it.</ParaText><ParaText id="514425">We've seen the pain and suffering that people have gone through. We've seen children being separated from their parents because they don't have the right to stay in Canada. We've heard from witnesses around this table who certainly had some heartbreaking testimony. And I think it's incumbent upon the minister and this government to do the right thing and not sweep it under the carpet, so it can be seen as having been done. We need to practise due diligence, and the minister and the deputy minister have to be held accountable in order to make sure it reaches all the affected Canadians.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973424"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514426">Thank you.</ParaText><ParaText id="514427">Mr. Jaffer.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973425"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="101811" Type="47">Mr. Rahim Jaffer</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514428">I don't have a problem with this motion, now that it's been amended and clarified. My concerns are with two things. One is that we've already asked the minister to come for the main estimates. Do we have a date on that yet?</ParaText><ParaText id="514429"><B>A voice:</B> That's a good question.</ParaText><ParaText id="514430"><B>Mr. Rahim Jaffer:</B> Okay.</ParaText><ParaText id="514431">The second thing is that I don't know if this motion is necessary. Although I agree with it, I don't think it's necessary, because one of the things I would say is that once we do secure a date for the minister, for the main estimates, I don't know if we'll be able to get the minister once again to be able to deal with this motion. I would support Mr. Karygiannis' taking some time when the minister is here. Or we can even let the minister know that the main estimates will be the main focus, but then--</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973434"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514432">The main estimates are quite wide-ranging anyway. You can bring up--</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973435"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="101811" Type="47">Mr. Rahim Jaffer</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514433">What I wanted to ask is if we only get one date for the minister, we should incorporate this motion so that she's prepared for the estimates and what Mr. Karygiannis wants.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973438"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514434">I'll go back to Mr. Karygiannis before going to Madam Faille and Mr. Siksay.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973439"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="99845" Type="47">Hon. Jim Karygiannis</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514435">I appreciate the fact that the minister has a busy schedule, and I appreciate the fact that her officials also have a very busy schedule. One of the things, however, that I find very distasteful is that they're coming in here, and they know fairly well what we're going to ask them--I sent a fax to the minister regarding advertising, and the minister was pre-warned as to what was going to happen--and the minister and her officials...I won't say “the minister” because the minister is only listening to her officials, but her officials turn around and say, point blank, to this committee, on television, watched throughout the world or throughout Canada, that they're advertising. That flies in the face of this committee and certainly its importance.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973455"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514436">Just for clarification purposes, would it be the intent to bring the minister, deputy minister, and officials just to deal with that one issue? </ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973472"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="99845" Type="47">Hon. Jim Karygiannis</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514437">If the minister can't come, certainly we can bring the deputy minister, and the deputy minister can speak on behalf of.... We would also hear what their plans are.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973475"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514438">Okay.</ParaText><ParaText id="514439">Madam Faille.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<FloorLanguage language="FR">[<I>Translation</I>]</FloorLanguage><Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973476"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102626" Type="40">Ms. Meili Faille</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514440">Could we settle the case by simply sending a press release in which we would issue the letter, and by mentioning Monday, when our hearings will be broadcasted, that a notice of correction of statements made during the hearings was issued?</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<FloorLanguage language="EN">[<I>English</I>]</FloorLanguage><Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973484"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514441">Thank you, Madam Faille.</ParaText><ParaText id="514442">We have Mr. Siksay.</ParaText><ParaText id="514443">No? Okay.</ParaText><ParaText id="514444">Mr. Telegdi.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973488"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102625" Type="40">Hon. Andrew Telegdi</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514445">Yes, and I think we could also mention this point when we're in televised hearings on Monday.</ParaText><ParaText id="514446">The other thing is I think it's important for us to serve notice to the officials that they cannot come before committee and bamboozle us with misinformation and do it with impunity. I hate to say that this has happened over time. Rahim and Nina, and anybody who has sat around this table for any period of time knows that has occurred. I think it's important that the officials understand that when they come to this committee, they're supposed to be here to provide us with the facts and certainly not to bamboozle us. I've seen it so often on different issues: they take something that a committee member tries to do, and in the case of provision of sureties, they come in and twist and politicize an issue that was never meant to be treated in such fashion. So it will do well for us in the long term to have the department understand that they cannot do that in this committee and get away with it.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Timestamp Hr="12" Mn="55">(1255)</Timestamp><Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973502"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514447">After I call on Mr. Karygiannis, we will call for a vote on the motion. </ParaText><ParaText id="514448">First of all, I'll go to Mr. Karygiannis.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973506"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="99845" Type="47">Hon. Jim Karygiannis</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514449">Let's hear from Mr. Komarnicki. I'll give my turn to Mr. Komarnicki.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973507"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514450">Mr. Karygiannis is graciously yielding to Mr. Komarnicki.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973508"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="101812" Type="47">Mr. Ed Komarnicki</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514451">I think Ms. Faille has indicated a way of addressing the issue, if you want to, without having to involve a whole lot of testimony, which we've already heard. That may be where the committee wants to go.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973511"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514452">That's where Mr. Karygiannis wants--</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973514"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="101812" Type="47">Mr. Ed Komarnicki</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514453">But I just want to make it clear that what occurred here and what's indicated by the letter is that an error was made and is being corrected. I don't think it would be fair to categorize the statement that was made by the deputy minister as being made with impunity. I don't think it was. </ParaText><ParaText id="514454">I think it is important that statements be correct. But I also think it's important that if the officials find that they have misstated or provided information that isn't correct, they do what was in fact done here: correct it, and correct it on the record. I don't think anything was done with impunity. I wouldn't have gathered that from the facts that we saw, both in the committee that I was in and also the letter that brings it forward. I think it's good to bring the letter forward to correct the wrong impression. I just want to state that.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973520"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514455">Mr. Karygiannis, could I--</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973521"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="99845" Type="47">Hon. Jim Karygiannis</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514456">If I could ask the following from the committee members, it could be a little bit unusual. </ParaText><ParaText id="514457">Maybe we can put this off until Monday. The department, under Mr. Komarnicki's question, or leadership, can certainly come up with a press release. We can look at this press release, and if this press release is not something we are all in favour of, then--</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Debate" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1974308"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514458">This sounds like a very good compromise to me--</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Debate" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1974309"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="99845" Type="47">Hon. Jim Karygiannis</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514459">--we can bring this again on Monday. Here's an opportunity for the department to say, look, there was an error that was presented and this is what we intend to do. We need to somehow advertise, and I hope Mr. Komarnicki....</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973526"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514460">That sounds like a very good compromise.</ParaText>
							<ParaText id="514461"> I have to go to Madam Faille.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<FloorLanguage language="FR">[<I>Translation</I>]</FloorLanguage><Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973527"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102626" Type="40">Ms. Meili Faille</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514462">I would like to simply add this. When I asked this question during the Committee hearings, I had to ask it again and again. As a former employee of the Department, I know for a fact that this information was not available. I asked if they were positive about what they were saying, and the answer was yes. So, I would think that the compromise suggested by Mr. Karygiannis is apropos. The Department must announce its view.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<FloorLanguage language="EN">[<I>English</I>]</FloorLanguage><Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973530"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514463">Okay.</ParaText><ParaText id="514464">Mr. Komarnicki.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973531"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="101812" Type="47">Mr. Ed Komarnicki</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514465">I do want to comment.</ParaText><ParaText id="514466">When Ms. Faille was speaking, she was talking about a press release coming out of this committee, which is one thing, but it turns out--</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Timestamp Hr="13" Mn="00">(1300)</Timestamp><Intervention Type="Debate" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973990"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514467">No. That's not what Mr. Karygiannis suggested.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Debate" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1974003"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="101812" Type="47">Mr. Ed Komarnicki</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514468">That's not what he said, but that's what she said. I was referring to what she said, not what Mr. Karygiannis said.</ParaText><ParaText id="514469">To comment on what he said, I think because the fact that the misstatement was made during televised proceedings, a letter was forwarded to this committee setting out the substance of it. That letter can certainly be filed, and it addresses the issue directly. It certainly can be read on the record if you like, because that would bring it to the proper place. </ParaText><ParaText id="514470">But as far as asking somebody to make a press release to distribute, that is something beyond the scope of what happened and what needs to be done. I'm not sure I would agree with even going that far, with the department press release. If this committee wants to make one, that's fair, but if you want to correct the situation, you might want to read the letter into the record, and that speaks for itself. I think that would be an appropriate way of handling it. </ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973537"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514471">Mr. Karygiannis.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973538"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="101812" Type="47">Mr. Ed Komarnicki</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514472">I make no commitment beyond that.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973539"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514473">Mr. Karygiannis.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973540"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="99845" Type="47">Hon. Jim Karygiannis</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514474">Mr. Chair, I would like to give Mr. Komarnicki...if the rest of the committee allows, that we put this off until Monday. He can certainly speak with his officials. </ParaText><ParaText id="514475">I would highly recommend that the department issue a press release. There was a department spokesperson who was here and who bamboozled, misled, and misinformed the committee. A letter was issued. If the department doesn't want to do that, then on Monday we can revisit this thing.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973547"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514476">Mr. Karygiannis would like to have this issue revisited on Monday. I think that's a fair request from him.</ParaText><ParaText id="514477">Do I detect that the committee wants more discussion?</ParaText><ParaText id="514478">Mr. Siksay.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973550"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="99638" Type="47">Mr. Bill Siksay</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514479">Mr. Chair, I would ask that we formally table it until Monday, so that we don't just leave it as an understanding but that we have a motion on the table until Monday.</ParaText><ParaText id="514480"><B>A voice:</B> [<I>Inaudible--Editor</I>]</ParaText><ParaText id="514481"><B>Mr. Bill Siksay: </B> I understood we were going to reconsider it--</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973556"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514482">It's going to be reconsidered on Monday. I think that comes from Mr. Karygiannis, so I think that is fair.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973557"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="99845" Type="47">Hon. Jim Karygiannis</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514483">Do you need something in writing, Mr. Chair?</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
					<Intervention Type="Interjection" ToC="No" ToCText="" id="1973561"><PersonSpeaking><Affiliation DbId="102624" Type="35">The Chair</Affiliation>: </PersonSpeaking><Content><ParaText id="514484">No. I don't think so. Just move it until Monday.</ParaText><ParaText id="514485">Thank you, Mr. Karygiannis.</ParaText><ParaText id="514486">The meeting is adjourned.</ParaText></Content></Intervention>
				</SubjectOfBusinessContent></SubjectOfBusiness></OrderOfBusiness></HansardBody></Hansard>
