Peter Fragiskatos

Mr. Speaker, personal attacks speak for themselves. I have great respect, in fact, for the member. We have had the pleasure of working together on the House of Commons committee responsible for immigration. He understands that, fundamentally, immigration has played a very important role in the history of this country, and that needs to continue. He also understands, as our side does, that [more]

Mr. Speaker, the member will be aware of the landmark 2013 Supreme Court decision, the Pham decision. That decision makes very clear that when it comes to assessing the criminal actions of individuals, whether they are foreign nationals or Canadians, public safety always takes precedence. If the individual has concerns with the decision of the court, that decision is a court decision. It is not a [more]

Mr. Speaker, if the Conservatives want to talk about past policy, that is their prerogative. What we are focused on, from start to finish, is making sure that this country's present, and especially its future, is on a sustainable footing; that we build this country up; that we focus on the economy; and that we look to the immigration system as one way to make that happen. I will absolutely [more]

Mr. Speaker, personal attacks again speak for themselves. I am honoured to work with every single member of caucus who time and again devotes themselves to their constituency. As far as London or any Canadian community is concerned, we continue to see immigration as a fundamental building block in this country. Of course, transformations and policy are needed. That is exactly what we are devoted [more]

Mr. Speaker, I have already gone over the achievements of the government on the immigration file. We will continue that work. Furthermore, Conservatives have a tendency, unfortunately, to count permits and not people. They will count the original permit that is issued and then the renewal, so a double counting often happens. As far as creative math is concerned, we will put that aside. leader [more]

The proposed subamendment for proposed subsection 35.1(2) is as follows: (2) An exemption ceases to have effect on the earliest of the following days: (a) the day that is specified by the Minister in the exemption; (b) the day on which the Minister revokes the exemption; or (c) the day that is one year after the day on which the exemption takes effect. This has been submitted to the clerk.

C-15 I move that Bill, in clause 45, be amended by adding, after line 4 on page 70, the following: (5) Every employer who pays an amount described in paragraph (a) of the definition yearly eligible remuneration in subsection (1) to an individual in a taxation year must provide the certification described in paragraph (b) of that definition in respect of the total amount described in paragraph [more]

We have a subamendment for CPC-6.

Thank you, Chair. C-15 I move that Bill, in clause 71, be amended by replacing lines 12 and 13 on page 164 with the following: taxation years that end after December 30, 2024.

There seems to be some confusion that I think can be best taken up if we suspend for a few minutes, if that's okay.

I have an amendment to clause 196, Madam Chair, under “Exception — fair and reasonable rates”. I move that Bill C-15, in clause 196, be amended by adding after line 30 on page 296 the following: (3.1) The Corporation must provide for (a) the transmission by post, free of postage, of letters, books, tapes, records and other similar material for the use of the blind; and (b) a reduced rate of [more]