Strengthening and Modernizing the Citizenship Act – Some Thoughts

For those who have not seen it, the release and backgrounders to the revisions of the Citizenship Act, with the high level messaging as follows:

“Our government is strengthening the value of Canadian citizenship.  Canadians understand that citizenship should not be simply a passport of convenience. Citizenship is a pledge of mutual responsibility and a shared commitment to values rooted in our history. I am pleased to bring forward the first comprehensive and overdue reforms of the Citizenship Act in more than a generation.”

“Our government expects new Canadians to take part in the democratic life, economic potential and the rich cultural traditions that are involved in becoming a citizen. We are proud to introduce changes that reinforce the value of citizenship while ensuring the integrity of the immigration system is protected.”

Chris Alexander, Canada’s Citizenship and Immigration Minister

News Release — Strengthening and Modernizing the Citizenship Act.

Ten ways Ottawa is changing how to become a Canadian citizen (Globe)

It is a comprehensive package (and well put together by my former team). Looking through the various aspects through the lens of citizenship integrity, citizenship fairness, competitiveness with other countries, and citizenship focus, it is clear that the focus is on citizenship integrity and meaningfulness. No surprise with this policy continuity with the earlier initiatives by then CIC Minister Kenney (Discover Canada, more rigorous knowledge test and language assessment, anti-fraud measures).

The following table is illustrative:

In terms of “winners and losers,” the big winners are the remaining “lost Canadians” who are no longer penalized for being born pre-1947 (when Canadian citizenship started) and Crown servants with respect to their children born abroad and previously subject to the first generation limit. For most applicants, these changes will not make citizenship much more difficult, although it will take require longer residency (and residency meaning physical presence – being in Canada).

Applicants who may have greater challenges with these changes include:

• Groups that already have difficulty with the current knowledge test and language requirements (no major change);
• Mobile professionals, although based in Canada, whose work requires frequent and extensive travel;
• Low income applicants given fee increase; and,
• The target group of “citizens of convenience.”

The package is weaker on issues related to fairness, whether that means ensuring that citizenship materials (e.g., Discover Canada, test etc) are written in plain language and focus group tested to ensure readability and comprehension, expanding settlement or integration services to include citizenship knowledge and preparation for groups with lower success rates, and lastly, published service standards that are reported quarterly, as in Australia, to ensure accountability.

Much of the debate over the bill will likely be over the revocation provisions, particularly as they apply to dual nationals convicted of terrorism or high treason. Apart from the break that this represents of treating all Canadians equally irrespective of whether they were born in Canada or became Canadian, a large focus will be on the whether due process will be followed or not in determining whether citizenship should be revoked. It will be an interesting debate and discussion as while the numbers are small, they have symbolic value. But as always, where some cases appear clear cut (e.g., Al-Qaeda affiliates), others may not be.

Some selected commentary. In favour of the changes (iPolitics The meaning of citizenship, Kelly National Post: Ccitizenship changes recognize high value of being Canadian), reactions from stakeholders (Toronto Star Citizenship changes will mean longer wait to become Canadian, including quote from me), and an editorial from the Globe, generally in favour but strongly objecting to the treating naturally born and naturalized citizens differently:

That is effectively creating two-tier citizenship. Canadians who commit crimes should be punished, and they are. But even Canadians behind bars are still Canadians. Loss of citizenship, except in cases of citizenship fraudulently obtained, should not be on the menu of possible punishments, even for the gravest crimes.

It was an earlier Conservative government, that of John Diefenbaker, that changed the law to ensure that Canadians could not be stripped of citizenship. The decision was made in the wake of a particularly damaging scandal: In 1957, former MP Fred Rose was stripped of his Canadian citizenship after being convicted of spying for the Soviet Union. Diefenbaker thought that was wrong. Even in the case of treason, he didn’t believe any Canadian should ever again be threatened with a similar fate.

 Chris Alexander’s flawed overhaul of citizenship law 

Overall, to use then CIC Minister Kenney’s phrase, the changes are in line his wish to make “citizenship harder to get and easier to lose.”  Yet the changes largely remain competitive with other immigration-based countries like Australia, New Zealand, and the US and thus are unlikely to deter potential immigrants.

What will be interesting, however, are the longer-term effects on the number of permanent residents who become citizens. The current figure is 85%, one of the highest in the world, and one that attests to the overall success of Canadian integration policies and programs. The more rigorous test and language assessment introduced over the last few years resulted in a higher failure rate than earlier (from about 95% to around 85%, but much lower for a number of groups). These additional changes may further decrease the number of permanent residents who become citizens, and weakening the integrative aspect of citizenship.

As always, despite the best efforts of policy makers and political leaders, there will likely be some unforeseen effects that emerge over time.

The broader question, of what is the appropriate balance between making citizenship more meaningful and recognizing the reality of a globalized world, where people can move around more, can maintain their relationship with their country of origin more easily, and generally have more diverse and varied identities, will continue to be a challenge for Canada and other countries