Ottawa’s new air-travel rule catches dual citizens by surprise

2016/08/19 2 Comments

While I have some sympathy for those taken by surprise if this change was not adequately communicated in advance, I have little for the substantive nature of some of the complaints mentioned in the article.

There were and are sound policy and program reasons for this requirement, linked to the eTA.

Tellingly, all those quoted come from dual citizens from the UK or Australia, although this situation would likely apply to most dual citizens from countries that Canada does not require a visa.

Dual citizens who come from developing countries, many of whom do not formally allow for dual citizenship and thus who have to travel back to their country of origin on that country’s passport, generally use their Canadian passport to return to Canada as airlines only accept passports as reliable proof of citizenship:

Canadian citizens with dual citizenships will soon be allowed to fly into the country only if they have a Canadian passport.

The policy will come into effect Sept. 30 as a final phase of Canada’s move to an electronic screening system to step up border security and boost exit control of travellers, including Canadians on government benefits.

The upcoming requirement has caught many by surprise calling the practice “discriminatory” against dual citizens and a money grab, and is expected to create havoc as travellers with dual Canadian citizenships may find out only at the last minute when trying to board on a flight.

“What is changing is that the Government of Canada is implementing a new electronic system to assist airlines in verifying that all travellers have the appropriate documents to travel to or transit through Canada by air,” Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada spokesperson Lindsay Wemp told the Star.

“Air carriers are obligated by law to confirm that all persons seeking to travel to Canada carry both proof of citizenship and proof of identity. A valid Canadian passport satisfies these requirements for Canadian citizens, and is the only acceptable travel document for the purpose of air travel.”

Currently, Canadian citizens with dual citizenships can use the passport of the other country to enter Canada by air if they can provide proofs of residency in Canada, such as a driver’s licence and Canadian citizenship card.

According to the 2011 Census, at least 2.9 per cent of Canadians — 944,700 people — had multiple citizenships; the most frequently reported other citizenships were the United States, the United Kingdom, France and Poland.

Ottawa rolled out the electronic travel authorization, or eTA, system last year, requiring air passengers — including all applicants for study and work permits, as well as those from countries that currently do not require a visa to come to Canada — to submit their biographic, passport and other personal information through the immigration department website for prescreening or face being denied entry. American citizens are exempted.

 However, Canadian citizens will be ineligible for eTA of Sept. 30, because they will be expected to carry their Canadian passports which, by default, bar dual citizens from using the passport of the other country to return to Canada. What baffles several observers about the new rule is that it only applies to air passengers.

“This proposed policy change is discriminatory to dual citizens and for the life of me, I cannot see why it is necessary. It would appear to be a money grab with no benefit and huge inconvenience for any of us who live overseas,” said Craig Campbell, 60, who was born to a military family in Manitoba and is a dual Canadian-Australian citizen.

“There is time to fix this appalling discriminatory policy. I served the country of my birth as did my father, uncles, aunts and grandfather before me. This is simply a shameful way to treat one very small category of proud Canadians for no discernible benefit to the country.”

Calgary-born Carey Du Gray, 45, who has lived in the U.K. since 2009, said he only found out about the new requirement when he was trying to book travel two weeks ago to fly home in October.

“My daughters were born in the U.K., but they are Canadian citizens. They would not be able to travel to Canada using their British passports. What lunacy, eh?” asked Du Gray, a fundraising consultant based in London.

“What followed was a 48-hour scramble to get all of the documentation and photos together. The guidance on the (Canadian) website said they were taking up to 40 business days to process new passport applications on account of the flood of them that are coming in ahead of the policy change.”

Canadian expatriate Sandi Logan, who worked in the Australian immigration department, said the requirement on dual citizens’ travel just doesn’t make sense.

“It’s bad policy on so many fronts. It discriminates against dual citizens of Canada for starters. It discriminates against dual citizens of Canada flying into any Canadian port, as opposed to arriving by sea or land,” said Logan, 59, who was born and raised in Toronto before settling in Australia in 1980.

“From my vast bureaucratic experience in the public service, it has all of the hallmarks of being a simple revenue grab masked as ‘border security,’ with no discernible impact on safe and stronger borders.”

Source: Ottawa’s new air-travel rule catches dual citizens by surprise | Toronto Star

Filed under Citizenship, Dual Citizenship Tagged with ,

Liberal appeal for expat donations offends those still barred from voting

2016/08/18 Leave a comment

Not the brightest move given the inevitable backlash from some. For my analysis of expatriate voting, see my earlier What should expatriates’ voting rights be? – Policy Options:

An appeal by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to Canadians living abroad for donations to the Liberal party has struck a sour note with disenfranchised long-term expats.

The cash solicitation on Trudeau’s Facebook page calls on Canadians living abroad to be part of “Canada’s most open and progressive movement,” and says under a picture of the prime minister that “your donations help fuel our party.”

Various comments reflect the displeasure of those unable to vote in federal elections because of a law — only enforced by the previous Conservative government under Stephen Harper — that strips voting rights from those who have lived outside Canada for more than five years.

“Asking for my donation after removing my right to vote is just offensive,” wrote Ian Doig, who lives in Houston.

Another commenter, Angus McGillicuddy, offered a similar sentiment.

“Not going to waste my money until our constitutionally guaranteed right to vote is restored,” McGillicuddy said.

The disenfranchising of an estimated 1.4 million long-term expats has been a running legal battle since Canadians abroad found they could not vote in the 2011 election. While the rules were first enacted in 1993, they had not been enforced until then.

Two Canadians living in the U.S. went to court to argue the relevant parts of the Canada Elections Act were unconstitutional.

In May 2014, an Ontario Superior Court justice ruled in their favour. However, the Harper government appealed on the grounds that it would be unfair to resident Canadians to allow those abroad to elect lawmakers. Ontario’s top court sided with the government. The Supreme Court of Canada is slated to hear the expats’ appeal of that decision in February.

“Canadians living abroad should be able to vote with more than their pocketbooks,” Gillian Frank, one of those who launched the constitutional challenge, told The Canadian Press.

The voting issue became a flashpoint for many expat Canadians during last year’s election that propelled Trudeau to office. He has since indicated a willingness to review the ban, and a spokesman has said the government believes “more Canadians should have the right to vote, not the opposite.”

However, nothing has changed and the Supreme Court case remains pending.

“You have some gall asking for expats’ money when you’ve done nothing to restore our vote, despite promises during the election by your members that you would rectify the situation,” Kate Tsoukalas wrote in a post.

Source: Liberal appeal for expat donations offends those still barred from voting – The Globe and Mail

Filed under Citizenship, Government Tagged with , ,

What’s suddenly luring Brexit-hit Britons? Estonia’s digital citizenship for anyone | ZDNet

2016/08/18 Leave a comment

Interesting – residence-free business facilitation status:

The concept of Estonian e-residency emerged two years ago as a transnational digital identity, available to anyone in the world interested in administering a location-independent business online.

Applicants for e-residency are fingerprinted and background-checked by the Estonian state. Once approved, the new e-resident is issued an electronic ID card which, in combination with a four-digit pin, can be used for secure digital identification.

E-resident entrepreneurs and freelancers can open and run location-independent businesses online, apply for a bank account and conduct e-banking, get access to international payment service providers, declare taxes, sign all relevant documents and contracts remotely with the same legal status as handwritten ones, and gain easier access to EU markets.

At the same time e-residency does not confer citizenship, tax residency, residence or right of entry to Estonia or to the EU.

In the beginning of August, Estonian e-residency had altogether 12,480 applicants, with 568, or a little less than five percent from the UK.

Korjus believes that the interest will grow in time, especially when the Brexit processes approach their final stages.

 With crowds of new e-citizens and hundreds of new companies, Estonia’s e-residency project has exceeded expectations in its first year.

“It all depends on what specific decisions and agreements are made as to the results of the referendum. Today there are still a lot of loose ends. We believe that e-residency will become the main tool for the British to continue their businesses in the EU. It’s wise for an international company to keep at least one body in the EU, and Estonian e-residency is the cheapest and most convenient way to do it,” he says.

Source: What’s suddenly luring Brexit-hit Britons? Estonia’s digital citizenship for anyone | ZDNet

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with ,

Will investors shell out cash for Egyptian citizenship?

2016/08/17 Leave a comment

The mark of desperation when a country decides to sell its citizenship:

The Egyptian government has recently proposed a draft law to amend the country’s nationality law. It would give investors the right to apply for citizenship after living and investing in Egypt for five years. The bill has caused controversy and dispute both within parliament and among the public. While some Egyptians argue it will encourage investment and help the country’s financial recovery, others maintain that nationality is not something that should be sold.

The draft law was submitted to the Cabinet by Egyptian economist Sameh Sidqi earlier this month. It would amend Presidential Decree No. 89 of 1960 on Entry, Residence and Exit of Foreigners and Law No. 26 of 1975 Concerning Egyptian Nationality. The government announced Aug. 2 that it was being discussed in the Egyptian State Council.

Speaking to Al-Monitor, Sidqi said, “The bill grants Egyptian nationality to foreigners who deposit $500,000 [in foreign currency] in an Egyptian bank. If nationality is granted, the sum may not be refunded. The foreigner shall obtain nationality within five years, but if the application is rejected, the sum may be retrieved.”

He said that approving this bill “requires amending the clause related to nationality in the Egyptian Constitution, as well as another clause of the Investment Law, so that any investor who deposits the required sum may be granted Egyptian nationality if he or she meets the conditions set by the Cabinet.”

Sidqi argued that more than 5 million expatriates now reside in Egypt, and they include Iraqis, Syrians and Libyans, in addition to 4 million Sudanese living in Egypt since the era of Sudanese President Gaafar Nimeiri. Like Egyptians, these expatriates benefit from subsidies on oil, electricity, bread and other food supplies.

“Such legislation is applied in many countries that encourage foreign investment, including the United States and Canada,” Sidqi added, indicating that he had previously presented this proposal to the Dubai government when working as an economic adviser during the international financial crisis a few years ago. Although the proposal was initially approved, he said, the number of expatriates that would be granted Emirati nationality exceeded the Emirate’s native population, leading the Dubai government to reject the proposal.

Sidqi pointed out that at least 100,000 of the foreigners living in Egypt with no criminal records wish to obtain Egyptian citizenship. This means that the state could potentially benefit from billions of dollars without recourse to loans subject to terms from the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

Egypt is currently negotiating a $5 billion loan with the IMF in order to cover growing budget deficits as a result of the decline in tourism and tourism revenues.

Sidqi further said that his proposal has already been approved by the Cabinet and has now been submitted to the State Council and parliament for ratification.

According to Sidqi, the opposition claims that the bill would grant citizenship to anybody in return for money. However, this not the case, he argued, as competent authorities shall conduct background checks on all applicants, including their relatives up to a fourth-degree kinship.

Sidqi added that to obtain Egyptian nationality, applicants must submit a certified list of all the countries they traveled to in the past 10 years, noting that the Egyptian government reserves the right to withdraw citizenship, without prior notice, from any applicant convicted of a crime against honor, spying for a foreign country against Egypt or if the applicant obtained another citizenship.

Source: Will investors shell out cash for Egyptian citizenship?

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with ,

Collacott: Birth citizenship makes no sense

2016/08/15 Leave a comment

Martin is silent on the previous government’s effort to abolish birthright citizenship, which failed due to provincial opposition as the numbers were too small to justify the cost of such a major change to vital statistics and other identity systems. See my earlier What happened to Kenney’s cracking down on birth tourism? Feds couldn’t do it alone | hilltimes.com.

Again, a more practical and realizable measure is to collect better and regular data, and regulate or ban birthright citizenship consulting services:

Acquisition of citizenship simply by virtue of having been born on the soil of a country, in fact, makes such little sense that all developed nations where it has been available except Canada and the United States have abolished it in recent years.

The U.S. had originally put it in place after the Civil War, when some southern states tried to deny former slaves the right to become American citizens. Today, the issue of whether to continue with birth citizenship revolves largely around the question of what to do with the millions of illegal migrants and their children who were born in the U.S. and therefore have an automatic right to citizenship. In general, the Democratic Party wants to keep birth citizenship in place since those who benefit from it can be expected to vote for that party when they are old enough to do so. In the circumstances, this has made it difficult to abolish despite the fact that it goes against the interests of Americans in general.

 On our side of the border, a petition has been launched by Richmond resident Kerry Starchuk to do away with birth citizenship and therefore birth tourism. The petition is on the Parliamentary website under the sponsorship of MP Alice Wong. While sponsorship does not necessarily mean that the MP agrees with the petition, it can be assumed that he or she considers it to be a legitimate subject for discussion. To date more than 6,700 people have signed it — more than 13 times the number required for it to be tabled before the House of Commons.

The federal government’s reaction to attempts to abolish birth citizenship has been puzzling to say the least.

Earlier this month, federal government spokespeople made it clear that their main concern with birth tourists was that they pay their hospital bills — which in some cases involve deposits that are three times what the hospital requires from local residents. Curiously, however, the spokespeople made no mention of the fact that when the newborns get older they will be able to use their citizenship to incur substantial costs on Canadian taxpayers because of the benefits they will be eligible to claim.

One of the issues raised in relation to doing away with birth citizenship is that it would be costly to do so. The extent of such costs, however, is open to debate and must be weighed against those incurred when the birth citizenship babies get older.

What is clear is that birth citizenship works against the interests of Canadians in general and that a good number are now aware of this and want it done away with.

Whether the federal government is prepared to act accordingly remains to be seen.

Source: Opinion: Birth citizenship makes no sense | Vancouver Sun

Filed under Birthright Citizenship, Citizenship Tagged with

Germany: Who′s afraid of dual citizenship? | Opinion | DW.COM

2016/08/13 Leave a comment

While in my opinion the article focuses too much on identify aspects of dual citizenship while ignoring the practical aspects that require many to retain their old citizenship in order to be able to easily visit their country of origin, it gives a flavour of German debates:

The issue of dual citizenship is dividing opinion in Germany. The arguments against it are old fashioned to say the least: Citizens cannot “serve two masters,” and the conflict of allegiance for those who possess two passports is emphasized. Such arguments are designed to influence mood and create fear: Opponents of dual citizenship often talk of the threat of a “fifth column” for despots and autocrats, and call into question the democratic will and capacity of those with two passports. The message is clear: Danger is on the way!

But the argument is not aimed at Trump supporters among American-Germans, Le Pen supporters among French-Germans, Kaczynski fans among the 690,000 Polish-Germans, nor those among the 570,000 Russian-Germans that are sympathetic to Vladimir Putin. No, the problem is with those among the 530,000 Turkish-German dual citizens in Germany that support Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Erdogan is currently Germany’s favorite bogeyman, the one person that threatens European democracy and that we should all be afraid of. And we should also fear his fifth column, the Turkish-Germans living here and just waiting for Ankara to give them the signal to mobilize.

Enemies of democracy

 However: Doing away with dual citizenship will not solve any of the real or perceived problems that its opponents envision. Dual citizenship is anchored in current EU law. Thus, EU citizens cannot be deprived of it. Therefore Germans have to tolerate the Orban supporters among Hungarian-Germans as well as the nostalgic right-wing extremist Ustashe fans among Croatian-Germans.

Apparently, the real issue only has to do with the Turks. In that case it would serve us well to recall a few facts: According to the 2011 federal census, about 4.3 million people in Germany had citizenship in a second country in addition to being German passport holders. Of those, some 500,000 were Turks. In comparison: 1.5 million Turkish people were living in Germany without German passports, and 800,000 people of Turkish origin had only a German passport. So, on the whole, less than 20 percent of all Turks in Germany have dual citizenship. So where exactly does the threat to German democracy lie?

This most recent discussion on dual citizenship flared up at a pro-Erdogan demonstration two weekends ago in Cologne. Some 30,000 to 40,000 people demonstrated at the event – which figures out to about six or seven percent of all Turkish-German dual citizens, or 1.5 percent of all persons of Turkish descent living in Germany. Even if every single person at the event were an avowed enemy of democracy – it would still be no greater a number than all opinion polls and election results tend to register among ethnic Germans with no immigrant background.

Not a threat – an enrichment

The favorite argument of dual citizenship opponents is the equation: two passports = dual allegiance. That has little to do with reality. Multi-faceted identity is a matter of fact for millions of people with migrant backgrounds living in Germany. It is a matter of different languages, different cultures and different answers to the question: Where do I feel comfortable, where am I at home? Dual citizenship is a possible answer, and a clear sign of belonging to two different worlds. The belief that someone who is forced to forfeit a passport will also forfeit his or her loyalty is a fallacy. It would only lead to bitterness, hypocrisy and estrangement. For loyalty is like love: You can force someone to have sex, but you cannot force them to love you!

Of course democracy must have the possibility to defend itself against its enemies. But modern democracies can only survive and flourish as open societies. One expression of this openness is to allow citizens to live their identities as they feel them – even if that means they need two passports to do so.

Source: Opinion: Who′s afraid of dual citizenship? | Opinion | DW.COM | 09.08.2016

Filed under Citizenship, Dual Citizenship Tagged with

Germany mulls stripping citizenship in terror crackdown – France 24

2016/08/13 Leave a comment

To watch:

Germany’s interior minister has proposed tough new security measures including deporting foreigners and revoking citizenship after two attacks claimed by the Islamic state group.

At a press conference on Thursday Interior Minister Thomas de Maizière outlined plans to beef up federal security forces, make the promotion of terrorism a crime and strip German citizenship from dual nationals who fight for foreign militias.

After terrorist attacks on German soil this year, two of them by migrants, the minister has been under intense pressure from both the political right, who want fewer Muslim migrants, and the left, who’ve been calling for a stronger police presence.

“A lot of people … are worried about further attacks. That is understandable,” De Maizière told reporters. “No one can guarantee absolute security, but we must do what is possible.”

‘Politically reasonable’

Revoking German citizenship would go some way towards dealing with the estimated 820 Germans fighting in Syria and Iraq who may pose a threat on their return to Germany.

It’s nonetheless considered a controversial proposal with Green lawmaker Volker Beck among those condemning it as “desperate activism”.

Social Democrats (SPD) chief Sigmar Gabriel said his party — the government’s junior coalition partner — are not open to just “any populist quick fix”, but that they are “ready for discussions on anything that can contribute to reinforcing security”.

And the security package has yet to be approved by the country’s right-left coalition and German parliament.

Deportations

Beyond the issue of homegrown terrorism, the minister is proposing to make it easier to deport terror suspects and detain foreigners who have committed crimes or are a public security risk.

A tightening of German and European Union weapons laws is also on the cards.

De Maizière said he was limiting himself to policies that could be implemented quickly, and that he considered “politically reasonable”.

Source: Germany mulls stripping citizenship in terror crackdown – France 24

Filed under Citizenship, Revocation Tagged with

Is ‘birth tourism’ a problem in Canada? Doctors on frontline of debate

2016/08/12 Leave a comment

All the available evidence shows that the numbers are extremely small, both in absolute terms and in relation to the overall number of births in Canada.

IRCC, if it is not already doing so, should be systematically collect better quality data, working with provincial health ministries, rather than the piece meal data that we have now.

Despite the small numbers, there is a need to regulate or prohibit birth tourism consultancy services to avoid a further increase in the numbers. The CMA might also wish to take a more pro-active role.

Changing birthright citizenship, as the previous government learned, is not feasible without provincial buy-in given the various linkages between provincial vital statistics agencies and healthcare systems and any measure to restrict birthright citizenship:

Birth tourism appears to be on the rise in some parts of Canada, raising questions for doctors and hospitals, as well as debate about Canada’s practice of offering instant citizenship to infants born in the country.

“We sense there’s a growing demand in birth tourism from several countries, especially considering the instability in today’s world,” Alex Davidson, managing partner of the Toronto-based LP Group, told CTV News. “There are more and more people coming in and approaching us.”

Davidson said he typically sees two types of clients. Some are wealthy individuals, often from European countries, who want a “second passport” for their children and are able to pay anywhere between $10,000 and $20,000 to deliver a baby in Canada.

Davidson said some of his recent clients have included U.K. residents worried about the post-Brexit future once their country leaves the European Union.

Others are people from poor, crime-ridden countries who want to provide security for their children, and hope that their Canadian babies can provide an anchor in the country for the rest of the family.

“Canada has been perceived — well, it is — as a safe harbour on this planet,” Davidson said.

He said LP Group helps birth tourism clients find temporary accommodations in the country and the firm also has a list of Canadian doctors who are willing to see foreign patients.

“Elena” is a pregnant woman from Russia now awaiting to give birth in Toronto. She spoke to CTV News on condition of anonymity.

“My baby will get Canadian citizenship upon delivery and also with a Canadian passport he will get some benefits like free school and free healthcare,” she said. “It is good for the baby I think because the baby gets to choose if he wants to live in Russia, as in my case, or in Canada.”

At a recent Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada conference, Dr. Fiona Mattatall an obstetrician in Calgary, presented figures that show an increase in the number of overseas patients who have given birth in Calgary hospitals.

She said there are now about 10 “passport babies” born each month in the city’s hospitals. Her survey also found many doctors are uncomfortable with the practice.

While many overseas patients pay to have their babies delivered in Canada, some do not, leaving hospitals on the hook for the costs.

Dr. Saul Pytka, a Calgary anesthesiologist, said he’s alarmed by the issue.

“I am frustrated — and I have to be honest, angered — by the fact that as a society we are being abused. I think we are a very generous society,” he said.

Under the Citizenship Act, all babies born on Canadian soil are automatically granted citizenship, except for children of foreign diplomats.

Canada and the United States are the only G7 countries that have birthright citizenship. Other countries like France, Germany and Australia have revoked automatic citizenship unless at least one of the parents is a national citizen.

Birth tourism is not illegal in Canada. There is no official federal data on “birth tourism,” and some say the numbers are still small. According to Statistics Canada figures from 2012, the most recent year for which numbers are available, there were only 699 babies born in Canada to foreign mothers out of more than 382,000 births across the country.

But one immigration consultant says there has “certainly” been an increase in birth tourism in Canada over the past few years with sites advertising companies that assist in getting pregnant women to Canada.

“The best gift you can give your child is a Canadian passport” says one website.

A potentially costly overhaul

In 2014, immigration officials urged the Conservative government to restrict granting citizenship by birth on Canadian soil to children with at least one parent who is a citizen or permanent resident.

But the report cited limited data and possible increased costs to provinces and territories as potential barriers to legislation reform.

Will Tao, a Vancouver-based immigration lawyer, told CTV News Channel last week that overhauling birthright citizenship rules could be extremely costly for Ottawa.

“Let’s actually look at what are the motivating factors, what are the organizations that are working abroad, perhaps without reference to Canadian law, and promoting individuals to come here,” Tao said.

Online searches turn up dozens of organizations and groups in various countries that offer advice and help facilitate travel for women who want to give birth in Canada.

“Perhaps it is not illegal right now, but perhaps it needs to be curbed or organizations that are running the services need to be stopped,” Tao said.

He also said that panic over birth tourism, especially in British Columbia, is being fuelled by a “general misunderstanding of who a foreign national is.”

Many foreign nationals have study or work permits, “and in my mind these individuals are all on the pathway to permanent residency,” Tao said.

A petition that seeks to eliminate automatic citizenship for babies born to foreign nationals in Canada is adding fire to the debate.

Kerry Starchuk, a Richmond, B.C., woman, is calling on the federal government to enact legislation that will require at least one parent to be a Canadian citizen or permanent resident in order for a baby born on Canadian soil to be granted automatic citizenship.

The petition, sponsored by Conservative MP Alice Wong, has garnered more than 6,700 signatures since June 16 and will eventually be introduced in the House of Commons.

Starchuk said she started the petition because she suspects a house next door to hers serves as a motel for pregnant foreigners who come to Canada to secure birthright citizenships for their babies.

Source: Is ‘birth tourism’ a problem in Canada? Doctors on frontline of debate | CTV News

In a related story, the Canadian Medical Protective Association highlights potential medical and liability issues:

The Canadian Medical Protective Association is cautioning doctors about providing medical services to birth tourists coming here to have babies in order to acquire Canadian citizenship for their newborns.

“Canadian physicians who provide care to non-residents are at increased risk of medical-legal difficulties arising outside of Canada,” says a notice from the CMPA. “The Association is not structured to assist when medical-legal actions are instigated by non-residents outside of Canada.”

The CMPA is the legal defence organization for doctors; it provides and pays lawyers and settlements when doctors are sued for malpractice by Canadian patients. The new bulletin to physicians regarding medical tourism is relevant and timely, given a local trend where an ever-increasing number of non-residents (from 18 in 2010 to 339 last year) are having their babies, mostly at Richmond Hospital. The Vancouver Sun and The Province have reported that the provincial government is now aware of more than two dozen “birth houses” where pregnant women stay prior to, and after, the births of their babies, before returning to China.

Birth tourism brokers marketing their services show photos of Lower Mainland hospitals and lists of Mandarin speaking doctors to deliver babies.

The CMPA statement — titled “Emerging trends and medical-legal risks in medical tourism” — warns that while there are still more Canadians travelling abroad for medical treatment than foreign visitors coming here, there are risks to think about for both patient groups. Doctors should ensure foreign patients sign agreements promising not to sue outside of Canada and they should also make sure they fully document discussions with non-residents and the care provided to them.

 The CMPA said it cannot share information about the number of doctors sued by birth tourists. But it is attuned to the broader trend of medical tourism.

“We have published guidance for physicians on the medical-legal risks associated with medical tourism and the steps they can take to mitigate risks associated with this practice,” said Dr. Doug Bell, a managing director at CMPA.

Source: Canadian birth tourism doctors cautioned on risk of liability | Vancouver Sun

Filed under Birthright Citizenship, Citizenship Tagged with , ,

Nothing illegal about birth tourism at B.C. hospitals

2016/08/06 Leave a comment

More on birth tourism – numbers cited still small in relation to overall live births (about 44,000 in British Columbia 2014/15 ) but the local impact on the Richmond Hospital and residents being turned away should raise some concerns (according to the reporter, Pamela Fayerman, Richmond has the highest numbers of such births).

The relatively small numbers involved do not support the elimination of birthright citizenship but it is valid to question whether governments should regulate or prohibit birth tourism agencies or brokers.

For the overall numbers, see my earlier piece, What happened to Kenney’s cracking down on birth tourism? Feds couldn’t do it alone | hilltimes.com:

Federal authorities say foreign nationals coming to Vancouver to have babies aren’t breaking any laws as long as they can show they have money to pay for their medical care.

Birth tourism is becoming increasingly popular, especially in Richmond, where non-resident births are steadily rising, from just 18 in 2010 to 339 in the past fiscal year. Women primarily from China are seeking labour and delivery services at Richmond Hospital. Canada Border Services spokeswoman Sarah Lawley-Wakelin said pregnancy is “not a reason in itself to not admit a tourist.

“But if a foreigner is seeking entry to Canada for the express purpose of undergoing medical treatment and can’t show they have the money to pay for it, then that could be deemed by a CBSA officer as a potential excessive demand on health service, thus making that individual inadmissible.”

Chinese nationals must have a temporary (tourist/visitor) resident visa (TRV) to enter Canada and must state the purpose of travelling to Canada, said Nancy Caron, spokeswoman for Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC).

“People should always be honest about the purpose of their visit when applying to come to Canada. It is a serious crime to lie or to provide false information or documents when dealing with (IRCC). Lying on an application or during in an interview with an IRCC officer is fraud and it is a crime,” Caron said.

 Asked if there have been any investigations, charges or convictions against foreigners who didn’t admit they were coming to Canada to have a baby, she said:

“Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada isn’t aware of any investigations into foreigners who didn’t admit they were entering Canada solely for the purpose of giving birth to a baby.”

Vancouver immigration lawyer Steven Meurrens said the increasing popularity of birth tourism would appear to be so mothers can obtain Canadian citizenship, passports, birth certificates and other documents for their newborns. “You’ve got women who do it to help their child and those who think it will give them a leg up on their own immigration efforts. So these are so-called anchor babies, yes.”

Since 1947, the Citizenship Act has guaranteed Canadian citizenship for those born here, Meurrens said, and although the previous Conservative government under Stephen Harper explored changes to the Act, nothing was done.

Meurrens said while birth tourism may “leave a bad taste in some people’s mouths” Canada has forever been a “settler society” and birth on soil citizenship is “central to our laws.”

“Where the real problems arise is when people skip out on their medical bills,” he said.

Freedom of information documents supplied to Postmedia by the B.C. government show that half of non-resident bills related to births are paid. Meurrens said since there are agencies or birth tourism brokers running birth houses — 26 at last count that the government is aware of — it may be possible for authorities to collect funds from them.

Meanwhile, more than a dozen pregnant Richmond residents were turned away from their local hospital in the past 18 months because it was too full to accommodate them.

Source: Nothing illegal about birth tourism at B.C. hospitals | Vancouver Sun

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , , ,

New gender-neutral Ontario health cards make it harder to get a passport

2016/08/06 Leave a comment

Inexcusable lack of communication and due diligence by the Ontario government. While I know that OHIP cards are not intended for identification purposes, the reality suggests otherwise.

Systems are linked and it is the responsibility of officials to make the necessary checks:

Ontario’s decision to issue gender-neutral health cards is making it more difficult for some of the province’s residents to get a passport, since the federal government wasn’t consulted on the switch.

….The province announced in June that it will start issuing health cards that no longer display information about a person’s gender on the front of the card.

Changes made to be fair and equitable, province says

Beginning in early 2017, drivers will also have the option on their licences to select X, instead of an M for male or F for female.

The province’s Liberal government said it is making the changes “to ensure the fair, ethical and equitable treatment of people with trans and non-binary gender identity.”

Bestard maintains this is a positive step for non-binary people, and one that she has absolutely no problem with. “I do understand the nuances of the LGBTQ community, and the challenges they face,” she said.

The issue, she says, is the headache that has been created by the two levels of government not working together.

“The lack of communication is quite surprising,” she said.

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada spokesperson Lindsay Wemp told CBC News that “IRCC was not consulted as part of this initiative from the government of Ontario.”

Christine Burke, spokesperson for Ontario’s Ministry of Government and Consumer Services, says ServiceOntario has been working with the federal government to address this situation.

“No consultations took place with the federal government prior to the change, as we were unaware that the photo health card was being used and accepted as an identity document by Passport Canada,” she said in an email.

Kwok Wong, spokesperson for the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario, told CBC News that the ability to just mark an X for gender on an Ontario licence complies with the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) standards for machine-readable official travel documents.

“In various other countries, X is used in place of M or F when gender is not specified,” he said in an email.

“Ministry of Transportation officials discussed this proposal with the federal government counterparts including Passport Canada and Canada Border Service Agency.”

It appears that a licence marked with an X would not be able to be used to obtain a passport, as proof of gender is still one of the requirements.

Source: New gender-neutral Ontario health cards make it harder to get a passport – Hamilton – CBC News

Filed under Citizenship, gender Tagged with ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →