Citizenship workshop @ImmigrationCBoC: Points of interest

Good workshop panel, with Charlie Foran and Arghavan Gerami joining me, with each of us covering different aspects.

Two points of interest for me that arose in the questions and discussion:

  • The impact of the physical presence requirement on internationally mobile professionals and business people. One CEO made the persuasive case that this requirement precluded citizenship for those based in Canada but whose frequent travel abroad meant they were not able to meet the minimum number of days in Canada requirement; and,
  • A former citizenship judge picking up on this point, noted the reduced role of judges in decision-making meant that the lack of days could not be balanced against the overall contribution such individuals made. The lack of discretion, introduced to provide greater consistency in decision-making (a valid policy and program objective), had consequences for this small but significant group.

Physical presence was introduced to address those who only had a legal residence or presence in Canada but who lived abroad, with the main examples being from Hong Kong and the Gulf countries.

Some early consultations and discussion on residency requirements suggested that making it four out of six years (being changed to three out of five years in C-6) would provide reasonable flexibility for those whose work took them outside Canada (e.g., truckers, pilots and a number of professions), while balancing the need to have the meaningful experience of Canada that came from living here.

I suspect that additional consultations and analysis would provide better data on how many people are affected, or potentially affected, with consequent reflection on whether policy and program adjustments are required.

Given the nature of the Conference Board audience, many of the plenary sessions focussed, directly or indirectly, on questions of business or investor immigration. Most of these speakers were advocates, given the nature of their organization or business, and largely ignored the body of evidence that previous programs had not generated significant economic returns.

One panelist even praised the Quebec model, despite the common knowledge that many if not most business investors in Quebec left, with Chinese investors in particular largely ending up in British Columbia, and who also advocated for a citizenship investor program similar to Malta and Cyprus.

Will be interesting to see if these comments on citizenship and business and investor immigration make it into the Conference Board’s immigration action plan and, if so, the precise nature of the recommendations.

ICYMI: Ankara’s citizenship plan for Syrian refugees raises Kurdish worries

The politics of citizenship:

Turkey’s Kurdish lawmakers say the government’s decision to gradually grant citizenship to over 3 million Syrian refugees in the country’s Kurdish cities can disturb the population makeup of the area and incite ethnic tensions.

“We support efforts to embrace and help the refugees but the government’s plan is not assistance, it is part of a wider political game to strengthen its roots here,” said Mahmoud Togrul, a member of parliament from the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP) in the city of Entab.

Togrul believes Ankara is exploiting the refugee crisis, and by giving voting rights to the Syrian migrants it plans to secure votes ahead of the 2019 elections.

“Most of the Syrians will choose to stay in Turkey and that will be decisive in the coming elections,” he said.

According to the Turkish law, applicants will be granted citizenship after five years of residence in the country. This makes the bulk of the Syrian refugees eligible candidates for Turkish citizenship in the coming years, and able to vote in the next elections.

Official data also show that nearly 152,000 children have been born in Turkey whose parents came as refugees from Syria.

Ankara has said by getting citizenship, the refugees will have brighter prospects in the labor market and reduce the overall migration to Europe.

As part of an agreement with the European Union, called the Facility for Refugees in Turkey, Ankara will be receiving 6 billion euros over the next three years and resume the EU membership talks that stalled in late 2000.

Critics say giving millions of refugees citizen status will serve the strategic plans of the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP).

“There will be over 1 million new voters in the 2019 elections if the government goes through with the proposal, which will in turn change the outcome of the elections,” said lawmaker Erdogan Toprak from the opposition Republican Peoples’ Party (CHP), quoted by Turkish daily Hurriyet.

Toprak said the government plans to create settlements for the refugees with the financial help it will receive from the EU, influencing the demographic development in the southeast where Kurds are in the majority.

The majority of the Syrian refugees in Turkey are of Arab origin, along with large numbers of Kurdish and Turkmen asylum seekers.

“What is strategically important for the government is the bordering areas connecting Kurdish lands in Syria, Iraq and Turkey, which Ankara wants to influence by placing the refugees’ families there,” said Kurdish author Fehim Ashiq.

Source: Ankara’s citizenship plan for Syrian refugees raises Kurdish wor

Citizenship Deck and Statistics Update: Conference Board Immigration Summit Presentation

Will be presenting today this updated and tightened version of the Metropolis deck presented a month ago with the full 2015 operational data. Overall trends remain the same: current pass rate remains about 90 percent and the trend of declining naturalization remains.

Citizenship – Conference Board April 2016

ICYMI: Hollande cancels plan to strip French citizenship in terrorism cases – The Boston Globe

Welcome pull-back, even if prompted more by politics than substance:

President François Hollande of France announced Wednesday that he was withdrawing a proposal to strip French citizenship from dual nationals convicted of terrorism, ending a months long debate that convulsed his governing Socialist Party, dominated political discussion after the November terrorist attacks and led to the resignation of the justice minister.

The idea, originally endorsed by right-wing parties and adopted by Hollande three days after the deadly attacks Nov. 13, drew furious opposition on the left in France, even though all sides agreed it was largely symbolic and would have little practical effect in combating terrorism.

But the proposal highlighted a growing split within the Socialist Party, between those who favored a tough law-and-order approach in the wake of the attacks that killed 130 people, and those worried that the government would be impinging on civil liberties.

Critics on the left complained that the plan would create two classes of citizens, saying it recalled the dark days of the World War II collaborationist government in France, which rendered hundreds of Jews stateless.

France is still under a state of emergency imposed after the attacks, and the police have conducted thousands of raids and put hundreds of suspects under house arrest.

Last week, after the Brussels bombings March 22, officials identified a possible terrorist attack in the “advanced stages” of planning, according to the French interior minister, Bernard Cazeneuve, and announced the arrest of a suspect with links to one of the November attackers.

On Wednesday, however, Hollande said he was pulling back from the citizenship proposal that had become the most intensely debated measure in a bill to overhaul the Constitution. The reversal is likely to reinforce among many voters what pollsters say is Hollande’s reputation for indecision.

Hollande blamed members of the right-wing opposition, which controls the Senate, for his decision.

“I take note that part of the opposition is against all constitutional revision,” he said. “I deplore, profoundly, this attitude, because we must do all we can, under the current serious conditions, to avoid divisions.”

Hollande also abandoned a proposal to create a constitutional provision for declaring a state of emergency, even though it had garnered broad support across the political spectrum.

Hollande’s government had slightly backtracked on the citizenship proposal in January, largely to mollify his critics on the left, in deciding that the bill would not contain any language explicitly referring to dual citizens.

The lower house, the National Assembly, where Socialists are in the majority, approved an amended bill that extended the measure to all French citizens, regardless of how many passports they held.

But the Senate insisted on sticking to the original idea and restricting the proposal to people with dual citizenship, with its leaders saying that the creation of stateless individuals was a “red line” they would not cross. With a presidential election scheduled next year, analysts interpreted the move as a way of dealing yet another blow to an already weakened Hollande.

Source: Hollande cancels plan to strip French citizenship in terrorism cases – The Boston Globe

Citizenship and Immigration Canada finds passport lost for 13 years

Fortunately, a very rare occurrence, but why should it have taken so long, and why were previous MPs not able to ‘encourage’ officials to find it?

A woman whose passport was lost in the depths of a federal department for over a decade is finally on her way to becoming a permanent resident.

“It has cost us so much heartache,” said Janina Ibarra. “I haven’t seen my mother in 11 years and I have not been able to go back.”

Ibarra came to Canada 17 years ago from Sri Lanka, which was in the midst of a civil war at the time. She says she had hoped to stay as a refugee.

Before her refugee case was settled, Ibarra met and married a Canadian citizen, and he applied to sponsor her for permanent residency status.

As part of that process, 13 years ago Sri Lanka sent her passport to Citizenship and Immigration Canada — but it went missing, leaving her with no official residency status in Canada.

Ibarra says for the past two years she has been under a deportation order she was told could be enforced at any time, which would mean leaving behind her husband and their two children.

The situation put her and her family in a precarious position — emotionally and financially — leaving them to rely on their community for support.

“There were times we would have money thrown in our mail slot,” she said. “At the end of the day it really was the benevolence of our church and church friends.”

Note buried in file

After the federal election last fall, Ibarra decided to ask her new MP Harjit Sajjan for help.

She got the answer she was hoping within three weeks. Buried in a half-metre-tall file was a note that said the passport had been archived by the government at least five years ago, if not longer, and where to find it.

Ibarra’s sponsorship application is on track for the first time since 1999. She says she hopes to have her permanent residency by late summer.

In the meantime, she’s looking for answers from the federal government for the years of her life she feels were put on hold waiting for her paperwork to get processed.

Source: Citizenship and Immigration Canada finds passport lost for 13 years – British Columbia – CBC News

Canadian Language Benchmark Test Nightmare – Immigroup

One of the implications of the change in to pre-application assessment of language introduced in 2010 or 2011 as a means of streamlining processing based on advice from the Operations people.

I didn’t fully grasp the implications at the time (my bad!) but since then a number of these anecdotes have emerged (a Danish friend of mine, having worked in Silicon Valley and Ottawa for many years, had to pay $200 or so for his test despite obviously being fluent given his work history).

The end result is that for a number of people, Canadian citizenship costs $630 in government fees plus about $200 or more for language assessment, higher than comparator countries like Australia:

IRCC is asking that I take either a French exam which would cost me $460 or an English exam which would cost me $299. Why the difference in price? Why is it that I have to take a French exam when I graduated with a BA Honours French from a recognised university in Canada? The test is plainly highway robbery! Not only am I fully bilingual, I have also studied French since kindergarten and the best part of it is that I am a French teacher who has been working in a language school for a year and seven months now, teaching government employees the language (oral, written and comprehension at all levels)! On top of this $460 for the exam, I will also be required to pay $475 for the PR fee.

Source: Canadian Language Benchmark Test Nightmare – Immigroup – We Are Immigration Law

ICYMI: Stateless Prince George man one step closer to citizenship

No longer falling through the cracks:

Qia Gunster is one step closer to being Canadian.

The 20-year-old Prince George man has lived in B.C. since he was a baby, but has never been recognized by his country.

As a “stateless person,” Gunster has been unable to get government identification, which means he couldn’t legally work, drive a car or travel.

But this week, Citizenship and Immigration Canada granted Gunster permanent resident status and he will finally be able to get a driver’s licence. He will also be able to get a social insurance number, so he can work and pay taxes.

He won’t be able to apply for Canadian citizenship for another four years.

“It’s pretty awesome — my whole outlook on the future has changed,” Gunster said Thursday.

“It makes everything easier.”

Gunster was born in Arizona, but his mother didn’t register his birth and when he was 18 months old, she crossed the border into B.C. with him. She left her baby in McBride, east of Prince George, where he was raised by a friend of a friend.

Being without ID wasn’t a significant problem until he finished high school. With help from a large circle of supporters, Gunster was able to earn a living. He is partway through his apprenticeship as an electrician and has found employers willing to pay in cash.

But Gunster still faced many limitations. He needed a birth certificate even to begin the process of applying to the federal government for citizenship.

The school principal got involved, and his adoptive families tried to help. Even the local MP contacted Arizona government officials in an attempt to get Gunster a birth certificate.

Despite stacks of paperwork, and a DNA test proving he is the son of an Arizona resident, the state has refused to issue the document.

Late last year, Michelle Quigg, a lawyer with North Vancouver-based Access Pro Bono, got involved with Qia’s case. She succeeded in getting Gunster permanent residency status, but she intends to press the government to grant him citizenship sooner under a section of the Immigration Act that allows it for “exceptional circumstances.”

Gunster, meanwhile, is making plans. He is going to get his driver’s licence and apply for jobs as an electrical apprentice at any company who’s hiring. He can go to a bar and no longer worry about being asked to prove his age. He can apply for a credit card.

“When you’re stateless, the options are so limited — you can’t work unless you know the right people,” he said.

“Basically I was stuck in a black hole that I couldn’t get out of, and now I have a world of opportunities.”

ICYMI: Liberals cheapen citizenship | Chong

Gordon Chong, former Toronto municipal councillor, criticizes most aspects of the changes to the Citizenship Act announced by Minister McCallum (like all such critiques, ignores that McCallum maintained and added to integrity measures introduced by the Conservatives):

But this new soft-headed federal government wants to demonstrate its soft-heartedness by easing the rules to obtain our most treasured commodity, citizenship.

But should newcomers self-segregate and be functionally illiterate in English and French?

Should we establish a multitude of solitudes in addition to our “two solitudes”?

Should we discourage newcomers from “throwing their lot in with us”, as former federal court judge Francis Muldoon described unconditional commitment to Canada?

We need Canadians of conviction, not Canadians of convenience!

If citizenship is to be made irrevocable, a true “until death do us part” contract — unlike the Order of Canada, or an Olympic medal — then we should make the requirements reflect the unalterable nature of that contract.

Serious standards should be de rigueur.

When Paul Martin Sr. brought in Canada’s first Citizenship Act in 1947, he did not do so lightly.

He had visited the battlefields of Europe and solemnly recognized the contributions of French Canadians and others, including Japanese Canadians, Chinese Canadians, Italian Canadians and German Canadians, even though some were not recognized as “Canadians” in the same way as those of British descent.

Martin Sr. corrected that glaring oversight because so many had volunteered to fight for Canada — some on the battlefields, others in intelligence gathering — in World War II.

By 1947, Chinese inhabitants of Canada could finally vote.

In my family, there had been a dichotomy before that.

My British mother could vote, but my Chinese father could not!

The then Liberal government thought Canadian citizenship sufficiently precious that five years of residency was required prior to applying — with no flexible interpretations of “residency”.

In the 1960s, the residency requirements were shortened to three years with a looser interpretation of “residency”, to accommodate the business interests of those with international ties.

As their families were settling in, the business class immigrant (usually the husband] could leave the country and still be considered a “resident” because he had established a residence in Canada.

Our new-age Liberals are now proposing a change in the requirements for someone to be physically present in Canada from four out of six years to three out of five.

Why? The present rules are hardly onerous when granting something so valuable.

How much is Canadian citizenship worth? How much are we willing to devalue it? How soft-headed are we going to be?

Admittedly, revoking citizenship is challenging.

However, if the federal government is determined to keep dual citizenship, then those convicted of terrorism or other treasonous crimes against Canada should face the death penalty.

One way of extracting a seed of good from the psychotic nihilism that permeates terrorism would be to harvest the organs of convicted terrorists sentenced to death for transplantation and medical research.

Some faint-hearted souls may think this extreme. Many Canadians will not.

Serious, hard-headed, utilitarian leadership is the sine qua non for this debate. Who will lead it?

If patriotic Canadians willingly sacrifice their lives fighting terrorism, should traitorous Canadians not have to sacrifice theirs?

Then our policy will truly be once a Canadian, always a Canadian, irrevocably, right up to, “until death do us part!”

Source: Liberals cheapen citizenship | Chong | Columnists | Opinion | Toronto Sun

Canadians support visa-free travel between some [largely white] countries: poll

Apart from the practicalities (more complicated than portrayed by the advocates), this is a throwback to imperial preferences and has a xenophobic tinge given that all four are majority white countries.

Echoes of ‘old-stock’ vs new stock, and hard to see how it would be a winner given the underlying message:

A majority of Canadians support the right – along with Australians, New Zealanders and Britons – of residents to have unrestricted travel between the countries without the need for visas, a new poll has found.

According to the poll commissioned by the Britain-based Royal Commonwealth Society, 75 per cent of Canadians believe that residents of the four Commonwealth countries should have an arrangement similar to the European Union, which allows citizens to travel freely to live and work in member countries. The poll, conducted by Nanos Research, is part of the group’s ongoing efforts to promote greater mobility between the countries.

The results showed 82 per cent of New Zealanders, 70 per cent of Australians and 58 per cent of Britons also support the idea. The survey of 1,000 Canadians was conducted in late January.

Tim Hewish, the society’s policy director, said the group plans to lobby politicians in Ottawa in the coming months. “It’s the responsibility of elected governments to respond to these types of responses from their citizens,” he said.

Currently, Canadians require a visa for all travel to New Zealand and Australia. Canadians visiting Britain for work or study, or on trips longer than six months, also require a visa.

The four countries were selected out of the 53 Commonwealth nations because they share similar socioeconomic characteristics, Mr. Hewish said. “It is intended that this could apply to other Commonwealth countries with comparable economic characteristics over time,” his statement said.

But Emily Gilbert, a University of Toronto geography professor who studies citizenship and migration, voiced concern about which countries were included – and excluded – from the proposal, and pointed to anti-immigration sentiments being played out around the world.

“Given the context of us really being really antagonistic against people coming from places who we think are not like us, I find it highly problematic that this proposal – ‘These are people like us, they’re okay’ – that this proposal is getting this kind of groundswell of enthusiasm,” she said.

She added that arriving at such an arrangement between the four countries would be far from simple. Even if their leaders agreed to it, the implementation would require the involvement of countless departments and ministries at multiples levels of government. “I’m skeptical that it could actually be put into place,” she said.

Mr. Hewish said specific details, such as whether residents would have the right to vote, could be worked out between the individual countries. Mr. Hewish attributed the slightly lower level of support in Britain, at 58 per cent, to recent debate over a possible British exit from the EU. In fact, the survey found that only 46 per cent of respondents in Britain expressed support for continued free movement within the EU.

The poll, released Sunday, is just the latest in an ongoing effort by groups lobbying for such an arrangement. Last year, the Commonwealth Exchange – the policy arm of the RCS – released a report floating the idea. That received support from London Mayor Boris Johnson, who has spoken publicly about creating a “bilateral free labour mobility zone” between Australia, New Zealand and Britain.

Around the same time, an online petition created by a Vancouver-based group called the Commonwealth Freedom of Movement Organization received more than 100,000 signatures.

“The U.K., Australia, Canada and New Zealand share the same head of state, the same common-law legal system, the same Western culture, the same respect for democracy and even the same language,” the petition states. “It is therefore unreasonable for each to not share the same economic, political and cultural benefits that a free-movement policy would bring.”

Source: Canadians support visa-free travel between some countries: poll – The Globe and Mail

Citizenship must be about more than a genetic link

This issue was already subject of some analysis and study during my time at CIC/IRCC a number of years ago.

The previous government, which addressed adoption issues, was not prepared to move on this one.

We will see whether the current government will respond (it was not in the party platform, ministerial mandate letter or the proposed changes to citizenship in Bill C-6, so I expect not in the short-term):

The Canadian government is playing fast and loose with the definition of “Canadian.” In March 2014, the Federal Court of Appeal decided Nanakmeet Kandola, a young girl born abroad to a Canadian parent, was not a citizen because there was no genetic link between them. Nanakmeet’s mother carried and gave birth to her but she was the product of anonymously donated sperm and ova. Think of it as adoption in utero.

Yet, a child adopted by Canadian parents who fills out the same application for a Citizenship Certificate as Nanakmeet’s father did will be approved. No genetic link required.

Perversely, ex-Nazi war criminal Helmut Oberlander maintains his right to Canadian citizenship until yet another government review is completed. And shocking to some, children born to Canadian Daesh brides are considered citizens.

Where has Canada gone wrong?

The Citizenship Act dictates who is Canadian. There are three main roads to “become” Canadian — be born in Canada, immigrate and then apply when you meet all the requirements, or inherit citizenship through your parent or grandparent if born abroad. So why was Nanakmeet’s request for citizenship refused when others using the same route were approved?

The law is behind the times.

Sex and adoption were once the only ways a person was able to become a parent but times have changed. These options are now mere fence posts in the world of conception. As early as 1983, the first “test tube” birth occurred in Canada. In 2004, the Assisted Human Reproduction Act officially sanctioned fertility relationships with surrogates, where a woman carries a child for someone else, and ova and sperm donations. Today, assisted human reproduction is a full-fledged, albeit small, industry in Canada with fertility doctors, counsellors, clinics, lawyers and even agents.

Is it hypocritical for Canada to condone the birth of children through assisted fertility procedures but then deny some children citizenship because they were born through these same procedures?

The court decided Nanakmeet’s case two years ago. The majority of the court wrote, “Several important policy issues also arise because of the novelty which this case presents … These questions are worthy of further consideration and risk being answered by the Courts unless Parliament exercises its prerogative to deal with them by way of legislation.”

What changes do we need?

Canada must expand the definition of parent in the Citizenship Act to include those who use assisted fertility to become parents. Grant these children citizenship the same way naturally born and adopted children receive it. As long as a parent is legally recognized as the parent of their child, that child deserves citizenship.

As the Federal Court of Appeal warned, the government risks a host of policy issues if changes aren’t made to the law. Such issues include confusion if judges reach different conclusions with each case they decide. If genetics is the test, ova and sperm donors could pass their citizenship to children even if they aren’t parents to them. Surrogates could claim genetic links and the right to pass on citizenship to children they birth when the surrogate never parents the child. Being Canadian must mean more than having the right genetic link.

The new Liberal government and the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, John McCallum, have shown they are sympathetic to the realities of the times by admitting Syrian refugees, shortening processing times for certain immigration applications, and proposing changes to the Citizenship Act to make it easier to become a citizen.

Source: Citizenship must be about more than a genetic link | Toronto Star