C-24 – Citizenship Act Revisions – Committee Hearings Started

2014/04/29 Leave a comment

Will be interesting to see how these play out. First day was essentially introduction plus some initial positions from the opposition parties:

… NDP opposition critic Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe started off by asking Alexander to address the bill’s constitutionality. Given the Harper government’s record on tests of constitutionality before the Supreme Court recently, the question’s a touchy one.

In particular, she asked whether the new requirement for those applying for Canadian citizenship to declare their intention to reside in Canada post-citizenship — violated sections six and 15 of the Charter — those that protect the right to free mobility and equal protection under the law.

“With regard to our bill and the constitution — of course we reviewed this bill in that context. I carried this out with my colleague the minister of justice and we believe this bill is in complete conformity with the requirements of our constitution,” Alexander answered in French.

“It is reasonable, in our view, to require that a permanent resident wishing to become a Canadian citizen express his or her intention to reside in Canada.”

Liberal critic John McCullum focussed on the impact of no longer providing credit to foreign students for time spent in Canada prior to becoming permanent residents as part of residency qualifications. Minister Alexander restated the government’s position.

This change also affects refugees, arguably not a priority for the Government, and live-in caregivers. The latter, largely Filipinos, may, should the Filipino Canadian community become active on this issue, may be more problematic given that this community is one of the Government’s political target communities.

To be continued, and thanks to iPolitics for covering the hearings.

Citizenship reform bill is constitutional, Alexander assures committee

Filed under C-24, Citizenship, Citizenship Act Tagged with , ,

Le gouvernement Couillard peut sauver la réforme de 2006

2014/04/24 Leave a comment

Good commentary by Christian Laville on Quebec’s “history wars” in relation to public education and the historical narrative used. The PQ government had plans to revise the curriculum, in line with their objective of creating long-term disengagement from Canadian history, a more balanced approach may come from the new Liberal government:

Comme on pouvait s’y attendre, le rapport Beauchemin–Famhy-Eid est bien conforme aux voeux du Parti québécois et de la Coalition. Ce qui est central dans ce rapport, c’est la proposition de revenir à un programme ordonné selon la trame nationale. En veut-on une illustration ? Dans la partie argumentative de ce petit rapport, quarante pages bien aérées, on compte 25 fois les mots « trame nationale », dont 13 fois « la trame nationale ». Comme il est expliqué, la trame nationale doit servir de fil conducteur vers la question nationale « qui organise et singularise l’histoire du Québec, depuis les premiers balbutiements d’une communauté découvrant sa singularité jusqu’aux méandres de la “ question nationale ” telle qu’elle circonscrit aujourd’hui nos conflits et nos rassemblements » (p. 41).

Il est donc facile de reconnaître ce que cela implique. D’autant plus facilement que dans les milieux nationalistes-conservateurs, ladite trame nationale apparaît souvent comme synonyme de cheminement vers la souveraineté. Ainsi, chez un des principaux animateurs de l’opposition au programme actuel, l’historien Éric Bédard, qui, commentant la défaite du Parti québécois du 7 avril, explique : « On annonce un peu vite la défaite du mouvement souverainiste. Cette trame nationale traverse notre histoire. »

Le ballon est maintenant entre les mains du nouveau gouvernement. Durant la campagne électorale, Philippe Couillard a déclaré : « Je veux m’assurer qu’on est dans une direction de mieux informer les gens de notre histoire, et qu’il n’y ait pas de teinte politique partisane, qui est parfois subtile. » Le moment est venu de s’en assurer. Et de procéder pour sauver un enseignement de l’histoire de qualité qui peut encore être sauvé, un enseignement de l’histoire moderne sachant tenir compte des réalités de notre époque et des besoins des élèves d’aujourd’hui.

Sauver l’enseignement de l’histoire en préservant la forme moderne du programme en vigueur, cependant, n’empêcherait pas de corriger certains des irritants que les enseignants ont constatés dans leur pratique, et dont plusieurs, il est juste de le dire, sont mentionnés dans le rapport Beauchemin–Famhy-Eid. Nous pensons par exemple au rétablissement d’une chronologie continue, à une rédaction plus claire du programme, à la clarification des connaissances à faire acquérir… Le rapport propose aussi d’accroître la part de l’histoire dans la formation des maîtres, ce que nous appuyons.

Le gouvernement Couillard peut sauver la réforme de 2006 | Le Devoir.

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , ,

Why is Canada botching the Great War centenary? – Granatstein

2014/04/22 1 Comment

Funny to see how the academics who support the overall thrust of the Government’s change of emphasis on Canada’s historical narrative, particularly the increased emphasis on the military, have started to realize the limitations of the Government’s commitment. Jack Granatstein’s commentary on the commemoration of WW1 and Canada’s role is valid and telling (for his critique of the Government’s cuts to Library and Archives Canada see Who will preserve the past for future generations?:

But the Great War years also changed the homeland. Women relatives of Canadian soldiers got the vote in 1917, and thousands of women left farms and hearths to work in munitions factories that produced a quarter of the artillery shells for British and Dominion forces by 1917. Prohibition cut off alcohol sales; millions were raised in Victory Loan campaigns; income tax came into effect (as a “temporary” wartime measure); and farmers and workers began to organize politically as inflation hit everyone. Above all, conscription in 1917 split the nation, pitting farmers against city dwellers, labour against bosses, French against English. That year’s election, won by the pro-conscription Unionist government of Sir Robert Borden, was the most racist in our history.

We certainly don’t want to celebrate all of these wartime events and changes, but we need to talk about them and learn from them. We need TV documentaries on the war and its battles and on the events, positive and negative, on the home front. We need books, conferences, lectures and displays in our national and local museums. We need to remember.

This requires some modest new funding. There will be a surplus by 2015, and there will be money available – if the government wishes to use it. There will also be the money to ensure that veterans get the help they require. It’s not a zero-sum game.

We really must remember the Great War properly. It was when Canada stood proudly on the world stage for the first time, and it would be a disgrace for the government to shortchange it.

Why is Canada botching the Great War centenary? – The Globe and Mail.

Filed under Citizenship, Government Tagged with ,

Spotlighting a law that stripped U.S.-born women of citizenship

2014/04/22 Leave a comment

Good reminder of some of the past history of citizenship policy, and how people lost their citizenship, in this case due to marriage of an immigrant:

Daniel Swalm was researching his family when he came across a disturbing episode in immigration history. That discovery would lead to a move in the U.S. Senate to apologize for action the nation took more than a century ago.

Swalm discovered that under an obscure 1907 law, his grandmother Elsie, born and raised in Minnesota, was stripped of her U.S. citizenship after marrying an immigrant from Sweden.

Swalm had never heard of the Expatriation Act that required a U.S.-born woman who married a foreigner to “take the nationality of her husband.”

Swalm, who lives in Minneapolis, found out about the law when he stumbled across an alien registration form filled out by Elsie Knutson Moren.

“I could not figure out why Grandma Elsie had to fill one out, because she was born in the United States,” he said.

The law has caught others by surprise, too.

“There are all these people doing their genealogy, and they come across relatives who were declared alien enemies during World War I, and they’re trying to figure out why that would be if they were born in the United States,” said Candice Bredbenner, a history professor at the University of North Carolina Wilmington.

Spotlighting a law that stripped U.S.-born women of citizenship – latimes.com.

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with

Can we really wash our hands of extremist dual nationals?

2014/04/19 Leave a comment

Konrad Yakabuski on C-24’s proposed revocation measures for terrorism-related crimes, calling for serious debate on the implications, given recent US and UK revelations regarding US drone strikes on former UK citizens whose citizenship was revoked. See also Chris Selley’s Actually, my citizenship is a right | National Post.

Will be interesting to see if the debate within Committee focuses on the long-standing principle since Diefenbaker that a citizen is a citizen, whether born in Canada or naturalized, or more on due process and rule of law in any referrals to the Federal Court seeking revocation.

Still, C-24 is not perfect. Its proposal to strip dual nationals convicted of terror-related crimes of their Canadian citizenship warrants serious scrutiny in light of recent revelations by the British news media. If the intent is to ease CIA drone strikes, or the extradition to the United States of terrorist suspects living abroad, MPs should think long and hard about what that means for Canada.

Mr. Alexander has said he is “confident” that many of the 130 Canadians believed to be fighting with extremist groups abroad are dual nationals. Revoking their citizenship while they’re outside the country could prevent them from ever returning to Canada. This country would effectively absolve itself of their fate, even though some of them may have been born here…

Mr. Alexander has insisted that “the courts will play a very important role” in the process of revoking the Canadian citizenship of a dual national convicted of terrorism. That’s an improvement over the British system, where most of the power lies with the Home Secretary. But is it enough? The Commons citizenship committee needs to ask Mr. Alexander some tough questions.

Can we really wash our hands of extremist dual nationals? – The Globe and Mail

Or, given the “shopping for votes” culture, opposition parties focus more on fee increases and increased residency requirements.

Filed under C-24, Citizenship, Citizenship Act, Revocation Tagged with

Joseph Heath: The new nationalism

2014/04/19 Leave a comment

More excerpts from Joseph Heath’s book, Enlightenment 2.0, on one of the ironies of Trudeau’s policies promoting Canadian symbols. For the Conservative take on successive Liberal governments, see Chris Champion’s Tory History and Its Critics | The Dorchester Review.

So that is how, in a case of not inconsiderable historical irony, Trudeau — the avatar of pure reason — became the father of modern Canadian nationalism, in all of its most boisterous and vulgar manifestations. One wonders how he would have felt had he seen the closing ceremonies of the 2010 Vancouver Olympic Games, with its giant inflatable beavers, table-hockey players, moose hats, dancing lumberjacks and voyageurs, and Michael Bublé dressed as a Mountie singing “The Maple Leaf Forever.” The phrase “What have I done?” might have sprung to mind. And yet, almost 40 years after Trudeau made the initial moves, one could see the power of the strategy. Quebec artists essentially boycotted the Olympic ceremonies, refusing to participate in what they rightly anticipated would be an orgy of Canadian nationalism. And yet when the curtain closed, they proceeded to complain about the lack of “French content” in the program. A principled commitment to national sovereignty is all well and good, but no one likes to feel left out of a party. As far as political dilemmas go, the shoe had been moved to the other foot.

Joseph Heath: The new nationalism | National Post.

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with ,

Meet a Few “Citizens of Convenience”

2014/04/15 Leave a comment

Along with some illustrative scenarios, some of the questions I suggest in considering whether one is or is not a citizen of convenience in my recent piece in New Canadian Media:

Is it only time away from Canada following becoming Canadian that counts? Or should the reasons for being away from Canada also be a consideration? Examples include:

  • Someone working abroad for a Canadian or a non-Canadian firm

  • Someone working for an international organization like the UN, WTO or non-governmental organization

  • Someone moving abroad to accompany a spouse

  • Someone moving abroad for study

  • Other contributions to Canada

Meet a Few “Citizens of Convenience” – New Canadian Media – NCM.

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with ,

Britain Increasingly Invokes Power to Disown Its Citizens

2014/04/12 Leave a comment

More on the issue of citizenship revocation in the UK and that the House of Lords rejected the proposed amendment that would have allowed revocation in cases where the person would be left stateless. Whether or not one agrees with revocation in terrorism or related cases, the lack of due process and full ministerial discretion (no role for the courts) is of concern. The proposed Canadian version is through the Federal Court; the Minister only has discretion in cases of fraud:

The issue is beginning to stir public debate. A government-sponsored amendment expanding the practice to naturalized citizens who have no other nationality sailed through the House of Commons this year. But on Monday, in a rare act of parliamentary rebellion, the House of Lords rejected the amendment and asked instead for a joint committee of both houses to examine whether the additional powers are necessary. The draft legislation will now return to the House of Commons.

Britain typically strips people of citizenship when they are outside the country. The procedure requires only that the home secretary find that stripping someone of citizenship would be “conducive to the public good,” then sign a deprivation order and send a letter to the person’s last known address. Loss of citizenship is effective immediately. It can be challenged in court, but that is a difficult task in most cases, given the inability of a targeted person to return to Britain for any proceedings.

Britain Increasingly Invokes Power to Disown Its Citizens – NYTimes.com.

Filed under Citizenship, Revocation Tagged with

Born Canadian? Citizenship of babies born using new fertility methods sometimes unclear

2014/04/12 Leave a comment

One of the complexities in citizenship policy related to new fertility techniques and the question of a genetic link. Not addressed in the proposed Citizenship Act revisions. While the number of cases is relatively small, they are hard on the families involved but also raise issues as to whether surrogacy should be encouraged in developing countries, where women may be more desperate and vulnerable:

Even the judge who wrote last week’s Federal appeal court’s majority decision said Parliament should consider developing new legislation to address some of the issues.

Under the current law, for instance, a foreign-born baby with non-Canadian parents would automatically become a citizen merely if the sperm or eggs used in assisted reproduction happened to originate from a Canadian donor, suggested Justice Marc Noel.

The current policy requiring a genetic link also creates “an unequal treatment between children of Canadian citizens depending on the manner in which they were conceived,” he wrote.

On the other hand, any child born on Canadian soil is automatically a citizen, even if the parents are not citizens, they used IVF and the sperm and eggs came from donors outside this country, said Michelle Flowerday, a Toronto-based fertility lawyer.

Born Canadian? Citizenship of babies born using new fertility methods sometimes unclear.

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with

Oath to the Queen ‘repugnant’ to some, appeal court told

2014/04/10 Leave a comment

Yet another court case on the citizenship oath. I do not expect the plaintiffs to win given that the Crown is more in the institutional sense rather than literal sense (see Philippe Legacé’s The Citizenship Oath and the Nature of the Crown in Canada):

Oath to the Queen ‘repugnant’ to some, appeal court told – Toronto – CBC News.

While a case can be made for changing the oath, as Australia did, better this be done through the political process rather than by the courts.

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →