Strengthening and Modernizing the Citizenship Act – Some Thoughts

2014/02/07 2 Comments

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:

Element  
Integrity Increased fees for full cost recovery ($100 to $300 – 200%, but comparable to other countries)Physical presence requirement clarified (2010 bill)Period extended (current 3 of 4 years to 4 of 6 years, 183 days in each of 4 years)PR waiting period no longer gives credit towards citizenship period (currently each day counts as half day)

Require applicants to state their intention to reside in Canada (citizenship of convenience)

Required income tax filing (if required under the Income Tax Act)

Knowledge and language tests expanded from 18-54 to 14 to 64 (reversing 2005 change for older applicants)

Stronger penalties for citizenship fraud ($100k) and regulation of citizenship consultants (2010 bill)

Revocation from dual nationals convicted of terrorism, high treason and spying offences. 

Barring Permanent Residents from applying for citizenship for foreign criminality and national security, 

Judicial review available beyond Federal Court, subject to leave and certification filters (from “will” to “has, is or may engage”

Strengthening safeguards for adoptees (Hague Convention on Inter-Country Adoption or other legal safeguards

Authority to declare applications abandoned should applicant not submit information or attend interview
Fairness “Lost Canadians” remaining issues addressed for those born before 1947 as well as their children (1st gen)Crown servant exemption (waiver for first generation limit for children born of Crown servants) (2010 bill)
Competitiveness Overall, changes remain largely in line with comparator countries (some are less stringent (e.g., national interest revocation only applies to dual nationals unlike UK) and some more (e.g.,  fast-track for Canadian Forces – US has similar provision)
Citizenship Focus Business process: Reduction in decision process from 3 steps to 1 to reduce processing time to 1 year by 2015-16Citizenship judge role limited to ceremonial role (CIC officers to make decisions directly)Stronger authority for CIC to define “complete application” and what evidence is provided (not defined in background info)Streamlined process for discretionary grants (Minister rather than GIC, one step rather than two)

Allow for electronic means to verify citizenship in the future

Streamlined revocation from 3 steps to 2 (2010 bill). Fraud to be decided by CIC Minister (barred to reapply for 10 years compared to 5 currently), more complex (e.g., war crimes, security, organized criminality) to be decided by Federal Court

Fast track for members of Cdn armed forces

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

Filed under Citizenship, Citizenship Act Tagged with

Citizenship & International Migration Reading List

2014/02/07 Leave a comment

Others may have other lists, and I confess to not having read most of the books on this list, but Victoria Ferauge has a good annotated reading list for those interested in these issues.

Citizenship & International Migration Reading List.

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with ,

Finding the Right Balance in Canada’s Citizenship Policy – My Article in Inside Policy

2014/02/06 Leave a comment

On the day of tabling of the revisions to The Citizenship Act, my article on finding the right balance is out in Inside Policy. I focus on four elements of  balance:

  • Maintain citizenship program integrity and rigorousness;
  • Ensure fairness and comparable opportunity to obtain citizenship among different communities and education levels;
  • Maintain competitiveness of Canadian citizenship policies compared to other immigration-based countries; and,
  • Ensure a citizenship focus in immigration, settlement and multiculturalism programs (i.e., permanent not temporary residents).

Inside Policy – February 2014 (page 42)

Filed under Citizenship, Citizenship Act Tagged with ,

Citizenship Processing – Improvement

2014/02/05 Leave a comment

In anticipation of the tabling of the revisions to The Citizenship Act tomorrow, some significant improvements in number of applications processed this January:

Investments announced in Economic Action Plan 2013 have helped make the system more efficient and strengthened the integrity of Canada’s citizenship program. The immense popularity of Canadian citizenship, though, has hampered efforts to tackle long processing times.

The government will take additional steps in the coming days to reduce backlogs while further strengthening the value of Canadian citizenship. As announced in the October 2013 Speech from the Throne, these measures – taken together – will form the first comprehensive reforms to the Citizenship Act in more than a generation.

While welcome, understates just how bad both 2012 and 2013 were: 113,111 and 128,94 compared to the previous years which varied between 143,595 and 199,866. However, the trend line is improving, thanks to the temporary funding increase that should largely eliminate the backlog and improve processing times by 2015.

The longer term issue is to ensure a business process and ongoing funding that prevents future backlogs from emerging. CIC has traditionally underfunded citizenship (under current business processes), waiting until the backlog increases to unacceptable levels, and then finding temporary funding to address the backlog.

And citizenship applications, as they come from permanent residents, generally do not fluctuate that much year-to-year, and thus are easier to predict, and manage, than previous immigration regimes, where demand was always greater than CIC’s ability to manage (recent changes to Canadian immigration policy have a large “demand management” aspect).

News Release — Welcoming new Canadians.

Filed under Citizenship, Citizenship Act Tagged with , ,

Canadian citizenship bill to be tabled Thursday – Politics – CBC News

2014/02/04 Leave a comment

It’s official, with the high level message from Minister Alexander, continuing to emphasize meaningfulness and integrity:

“Canadians today take great pride in citizenship, they attach more value than ever. We’re going to spell out some of the rules that will ensure that it has that value,” Alexander said.

Canadian citizenship bill to be tabled Thursday – Politics – CBC News.

Filed under Citizenship, Citizenship Act Tagged with

UK: Don’t trust the government’s citizenship-stripping policy

2014/02/04 1 Comment

Commentary on the UK citizenship revocation policy with respect to persons suspected of terrorist offences or other serious international crimes. While not sympathetic to most of his arguments, I share his concern over due process and the risks of giving Ministers too much discretionary power. As Canada prepares for similar legislation, we will see how the Canadian government balances the ability to revoke citizenship (the current process is unworkable) with  necessary process safeguards.

A different concern is that denaturalisation laws like the ones active in the UK are simply arbitrary, and for that reason unjust. Our legislation does not require that an individual be convicted of a crime in a court of law; indeed, one of the attractions of the current legislation for British governments is that it allows the home secretary to get rid of individuals without going through the difficult process of providing the evidence necessary for criminal conviction. To be sure, there is a statutory right of appeal, but given that most Britons are stripped of their citizenship when outside the UK, the chances for an effective appeal are minimal. Current laws define the grounds for deprivation so broadly that a successful appeal on the merits of a decision is highly unlikely.

If these moral concerns about stripping of citizenship fail to convince, there is one final and compelling reason why we should look askance at this power. Even if depriving dangerous individuals of their citizenship can be right in principle, can we really trust governments to use such a power prudently in practice? I think not.

Don’t trust the government’s citizenship-stripping policy.

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , ,

Law that strips certain Canadian expats of voting rights to be debated in court

2014/02/04 Leave a comment

One point the plaintiffs are silent on is that they do not pay taxes. Would they prefer the US system, with expatriates required to file tax returns (and get tied up with the IRS under the US FATCA revenue “grab” from expatriates)?

Yes, one can follow Canadian politics and life from afar, one can maintain family and friends, but I fail to see how voting is an absolute right applying to long-term expatriates. But we will see how the courts decide.  The below seems to be wanting to have your cake and eating it too:

“With globalization what we have is this increased movement. And a lot of the reason that Canadians move outside the country is for employment,” she said. “It’s not appropriate to say that in order to exercise your full fundamental democratic rights you have to curtail your employment.”

The case had led to a number of expatriate Canadians coming forward with concerns similar to Frank and Duong’s, said O’Brien.

“If people feel that strongly about Canada and wanting to vote…why would we not want to have their participation in the country,” she said. “Why would we want to limit such a fundamental democratic right that people hold so deeply.”

Law that strips certain Canadian expats of voting rights to be debated in court.

Filed under Citizenship, Public Policy Tagged with ,

UK Immigration Bill: UK terror suspects could be stripped of their citizenship

2014/01/31 1 Comment

Interesting that the UK revokes citizenship even when this would leave someone stateless, contrary to the UN Conventions on statelessness. Will be interesting to see if Canada (and Australia) follow suit with respect to statelessness, as well as giving the Minister discretion with limited due process.

Immigration bill: UK terror suspects could be stripped of their citizenship – UK Politics – UK – The Independent.

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with ,

Andrew Cohen: Citizenship should mean more

2014/01/29 Leave a comment

Provocative commentary by Andrew Cohen on making citizenship more meaningful. Opposite perspective to the article by Elke Winter Becoming Canadian » Institute for Research on Public Policy.

Part of the challenge of citizenship policy is balancing the need for meaningfulness (and integrity) with the realities of today’s globalized world and individuals. If our immigration policy tries to attract more skilled and entrepreneurial immigrants, these are also likely to be more mobile and may have a more instrumental approach to citizenship.

While there are further opportunities to strengthen citizenship, many of Cohen’s suggestions are either not real world solutions or reasonable. For example:

  • Five year continuous residency:  are we really going to deny someone citizenship if they visit their parents once a year?;
  • Taxation of dual nationals, and the determination of who should be taxed, is not easy. Some of the problems the Americans have in implementing the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act – FATCA (see The American Diaspora Meets a Polarized America) illustrate this;
  • Making the test tougher and language requirements harder will continue to disadvantage many non-English and non-French native speakers, as well as those with lower levels of education (e.g., family members). Under Minister Kenney, much of the looseness in the process was appropriately tightened and the rationale for further tightening has not be demonstrated.

I am sympathetic to his view on raising the citizenship test exemption back to 65 and over (the Liberal government changed the exemption to 55 and over), although politically this is likely untenable.

If we are serious about giving substance to our citizenship, let the government reinstate the residency requirement of five years, making it mandatory to remain in Canada the entire time. Let it find a way to tax dual citizens who have never lived in Canada.

Let it establish a tougher test on knowledge and language, and apply it everyone under 65, not 55 (as is the case now). And let it address the injustice of the “lost Canadians” who have been denied citizenship through loopholes in the law.

At the same time, we should re-examine our commitment to country, too. For many Canadians citizenship is no more than paying taxes and obeying the law. It isn’t even about voting.

To give new meaning to citizenship, we should consider universal national service (community or military) for young Canadians; national standards in education for the teaching of Canadian history; a new commitment to encourage lifelong volunteerism and civic activity; and mandatory voting in federal elections.

As Canada goes to the Olympics, expect the usual orgy of chest-thumping and fist-pumping with every gold medal. But don’t mistake cheering athletes, wearing red mittens and sipping double-doubles for patriotism. It isn’t.

Real patriotism, and real citizenship, is knowing who you are, how you got here, what you have, and what you would do to keep it all.

If we ask that understanding of others, shouldn’t we ask it of ourselves, too?

Column: Citizenship should mean more.

Filed under Citizenship, Dual Citizenship Tagged with , , ,

Experts raise concerns about citizenship rules | canada.com

2014/01/29 2 Comments

While it is correct that the previous definition of residency was not formally clear (ranging from being physically present to mere legal residency), the common sense definition was physical presence, not merely having a mailing address. The policy objective of ensuring a meaningful connection to Canada by being here is part of the integrity of the citizenship program. But as noted by Winter, Robbins and Kurland, this runs against the immigration policy objective of attracting more highly skilled and entrepreneurial immigrants.

We will see what is in the revisions to the Act.

Experts raise concerns about citizenship rules | canada.com.

Another variant of residency is  medicare coverage, in this BC case where coverage was denied given absence from Canada. Hard to argue with the decision, as this seems a classic case of citizens of convenience, as exemplified by the following entitlement attitude:

They [the couple in question] also suggested “the citizenship ceremony granted them the right to live anywhere,” and that it was “illegal to force them to reside in Canada when they cannot afford to do so,” said the appeal court ruling, written by Justice David Frankel.

Immigrant couple loses appeal to regain medicare revoked for spending too much time outside Canada

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with

← Older posts

Newer posts →