ChatGPT: Remarkably good on immigration and citizenship

2022/12/12 1 Comment

With all the coverage on ChatGPT and its ability to answer normal language questions, I tried out some questions.

Remarkable comprehensive and balanced responses, suggesting that the programmers and others behind it have minimized biases and distortions in the software.

While currently cannot search the internet (may be a blessing!), I am thinking it may supplant Wikipedia for many requests:

—–

What is multiculturalism?

Multiculturalism is the idea that different cultures and ethnic groups can coexist within a single society. It is based on the belief that diversity is a positive aspect of society and that different cultures can enrich one another. In a multicultural society, different cultural groups are allowed to maintain their own customs and traditions, and there is a general tolerance and acceptance of cultural differences. Multiculturalism is often seen as a way to promote harmony and understanding between different groups within a society.

What are the problems with multiculturalism?

There are several potential problems with multiculturalism. One is that it can lead to the segregation of different cultural groups within a society, with each group living in its own separate community. This can make it difficult for people from different backgrounds to interact and understand one another, and it can create social tensions.

Another problem is that some people argue that multiculturalism can undermine national unity and a sense of shared identity. Critics argue that when different cultural groups are allowed to maintain their own customs and traditions, it can create a fragmented society where people are more loyal to their own cultural group than to the nation as a whole.

Additionally, some people argue that the emphasis on cultural diversity can lead to a lack of recognition of the values and traditions that are common to all members of a society. This can make it difficult to build a sense of shared identity and unity among people from different cultural backgrounds.

Which countries have been most successful in implementing multiculturalism? Which countries have been the least successful?

I’m sorry, but I do not have the information needed to answer that question. As a large language model trained by OpenAI, my knowledge is limited to the text that I have been trained on, which includes a wide range of general knowledge but does not include specific, up-to-date information on current events or recent changes in the policies of different countries. Additionally, I am not able to browse the internet, so I do not have access to the most recent data and statistics on the success of different countries’ multiculturalism policies.

What are the benefits of immigration?

There are many potential benefits of immigration. One is that it can help to fill labor shortages and support economic growth. Immigrants often have different skills and experiences than the native population, and they can bring new ideas and perspectives to a country. This can help to drive innovation and support the growth of new industries.

Immigration can also help to promote cultural diversity and understanding. When people from different backgrounds and cultures come together in a new country, they can learn from one another and gain a deeper understanding of different perspectives and ways of life. This can help to create a more vibrant and dynamic society.

Additionally, immigration can help to address demographic challenges, such as an aging population. In countries with low birth rates and an aging population, immigration can help to maintain a healthy balance between the number of workers and the number of people who are retired or unable to work. This can help to ensure that there are enough workers to support social programs and maintain a strong economy.

What are the disadvantages of immigration?

There are also potential disadvantages of immigration. One is that it can put pressure on a country’s public services and infrastructure, such as schools, hospitals, and public transportation. When a large number of people move to a new country, it can be challenging for the government to provide the necessary resources to support them. This can lead to overcrowding and reduced access to public services for everyone.

Another potential disadvantage is that immigration can lead to job competition and wage stagnation for the native population. When there is a large influx of immigrants into a labor market, it can create competition for jobs, which can lead to lower wages for some workers. This can be particularly challenging for workers with lower levels of education and skills, who may have difficulty competing with immigrants for jobs.

Additionally, immigration can create social tensions and conflict, particularly if there is a perception that immigrants are taking jobs away from the native population or are not assimilating into the country’s culture. This can lead to resentment and hostility between different cultural groups within a society, which can be difficult to address.

What are the advantages of immigrants becoming citizens?

There are several advantages to immigrants becoming citizens. One is that it gives them the right to vote and participate in the political process, which allows them to have a say in the decisions that affect their lives and their communities. Citizenship also gives immigrants the right to hold public office, which can help to ensure that their voices and perspectives are represented in government.

Another advantage of citizenship is that it provides immigrants with greater security and stability. As citizens, they are less likely to be deported or separated from their families, and they have the right to live and work in the country without the threat of losing their legal status. This can give them the freedom to pursue their goals and build their lives without the constant fear of being forced to leave.

Additionally, citizenship can give immigrants access to certain benefits and protections that are not available to non-citizens. For example, in many countries, citizens have the right to access public education and healthcare, and they may be eligible for certain government programs and services. Citizenship can also make it easier for immigrants to travel internationally and to sponsor their family members to join them in the country. Overall, becoming a citizen can provide immigrants with greater opportunities and a sense of belonging in their new country.

Write an article on becoming a Canadian citizen

Becoming a Canadian citizen is a rewarding and exciting experience, but it can also be a complex and challenging process. In this article, we will provide an overview of the steps involved in becoming a Canadian citizen, as well as some tips and advice to help you navigate the process successfully.

The first step in becoming a Canadian citizen is to determine if you are eligible. To be eligible, you must be a permanent resident of Canada, have lived in Canada for at least three out of the last five years, and have a good knowledge of English or French. You must also have good moral character and be willing to swear allegiance to the Queen and to the values of Canada.

If you meet these requirements, the next step is to gather the necessary documentation. This includes proof of your permanent resident status, evidence of your time spent in Canada, and proof of your language skills. You will also need to fill out an application form and pay the required fees.

Once you have submitted your application, it will be reviewed by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC). If your application is approved, you will be invited to attend a citizenship ceremony, where you will take the Oath of Citizenship and become a Canadian citizen.

Becoming a Canadian citizen can bring many benefits, such as the right to vote, the ability to hold public office, and access to certain government programs and services. It can also provide you with a sense of belonging and connection to your new country.

If you are interested in becoming a Canadian citizen, it is important to carefully research the process and to ensure that you have all the necessary information and documentation. You can find more information on the IRCC website, or you can contact the IRCC for assistance. With the right preparation and guidance, you can successfully navigate the process and become a proud Canadian citizen.

What is birth tourism?

Birth tourism is the practice of traveling to another country for the purpose of giving birth in order to obtain citizenship for the child. This is typically done in countries that have generous citizenship laws, such as the United States, Canada, and some countries in Europe, where children born on their soil are automatically granted citizenship.

Birth tourism is a controversial practice, as it can allow people to bypass the usual immigration processes and obtain citizenship for their child without having to meet the normal requirements. Critics argue that it undermines the integrity of a country’s citizenship laws and can create a backdoor route to citizenship for people who may not otherwise be eligible. Some countries have introduced measures to crack down on birth tourism, such as requiring parents to provide proof of their ties to the country or imposing additional fees on foreign-born children.

What is employment equity?

Employment equity is a policy or set of policies aimed at promoting equal opportunities and reducing discrimination in the workplace. The goal of employment equity is to ensure that all individuals, regardless of their race, gender, age, or other personal characteristics, have an equal chance to access employment opportunities and to advance in their careers.

In many countries, employment equity programs are designed to address systemic discrimination and to ensure that historically disadvantaged groups, such as women and minorities, have the same opportunities as other groups in the labor market. This can include measures such as setting targets for hiring and promoting members of these groups, providing training and support to help them succeed in the workplace, and addressing workplace policies and practices that may be biased against them.

Overall, the goal of employment equity is to create a more inclusive and diverse workplace, where all individuals have the opportunity to reach their full potential and contribute to the success of the organization.

Filed under Citizenship, Immigration Tagged with

Mesut Özil’s case stirs debate on German nationality laws | Daily Sabah

2022/12/10 Leave a comment

Of interest (while or course Turkey erases identities of its Kurdish, Assyrian, Armenian and Greek minorities):

In the mid-1900s, West Germany experienced the “Wirtschaftswunder” – which means “economic miracle” in German – but after the Berlin Wall was constructed in 1961, West Germany’s labor crisis was exacerbated due to the fact that the flow of immigrants from East Germany was restricted. As a result of the shortage of workers, the West German government felt the need to sign a labor recruitment agreement with Türkiye on Oct. 30,1961, paving the way for Turkish people’s immigration to the country.

Since then, German legislators have time and time again failed to fully embrace the nation’s multiculturalism, and Germans of Turkish descent were not provided with a feasible path to citizenship. In addition, religious bigotry was also practiced against ethnic Turks who are overwhelmingly Muslims.

One of the most prominent signs for the fact that xenophobia peaked in the country was former Chancellor Helmut Kohl of the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) infamously telling former British Prime Minister, the “iron lady” Margaret Thatcher that he didn’t have a problem with European immigrants but that “Turks belong to a very distinct culture.” He also had the audacity to supply monetary inducements for them to return to Türkiye.

Only in the 1990s did Germany pave a path to citizenship for non-ethnic Germans who lived in the nation for over 15 years. And only at the dawn of the 21stt century, did the then-German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder and the lobbying by the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) and the Greens to lower this lengthy residency criteria to eight years for all and introduce a “jus soli” basis – or birthright citizenship – to be also valid alongside its current “jus sanguinis,” which is the ethnicity-based citizenship framework. This is glaringly different from the United States’ practice of automatically granting people born on American territory ID cards and passports. To qualify for citizenship, a child must have one parent who has lived legally in Germany for a minimum of eight years. “Until the end of the 1990s, you were a German or a foreigner. There was nothing in between,” Ferda Ataman, who is currently Germany’s anti-discrimination commissioner, previously said about the issue.

Still, Germany’s immigration policy evolved from refusal to reluctance. The SPD had to make compromises to get the new citizenship law past conservatives in the CDU and Free Democratic Party (FDP) which argued that permitting naturalized or Germans that got their citizenship through the “jus soli” basis to maintain their previous citizenship was an “act of provocation” that would “sow the seeds of division.”

Such opposition was laced with racism and right-wing German politicians complained such relaxation would lead to the “formation of ghettos.” The CDU opposed dual nationality and forced the SPD and Greens into incorporating a clause that kids who became German citizens under the jus soli framework and had a second nationality would have to choose one citizenship upon assuming legal adulthood. Ironically, this policy did not apply to the ethnic Germans who are dual citizens of both Germany and another country.

Nevertheless, a wholesale ban on dual citizenship, which, in theory, applied to all non-ethnic Germans, was particularly aimed at Turkish Germans and other Muslim minority immigrants. An exception was also granted to dual nationals of other European Union states and Switzerland – which sits right at the heart of the EU’s geography but rejects to join the bloc over its principle to stay neutral in global politics.

Mesut Özil case

I have researched and focused on such legal details to highlight their inherent inconsistencies and how they became part of Turkish-German football star Mesut Özil’s narrative. The footballer was born to a third-generation Turkish-German family in 1988 and only assumed German citizenship when he turned 17. He had to renege on his Turkish passport soon after. Though Özil was passionate to play for Germany back then, the compulsory decision seems to have left a deep emotional wound in his psyche.

Such realities also undermine Germany’s rhetoric on integration. Formerly a paragon of productive integration, Özil swiftly learned that this status would only be safeguarded by renouncing his Turkish roots. In his 2018 resignation, Özil blamed the former German Football Association (DFB) President Reinhard Grindel, a former CDU member of parliament, for having “voted against legislation for dual nationalities” during his tenure.

The government already scrapped the dual citizenship provision for most naturalized and “jus soli” Germans who grew up in Germany in 2014 due to the lobbying by the SPD, and Germany is painstakingly adjusting to its multicultural composition, albeit hesitantly. This evolution was accelerated by the arrival of refugees in 2015 under the then-Chancellor Angela Merkel and by Özil’s resignation.

Özil’s withdrawal from the German national team was such a jolt to the country’s cohesion that it forced many ethnic Germans to deal with the bitter reality that their country was not as accommodating as they had perceived. Germany officially announced plans to speed up its naturalization process. Palestinian German politician Sawsan Chebli labeled the reality an “indictment of our country” and wondered if “we will ever belong? My doubts are growing daily.”

Ordinary Germans of color kicked off a huge social media campaign to share their lived experiences of racism under the hashtag “#MeTwo” – which essentially altered Germany’s debate with regard to racial issues, ethnicity and identity. And even Grindel apologized for his actions, vowing substantive reform within the DFB, lamenting that he “needed to stand by Mesut Özil.”

In 2022, Chancellor Olaf Scholz of the SPD favored Reem Alabali-Radovan to be Germany’s first-ever federal anti-racism officer. And this past week, Scholz’s government confirmed that the Federal Ministry of the Interior and Community headed by Nancy Faeser was promulgating new nationality reform. Faeser plans to lower the citizenship application residency requirement from eight to five years, a reduction that would also extend to jus soli provisions. She also plans to scrap all restrictions on dual citizenship.

Zero-sum game

If properly implemented, these are welcome first steps as they would offer representation and voting rights to over 9 million non-citizen residents who productively contribute to Germany’s economy and society. The conservatives’ obsession with dual citizenship was always illogical. “Belonging and identity are not a zero-sum game,” Scholz told the German parliament during a debate this week.

Expect opposition from the FDP and CDU, and outright rejection from Germany’s controversial far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, which has gained alarming political clout over the past decade. The AfD is often called “Neo-Nazi” because of apparent racism and xenophobia among its members, who embrace more controversial and populist stances against Scholz and Faeser’s more reasonable recommendations. CDU leader Friedrich Merz has warned of immigrants skirting integration and abusing the welfare state properties of Germany.

Scholz may not need the green light from the AfD and CDU to pass his recommendations, however, the FDP is a part of the current coalition and is likely to undermine the commendable reforms. It’s remarkable how out of touch these three parties’ comments are with Germany’s swiftly evolving cultural, social, sporting and economic journey over 20 years. Such inconsistencies are even more pronounced with Mesut Özil back in the news.

At FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022, the departure of Germany’s outstanding football legend Özil attests how his withdrawal represents a deep scar for a country that is deeply politically divided and still racially segregated, both on and off the football pitch. Scholz’s recommended new citizenship law will never undo the racist abuse faced by Mesut Özil, suffered by Ilkay Günoğan, experienced by Antonio Rüdiger, Son Hueng-Min and hundreds of other Germans of color and religious minorities, but it can mitigate Özil’s main complaint by reassessing more holistically what it means to “be German” in a post-modern, multiethnic multicultural society. It can also be a first step toward proving to a skeptical global public that Özil’s disastrous departure has become one of the leading causes for inclusive reform in a country where segregation and racism still exist. This is Germany’s moment of reckoning; with itself, its past and also its future.

Source: Mesut Özil’s case stirs debate on German nationality laws | Daily Sabah

Filed under Citizenship, Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

IYMI: Chinese residing in Australia reveal why they are giving up citizenship of their homeland — or why they don’t want to

2022/12/07 Leave a comment

Some signs of similar views among Chinese Canadians:

Xi Jinping securing his third term as general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party was the last straw for Victor Zeng.

Mr Zeng, 26, who grew up in a remote town in Xinjiang province before moving to Melbourne to marry his husband, became an Australian permanent resident about 18 months ago.

With Mr Xi cementing his position as China’s unchallenged leader at the CCP’s National Party Congress in October, he now feels war with Taiwan and a return to a state-run collective economy is imminent.

And he worries that if he goes back to China as a Chinese citizen he may be trapped there, or one day his Australian permanent residency may be unexpectedly revoked.

“I don’t know if this is my paranoia, but I feel uncertain,” he told the ABC.

“So I’m going to discuss it with my family as soon as possible and enter the process of joining Australian citizenship.”

China’s increasing authoritarianism under Mr Xi — typified by the strict COVID-zero policy — is prompting some Chinese residents in Australia to consider taking the next step to officially become Australians.

However, China does not allow dual nationality, so it means forfeiting their Chinese citizenship.

It’s a difficult decision, with practical and emotional considerations.

‘I felt that there is another way of life’

Mr Zeng said he started feeling “conditions were deteriorating” in China from around 2016, as Beijing intensified its crackdown on the Muslim Uyghur community.

In Xinjiang, where Uyghurs are about half the population, many areas were cut off from the surrounding streets by iron gates, and authorities were checking identity cards everywhere.

“After arriving in Australia, I felt that there is another way of life that is not coerced into the grand narratives, that I can say no to the propaganda and political missions,” he said.

Mr Zeng said his biggest concern was for his family members who were still living in Xinjiang.

“If I become an Australian citizen, I don’t know if there will be more restrictions on my [visitor] visa [to China] as Xinjiang is a sensitive region,” he said.

‘We have a stronger sense of urgency than before’

In the 2021-22 financial year, 5,392 people born in China became Australian citizens, according to figures from the Department of Home Affairs.

Fan Yang, a researcher at Deakin University’s Alfred Institute, said individual choices were often connected to structural change at the societal, cultural, political, national, and even international levels.

“Xi’s third term would give people the impression that China is less likely to change,” she said.

“For those who gained significant benefit from their social status in China, it is less likely that they would give up on their Chinese citizenship.

“However, for those who tend to be more politically active, they are more likely to acquire Australian citizenship for the rights of political participation.”

While some Chinese residents in Australia share Mr Zeng’s concerns, those worries may not be enough to push them to give up their Chinese citizenship.

Aaron, who asked not to use his real name, migrated to Australia with his family in 2011.

Mr Xi’s third term and the continuation of the national COVID-zero policy were two “realistic factors” that led him to “seriously consider the choice of citizenship”.

“We have a stronger sense of urgency than before,” he said.

“China’s political and democratic environments have changed dramatically. There is the possibility of going backwards … we have put our citizenship choices as a priority now.

“When the politics is stable and the economic reforms are more stable and China connects with the rest of the world well, we think our citizenship choices don’t matter that much.”

However, because he still operates businesses and has property in China, he is reluctant to follow Mr Zeng’s lead and give up his Chinese citizenship.

He said he was also worried he would lose access to a social security fund he had been putting money into for many years.

“If we join Australian citizenship, we worry that they won’t allow us to draw money from it,” he said.

‘Identity and a choice of loyalty’

Yu Tao, senior lecturer and coordinator of Chinese studies at the University of Western Australia, said for many Chinese migrants, the decision to take Australian citizenship was tied to their “identity and a choice of loyalty”.

Becoming an Australian citizen meant “cutting ties with China” symbolically, he said.

“If China continues to close its door or gets very isolated from the rest of the world [under the COVID-zero policy], then inevitably, lots of people will have to make a choice,” he said.

“If the bilateral relationship is better, some people [will] probably feel they don’t have to make a choice.”

He said in isolation Mr Xi’s third term was unlikely to be the “single and biggest reason” for their citizenship choices.

“Xi’s third term was in a way well expected [from] when he removed the term limits of the president of PRC,” he said.

Dr Tao said the long-term sociopolitical conditions under Mr Xi’s rule, such as the COVID-zero policy and Sino-Australian relations, were likely having a more profound impact.

He said practical, economic issues were also important factors.

“I suppose if, in the long run, COVID is going to touch upon some of these practical material parts of the consideration, that will also have a profound impact on how people negotiate their citizenship,” he said.

Family ties still bind for some

Riki Lee, who came to Australia as an international student and has had permanent residency status since 2014, said taking Australian citizenship was not even a consideration for him.

He said Chinese people, influenced by the Confucian culture, were deeply affected by thoughts of homesickness and nostalgia for loved ones.

“I am an only child and my parents and family are in China,” Mr Lee said.

“If unexpected things happen, such as a war or if the bilateral relationship gets worse, a Chinese passport and a PR (an Australian permanent residency) are the most convenient way to return to China.”

‘I feel like anything could happen if I’m in China’

Dr Yang said Beijing offered incentives for young people — particularly academics — to return to China and contribute to the country, such as research allowances and discounted accommodation.

However, she said she did not believe these sweeteners played into many people’s thinking.

“Those policies are like scratching an itch outside one’s boots due to the harsh academic environment and the lack of academic funding in China,” she said.

“Academics are not well paid in China and there are unwritten rules that disadvantage female academics or LGBTQIA+ academics.”

Jessica Ching, an educational psychology graduate and holder of a Hong Kong passport, grew up in mainland China.

Before the pandemic, Ms Ching spent time in China doing psychology workshops with parents and schools and had intended to live and work in China.

She is now hesitant to continue her plan.

“I think especially in the next three to five years, I don’t see myself going back to China to start a clinic or actually going into schools to speak because there’s an imminent threat that I can’t return back to Australia,” she said.

“I feel like anything could happen if I’m in China.”

Ms Ching has a utilitarian approach to her citizenship.

She said she was holding on to her Hong Kong passport, which enables visa-free travel to many more countries than a Chinese passport, for now but she was worried that in a couple of years’ time it might lose its benefits.

“I will try to keep my Hong Kong passport as long as I can, but if it gets to a point where we have to choose, I think I will choose to be an Australian citizen,” she said.

Source: Chinese residing in Australia reveal why they are giving up citizenship of their homeland — or why they don’t want to

Filed under Citizenship, Dual Citizenship Tagged with ,

Savory & Partners: Birthright citizenship and the exciting world of birth tourism

2022/12/05 Leave a comment

Have an update on Canadian numbers forthcoming but in the meantime, the marketing by one of the major citizenship-by-investment firms:

Jus Soli, or birthright citizenship, is a concept that has been applied for centuries throughout various countries. The premise of birthright citizenship is simple; those born within a country’s borders are granted direct citizenship.

However, in practice, birthright citizenship can get quite complicated, as each country continues to set its own laws and restrictions.

What is Jus Soli?

In April this year, Portugal passed a legislation regarding Jus Soli. According to this law, after one year of having a Portuguese residency, should you have a child born, they would be able to obtain Portuguese nationality immediately.

The idea of obtaining a preferable citizenship for one’s children remains a major attraction, and in a world where travel times are short and visas are plentiful, it has given birth to a new type of tourism altogether – birth tourism.

“Jus Soli, or birthright citizenship, is a concept that has been applied for centuries throughout various countries. The premise is simple; those born within a country’s borders are granted direct citizenship.”

Birth tourism refers to those who obtain a visit visa to give birth to their child in a country that has Jus Soli laws in place, allowing them to obtain a citizenship for their newborn.

Unlike immigrants giving birth to their children abroad in their new country of residence, birth tourism only requires a visit visa and a well-timed trip.

One of the countries with the highest birth tourism rate is unsurprisingly the USA, as the nation has unrestricted birthright citizenship laws in place, allowing anyone born on its land to obtain US citizenship directly.

While birth tourism is not easily tracked, the Center For Immigration Studies, a US based think tank, estimates that 33,000 people on visit visas give birth in the US each year. The center also states that most of these birth tourists hail from China, Taiwan, Korea, Nigeria, Turkey, Russia, Brazil, and neighboring Mexico.

The premise of birth tourism has quickly grown, but those considering it must be aware of the country’s birthright citizenship laws, as not all Jus Solis are born equal, and traveling to a country to give birth for the purposes of gaining citizenship without understanding birthright citizenship regulations can be a costly and futile affair.

Understanding Birthright Citizenship

First, there are unrestricted and restricted birthright citizenship laws. Unrestricted birthright citizenship means that anyone born on the soil of a nation will automatically obtain citizenship, no matter their circumstances. This is the case in the US, Canada, and even Brazil, which many estimate may be one of the most birth-touristic countries in the world thanks to its powerful passport and easy visa process.

Other countries have restricted birthright citizenship, which means that in addition to being born within the country’s jurisdiction. This is the case in the UK and Ireland, for example, where to gain citizenship in the former, one of the newborn’s parents must either be a citizen or a settled resident in the UK. Settled in this context refers to someone on a permanent residence permit, or an indefinite leave to remain in the UK.

As for Ireland, one of the parents must actually be a full-fledged citizen, hence negating the entire premise of birth tourism.

Most countries allow the children of their citizens born abroad to apply for citizenship; and with a few exceptions such as Saudi Arabia requiring the father to be a Saudi national for the child to obtain citizenship, it allows for people who venture into birth tourism to obtain dual citizenship for their newborn on the day they are born.

Understanding the laws of birthright citizenship is the first obstacle, the second is getting to the country at the right time. This usually requires a visa, unless a person has visa-free travel to a country, and in the case of the US, it is difficult for pregnant women to obtain B1 or B2 visas during their second and third trimesters.

The Dual Benefits of a Dual Citizenship

Nevertheless, birth tourism remains highly attractive, especially for those who have already obtained a second citizenship through investment. For example, a person that obtains a Maltese citizenship through investment gains the ability to travel visa free to the US and Canada, two countries with unrestricted birthright citizenship, and the latter even provides free healthcare.

By getting a Maltese citizenship, a person can structure it so that their child is born in the US or Canada, giving them a third citizenship in the process, in addition to the Maltese one and their original citizenship, essentially tearing down all mobility obstacles in their child’s path and providing them with the tools they need to fulfill their potential.

Another simplified route that allows people to get another citizenship for their children is through the Portuguese golden visa, which awards those who invest in Portugalwith a residency permit for themselves and their family members. If a person has a golden visa and has a child within Portugal then that child can become a citizenship after one year of their birth. As the golden visa has a fast track to citizenship after five years and minimal residence (just seven days a year), it is an excellent option for those looking to get a second citizenship for their children in a relatively short time frame while also laying the groundwork for getting the citizenship themselves a little farther in the future.

Birthright citizenship on its own remains a very interesting topic, however, when combined with citizenship by investment, it can yield outstanding results that are open to very few people around the world.

To know more about citizenship through birthright or investment, contact us today to talk with one of our second citizenship experts.

Source: Savory & Partners: Birthright citizenship and the exciting world of birth tourism

Filed under Birthright Citizenship, Citizenship, citizenship-by-investment Tagged with ,

‘This is not inclusion’: Canadian hockey parents frustrated as foreign-born kids asked to apply for transfer

2022/12/03 Leave a comment

Weird requirements at that level:

Mark Donkers of Sarnia, Ont., is your typical hockey-loving Canadian kid. The 11-year-old is proud to play for the under-12 BB Sarnia Sting junior team.

But while he wears the same jersey as his teammates — the one with the angry bee logo —  Mark was told last month he couldn’t keep playing on the team until he provided more documentation, because he wasn’t born in Canada.

Mark has been playing hockey for years and the request came a week before a tournament in Kitchener.

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with ,

Barbaud: Abolissons l’écriture « inclusive »

2022/11/30 Leave a comment

Overwrought worries on inclusive language, even if excesses occur. Language usage evolves, and French is no exception. Remember in my high school days when debate was over he/she rather than just he:

La récente publication sur le Web des Lignes directrices de l’écriture inclusive par le Bureau de la traduction du gouvernement fédéral donne à lire un document comportant plusieurs dizaines de pages d’instructions et se revendiquant de six grands principes « qui devraient guider l’application des différents procédés d’écriture inclusive ». Ne nous y trompons pas : le ton est directif, à preuve l’emploi répété de l’infinitif injonctif, par exemple, « Respecter les préférences des personnes concernées ». L’objectif inavoué est le reformatage en profondeur de la culture et de la conscience collectives de la population francophone du Canada, entre autres, pour qu’elle se plie aux exigences des minorités qui désormais nous gouvernent. Une acculturation à l’envers de la majorité, en quelque sorte.

Or surtout, n’allez pas croire que l’écriture inclusive se veut une réforme de l’orthographe. Celle-ci est souhaitable, sans être vraiment nécessaire, mais celle-là est une véritable manipulation des esprits. Autant la féminisation des noms de métier et des titres, par exemple, s’avère conforme à nos valeurs d’égalité et de démocratie, autant l’intrusion de la diversité dans le code écrit relève d’une démarche totalitaire qui vous enjoint de communiquer pour qu’une « personne se sente respectée ». Mais de quoi je me mêle ? J’ai le droit de respecter qui je veux et je ne suis pas responsable de la sensibilité des autres. J’en suis le seul juge et je l’assume.
 
À cette offensive idéologique du multiculturalisme canadien se joint le volumineux document contenant les directives, plus nuancées, faut-il admettre, de l’Office québécois de la langue française. Celui-ci s’articule en quatre volets : rédaction épicène, formulation neutre, rédaction non binaire et écriture inclusive. Le moindre qu’on puisse dire, c’est que ces organismes officiels mettent le paquet pour parvenir à leurs fins. Au lieu de simplifier l’enseignement du français et de le rendre plus attrayant, ces documents gouvernementaux sont « toxiques » parce qu’ils ne feront qu’empoisonner la vie des enseignants et de nos élèves en rendant cette matière scolaire encore plus rébarbative qu’on le dit.

Au fond, ces deux entreprises ne font que perpétuer le même esprit de normativité que celui qui était dévolu à l’Académie française, fondée en 1634 et si décriée par certains (et certaines, cela va de soi) « réformistes » d’aujourd’hui. La différence de contexte est pourtant énorme. Au début du XVIIe siècle, la langue française du pouvoir royal visait à rallier la diversité dialectale de la France en la dotant d’une langue commune qui n’existait toujours pas malgré l’ordonnance de Villers-Cotterêts proclamée presque cent ans plus tôt par François Ier en 1539. De nos jours, la diversité constitutionnelle fait peser l’anathème de la discrimination sur l’individu qui écrit dans une langue française traditionnelle enfin devenue commune depuis deux cents ans. Il ne s’agit plus de politique linguistique, mais de religion.

En effet, l’écriture traditionnelle en langue française serait devenue discriminatoire en vertu de la croyance religieuse qui définit « la nouvelle culture de l’offense » faite au prochain, comme l’écrit si bien Salman Rushdie. Le masculin est une offense au féminin. Le genre est une offense à la non-binarité. Son accord par défaut est une offense à la diversité. L’épicène est la rédemption de toutes les dénominations. L’offense présumée est ainsi devenue le fonds de commerce de la bigoterie communautariste anglo-américaine qui déferle sur le monde entier, et non pas seulement occidental, grâce à l’argent des églises évangélique, baptiste, catholique, pentecôtiste, méthodiste, et sectes affiliées, dont le zèle apostolique fournit le terreau nécessaire à la diffusion de l’islamisme radical et mortifère soutenu par les pétrodollars des monarchies musulmanes.

Il s’agit ni plus ni moins que d’enfoncer à travers la gorge des ignorants les pratiques d’écriture de la bienséance diversitaire. Le stratagème est vieux comme le monde : se servir du pouvoir pour culpabiliser quiconque déroge aux normes que ce pouvoir édicte en matière de langue, de langage, de communication et de grammaire. Aussi l’écriture inclusive adopte-t-elle le procès d’intention pour fondement de sa mise en oeuvre. Une plaie « censurielle », comme au temps de l’affaire Calas rendue célèbre par Voltaire. […]

Ne pas écrire selon les nouvelles normes de la bienséance linguistique fera de vous un être qui adhère à « toute forme de discrimination fondée sur le sexe, le genre, l’orientation sexuelle, la race, l’origine ethnique, les handicaps », y compris « tout autre facteur identitaire ». La langue française définissant l’identité d’un francophone, écrire en langue française traditionnelle, c’est-à-dire non conforme à l’écriture inclusive, fait de vous par défaut un délinquant ou une délinquante « normatif.ve ».

Bref, ne pas écrire en écriture inclusive vous relègue dans le camp du racisme si vous dérogez au « Principe 4 : Faire des choix représentatifs de la diversité ». Voilà comment s’y prend l’idéologie diversitaire pour formater l’esprit du scripteur (ou de la scriptrice, cela va de soi) idéal.e (faut-il préciser ?). Écrire selon les règles traditionnelles laisse donc entendre que vous ne respectez pas votre destinataire, comme si vous ne connaissiez rien d’autre que Twitter, Facebook, Snapchat ou TikTok.

Source: Abolissons l’écriture « inclusive »

Filed under Language, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

German government defends plan to ease citizenship rules

2022/11/30 Leave a comment

Watching with interest on how the debate and discussion proceeds given significance of shift (disclosure our son in Germany would benefit from these changes):

Germany’s government on Monday defended a plan to make it easier for people to apply for citizenship, countering complaints from within the ruling coalition and the opposition that it might encourage illegal immigration.

The government has said it wants to boost immigration and training to tackle a skills shortage weighing on Europe’s largest economy at a time of weakening growth, and when an aging population is piling pressure on the public pension system.

A position paper obtained by Reuters – and earlier reported on by the German news site t-online – shows the government wants to do that in part by sigificantly reducing the income threshhold for migration and introducing a points system.

“Anyone who lives and works here on a permanent basis should also be able to vote and be elected, they should be part of our country with all the rights and duties that go with it,” Chancellor Olaf Scholz said at a televised immigration forum.

“And this should be completely independent of origin, skin colour or religious affiliation,” he added.

Interior Minister Nancy Faeser, from Scholz’s Social Democrats (SPD), has outlined plans to cut the maximum number of years a person must wait before becoming a citizen from eight to five, and lift restrictions on dual nationality.

German language requirements for citizenship would also be eased for members of the so-called “Gastarbeiter” generation, many of them Turkish, who came to Germany in the 1950s and 1960s as migrant workers.

Scholz further said that Germany, echoing a policy in other countries, would introduce a “transparent, unbureaucratic” immigration points system to allow foreigners who have the right qualifications to apply for work.

It would also be made easier to study or obtain qualifications in Germany, he said.

Scholz defended allowing immigrants to hold dual citizenship, arguing that “belonging and identity are not a zero-sum game.”

The draft legislation will be discussed by cabinet on Wednesday, Scholz said, after which it must be put to lawmakers in the Bundestag, the lower house of parliament.

The secretary-general of the FDP, the junior partner in coalition with the SPD and environmentalist Greens, has spoken out against the plan. In an interview with the Rheinische Post, Bijan Djir-Sarai questioned its timing while decrying a lack of progress on deportations and combating illegal migration.

Faeser played down differences in the coalition and said that all parties had signed up to the plan in their coalition agreement. The legal changes could take effect in the summer of 2023, she added.

Source: German government defends plan to ease citizenship rules

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with

Germany ‘needs better rules’ for citizenship: Scholz

2022/11/28 Leave a comment

Change is coming and we will see whether the changes prompt much debate:

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz on Saturday called for reforms to the country’s citizenship regulations, a day after the Interior Ministry said draft legislation on the citizenship process was “as good as ready.”

“Naturalization needs better rules,” Scholz said in a tweet Saturday. “It’s about respect and, of course, about our prosperity. Because all these women and men contribute to a strong economy. It is good if they also opt for German citizenship.”he said.

In his weekly video message, Scholz emphasized the integral role that immigrants have played in rebuilding and strengthening Germany, according to media reports. “Germany has become a country of hope for many,” the chancellor said. “The women and men and sometimes children who came to Germany have contributed greatly to making our economy as strong as it is today.”

Changing the citizenship rules is one of the reforms that the three-party coalition promised when it took office in December 2021.

German newspaper Bild on Friday reported that the Interior Ministry is preparing draft legislation that would enable foreigners residing in Germany to apply for naturalization after five years instead of eight. The ministry said proposals were still under discussion, according to the report.

Interior Minister Nancy Faeser said on Friday that reducing the waiting time to be eligible for citizenship is “an incentive for integration,” the Associated Press reported. “We are a diverse, modern country of immigration, and I think legislation must reflect that,” she said.

The Interior Ministry said on Friday that draft legislation is “as good as ready,” the AP reported.

Source: Germany ‘needs better rules’ for citizenship: Scholz

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with ,

Canadians need access to immigration and citizenship data. Through a new dashboard, the ICC and Andrew Griffith are making it more accessible to the public.

2022/11/19 Leave a comment

Just launched yesterday, a fun project to work on and one that hopefully will make some key IRCC data more accessible and understandable. My post on the Institute for Canadian Citizenship website below.

Check it out and let us know what you think:

In the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, Dan Hiebert (University of British Columbia) and Howard Ramos (Western University) were speculating about the possible impact of COVID-19 on immigration and citizenship in Canada. These discussions highlighted the unique value and importance of data and ultimately led to monthly tracking of IRCC data across the full range of programs: Permanent Residents, temporary workers, settlement services, international students, citizenship, and visitor visas.

The importance of data was made visible during the citizenship backlogs in the early 2000s and 2010s, which prompted the respective governments to increase funding to IRCC to reduce large backlogs.

We were curious how COVID-19 would change the complex set of push and pull factors that incentivize migration. Put simply, source countries have attributes that make life look more attractive abroad and host countries have features that attract newcomers. For instance, a weak economy or poorer quality of life at home compared to good jobs and good health abroad.

Monthly tracking of data would allow us to observe the downstream impact of COVID-19 on the number and origin of people moving through Canada’s various immigration and citizenship programs delivered through IRCC.

As it happened, the data revealed that COVID-19 did not significantly affect immigration source countries apart from China, where Chinese government restrictions and policies resulted in an ongoing decline compared to other countries.

Source: Immigration Dashboard

In the end, it was the Canadian government’s immigration policy response after the initial shutdowns and restrictions that had a much greater impact on immigration and citizenship than our relative handling of COVID-19.

The government’s response included both short-term measures to address particular pressure points such as seasonal agriculture workers, greater flexibility for international students for remote study, and perhaps most significantly, the vast expansion of temporary residents transitioning to permanent residency (TR2PRR).

Picking up on earlier plans stalled by the pandemic, the government took full advantage of the opportunity to implement substantial increases in immigration levels, with the most recent plan committing to welcome 500,000 new permanent residents in 2025.

Source: Immigration Dashboard

The citizenship program, briefly shut-down, moved to a mix of virtual and in-person citizenship ceremonies and has recovered to pre-pandemic levels.

Medium and longer-term measures included more online applications and tracking along with IT, AI, and associated investments to improve processing.

Each of these responses had an impact on the people moving through IRCC’s immigration and citizenship programs. But to what degree? The observable change can only be seen in IRCC’s monthly data tables, which remain complex and unapproachable to most.

The goal of this dashboard is to make basic immigration and citizenship data more readily available and accessible to the public. It focuses on permanent residents and new citizens in terms of overall numbers, immigration categories, the countries of citizenship and the year-over-year change. Application data is not included given the approximately six-month time lag. IRCC web data provides a sense of interest in immigrating to Canada and becoming a citizen.

The data series starts in 2018, two years prior to the start of COVID-19, and tracks the impact of COVID-19 and the related effects of the government policy and program responses to COVID-19.

Now, more than two years later, most of Canada’s immigration programs have recovered from the depths of COVID-19 health and travel restrictions.

A more in-depth analysis of COVID-19’s impact and Canadian immigration and citizenship’s recovery can be found in my article, “How the government used the pandemic to sharply increase immigration“.

The hope is that this dashboard will help to spark, substantiate, and contextualize more conversations about immigration and citizenship in Canada.

Filed under Citizenship, Immigration Tagged with ,

COVID Immigration Effects: September 2022 Update

2022/11/18 Leave a comment

The government has made progress on stabilizing backlogs, with small reductions in citizenship and temporary residence, stability in permanent residence inventories (November 3).

PRs: Increase compared to August. YTD 352,000,  2021 same period 267,000.

TRs/IMP: Increase compared to August. YTD 337,000, 2021 same period, 258,000.

TRs/TFWP: Slight increase compared to August. YTD 112,000, 2021 same period 95,000.

Students: Large seasonal decrease compared to August. YTD 431,000, 2021 same period 367,000.

Asylum claimants: Small increase compared to August. YTD 61,000, 2021 same period 12,000.

Settlement Services (July): Decrease compared to June. YTD 1,031,000, 2021 same period 918,000.

Citizenship: Decrease compared to August. YTD 279,000, 2021 same period 68,000.

Visitor Visas. Seasonal decrease compared to August. YTD 836,000, 2021 same period 111,000.

Filed under Citizenship, Immigration Tagged with

← Older posts

Newer posts →