Marchi: Citizenship ceremonies are too valuable to replace with a mouse click

Former Minister of Immigration (1994-96), Sergio Marchi, nails it. Minister Fraser, his staff, and the officials who recommended this change should reflect on his commentary, and how the changes would further diminish the value of Canadian citizenship.

Have been working with others on additional op-eds so stay tuned:

Processing Canadian Citizenship applications has become frustratingly long process. It is not unusual for it to take up to two years. With the excitement of becoming a citizen, this is a cruel punishment for applicants. They, and we, deserve better.

Last weekend, federal officials proposed doing away with the swearing an oath before a citizenship judge. The alternative? People can take an oath on their own, perhaps by the click of a computer mouse. They claim that this measure would save three months.

Talk about adding insult to injury!

Why debase the value of citizenship, for the sake of gaining a measly three months? I hope Canadians — and those actually waiting in the citizenship queue — will voice their displeasure. As a former minister of citizenship and immigration, I cannot believe that this, or any other government, would approve such a misguided idea. 

And here’s why:

  • First, the act of swearing allegiance to one’s country before a citizenship judge is a powerful, and moving ceremony. It helps to cement a formal commitment to country, and witnessing these ceremonies was one of my highlights as minister. Watching hundreds of people — young and old, women and men, Black, white, and brown — all raising their right hands and reciting the pledge was wonderful to behold. These moments would always be embraced by tears of joy, and immense pride. After migrating from Argentina, my parents and I stood before a judge, too. For years, my parents would recount how momentous and meaningful this date was. Why would government want to rob future citizens of this feeling of attachment?
  • Secondly, the ceremony is not just for the candidates. It is a special occasion to be shared with other Canadians. It helps to remind us all of our civic obligations and respect toward one another. As minister, I encouraged hosting these sentimental events in our communities — in churches, schools, recreational facilities, libraries and community centres. I wanted neighbours to see firsthand who these new citizens were. I wanted them to also celebrate this solemn ritual. The auditoriums were consistently full and local residents willingly helped with the organization and refreshments. In the process, it helped to break down barriers between old and new Canadians.
  • Thirdly, the functions regularly enjoyed the participation of numerous youngsters — underaged children who were automatically assuming Canadian citizenship on account of their parents; youth over 18 years who stood taking the oath; and many local students as observers. The latter would sing the national anthem, waive small flags, and applaud enthusiastically. At a time when we question if our kids are taught enough about our country and its traditions, these ceremonies served as a practical lesson in civics. After all, what can be more important than citizenship?
  • Finally, there are other ways of reducing backlogs without undermining the meaning of citizenship. The government could easily allocate more funds for the hiring of additional citizenship judges. Keeping the rendition of an oath in our courts and communities would be worth every additional cent.

Or, even better, enlist recipients of the Order of Canada to preside over these ceremonies. That is what I directed my officials to do when we faced long waiting times in the early ’90s. The recipients loved it and they happily volunteered. Moreover, what better role model for our new citizens, than fellow Canadians who were awarded our country’s most prestigious award? It served to underline civic duty and honour.

As well, we could summon an army of young Canadian students to help applicants prepare for their citizenship exams. The landed residents would find their confidence much quicker, and pupils could do this as part of their school curriculum. Talk about a win-win.

Taking an oath of citizenship, in the presence of other applicants and a community of Canadians, has been in vigour since 1947. It’s an elegant and unifying act that bolsters patriotism. It would be scandalous to replace this by a laptop relegated to the privacy of one’s home.

If anything, we should be further strengthening the institution and importance of Canadian citizenship.

Source: Citizenship ceremonies are too valuable to replace with a mouse click

Why thousands of people who thought they were British could lose …

One of the apparent collateral damage of BREXIT:

Confusion has arisen around the British government’s own understanding of its citizenship laws, following a judgment by the UK’s high court. In a ruling handed down on January 20 2023, in the case of Roehrig v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Mr Justice Eyre determined that the restrictive approach applied by the Home Office since 2000 to how the children of EU nationals automatically acquire citizenship is the correct interpretation of the law.

The case in question concerns the nationality of Antoine Lucas Roehrig, who was born on October 20 2000 in the UK. His mother is a French national who had lived and worked in the UK under EU law for the five years before he was born. Roehrig claimed he acquired British citizenship at birth by virtue of section 1(1)(b) of the British Nationality Act 1981 because his mother was settled in the UK at the time he was born. The Home Office disputed that his mother met the act’s criteria for being settled and refused his application for a British passport.

Eyre’s ruling in favour of the Home Office hinges on the government’s interpretation of how the legal definition of being “settled” in the UK applied to EU nationals. It could upend the lives of many thousands of people, who have always believed that they were British.

Indefinite leave to remain

Before 1983, anyone born in the UK automatically acquired British citizenship. After that, when the British Nationality Act 1981 came into force, those born in the UK would only be considered British citizens if at least one of their parents were either a British citizen themselves or “settled” in the UK at the time of the child’s birth.

For 17 years, the Home Office deemed EU nationals exercising free movement rights in the UK to be settled and their UK-born children, thus, British. But on October 2 2000, the Home Office changed the rules. In order to be deemed “settled”, EU nationals now had to apply for and be granted indefinite leave to remain.

The problem is that many EU nationals did not apply for indefinite leave to remain, simply because they did not need it to enter and reside in the UK. Why apply for something you apparently don’t need?

The question posed by Roehrig’s case, therefore, is whether EU nationals without indefinite leave to remain could be considered “settled”. To answer this question, the high court had to determine whether EU nationals met the definition, as specified in section 50 of the British Nationality Act, of someone residing in the UK without any immigration law restrictions on the period that they could stay.

EU law, which had direct effect in the UK until Brexit, effectively created a conditional residence for EU nationals, who could reside in the UK for as long as they remained a “qualified person”. These residence rights were usually granted on the basis of being in employment. In certain circumstances, someone might be eligible through being unable to work due to illness or job loss, through living off personal savings, or through relying on a family member.

Eyre found that this conditional residence had the same effect as an immigration law restriction on the period for which EU nationals could remain in the UK. In other words, he judged that being a “qualified person” under EU free movement law did not mean you can now be deemed to have been “settled”.

This is a surprising interpretation of the law. Until Brexit, and the subsequent requirement to apply for the EU settlement scheme, many EU nationals were able to reside in the UK on the basis of EU law for decades without applying for indefinite leave to remain. They were treated as settled, and their children treated as British.

The impact of this judgment

Importantly, new rules, like those the Home Office introduced on October 2 2000, do not actually change the law. They simply alter the interpretation of the law and how to implement it.

Eyre has decided that the Home Office’s restrictive approach to British citizenship, as applied since October 2 2000, is the correct interpretation of the British Nationality Act. It follows that the previous interpretation, as implemented between 1983 and October 2 2000, was incorrect. This means that the Home Office will have mistakenly granted British citizenship to many people born during this time period to parents who, like Roehrig’s mother, were “qualified persons” under EU free movement law.

Conversely, if Roehrig appeals the judgment, and is successful, it is the restrictive approach the Home Office has taken since 2000 that will be found to be unlawful. The interpretation of the law, as implemented before October 2000, will have been the correct one. In this instance, the Home Office will have mistakenly denied British citizenship to many people born since 2000 to EU nationals who should have been considered to be “settled” in the UK.

Given that the government has greatly underestimated the number of EU nationals living in the UK before Brexit, it is not unreasonable to expect the number of people who could be affected, either way, to be in the tens of thousands.

The secretary of state’s submissions to the high court provided reassurance that the Home Office has accepted “as a matter of policy and fairness” that affected children born before October 2 2000 are British. But this is simply a matter of policy. It provides no legal certainty.

As immigration barrister Colin Yeo warns, the Home Office has nullified citizenship before, relying on the confusing logic that it was never actually held if acquired through error or Home Office mistake. At present, the policy to recognise the British citizenship of those born before October 2 2000 has been paused.

And what of those who have gone on to have their own children, thinking they had passed on their British citizenship? Guaranteeing protection for the affected group could be achieved through legislation which retroactively recognises their acquisition of British citizenship. For now, though, thousands of “possibly British” people with EU national parents are left facing great uncertainty.

Source: Why thousands of people who thought they were British could lose …

Proposal to make citizenship ceremonies optional a ‘disservice to all of Canada’

More coverage of this misguided proposal:

A proposal by the Canadian government to allow prospective citizens to tick a box on a website rather than affirm a formal oath of citizenship is causing concern among those who see the longstanding swearing-in ceremony as an important rite of passage for new Canadians.

As detailed over the weekend in the Canada Gazette, the Department of Citizenship and Immigration is proposing to allow new citizens to fast-track their applications by giving them the option of affirming their citizenship oath via a secure internet webpage rather than raising their hands at a citizenship ceremony.

“In the 5 years from 2016–2017 to 2021–2022, citizenship grant applications have more than doubled, from 113,000 to 243,000,” read the statement published in the Gazette.

“Immigration levels continue to rise, with a target of 500,000 permanent residents for 2025, which will contribute to ongoing increases in citizenship applications.”

As of October 2022, the department said, around 358,000 citizenship applications were pending with Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, with some waiting over two years before having their citizenship ceremony — the last step in Canada’s long and drawn-out citizenship process. 

The change, the department said, would save prospective citizens two to three months of processing time. 

Institute for Canadian Citizenship CEO Daniel Bernhard told the National Post that losing the ceremony is tantamount to losing an important chapter in Canadian history.

“It’s really unfortunate,” he said.

“The day you become a citizen is a once-in-a-lifetime occasion that has implications for every generation afterwards. People recognize that, and these are very special, meaningful and very emotional days, not just for the new citizens but also for their family and friends.”

Rather than giving options to bypass the affirmation, Bernhard said Canada should be doing more to celebrate citizenship.

Indeed, fewer Canadian permanent residents are going through the process of obtaining citizenship.

Last month, Statistics Canada reported that just under half of permanent residents who immigrated to Canada between 2011 and 2021 obtained Canadian citizenship.

That’s compared to just over 75 per cent in 2001.

A 2022 Leger poll commissioned by the Institute for Canadian Citizenship found immigrants are realizing that life in Canada isn’t as rosy as assumed, with the current leadership and/or government (43 per cent), high cost of living (35 per cent) and racism (19 per cent) listed as the top three reasons why they wouldn’t recommend others immigrate to Canada.

That same survey reported around 22 per cent of new immigrants saying they were likely to leave Canada over the next two years.

That said, the same survey reported 71 per cent of respondents saying Canada provides immigrants with a good quality of life.

While Bernhard understands the need for the government to streamline the process, particularly in this time where unreasonably long processing delays have become default for the federal public service, he stresses it shouldn’t be at the expense of ceremony.

“I understand the government is facing a lot of pressure from people who, very reasonably, want their applications to be processed more quickly, but I would hope that we would be able to find those efficiencies in other parts of the process,” he said.

“These celebrations are really special, and if we do away with them, that’s a disservice to all of Canada.”

Source: Proposal to make citizenship ceremonies optional a ‘disservice to all of Canada’

Soon a Canadian citizenship oath could be just a scroll and click away: But should it be?

The Canada Gazette notification of plans to further water down citizenship by allowing the oath to be administered by a “non-authorized person” risks further weakening the meaningfulness of Canadian citizenship.

IRCC justifies the proposal solely on operational and financial grounds, without any serious discussion of policy considerations. In a sense, this repeats the process of the previous government’s quintupling of adult citizenship fees in 2014-15, with a Gazette notice that discounted any impact from fee increases on naturalization rates. As we know from the recent Statistics Canada analysis and the Institute for Canadian Citizenship, that was likely one of the factors, along with the impact of the pandemic, on the drastic decline in naturalization from 60.4 percent in 2016 to 45.7 percent in 2021, five to nine years after landing.

More worrying is some of the rationale for this change. Upfront costs of some $5 million over 10 years are expected to be recouped though reduced ceremonies as the Gazette notice states: 

“Consequently, it is expected that participation in ceremonies would be lower than it is currently, and there would likely be fewer ceremonies overall. Therefore, the Government of Canada would save costs, as the proposal would likely reduce the number of ceremonies the Department would be required to arrange.”

In a nod to inclusion, the notice mentions that applicants will save “up to three months processing time.” Furthermore, “swearing or affirming in this manner via the secure online solution is expected to take significantly less time” than the 90 minutes the current ceremonies take. 

These are insignificant compared to changes made early in the government’s mandate that eased residency and language requirements, or the more recent change to the Oath to recognize Indigenous and treaty rights.

But to make citizenship more inclusive, the government would need to implement, at least partially, its platform commitment in the 2019 and 2021 election platforms to eliminate citizenship fees, a much more substantive measure.

Citizenship, as I have argued in the past, provides a mix of personal and public benefits. 

Applicants personally benefit from the security citizenship provides in terms of mobility and voting rights and the ability to run for office. Canadian society benefits from the “common bond for Canadian-born individuals and naturalized Canadians alike, signifying full membership in Canadian society.” 

This proposed change highlights how the government treats citizenship as a service transaction rather than a substantive unifying and integrating process to help new Canadians feel fully part of Canadian society. That the government has not issued the revised citizenship study guide, announced three ministers ago, is but a further example. 

Canadians, newcomers and old-timers, should raise their concerns with their MPs, regarding this diminishment of citizenship and the integration of new Canadians:

Starting as soon as June, new Canadian citizens could take the oath on their own — without the need for a citizenship judge.

The proposed change is an attempt by immigration officials to reduce processing time and backlogs.

However, critics warn the move would drastically change the decades-old ritual for generations of newcomers and with a click on the keyboard, further dilute the meaning of Canadian citizenship.

“This just further cheapens the significance of becoming a Canadian citizen. It’s just as easy to click terms and conditions to become a citizen as it is to create a Facebook or a TikTok account,” said Daniel Bernhard, CEO of the Institute for Canadian Citizenship.

“That’s really a shame.”

The change, as part of the modernization and digitalization of immigration processing, is expected to reduce the current citizenship processing time by three months to 21 months, according to the plan published in the Canada Gazette over the weekend.

Swearing an oath has been a legal requirement of becoming a citizen in this country since 1947. It’s a solemn vow taken by citizenship applicants to follow the laws of Canada and fulfil their duties as citizens.

Citizenship is not only a milestone for new immigrants toward their belonging and commitment to Canada, it also comes with the benefits of a passport, voting rights and the ability to run for elected office.

Under the proposed change, the immigration minister would have broad discretion to allow citizenship applicants to take the oath by other means and not necessarily before an authorized individual. 

Currently, new citizens swear or affirm the oath before a citizenship judge at virtual or in-person ceremonies, which are mainly scheduled on weekdays, during working hours, although ceremonies are occasionally scheduled on Saturdays. 

“Many clients have to take time off work to attend citizenship ceremonies, and this time off is not necessarily paid by employers,” the immigration department said in the Gazette.

“The flexibility would allow the Department to implement options aimed at improving client service and reducing processing times of citizenship applications.”

The proposed change came in the wake of new data indicating a nosedive in citizenship uptake over 20 years.

The 2021 census found that just 45.7 per cent of permanent residents became citizens within 10 years, down from 60 per cent in 2016 and 75.1 per cent in 2001.

“Citizenship does take a long time, and they’re working on the process,” said Bernhard, whose organization obtained the data. “But the actual problem is not how long it takes to get the citizenship. The actual problem is the desirability of Canadian citizenship itself.”

During the pandemic, citizenship processing time has doubled from the prior 12-month service standard, even though the number of citizenship applications granted annually has risen significantly to 243,000 from 113,000 over the last five years. 

With Canada moving toward bringing in half a million new permanent residents a year by 2025, the inventory of citizenship applications — standing at 358,000 — is expected to grow.

Citizenship applicants must go through a stringent screening process to ensure they meet all requirements, including three out of five years of physical presence in Canada at the time of applying. Those between ages 18 and 54 must also show proficiency in either official language and pass a citizenship exam before they are scheduled for a citizenship ceremony.

Due to COVID, officials have brought in virtual citizenship ceremonies as of April 2020. Since then, 15,290 of the 15,457 ceremonies have been held online in front of an authorized official, generally a citizenship judge.

The “self-administration” of the oath-taking would now allow new citizens to sign a written attestation online without a witness to complete the obligations of citizenship, and applicants would still have the option to do it before a citizenship judge, the immigration department told the Star in an email Monday.

Officials said the measure could result in savings as fewer ceremonies are expected to be hosted.

For Andrew Griffith, a former director general at the immigration department, the change marks another diversion of the federal government in its approach to immigration and citizenship.

“I just look at all of our immigration policies,” said Griffith, now an Environics Institute fellow. “It’s basically the more, the merrier. It’s not about the ability to integrate. It’s just increasing numbers. I can see the logic in terms of you just want to push people through but I always thought that immigration and citizenship was more than that.

“We’re just really further diminishing the value of citizenship.”

The public has 30 days to comment and provide feedback to the proposed regulatory change.

Source: Soon a Canadian citizenship oath could be just a scroll and click away

Pregnant Russians flock to Argentina, seeking passports — and options — for their kids

More detailed account than elsewhere. In contrast to some earlier reports, appears many are fairly afflluent. And not all are birth tourists with some settling in Argentina:

Shortly after Vladimir Putin ordered the invasion of Ukraine, Alla Prigolovkina and her husband, Andrei Ushakov, decided they had to flee their Sochi, Russia, home.

Ushakov had been detained for holding up a sign that read “Peace,” and Prigolovkina, a pregnant ski instructor, feared he would soon be drafted and potentially killed, leaving their baby fatherless.

The original plan was to stay in Europe, but anti-Russian sentiment discouraged them.

“We chose Argentina because it has everything we needed: Fantastic nature, a large country, beautiful mountains,” Prigolovkina, 34, told The Associated Press inside the home her family is renting in Argentina’s western Mendoza province. “We felt it would be ideal for us.”

They were hardly alone.

Over the past year, Argentine immigration authorities have noticed flights packed with dozens of pregnant Russians. But whereas Prigolovkina said her family intends to build a life here at the foot of the Andes mountains, local officials believe many of the other recent Russian visitors are singularly focused on receiving one of Argentina’s passports.

All children born in Argentina automatically receive citizenship and having an Argentine child speeds up the process for the parents to obtain residency permits and, after a couple of years, their own passports.

Crucially, the navy blue booklets allow entry to 171 countries without a visa, a backup plan that Russians believe could come in handy in the ever-uncertain future. Due to sanctions, Russians have also had trouble opening bank accounts in foreign countries, something an Argentine passport could solve.

According to official figures, some 22,200 Russians entered Argentina over the last year, including 10,777 women — many of whom were in the advanced stages of pregnancy. In January, 4,523 Russians entered Argentina, more than four times the 1,037 that arrived in the same month last year.

After an investigation, Argentine officials concluded that Russian women, generally from affluent backgrounds, were entering the country as tourists with the plan to give birth, obtain their documentation and leave. More than half of the Russians who entered the country in the last year, 13,134, already left, including 6,400 women.

“We detected that they don’t come to do tourism, they come to have children,” Florencia Carignano, the national director for migration, said during a meeting with international media.

Although Argentina generally has a relatively permissive immigration process, the recent arrest of two alleged Russian spies who had Argentine passports in Slovenia raised alarms in the South American country, where officials reinforced immigration controls.

“We canceled residencies of Russians who spent more time outside than in,” Carignano said, expressing concern the Argentine “passport will cease to have the trust it enjoys in all countries.”

Immigration authorities have also called on the justice system to investigate agencies that allegedly offer assistance to Russian women who want to give birth in Argentina.

It’s unclear how many women have left Russia to give birth in the last year, but the issue is big enough that lawmakers in Moscow this month raised the question of whether those who choose to give birth abroad should be stripped of the so-called maternity fund that all Russian mothers receive — a financial benefit of almost $8,000 for the first child and about $10,500 for the second.

There is no discussion on whether to cut off access to the maternity fund for Russian mothers who give birth abroad, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said.

The phenomenon also is not entirely new. Prior to the Russia-Ukraine war, Russian women were part of a wave of “birth tourists” in the U.S. and many paid brokers tens of thousands of dollars to arrange their travel documents, accommodations and hospital stays, often in Florida.

Embarking on a long journey during an advanced pregnancy can be particularly perilous, and Russians in Argentina insist that their decision to leave their homes goes beyond a new passport. Despite the government’s claims, some at least seem eager to make Argentina their new home.

In spite of the language barrier and the unfamiliar, stifling summer heat, Prigolovkina and Ushakov have quickly adopted Argentine customs since their July move. Prigolovkina said they especially enjoy spending time in the park with their dogs. And while the family may not have been interested in soccer in Russia, they happily cheered when their newly adopted country won the World Cup late last year.

Still, she also concedes that obtaining a passport for their newborn son, Lev Andrés, was a motivating factor for the move: “We wanted our baby to have the chance to not just be Russian and have a single passport.”

Some experts say a country in which migrants once made up as much as 30% of the population should be particularly sensitive to the plight of Russians trying to start a new life. The South American country was transformed in the late 19th and early 20th century by the influx of millions of European migrants, including many from Italy and Spain.

“Given our history of migration, a country like ours should empathize more with the humanitarian dimension” of these recent immigrants, Natalia Debandi, a social scientist and migrations expert who is a researcher at the publicly funded CONICET institute, said. “They are not terrorists, they are people.”

A study by immigration agents based on interviews with 350 newly arrived Russians concluded that most are married and largely well-off professionals who have remote jobs in finance and digital design or live off savings.

Days before giving birth to a boy named Leo, 30-year-old Russian psychologist Ekaterina Gordienko lauded her experience in Argentina, saying “the health care system is very good, and people are very kind. My only problem is Spanish. If the doctor doesn’t speak English, I use the (Google) translator.”

Gordienko arrived in the nation’s capital of Buenos Aires in December with her 38-year-old husband, Maxim Levoshin. “The first thing we want is for Leo to live in a safe country, without a war in his future,” Levoshin said.

In Mendoza, Prigolovkina is excited for her family’s new life in Argentina and optimistic they will be able to give back to the country that has welcomed them.

“We have left everything behind to live in peace. I hope that Argentines understand that Russians can be very useful in different areas of life, in business, the economy, in science,” she said. “They can help make Argentina better.”

Source: Pregnant Russians flock to Argentina, seeking passports — and options — for their kids

Soucy: Cohérence médicale pour les migrantes enceintes

Soucy makes a valuable distinction between birth tourists and vulnerable and precarious migrant women, some 2,000 according to RAMQ. Will be interesting to see whether Quebec provides a waiver to the non-resident medical surcharge or not:

Les enfants ne naissent pas d’une fleur : la santé de la mère est intimement liée à celle de l’enfant. La jolie formule utilisée par Médecins du monde résume bien l’incohérence de refuser aux mères ce qu’on a bien voulu accorder à leurs petits à venir, soit une couverture de santé bétonnée par un accès sans condition (sinon celle d’être présents sur le territoire plus de six mois) aux régimes d’assurance maladie et d’assurance médicaments, peu importe leur lieu de naissance ou le statut migratoire de leurs parents.

Il n’est pas inutile de rappeler que le projet de loi 83, qui a permis cette avancée, a été adopté à l’unanimité à l’Assemblée nationale en juin 2021. Guidés par des objectifs « d’équité et de solidarité », les partis n’avaient alors pas manqué de réclamer la même chose pour les mères en devenir. Il est bien documenté que l’absence de suivi de grossesse vient avec des risques accrus notamment de fausse couche et de césarienne, mais aussi de prématurité, de détresse foetale et de petits poids chez les nouveau-nés.

Outre leurs effets délétères sur les humains concernés, ces éléments pèsent lourd sur notre système de santé engorgé, en plus de nous coûter collectivement plus cher à long terme. Sensible à tous ces arguments tant éthiques et sanitaires qu’économiques, le ministre de la Santé, Christian Dubé, avait immédiatement mandaté la Régie de l’assurance maladie du Québec (RAMQ) afin qu’elle évalue les options qui s’offrent pour combler cette brèche.

Déposé en juin dernier, son rapport présente quatre solutions, dont le statu quo, qui va contre la volonté parlementaire. Au vu et au su des cas déchirants rapportés par les médias ces derniers mois, et dont le nombre grandit à vue d’oeil, il est clair que cette option n’en est pas une. Au Québec, un accouchement sans complications après un suivi de grossesse normal aura coûté entre un peu moins de 10 000 $ et jusqu’à près de 20 000 $ à qui n’a pas d’assurance maladie. Pour nombre de femmes enceintes à statut précaire, une facture de cette ampleur agit non seulement comme un frein, mais aussi comme un accélérateur de paupérisation terrible.

Ceux qui agitent l’épouvantail du tourisme médical dans ce dossier n’ont pas complètement tort. Ce phénomène existe bel et bien au Canada, nourri notamment par ce qu’on pourrait appeler une double citoyenneté de complaisance. Le Québec n’y échappe pas, lui qui a un fructueux historique en matière de tourisme obstétrique, rappelle la RAMQ. Mais ce n’est pas de cela qu’il s’agit ici.

Ce dont il est question, c’est d’une couverture d’assurance maladie pour les soins de santé sexuelle et reproductive accessible à toutes les femmes qui vivent au Québec (et non pas celles qui y transitent pour en soutirer le meilleur avant de repartir avec leur petit bonheur sous le bras), indépendamment de leur statut migratoire. Plusieurs pays offrent déjà ce genre de formules, comme la France, la Belgique, l’Allemagne et même quelques États du voisin américain, pourtant peu réputé pour sa générosité en matière de soins de santé.

Le Québec peut en faire autant pour les quelque 2000 femmes concernées par année, selon l’évaluation de la RAMQ. Celle-ci a retenu trois formules qui pourraient avoir des bienfaits notables dans la trajectoire de ces femmes et de leurs enfants à naître. Cela va de l’élimination de la surcharge de 200 % des coûts engagés imposée actuellement à la gratuité pour toutes, en passant par la gratuité pour les femmes migrantes qui répondent à des critères de vulnérabilité (comme la pauvreté et la sous-scolarisation).

Le ministre Dubé dit attendre les conclusions du groupe de travail censé soupeser ces options et en évaluer la faisabilité pour trancher. L’affaire n’est pas simple : il faudra être équitable tout en empêchant tous les abus possibles afin de garder une saine gestion du régime. Souhaitons, surtout, qu’il ne tarde pas.

À force de se déchirer sur le chemin Roxham, on a fini par perdre de vue une valeur cardinale chère aux Québécois, celle de prendre soin de notre monde. Indépendamment du nombre d’immigrants que le Québec veut ou peut accueillir — et qu’il faudra bien définir un jour —, des femmes sans statut vivent leur grossesse ici, maintenant. C’est fâcheux, mais une grossesse ne se met pas sur la glace.

Source: Cohérence médicale pour les migrantes enceintes

COVID-19 Immigration Effects – December 2022 update

Full-year data for 2022 across the suite of immigration programs.

The government continues to make progress on backlogs although the percentage failing to meet service standards has largely not improved: temporary residence 45 percent, permanent residence 48 percent and citizenship 28 percent. The backlog of visitor visas, highlighted in recent media articles, remains high at 70 percent (Dec 31 data).

All programs show a seasonal decrease in December except where noted.

PRs: 435,000 in 2022 compared to 404,000 in 2021. Drop in TR2PR transitions, from 279,000 in 2021 to 177,000 in 2022. Quebec 69,000 in 2022, compared to 50,000 in 2021 (despite public debates).

TRs/IMP: 494,000 in 2022 compared to 326,000 in 2021.

TRs/TFWP: 137,000 in 2022 compared to 106,000 in 2021.

Students: December end-of-year increase. 576,000 in 2022 compared to 469,000 in 2021.

Asylum claimants: Increased in December compared to November. 92,000 in 2022 compared to 25,000 in 2021. I have added a slide on “irregular arrivals” and their percentage of total asylum claimants.

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

Citizenship: 369,000 in 2022 compared to 137,000 in 2021.

Visitor Visas. Stable compared to November. 1,238,000 in 2022 compared to 236,000 in 2021.

Argentina says mafia groups are spurring Russian birth tourism

Appears that there may be a similar cottage industry to that of Richmond but possibly with criminal elements rather than businesses. But articles have been conflicting whether the women have resources to pay for these services or are relatively destitute:

Argentine officials have blamed organized “mafias” for promoting birth tourism to the South American country by Russian mothers-to-be amid a boom in numbers traveling there since the invasion of Ukraine looking to get their children citizenship.

Thousands of expectant Russian mothers have arrived in Argentina over the last year, including 33 on a single flight last week, which threw a spotlight on the trend. Some were detained and officials launched a crackdown on the practice.

Florencia Carignano, head of Argentina’s immigration office, wrote on Twitter on Sunday that “mafia organizations were profiting by offering packages to obtain our passport to people who do not actually want to reside in our country.”

Russians can travel to Argentina without a visa, where all newborns are granted citizenship automatically, making it an attractive destination for so-called birth tourism.

“We detected a significant increase in the entry of Russian citizens in recent months. That is why we decided to investigate and we interviewed 350 of them who were in advanced pregnancy,” Carignano said.

“In the interviews we discovered that this organization offers people, in exchange for a large sum of money, a birth tourism package with the Argentine passport as the main reason for the trip.”

Carignano said that the immigration office had passed data related to the case to the country’s judiciary with the aim of defending the integrity of Argentina’s passport issuance.

Source: Argentina says mafia groups are spurring Russian birth tourism

40% decline in permanent residents becoming Canadian citizens since 2001, data shows

Of concern, accelerating trend that I started identifying a number of years ago:

StatCan numbers reveal the percentage of permanent residents who become Canadians has plummeted over the past 20 years.

The Institute for Canadian Citizenship says Statistics Canada data points to a 40 per cent decline in citizenship uptake since 2001.

The group’s CEO, Daniel Bernhard, calls the drop alarming and says it should serve as a “wake up call” to improving the experience newcomers have in Canada.

In 2021, nearly 45.7 per cent of permanent residents who’d been in Canada for less than 10 years became citizens.

That’s down from 60 per cent in 2016, and 75.1 per cent in 2001.

The StatCan data did not identify reasons for the drop, but Bernhard suggests Canada’s cost of living and job prospects are likely factors.

He says the institute is investigating root causes.

“There are a myriad of issues,” said Bernhard.

“But ultimately, what’s changing is that people have decided that they’re less interested in being `Team Canada.”’

Bernhard said the decline affects Canada’s long-term economic and social outlook.

“This is a problem for all of us who care about Canada’s future prosperity and dynamism,” he said. “We need to solve this for the future of our country.”

The federal government has said it wants to boost immigration by adding 1.45 million permanent residents over the next three years, starting with 465,000 in 2023 and increasing to 500,000 in 2025.

Source: 40% decline in permanent residents becoming Canadian citizens since 2001, data shows

The National Post take:

As Canada ratchets up immigration to the highest levels in its history, surprising new figures from Statistics Canada are showing that nearly half of all recent immigrants are no longer bothering to seek Canadian citizenship.

The numbers were publicized this week by the Institute for Canadian Citizenship. And according to the group’s CEO Daniel Bernhard, they may be a sign that the Canadian dream is no longer working out for newcomers.

“What’s changing is that people have decided that they’re less interested in being ‘Team Canada,’” Bernhard said in a statement, adding that the figures are a “wake up” call to the Canadian immigrant experience is treating new arrivals.

In 2021, of the permanent residents who had come to Canada within the last 10 years, just 45.7 per cent had become citizens. In 2001, that figure was 75.1 per cent.

It’s not the first time that evidence has emerged to show that new immigrants are not as enthralled with Canada as in prior decades.

A March Leger survey — also commissioned by the Institute for Canadian Citizenship — found that more than one fifth of recent immigrants were already making plans to leave. Among under-34 immigrants, in particular, 30 per cent said they were “likely” to leave Canada within the next two years.

As to why, newcomers are citing the same concerns with the country as native-born Canadians: Skyrocketing housing costs and diminishing access to government services such as health care.

In the Leger poll, even among immigrants who wanted to stay, their number one reservation was “high cost of living.”

In a bid to boost GDP, the Trudeau government has already raised Canada’s immigration intake to the highest levels in Canadian history, and is on track to bring in 500,000 newcomers annually by 2025. Absent any dramatic policy changes, this influx will likely worsen many of the issues that are already beginning to scare away new Canadians.

On Tuesday, CIBC CEO Victor Dodig warned that if Canada continued packing in immigrants without a viable plan to absorb them, it could spur an unprecedented “social crisis.”

“New Canadians want to establish a life here, they need a roof over their heads. We need to get that policy right and not wave the flag saying isn’t it great that everyone wants to come to Canada,” Dodig said at an event hosted by Canadian Club Toronto.

One other factor potentially driving down rates of immigrants seeking citizenship is that Canada’s immigrant stream is increasingly coming from countries that do not tolerate dual citizenship, thus prompting many newcomers to remain permanent residents in perpetuity.

The chief examples are India and China. Indian nationals are required to surrender their Indian passport the moment they become Canadian citizens. Chinese prohibitions on dual citizenship were illustrated most glaringly in 2021, when the Beijing government tightened its control on Hong Kong by forcing 300,000 residents with joint Canadian citizenship to either leave or tear up their Canadian passport.

Both countries now represent a significant share of Canada’s current immigrant influx. As per 2021 figures, 18.6 per cent of recent Canadian immigrants reported India as their birthplace, while 8.9 per cent reported being born in China.

For context, just three per cent of recent immigrants were born in the United States.

In 2022, Canada officially welcomed 431,645 immigrants. Notably, the last time in Canadian history that immigration levels were this high — during the settling of the prairies in the years preceding the First World War – it was also paired with surging levels of outmigration as many newcomers swiftly abandoned their new Canadian homesteads.

“A lot of people left; outmigration was as high as in-migration for a very, very long time,” Adele Perry, a researcher of Western Canadian history, told the National Post in 2012.

Source: Canada is scaring away its new immigrants

Henley & Partners, Leader In Controversial ‘Golden Passports,’ Sets Sights On U.S.’s Ultra Rich

Of note:

Henley & Partners, the U.K.-based consultancy, has become the most prominent facilitator of so-called “golden passport” and “golden visa” schemes for the ultra-rich after decades of securing passports for the wealthy in Russia, India, China and more. Now it’s turning to the U.S. as its next major market, boasting an unprecedented uptick in the number of high net worth Americans seeking second citizenship.

Migration investment schemes, which effectively allow people to purchase citizenship or residency in exchange for an investment in a country, have long been controversial but came under a harsh new light after Russia’s February 2022 invasion of Ukraine. Forbesfound that nearly half of 35 sanctioned billionaires had a second (or even third) passport, including through European investment migration schemes. Many of the most prominent citizens by investment schemes have since moved to halt sales to Russian applicants, revoke passports or shut down altogether—including most recently Ireland, which announced abruptly on Tuesday it was shutting down its decades-old scheme. Portugal’s program, which has been one of the most lucrative for Henley & Partners, is currently being reviewed by its government.

Despite the crackdowns in Europe, Henley & Partners says business is better than ever—and not for the reasons many may expect. On Wednesday, at a glitzy private luncheon at the Lotte New York Palace, a five-star hotel in Manhattan, the firm’s leaders, including CEO Juerg Steffen, touted the record number of inquiries and applications received by Henley & Partners in 2022, with the highest number coming from a somewhat surprising market—the U.S.—which Steffen claims is about 20% of the firm’s citizenship investment business in 2022, followed by India.

Overall, Henley & Partners’ business grew 25% last year, and another 35% the year before, Steffen told Forbes in an interview before the event. The company would not share revenues for “competitive reasons” but it takes a cut out of every visa or citizenship application, with higher charges for applications with multiple people (70% of applicants are families). The migration firm also runs a government consultancy business advising countries on how to start and run investment migration programs, which Stefan said makes up about one third of the group’s total business. The firm saysit helped set up “many” of the 30 residence and/or citizenship programs it facilitates, such as St. Kitts & Nevis, which it helped relaunch starting in 2006. Steffen claims the investment migration industry is now worth some $30 billion, including the amount invested, though others have pegged it closer to $3 billion.

According to a “USA Wealth Report” published in conjunction with the event, the number of Americans making inquiries to Henley & Partners about citizenship investment and residency options has increased more than four fold since 2019 (the company did not share exact numbers for either data point). The firm claimed it received more inquiries from wealthy Americans than any other nationality last year. That includes Russians and Chinese, though the former is likely explained by many of these programs halting Russian applicants, and the latter by China’s strict coronavirus-related travel restrictions; Steffen said there has been an uptick in interest from wealthy Chinese since the country’s borders reopened in January.

To accommodate the new levels of interest, Henley & Partners announced the opening of three U.S, offices in New York, Los Angeles and Miami. Steffen also said the company is planning to expand its workforce from 300 to 400 people by the end of the year. Previously, the company’s office in Canada handled all inquiries from Americans. One employee of the newly formed New York office said it is already working with 200 clients.

As for why wealthy Americans would be interested in getting another passport, Steffen claims that a number of U.S. billionaires started approaching Henley & Partners after the start of the Covid-19 pandemic. “From our perspective it has probably to do with the political environment but also how the government handled Covid at the beginning. They realized, we have a private jet but we can’t just leave and go to another country even if it’s perhaps more secure. Then they realized how important it is to have more than one residence and citizenship,” he said.

But the U.S. is politically and economically stable relative to some of the countries where Americans are reportedly seeking access. According to the report, the most sought after programs among Americans were Portugal’s Golden Residence Permit Program, which requires a minimum real estate investment of nearly $300,000 and can take up to 18 months to process, followed by Malta’s, a program that requires its applicants to live in the country for 36 months and make a minimum investment of about $790,000. Also commonly pursued was Caribbean citizenship through St. Kitts & Nevis, which requires a significantly smaller $125,000 investment and can take less than half a year, according to the firm.

Critics have long pointed to the schemes as a vessel for potential corruption, money laundering and tax avoidance. “We consider that the sale of citizenship through ‘golden passports’ is illegal under EU law and poses serious risks to our security,” Didier Reynders, the European Commission’s commissioner for justice and consumers, saidlast March as the commission escalated its campaign against citizenship by investment schemes by calling an end to the programs.

In an April 2022 interview with Forbes, ” Eka Rostomashavili of the anti-corruption watchdog Transparency International acknowledged that while there are “legitimate reasons for wanting to have a second passport,” she argued. Many wealthy Russians sanctioned for their connections to the Kremlin have EU passports “because they probably don’t want to live in the mess that they helped create.”

As the biggest player in the investment migration industry, Henley & Partners has landed in the hot seat more than once in recent years after a slew of reports raised questions about some of people it has helped get passports. The Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) published a report in March 2022 detailing how the firm helped a “bevy of high-risk clients” gain citizenship, including some individuals with questionable backgrounds who were later sanctioned or convicted of crimes.

Henley & Partners has repeatedly responded to these allegations asserting it follows all local and international laws and regulations. In his interview with Forbes, Steffen echoed these points, saying that while the industry is largely unregulated, Henley & Partners follows an extensive due diligence process that involves looking at a person’s criminal record from everywhere they’ve lived in the past 10 years and consulting with external investigative companies that write reports ranging from 30 to 70 pages on each potential client. “For us, it’s of course, very important from a reputational perspective,” said Steffen. He said that it took a year to move through all the regulatory hurdles required to start its business in the U.S.

Whether the demand is as high as it claims, moving into the U.S. market seems to offer another important benefit to Henley & Partners, which is a shot at building legitimacy for an industry that has been delivered significant blows over the past year. Steffen says he isn’t worried. While some programs have tightened their application criteria or even closed, he said the firm has been conversing with many new governments open to launching programs. “It’s getting mainstream and most of the countries actually have these programs now,” said Steffen.

Source: Henley & Partners, Leader In Controversial ‘Golden Passports,’ Sets Sights On U.S.’s Ultra Rich