C-3 Citizenship Act to Replace First Generation Cut-Off: Stalled at Second Reading

2025/06/23 1 Comment

While Conservatives support the provision to treat adoptees born abroad as Canadian-born and the fix for the small remaining 1977-81 cohort of “Lost Canadians”, they maintain their opposition to the proposed connection residency test of 1,095 days with no time restriction for the second generation born abroad, as was the case in the identical C-71 that died on the order paper.

Likely reflecting the lingering bitterness of the Liberal and NDP efforts to “hijack” S-245 bill by broadening its scope beyond fixing the 1977-81 cohort to address second generation born abroad issues, it appears the CPC will oppose the Bill every step of the way.

As a result, the Bill did not complete second reading and will thus not make it to committee before the fall, a tight timeframe in which to meet the federal court deadline of November 20.

Conservatives raised three major concerns:

  • Cumulative 1,095 residency requirement, not consecutive or time limited (e.g., within 5 years as per permanent residents);
  • Lack of estimated numbers of persons affected and related operational estimates and costs (interestingly, government members did not mention the PBO study showing a likely 115,000 persons over five years but Conservative members did:; and,
  • Need for criminality or security checks for the second generation born-abroad (may be more of a stretch to argue given we don’t do criminal or security checks on first generation born or adopted abroad).

No new information or insights by the Minister and government members compared to C-71.

My analysis of the previous Bill C-71 opens up a possible never-ending chain of citizenship also featured in their remarks.

Source: Hansard link

Filed under C-3, Citizenship Tagged with

Ukraine Approves Law Allowing Dual And Multiple Citizenship Amid Ongoing War

2025/06/20 Leave a comment

Of note:

Ukraine’s parliament on Wednesday passed legislation permitting dual and multiple citizenships, to address the country’s deepening demographic crisis caused by the prolonged war with Russia. The new law also aims to strengthen connections with Ukraine’s sizeable global diaspora.

Previously, Ukrainian law did not recognise dual or multiple citizenship, meaning that ethnic Ukrainians living outside the country and holding other passports had to renounce their other citizenship if they wanted a Ukrainian passport.

Government officials estimate Ukraine’s diaspora at some 25 million people. They put the current population in Ukraine at 32 million, down sharply from 52 million in 1991 when Ukraine became independent after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

“This decision is an important step to maintain and restore ties with millions of Ukrainians around the world,” Oleksiy Chernyshov, minister for unity, said in a social media post on Facebook after Wednesday’s vote.

The issue of multiple citizenship has become even more pressing since Russia’s invasion in February 2022, exacerbating a demographic decline that had started years before.

Millions Of Ukrainians Fled Due To War

Ukraine saw several large labour migrations in the early 1990s. With the start of the invasion, millions of Ukrainians fled the fighting. With the war now in its fourth year, data shows that more than 5 million Ukrainians live in Europe, while tens of thousands of people have been killed in the conflict.

“Since the situation in Ukraine is unstable, people… do not know whether to return or not…,” said Natalya Kostyk-Ustenko, who fled Kherson in southern Ukraine in June 2022 and lives in Lithuania with her two children.

“Our roots are Ukrainian, we love our country, we support it as best we can. This (move on citizenship) is significant support for us as refugees, we are all scattered around the world,” she said.

Lawmakers said the new law would simplify procedures for children born to Ukrainian parents abroad and also for Ukrainians who obtain other citizenship by marriage.

It will also make it easier to obtain Ukrainian citizenship for foreigners fighting for Ukraine on the frontlines.

The law does not directly ban Russian citizens from obtaining Ukrainian passports but says the government will be able to implement restrictions related to the armed aggression against Ukraine.

Foreigners would have to pass a test to prove their knowledge of the Ukrainian language, history and constitution.

Source: Ukraine Approves Law Allowing Dual And Multiple Citizenship Amid Ongoing War

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with

Trump “Gold Card” Visa

2025/06/14 Leave a comment

The ongoing brazenness knows no bound, grift, ego and corruption combined in his personally branded website:

President Donald Trump has touted his $5 million “Gold Card” visa as a way to raise trillions of dollars for the U.S. But a new website launching the initiative doesn’t look or feel like a legitimate government site, experts say.

Among the red flags are the URL itself, unexpected links to the Department of Commerce rather than Homeland Security, and no disclaimer regarding usage of personal data. “This is a joke,” says immigration and investing expert Nuri Katz. “[The Trump Administration] is asking very wealthy individuals to trust a one-page website that feels like it was created in five minutes by a teenager in his bedroom.”

And while Trump told his social media followers that the waitlist for the Gold Card was open, it could take years for applications to be processed. Congress has yet to initiate any changes to immigration and tax law that the program would require. 

Link to site: The Trump Card is Coming.

Useful analysis by Boundless: U.S. Gold Card: A New Pathway to American Residency

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

Low turnout scuttles Italy referendum on citizenship

2025/06/11 Leave a comment

As expected and arguably planned:

An Italian referendum on granting faster citizenship to certain immigrants and seeking to strengthen labor rights failed because of low turnout, after Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and leading right-wing political parties urged Italians to boycott the democratic process.

In conceding defeat, Maurizio Landini, the secretary-general of the powerful CGIL trade union federation that helped bring about the referendum, said it still was a “starting point” on important issues that remain “on the table” for Italy. This includes heated debates over how many immigrants should be welcomed to Italy, as the country suffers a demographic crisis with an aging population and one of the lowest birthrates in the world.

As well as asking Italians to vote to liberalize the labor market, the referendum sought to reduce the time it takes to become a naturalized citizen from 10 years to five years. Campaigners for the change said this would help second-generation Italians born in the country to non-European Union citizens. They can spend years, often long into adulthood, battling to get full citizenship rights from the only country they know to be their home.

Italian economists have said the change could also be a useful measure to address the problems resulting from Italy’s aging society and low birthrate — just 12% of the population is younger than 14.

On Sunday and Monday, the two days of referendum voting, turnout was low and thus the referendum was declared void. Partial data from Italy’s Interior Ministry published Sunday showed national turnout of just 22.7%, far below the 50% participation by eligible voters that is required for referendums in Italy to be valid. After polls closed on Monday, the YouTrend polling agency estimated voter participation to have been around 30% of eligible voters. In his concession speech, Landini said it was clear from the results that “there is an obvious crisis of democracy.”

Source: Low turnout scuttles Italy referendum on citizenship

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with ,

EU Court Declares Malta’s Investor Citizenship Scheme Illegal – Inward/ Foreign Investment – Malta

2025/06/11 Leave a comment

Overdue:

Key Findings of the Judgment

A. Transactional Nature of the Scheme

The Court found that Malta’s program established a “transactional procedure” whereby nationality was “essentially granted in exchange for predetermined payments or investments.” This approach was deemed fundamentally incompatible with the concept of citizenship as representing a “special relationship of solidarity and good faith between a Member State and its nationals”.

B. Lack of Genuine Link

The Court emphasized that the scheme lacked provisions for establishing a genuine connection between applicants and Malta. The minimal residency requirements and the ability to expedite naturalization through additional payments undermined any serious claim of a real connection.

C. Violation of EU Principles

By operating such a scheme, Malta was found to have violated the principles of sincere cooperation and mutual trust among EU Member States. The Court stated that the scheme jeopardized the mutual trust necessary for the proper functioning of the EU, particularly concerning the recognition of national decisions on citizenship.

Comparative Perspective: Cyprus’s Experience

Cyprus faced similar scrutiny over its investor citizenship program. In response to EU concerns, Cyprus terminated its scheme in November 2020 and subsequently revoked the citizenships of 39 individuals. This proactive approach allowed Cyprus to align with EU expectations and avoid legal proceedings.

Commentary from AGPLAW

The CJEU’s decision underlines the importance of aligning national citizenship laws with EU principles. Cyprus’ experience demonstrates that while the termination of such programs may have short-term economic implications, it also opens avenues for developing alternative investment strategies that comply with EU law. For instance, Cyprus has since focused on enhancing its residency programs and attracting foreign investment through transparent and lawful means.

Malta now faces a critical juncture. By studying the Cypriot model, Malta can explore compliant avenues to attract foreign investment without compromising the integrity of EU citizenship.

Conclusion

The CJEU’s ruling marks a significant development in EU citizenship law, emphasizing that citizenship cannot be commodified. Member States are reminded of their obligations to uphold the principles of sincere cooperation and mutual trust. As the EU continues to explore the complexities of citizenship and investment, this judgment serves as a precedent for ensuring that the acquisition of citizenship remains a process grounded in genuine connection and adherence to EU values.

Source: EU Court Declares Malta’s Investor Citizenship Scheme Illegal – Inward/ Foreign Investment – Malta

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

‘Elbows up’: Canadian public opinion of the U.S. hits a new low after Donald Trump’s election

2025/06/10 Leave a comment

Not a surprise:

Canadian public sentiment towards the United States has plummeted to new depths, a new report suggests, revealing how decades of Canadian goodwill toward its southern neighbour have reversed mere months after President Donald Trump took office.

The survey, conducted by the Environics Institute for Survey Research, also found the vast majority of respondents were strongly opposed to Canada becoming the 51st state.

“It’s really the worst collective opinions of the U.S. that we have recorded” in the more than 40 years the institute has been keeping track, said Keith Neuman, a senior associate at the Environics Institute for Survey Research. “By more than a two-to-one margin, Canadians’ opinions are negative rather than positive.”

It’s the result of what some experts call a “visceral reaction” toward Trump’s tariffs and annexation threats.

“The unfavourable feelings are much stronger this time, and much more intense,” said Adam Chapnick, a Canadian foreign policy analyst and professor of defence studies at the Royal Military College of Canada.

“It’s being reflected in Canadians not travelling to the United States, not purchasing products that are made in the United States and becoming more serious about making hard decisions domestically to improve our productivity and competitiveness in the world.”

Canadian public perception of the U.S. hits new low 

The survey, conducted in mid-May, found 65 per cent of respondents held an “unfavourable” opinion of the U.S., while just  29 per cent had a “favourable” opinion.

That’s a dramatic shift from last fall, when public sentiment toward the U.S. was divided roughly 50-50.

The closest Canadians have come to a similar unfavourability rating was in 2020, during the tail end of Trump’s first administration. At the time, 63 per cent of Canadians felt unfavourable to the U.S.

“In Trump’s first term, it took several years for Canadian public opinion to deteriorate to the same point,” Neuman noted. “The impact on Canadian public opinion has been much quicker this time … there’s not only the history, but he’s been much more aggressive and assertive with policies much quicker this time around.”

A majority of Conservative voters — 57 per cent — still viewed the U.S. favourably, down six points from last fall. In contrast, more than 80 per cent of Liberal, Bloc Quebecois and NDP voters had an unfavourable opinion of the States.

Overall, 78 per cent of Canadians disapproved of Trump’s handling of the U.S. presidency, a figure that matched 2018. Trump was most popular among Conservative voters, 30 per cent of whom approved of his performance.

Canadians can still recover their positive relationship with the States “if we can turn things around in a reasonable period of time,” Chapnick said, referencing Trump’s tariffs and threats against Canadian sovereignty.

“I think that the long-term positive relationship is quite resilient,” he said. “Geography makes us more resilient. Family ties add to that. I think that, should things get back to some sort of new normal, there should be an ability for us to bounce back to a reasonable degree.”

Large majority of Canadians strongly against becoming the 51st state

Canadians have taken an “elbows up” response to Trump’s threats against Canadian sovereignty, Neuman said.

Eighty-three per cent of respondents said they “strongly disagree” that Canada and the U.S. should unite into one country, while just seven per cent said a merger should happen.

That’s a stronger sentiment than when the Canada-US Free Trade Agreement (CUSFTA) — the precursor to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) — was negotiated in 1986, stoking fears of an economic and cultural merger between the two nations. Back then, just 63 per cent of Canadians were strongly against Canada and the U.S. uniting.

Shortly after the CUSFTA was implemented in the late-1980s, an Environics poll found 30 per cent of Canadians felt it was “very likely” that Canada will remain independent from the U.S. over the next decade. Today, that figure has jumped to 70 per cent.

“That, in some ways, is maybe the most surprising or notable finding,” Neuman said. “It’s not evident that we should be seeing that strong a level of confidence right now, given the uncertainty with tariffs and the uncertainty about Trump … We have not been threatened as a country like this since before we became a country.”

But Chapnick wasn’t surprised, noting that Canadians grew more confident in their nation’s sovereignty after worries of annexation during CUSFTA negotiations didn’t come to pass….

Source: ‘Elbows up’: Canadian public opinion of the U.S. hits a new low after Donald Trump’s election

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , , ,

Canada Introduces New Citizenship Reform With Bill C-3, Opening Doors For Global Travel And Family Connections

2025/06/07 Leave a comment

The reality check on Bill C-3, how the unlimited time period to claim Canadian citizenship by the second generation and beyond without the same five-year period as Permanent Residents is being perceived by organizations and potential beneficiaries:

Canada has introduced Bill C-3, a groundbreaking piece of legislation that seeks to overhaul the country’s citizenship laws, making it easier for global families to claim Canadian citizenship and access travel benefits. This new law expands citizenship by descent beyond the first generation, allowing individuals born abroad to Canadian citizens to inherit citizenship, provided their Canadian parent has maintained a strong connection to the country. The reform comes in response to the outdated 2009 rule that limited citizenship for second-generation Canadians born outside Canada, ensuring a more inclusive approach for families with Canadian roots worldwide. By offering a broader definition of Canadian identity, Bill C-3 aims to enhance both the nation’s diversity and global connectivity, providing more opportunities for travel and connection with Canada.

Canada is set to make a profound change to its citizenship laws through the introduction of Bill C-3, a new piece of legislation designed to significantly expand citizenship by descent. This bill aims to extend Canadian citizenship eligibility to individuals born abroad, beyond the first generation, allowing more people with Canadian heritage to reclaim their citizenship.

A New Path to Reconnect with Canadian Roots

Are you looking to reconnect with your Canadian heritage? Thanks to recent legislative advancements, Bill C-3 offers a golden opportunity for families across the globe to reconnect with their Canadian roots. This bill holds the potential to redefine what it means to be Canadian, making citizenship more accessible for individuals worldwide, especially those born to Canadian parents outside the country.

A Major Shift in Citizenship Rules

Bill C-3 marks a monumental shift in Canadian citizenship policy. The federal government’s new legislation aims to overhaul the existing rules, which have long been criticized for limiting citizenship by descent to only the first generation born abroad. Introduced in 2009, the previous policy prevented many Canadians who were born overseas from passing their citizenship to their children if those children were also born outside of Canada. This limited approach excluded many individuals with strong Canadian ties, an issue that the new bill seeks to address by broadening the scope of who can claim Canadian citizenship.

The Need for Change: Why Now?

For years, Canada has maintained strict limitations on citizenship by descent. Under the 2009 legislation, children born abroad to Canadian citizens were only eligible for citizenship if their parent was born in Canada or if the parent was a first-generation Canadian citizen. This limitation meant that second-generation Canadians born outside the country were excluded from claiming Canadian citizenship, even though they had deep familial ties to the nation.

The outdated policy was seen as unjust, leaving many individuals—who identify strongly with Canada and its values—unable to claim citizenship. Acknowledging the flaws of this system, the Canadian government has decided to make citizenship by descent more inclusive and accessible, opening the door to a new generation of Canadians.

What is Citizenship by Descent?

Citizenship by descent refers to the practice of granting nationality to children born outside the country if one of their parents is a citizen. In Canada, this system has traditionally been limited to the first generation born abroad. The law excluded second-generation Canadians unless they were born or adopted within Canada’s borders. As a result, many children of Canadian citizens born overseas found themselves without Canadian citizenship, despite their parent’s national ties.

The Key Changes Introduced by Bill C-3

If passed, Bill C-3 would fundamentally alter the citizenship landscape by expanding eligibility. The key provisions of the bill include:

  1. Restoration of Citizenship: Individuals who would have been Canadian citizens had it not been for the first-generation limit will automatically regain their citizenship under the new rules.
  2. Expanded Citizenship by Descent: The new legislation would permit the children of Canadian parents—born abroad to be eligible for citizenship, as long as their Canadian parent has lived in Canada for at least 1,095 cumulative days (approximately three years) prior to the child’s birth or adoption. This change reflects the importance of maintaining a strong connection to Canada while also acknowledging the global nature of Canadian families.

These changes offer an inclusive and practical approach to citizenship, ensuring that the bond between Canadians and their descendants is not lost due to arbitrary geographic boundaries.

Who Will Benefit from Bill C-3?

The passage of Bill C-3 is expected to benefit a large group of individuals, particularly those who:

  • Were born abroad to Canadian citizens who themselves were born outside of Canada.
  • Were adopted outside of Canada by Canadian parents.
  • Were affected by previous provisions of the Citizenship Act, such as section 8, which stripped citizenship from some individuals once they reached the age of 28.
  • Are part of the “Lost Canadians,” individuals who were denied citizenship due to outdated legal frameworks.

Since the 2009 and 2015 reforms, approximately 20,000 individuals have regained or gained Canadian citizenship. Bill C-3 seeks to build on this progress by restoring citizenship to those affected by the previous law, extending a helping hand to even more people with Canadian roots.

A Court Ruling Accelerates the Reform Process

The call for change was given a significant boost following a ruling by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in December 2023. The court determined that the first-generation rule was unconstitutional, as it unfairly discriminated against children born abroad to Canadian citizens. The ruling underscored the need for legislative reform, and instead of appealing the decision, the Canadian government acknowledged its flaws and pledged to address them through the introduction of Bill C-3.

This ruling confirmed the government’s commitment to upholding fairness and ensuring that Canadian citizenship is available to those who are entitled to it, regardless of where they were born.

What Happens Next?

Bill C-3 must now undergo the legislative process before it becomes law. The bill must be passed by both Houses of Parliament and receive Royal Assent before it can be enacted. If the bill is approved, the Canadian government has pledged to swiftly implement the changes and provide clear guidelines on eligibility through the Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) website.

This means that eligible individuals could soon be able to reconnect with their Canadian identity, allowing them to enjoy the rights, privileges, and opportunities that come with Canadian citizenship.

Final Thoughts: A More Inclusive Canada

Bill C-3 represents an important step forward in making Canadian citizenship more accessible and inclusive. By extending citizenship by descent to second-generation Canadians born abroad, Canada is acknowledging the increasingly global nature of families and communities. It emphasizes that Canadian identity is not confined to geography, but is shaped by shared values of diversity, inclusivity, and belonging.

Canada introduces Bill C-3 to extend citizenship by descent beyond the first generation, enabling more global families to claim Canadian nationality. This reform reflects Canada’s commitment to inclusivity and recognizes the growing international ties of Canadian families.

As this legislation progresses through Parliament, it holds the potential to strengthen the connection between Canada and its global diaspora, ensuring that more individuals with Canadian heritage are able to claim their rightful place in the country’s future. Whether for personal or professional reasons, this legislation could be a game-changer for many seeking to establish or reconnect with their Canadian roots.

Source: Canada Introduces New Citizenship Reform With Bill C-3, Opening Doors For Global Travel And Family Connections

Also, Canada’s new bill to grant citizenship to thousands of people 

A proposed bill in Canada could open the path to citizenship for thousands, potentially impacting Indian-origin residents and skilled workers. Immigration Minister Lena Diab tabled legislation Thursday to restore citizenship to the “lost Canadians” after a court found the existing law unconstitutional.

The term refers to people who were born outside of the country to Canadian parents who were also born in another country. In 2009, the federal Conservative government of the day changed the law so that Canadians who were born abroad could not pass down their citizenship if their child was born outside of Canada.

That law was deemed unconstitutional by the Ontario Superior Court in December 2023 and the Liberal government did not challenge the ruling. The government received its fourth deadline extension to pass legislation to address the issue in April.

It applied for a one-year extension, but Justice Jasmine Akbarali set a Nov. 20 deadline, saying that should be enough time for the government to implement “remedial legislation” if it makes it a “priority.”

Akbarali has criticized the government’s handling of the legislation in her decisions to grant extensions, citing the harm that could follow if the Stephen Harper-era law were to be declared invalid without replacement legislation.

Children born in Canada automatically receive Canadian citizenship at birth, regardless of the nationality of their parents, subject to some exceptions, such as children of foreign diplomats. 

Children of second-generation Canadian citizens who meet the substantial connection to Canada test need not wait for the legislation to pass; they can already apply for discretionary grants of Canadian citizenship under the existing interim measures.

Filed under C-3, Citizenship Tagged with

Critic calls out border bill’s proposed new cabinet powers on immigration

2025/06/07 1 Comment

As expected. Suspect that the over-reach of the Bill with respect to civil liberties will over shadow concerns of immigration and refugee advocates:

An NDP critic says a provision in the federal government’s border security bill that would give cabinet the power to cancel immigration documents looks like an attempt to “mimic” measures deployed by the Trump administration in the U.S.

“It seems to me … this piece of legislation is Canada’s attempt to mimic some of those measures that the United States is adopting. I actually never thought that this day would come where Canada would go down that road,” B.C. NDP MP Jenny Kwan told The Canadian Press.

“However, it is here, and meanwhile the government is saying, ‘Don’t worry, trust us.’”

Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree said that the immigration minister would only be able to exercise the power to cancel, suspend or alter immigration documents in an “emergency” and after being granted the authority through an order-in-council.

“The tools are in place to ensure the minister of immigration has additional tools to ensure that in a modern era, for example, whether it’s a pandemic or issues around cybersecurity, she will have the tools to make those decisions,” Anandasangaree said during debate on the bill Thursday.

Conservative immigration critic Michelle Rempel Garner said the legislation contains several “poison pills” that threaten people’s civil liberties. 

This includes the ability for Canadian Security Intelligence Service and police to access customer information from online service providers in certain circumstances.

“The government has not shown Canadians any specific situation, any specific evidence or circumstance in granular detail about why we should be giving up our civil liberties to a government that unlawfully used the Emergencies Act,” Rempel Garner said during Thursday’s debate.

This is in reference to to a 2024 Federal Court ruling that found the government’s use of the Emergencies Act was unreasonable to breakup the 2022 “Freedom Convoy” protests against COVID-19 public health measures.

The government has appealed this ruling. 

Bloc Québécois MP Claude DeBellefeuille said that her party plans to support the bill at second reading so it can be studied by the public safety committee.

Speaking in French, she said the bill needs to be examined closely because it looks to give new powers to government ministers, law enforcement and even Canada Post.

Immigration Minister Lena Diab said Wednesday the legislation is designed to address “one-off” situations like a pandemic or some other “exceptional circumstance.”

“I think people, Canadians should feel safe that we are putting in all these safeguards, but again, as I said, it’s all part of protecting our country and protecting our system that we value and protecting people that come here because we want to ensure that they are successful as well,” Diab said.

Bill C-2 also proposes giving the immigration minister the power to pause the acceptance of new immigration applications and cancel or pause processing of the current inventory of applications in the event of an emergency.

Julia Sande, a human rights lawyer with Amnesty International Canada, said immigration applicants could lose a lot of money because the legislation doesn’t oblige the government to refund affected people.

“People give up their entire lives, in some cases, their life savings or their family’s life savings. People go into debt just to be able to come here,” she said. “And so to have the government be able to pull the rug out from under wide groups of people is concerning.”

Kwan said the proposed new powers are problematic because cabinet decisions are made in secret and there’s no firm definition of an “emergency” in the legislation.

“I don’t accept that the Liberals say, ‘Don’t worry, we’re the good guys, so trust us.’ I’m sorry, that is just not acceptable,” she said, adding there’s no way to know what a future government might do with this power.

The text of the legislation says that if the minister “is of the opinion that it is in the public interest to do so,” they may trigger the power to cancel, suspend or alter immigration documents through a cabinet order.

“They’re saying in an emergency, but that’s not what’s written. They said if they’re in the opinion that it’s in the public interest … that could really be anything,” Sande said.

“In the fall, we saw migrants and refugees being scapegoated for the housing crisis. And so, you know, what’s in the public interest?”

Last year, then-immigration minister Marc Miller said plans to reduce the number of permanent and temporary visas issued would help stabilize the housing market.

U.S. President Donald Trump has used national security as justification for a host of immigration measures that involve detaining and deporting people, including university students who have condemned the war in Gaza.

Sande said the proposed bill “attacks” the right to seek asylum by making it harder for migrants to make a claim if they are entering Canada from the U.S., or have been in the country for more than a year.

“They’re talking about fentanyl, they’re talking about guns and then all of a sudden they’re attacking the right to asylum,” Sande said.

“They are completely different things and it’s difficult for civil society, for experts to respond when there’s so many things going on.”

Source: Critic calls out border bill’s proposed new cabinet powers on immigration

Filed under C-3, Citizenship Tagged with , , , , ,

Bill C-3: An Act to amend the Citizenship Act (2025), same as previous C-71

2025/06/06 Leave a comment

Appears unchanged from the former C-71, with the same failings. See my earlier Bill C-71 opens up a possible never-ending chain of citizenship:

Canada’s Citizenship Act contains a first-generation limit to citizenship by descent for individuals born abroad, which generally means that a Canadian citizen parent can only pass on citizenship to a child born outside Canada if the parent was either born or naturalized in Canada before the birth of the child. Canadians born or naturalized in Canada before adopting a child abroad can apply for a direct grant of citizenship for the adopted child.

As a result of the first-generation limit, in general, Canadian citizens who were born outside Canada and obtained their citizenship through descent cannot pass on citizenship to their child born outside Canada, and cannot apply for a direct grant of citizenship for a child adopted outside Canada.

On December 19, 2023, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice declared that key provisions of the first-generation limit for those born abroad are unconstitutional. The Government of Canada did not appeal the ruling because we agree that the current law has unacceptable consequences for Canadians whose children were born outside the country.

The government is introducing legislation to make the citizenship process as fair and transparent as possible. Bill C-3 would 

  • automatically remedy the status of any person who would be a citizen today were it not for the first-generation limit or certain outdated provisions of former citizenship legislation
  • establish a new framework for citizenship by descent going forward that would allow for access to citizenship beyond the first generation based on a Canadian parent’s substantial connection to Canada

An interim measure will continue to be available for those affected by the first-generation limit while both Houses of Parliament consider amendments to the Citizenship Act. More information about the interim measure is available on IRCC’s web site.

Substantial connection test

Bill C-3 would allow a Canadian parent born abroad who has a substantial connection to Canada to pass on citizenship to their child born abroad beyond the first generation. It would also provide them with access to the direct grant of citizenship for their child adopted abroad beyond the first generation.

To demonstrate a substantial connection to Canada, a Canadian parent who was born abroad would need to have a cumulative 1,095 days (i.e., three years) of physical presence in Canada before the birth or adoption of the child.

Lost Canadians

The term “Lost Canadians” has generally been used to describe those who lost or never acquired citizenship due to certain outdated provisions of former citizenship legislation.

Most cases were remedied by changes to the law in 2009 and 2015. These changes allowed people to gain Canadian citizenship or get back the citizenship they lost. Despite this, additional amendments are needed to include other categories of “Lost Canadians” and their descendants who did not benefit from the 2009 and 2015 changes.

Bill C-3 will restore citizenship to remaining “Lost Canadians,” their descendants and anyone who was born abroad to a Canadian parent in the second or subsequent generations before the legislation comes into force. This includes people who lost their citizenship as a result of requirements under the former section 8 of the Citizenship Act.

Source: Bill C-3: An Act to amend the Citizenship Act (2025)

Filed under C-3, C-71, Citizenship

Recording of Research Matters event: Exploring citizenship trends and immigrant engagement in Canada and Australia 

2025/05/30 Leave a comment

ICYMI: Good webinar on recent trends in citizenship by Fung Hou of StatsCan (decline in naturalization along with “citizens of convenience” evidence showing little difference between citizen immigrants and non-citizen immigrants who leave Canada) and a Canada-Australia comparison by Li Xu of IRCC.

Source: Recording of Research Matters event: Exploring citizenship trends and immigrant engagement in Canada and Australia

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →