Citizenship Oath Self-affirmation Canada Gazette feedback: Using LLM and ChatGPT

Prompted by the thorough analysis by Nora Sobel of Red River University of feedback to the government’s proposal to allow for self-affirmation of the citizenship oath (“citizenship on a click”) as well as my earlier more informal analysis, it is interesting to note the respective conclusions.

My take, remarkably good in this example in terms of summarizing the main comments and the relative weighting of comments. ChatGPT’s conclusion reads partly like a general comment calling for “thoughtful implementation that preserves the integrity, symbolism, and inclusiveness of the citizenship oath” while stating a hybrid option as being the most broadly acceptable (i.e., a policy recommendation based on trying to please both groups rather than the essence):

From Sobel:

The analysis identified that a substantial portion of the online comments that supported the new regulations were reflective of specific experiences of the individuals submitting their opinions, especially related to decreasing the time of the citizenship process and increasing flexibility for participating in the citizenship ceremony.

On the other hand, a substantial portion of the online comments that opposed the new regulations were more general and connected to broader political matters, including the importance of the citizenship process, avoiding devaluing Canadian citizenship, respecting Canada, improper process for change in the regulations, improper reasons for change in the regulations, and concerns about the possibility of fraud.

The analysis also uncovered several alternative solutions proposed by participants with distinct positions about the regulations that could build a consensus about this public policy related to the Oath of Citizenship process. Some of the most common proposals were related to identifying a larger number of appropriate authorized officials to be present in the citizenship ceremonies, increasing the options of dates and times offering citizenship ceremonies, and advocating and legislating for paid work time for new Canadian citizens attending the citizenship ceremonies.

In addition, the analysis of the online comments showed another opportunity to build consensus given the common understanding between Canadian-born and not Canadian-born participants that the citizenship ceremony presents a high value for Canada, and that one of the main purposes in this ceremony should be to honour new Canadians.

Google’s LLM:

The provided text contains public feedback and commentary regarding a proposal to alter the process for taking the Canadian Oath of Citizenship, specifically suggesting allowing for self-administered online oaths without an official present. Many respondents support the proposal, citing the potential for reduced waiting times and increased convenience for applicants. Conversely, a significant number of comments strongly oppose the change, arguing it diminishes the importance and solemnity of becoming a citizen and should remain a meaningful in-person ceremonyto foster a sense of community and allegiance to Canada. Concerns about potential fraud and the devaluation of Canadian citizenship were also frequently raised by those against the proposed changes.

ChatGPT (only source cited is Canada Gazette notice, i.e., Sobel’s article not used)

Summary of Canada Gazette Feedback on Proposed Changes to Citizenship Oath Administration

The proposed changes to the Canadian citizenship oath aim to modernize the process by allowing individuals to self-affirm or declare the oath using a computer, without the physical presence of a citizenship official. This initiative is part of a broader effort to streamline administrative procedures, reduce costs, and improve accessibility.

Key Themes from Public and Stakeholder Feedback:

1. Support for Accessibility and Efficiency: Many respondents welcomed the proposed changes as a positive step toward improving accessibility, especially for individuals in remote areas, those with disabilities, or with scheduling constraints. The digital approach was seen as a cost-effective and time-efficient solution.
2. Concerns About Integrity and Symbolism: Some stakeholders expressed reservations about the potential erosion of the ceremonial and symbolic aspects of the citizenship oath. Concerns were raised about the importance of the shared experience and the presence of an official to lend solemnity and legitimacy to the process.
3. Recommendations for Safeguards: Several submissions advocated for built-in safeguards to ensure the authenticity and security of self-administered oaths. Suggestions included secure digital platforms, identity verification protocols, and post-oath follow-ups.
4. Call for Hybrid Options: There was a general consensus among some stakeholders for offering both virtual and in-person options to cater to diverse preferences and circumstances. Flexibility was emphasized as key to balancing modernization with tradition.
5. Cultural and Emotional Significance: Feedback underscored the deep cultural and emotional significance of the oath ceremony for new Canadians. Respondents highlighted the importance of preserving a sense of community and recognition in the citizenship process.

Conclusion:

While the majority of feedback reflected support for the proposed modernization efforts, there remains a clear call for thoughtful implementation that preserves the integrity, symbolism, and inclusiveness of the citizenship oath. A hybrid model with robust safeguards may be the most broadly acceptable path forward.