Citizenship Oath on a Click: My Submission

2023/03/13 Leave a comment

My submission in response to Canada Gazette, Part I, Volume 157, Number 8: Regulations Amending the Citizenship Regulations (Oath of Citizenship)

General 

The planned change risks weakening the meaningfulness of Canadian citizenship by allowing the oath to be administered by a “non-authorized person” and thus citizenship ceremonies to be reduced if not eliminated in number.

The notice is lacking in any serious analysis apart from some generalities around potential cost and time savings. 

Given that the proposal focuses on cost savings due to a reduced number of ceremonies, one would expect, at a minimum, estimates of the number of applicants who would avail themselves of “ceremonies on a click” and the consequent number of reduced ceremonies. 

There is no analysis on the impact on the sense of belonging and attachment that moving to “ceremonies on a click” will have on new Canadians, nor is their any consideration of the historical context or the will of Parliament. It appears that no public opinion research was conducted regarding this proposed change as none is mentioned in the notice. 

This proposal has been widely criticized in commentary by myself and Senator Omidvar, former Governor General Clarkson, former Immigration Minister Marchi among others. These public commentaries, and the comments they have generated, need to be included along with formal comments like this one.

Issues

While IRCC has correctly focussed on modernization of the process such as e-applications, e-tests and an on-line application tracker in order to facilitate the process for applicants, in other areas it has weakened the meaningfulness, integration and sense belonging of becoming a citizen. The move to virtual citizenship ceremonies, needed during the pandemic, has less power and significance than in-person ceremonies, as anyone who has attended both can attest.

The proposed change would further weaken the act of becoming a citizen by eliminating or at least reducing the need for citizenship ceremonies, an objective explicitly stated in the “benefits and costs” section.

It is also against the wishes of Parliament, expressed as early as the first reading of the original Citizenship Act on October 22, 1945, when the then Secretary of State, Paul Martin Sr. spoke of the importance of citizenship ceremonies, stating that the legislation would:

“by appropriate ceremonies, impress upon applicants the responsibilities and privileges of Canadian citizenship” (House of Commons Debates, October 25, 1945, p. 1337 and s.38, Citizenship Act, 1946.)

Mr. Martin went on to state that new Canadians must:

“be made to feel that they, like the rest of us, are Canadians, citizens of a great country, guardians of proud traditions and trustees of all that is best in life for generations of Canadians yet to be … [and] have a consciousness of a common purpose and common interest as Canadians; that all of us be able to say with pride and say with meaning: “I am a Canadian.”” (House of Commons Debates, October 25, 1945, p. 1337)

At second reading, Mr. Martin reiterated that where ceremonies were taking place for Canadian ‘naturalization’ (which occurred prior to 1947), these ceremonies “have made a deep impression upon every new Canadian who has obtained Canadian naturalization.” He added that is was the Government’s “determination under the statutory provisions of this bill to frame regulations that will make these ceremonies more than ordinary procedure, and one of a memorable character.” (House of Commons Debates, April 2, 1946, p. 505)

Mr. Martin understood the importance of a ceremony to welcome new Canadians into the Canadian family and our practice of public ceremonies has been emulated by other countries who emulate the benefits of what we have been doing. It would be a betrayal of those who preceded us to do away with citizenship ceremonies.

Background

The section focusses on the oath and ceremony as meeting the formal legal requirement and is silent on the broader implications on welcoming and belonging that citizenship ceremonies provide. There is no mention of public opinion research on attitudes towards citizenship ceremonies. 

Internal research and evaluations are similarly not mentioned. The 2013 IRCC Evaluation of the Citizenship Awareness Program noted: 

“Although newcomers have various reasons for getting their Canadian citizenship, the evaluation found that practical reasons, such as getting passports, ranked below more intangible reasons linked to their social integration, highlighting a role that promotion can have in creating a sense of belonging and permanency for newcomers to further encourage uptake.”

The 2020 Evaluation of the Citizenship Program also indicated that the “evidence suggested that wanting to feel fully Canadian and to make Canada their permanent home are primary motivators,” along with the need to “implement a new approach for the knowledge requirement, which could include a revised study guide and additional tools.” 

Public commentary in the media and social media indicate significant attachment to public ceremonies, whether in-person or virtual.  Again, there is no reference to the original will of Parliament that ceremonies take place and that:

“Since the passage of the Citizenship Act in 1947, Canadian citizenship policy has embodied two distinct objectives: i) to encourage and facilitate naturalization by permanent residents; and ii) to enhance the meaning of citizenship as a unifying bond for Canadians.” (2013 Evaluation)

Description

IRCC is essentially arguing that becoming a citizen in front of an authorized person along with other to be Canadians is not worth a few hours of their time? Seriously? 

The experience that I and others have while attending citizenship ceremonies is that the ceremony is a very significant moment in the immigration and citizenship journey for them, their families and friends. This more than compensates for a few more months of processing time.

Again, the lack of public opinion research on this proposed change is telling, as this is one of the few public moments in the immigration, integration and citizenship journey, and one of the few positive experiences with the process.

Regulatory analysis—Benefits and costs

The aim is clearly cost reduction through the holding of fewer citizenship ceremonies:

“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.”

Tellingly, there is no data on the recent average costs of holding citizenship ceremonies, both in-person and virtual. And there are no estimated numbers of the reduction of citizenship ceremonies that would be needed to cover the ongoing costs of $5 million over 10 years. This amount is negligible in relation to the overall budget of the Citizenship Program.

Similarly, there are no  estimates on the number of persons who would likely choose this option and the consequently reduced number of ceremonies. This information, and the underlying assumptions, should be stated in the notice (the government of the day did so with respect to the 2014-15 increase in citizenship fees).

But more than the financial benefits and costs, this change fundamentally diminishes the symbolic and celebratory aspects of citizenship by eliminating the most significant part of the process of becoming a citizen, being among others from around the world who are taking the next step in their immigration and integration journey.  As Paul Martin Sr. said in 1946, we need ceremonies and they must be these “more than ordinary procedure, and one of a memorable character.”

There is no discussion on this most fundamental aspect of this change, nor acknowledgement of how this shift will affect applicants and their sense of participation and belonging. Citizenship is not a drivers license or health card; it is the means of having a secure home, of have the right to vote and participate in decisions regarding the present and future of Canada. 

Trying to justify these changes on inclusion grounds, given processing and ceremony time savings, misses the most important and fundamental inclusion which is the ceremony itself, with all its rituals and symbolism and welcome it provides.

With no public opinion research or consultations cited in the notice, likely that none was carried out, yet we know from commentary to date that this change is highly controversial.

Implementation, compliance and enforcement, and service standards

Will IRCC report on the expected up to three months processing time separately? Unlikely, so we will never know whether these savings were realized.

Will IRCC publicly report on the number of persons self-administering the oath and those in ceremonies on an annual basis as part of the department’s annual departmental plan and results report? Given the weakness of IRCC’s current reporting on the citizenship, and given no commitment is made in the Gazette, unlikely. 

Recommendation

IRCC should abandon these proposals and maintain Canada’s proud tradition of meaningful public citizenship ceremonies.

However, should IRCC proceed in this ill-advised change, several commitments need to be made:

  1. IRCC needs to include breakdowns between the number of new Canadians self-administering the oath and those participating in public ceremonies in its annual departmental plans and result reports;
  2. IRCC needs to share publicly any internal targets in terms of ceremony reductions in order to assess the impact of the change; and,
  3. IRCC needs to commit to public opinion research on the experience of new Canadians who self-administer the oath and those who participate in ceremonies, an interim public report two-years after the change comes into effect (June 2025) and a further public report five-years later (June 2028)

Finally, as it was Parliament that originally directed formal ceremonies to take place, Parliament ought to review any actions by IRCC that undermine the will of Parliament.

Please consider providing your views to the Government through the Gazette process: https://canadagazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2023/2023-02-25/html/reg1-eng.html

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , , ,

Keenan: Citizenship should be marked by a more meaningful ritual than just a mouse click

2023/03/10 Leave a comment

Another commentary against the change, proposing a more expansive approach to citizenship ceremonies and their importance as ritual:

If there’s one thing that’s become clear from the whole kerfuffle over a government plan to replace citizenship oath-swearing ceremonies with the tick of a box on an online form, it’s that many of us feel there’s real value in a real initiation ritual. 

I probably don’t need to repeat the arguments that have been well articulated by others: making it akin to the “I accept the terms and conditions” formality of social media sign-ups “cheapens” the whole process, as the CEO of the Institute for Canadian Citizenship told the Star; “the act of swearing allegiance to one’s country before a citizenship judge is a powerful, and moving ceremony,” wrote Sergio Marchi, who was initiated in such a ceremony after immigrating from Argentina before becoming Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and presiding over many other such ceremonies; those ceremonies “were some of the most moving, joyful, and meaningful events I have ever attended,” wrote Rev. Mark McLennan on our letters page. Amen, amen, amen. I agree.

A few years ago, I was invited to participate in such a ceremony at Fort York — members of the community of existing citizens like myself joined round-table discussions with citizenship candidates being sworn in that afternoon to discuss what it means to be Canadian, what we valued about this country, what we felt about our rights and obligations. Then we witnessed the swearing of the oath that made this group formally a part of our country’s membership — and we were invited to also swear the oath to reaffirm our own allegiance. As someone born in Canada, it was the first time in my life I had ever spoken those words, or ever done anything to actively confirm my own citizenship. For the new citizens, it was an important, joyful milestone day marked by a powerful ritual. But it held great meaning for me too, prompting some welcome reflection and gratitude — not just for being able to witness the ceremony for others, but being able to participate in it myself. 

I wonder if, instead of Tinder-izing the process into a quick swipe-and-send, we should further cement this powerful ritual as a right of passage available to all Canadians, including those who are automatically Canadian citizens by birth.

In the Catholic faith tradition in which I was raised, children become members of the religion through baptism soon after birth, in a choice made by their parents. But at adolescence, they are invited to participate in a confirmation ceremony where they make their own choice to join the church as adults — a process that includes an elaborate preparation course and an elaborate ceremony usually presided over by a bishop or cardinal. 

In the Jewish tradition, there’s a similar and perhaps more widely known tradition in the bar mitzvah or bat mitzvah, in which members of the faith — usually born into it — have an elaborate coming-out ritual and celebration to mark their maturity as people and members of their community. Other faith and ethnic communities around the world have related ceremonies of adult initiation, or coming of age, from the Amish rumspringa to the Japanese seijin-no-hi to the Filipino debut.

It feels like Canada could use a similar ritual marking an embrace of mature citizenship, even for those who are already citizens. It could be a moving, joyful, meaningful event for them for many of the same reasons it is for new Canadians. 

Birthright citizenship, in Canada, is an important part of our legal and cultural tradition in itself, of course — the rights and obligations of citizenship extend to natural-born Canadians automatically, they are not contingent on any action they need to take or oath they need to swear, and I don’t think they should be. But it would be nice, I think, and potentially powerful, if all of us (those from here and from away alike) were invited to participate in ceremonies where we recognize and formalize our connection to our country ourselves, acknowledging and embracing what many of us inherited by accident of birth even as others are going to great lengths to obtain the same status. This process — optional, but maybe expected — could be build into the curriculum (or extracurricular schedule) of schools alongside civics lessons. It would be an educational opportunity — much needed if reactions to those periodic “could you pass the citizenship application test” stories that go around are any guide — as well as a chance to both reflect on and celebrate what citizenship means.

The click-a-box modification to the existing process was apparently proposed as a way to clear pandemic-induced backlogs in citizenship ceremonies. But my own sense is that one important thing the pandemic taught us — to repeat a theme I wrote on only recently — it’s that a lot of our life tasks can be accomplished online from home, but that much of life is less full and meaningful if we do everything that way. During the long period of isolation, most of us sorely missed the public ceremonies of weddings and funerals and graduations, and learned just how pale an imitation attending by video conference is. Rituals are powerful, they imbue the things they recognize with significance, marking important occasions and decisions and milestones in our memories and for our communities.

Many of us seem to recognize that citizenship initiation deserves a public in-person ritual. Maybe instead of streamlining that process into meaninglessness, we should expand it so more people get to experience its meaning. 

Source: Keenan: Citizenship should be marked by a more meaningful ritual than just a mouse click

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , ,

Rahim Mohamed: Trudeau has degraded the value of Canadian citizenship 

2023/03/10 Leave a comment

More commentary opposing the proposed change to the citizenship oath. Overly partisan in its narrative, the 2015 election was not “the niqab election” but driven more by the desire for change, the “barbaric tip line” and the uncertainty that citizenship revocation meant to many.

The usual simplistic mischaracterization of the post-modern comments of Trudeau. Canadian identity is more of a civic identity than one based mainly on ethnic origin, although Canadian institutions were shaped primarily by British and French Canadians, which of course continue to evolve and are influenced by more newly arrived groups (and have been increasingly influenced by the original Indigenous inhabitants).

And equally simplistic is blaming the recent steep decline in citizenship take-up rates on PM language neglects that this trend pre-dated the Liberals, the shutdown and slow recovery 2021-22 of the citizenship program due to COVID and other factors:

The 2015 federal election, which saw the Stephen Harper-led Conservatives fall to defeat after nearly a decade in power, is still known in some circles as “the niqab election.” It was, after all, the Harper government’s protracted legal battle to prevent Muslim women from wearing niqabs at citizenship ceremonies that effectively framed the race.

The drawn-out litigation, which dragged into the campaign, allowed the ultimately victorious Liberals to drive home the narrative that Harper’s team was using the issue to capitalize on latent anti-Muslim sentiment in pockets of the electorate (i.e., Quebec). Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau masterfully cast himself as an inclusive foil to the Conservatives, campaigning on the aspirational (and tautological) refrain, “A Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian.”

These numbers conveyed a broad national consensus that citizenship ceremonies were not just a mere bureaucratic box-ticking exercise, but rather a meaningful rite of passage for all new Canadians — one that necessitated a certain manner of dress and decorum. The niqab, a restrictive garment rooted in a sexist culture of oppression, was self-evidently improper attire for a ceremony to become a member of a liberal, egalitarian society.

So how, in the years since then, have we reached a point where new Canadians may soon be able to finalize the process of becoming citizens by, quite literally, ticking a few boxes on a government website?

Per a notice published last month in the Canada Gazette, proposed amendments to Canada’s citizenship regulations could allow applicants to “self-administer” their oath of citizenship through a “secure online solution without the presence of an authorized individual.” In other words, new Canadians would log in to a secure government website where they would be directed to click a button to agree to “faithfully observe the laws of Canada.”

In a few months’ time, the process of formalizing one’s Canadian identity could look virtually identical to the process of becoming an ordained minister with the Universal Life Church. What on earth has become of our country?

As has been something of a pattern lately, Canadians have arrived at the bottom of an entirely foreseeable slippery slope. “Click here to become a Canadian citizen” is merely the logical endpoint of the postmodern vision of Canadian identity that Justin Trudeau articulated all the way back in 2015.

Throughout the 2015 campaign, Trudeau held firm to the position that the sole criterium for being a Canadian was holding a Canadian passport — not even taking part in a terrorist plot targeting Canadians could disqualify a passport holder from membership in the national community. Before the year was out, he would tell the New York Times that, “There is no core identity, no mainstream in Canada,” which he claimed was the world’s “first post-national state.”

Given Trudeau’s open (and vocal) nihilism toward the very concept of Canadian identity, it’s hardly surprising that his time as prime minister has coincided with a precipitous fall in national pride. By the end of 2019, more than four-in-10 Canadians said they felt more attached to their province than to the country as a whole. This included majorities in Quebec, Alberta and Atlantic Canada. (In 2013, majorities in all provinces outside of Quebec reported a greater sense of belonging to Canada than to their province).

Following last year’s Freedom Convoy protests, national media outlets ran think pieces debating whether the Canadian flag was a “racist” hate symbol. Just a few weeks ago, Canadian R&B singer Jully Black was widely applauded for changing the lyrics to “O Canada” to “our home on native land” in her rendition of the national anthem at the NBA All-Star Game.

If this is how Canadians themselves view the Great White North, it shouldn’t come as a shock that newcomers aren’t exactly clambering to become citizens. Over Trudeau’s time in office, the percentage of permanent residents who go on to become citizens has fallen by nearly a quarter, dropping below 50 per cent in 2021.

The Trudeau government is looking to reverse this trend with technology. A more enduring solution may be to remind permanent residents why they should want to be Canadian in the first place.

The great niqab debate of 2015 wasn’t just about facial coverings — or even the place of Muslims in Canada. It was, more foundationally, a proxy battle pitting two visions of Canadian identity. Trudeau’s postmodern and tautological vision won out; today, the term “Canadian” is virtually meaningless.

We can’t say we weren’t warned.

Source: Rahim Mohamed: Trudeau has degraded the value of Canadian citizenship

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , ,

FIRST READING: Save the #citizenship ceremonies! 

2023/03/09 Leave a comment

Summary of some other commentary criticizing the move. Haven’t seen any commentary favouring the change although a small minority in comment sections and social media are in favour given “promised” reduction in processing times:

Amid news that the federal government is mulling an end to in-person citizenship ceremonies, a cross-section of prominent Canadians have emerged to denounce the “terrible” and “horrifying” idea.

“This is without question a terrible idea,” wrote former Calgary mayor Naheed Nenshi in a tweet last week. “The ceremony is deeply meaningful and the reasons for removing it given here are bureaucratic and puerile.”

On Feb. 25, the Department of Citizenship and Immigration first gave notice that they were mulling an end to in-person citizenship ceremonies in favour of a “secure online solution.” In-person ceremonies could still be arranged upon request, but subject to a delay.

Rather than swearing allegiance to the Crown in front of a citizenship judge, new Canadians would simply check a box online. Presumably, the “online solution” would also do away with a group singing of “O Canada.”

According to immigration officials, phasing out the ceremony was suggested purely as a way to relieve a three-month backlog in finalizing citizenship applications.

“Recognizing that more can be done to further improve client service and processing times … the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration announced that the Department would begin pursuing the necessary changes to allow for self-administration of the Oath of Citizenship,” it wrote.

A brief also noted the inconvenience of new citizens sometimes having to book time off work to make the ceremony. “Many clients have to take time off work to attend citizenship ceremonies, and this time off is not necessarily paid by employers,” it reads.

“It is a bad idea to do away with citizenship ceremonies. A very bad idea. The opposite of efficiency,” novelist John Ralston Saul wrote in a statement last week.

Some of the most vocal defenders, however, have been foreign-born Canadians whose own citizenship began with the swearing of an oath.

Sergio Marchi is an Argentinian immigrant to Canada who eventually served as minister of immigration under then-prime minister Jean Chrétien.

“For years, my parents would recount how momentous and meaningful (the ceremony) was. Why would government want to rob future citizens of this feeling of attachment?” wrote Marchi in an op-ed for the Toronto Star.

The former minister also called it an “insult” that the ceremony would be phased out merely in the name of expediency. He noted that when similar backlogs piled up under his tenure, the department began deputizing Order of Canada recipients to act as citizenship judges.

“In-Person Canadian citizenship ceremonies are the magical rituals that bring together everyone (new and old citizens) to celebrate the true meaning of the Canadian dream,” reads a Monday social media post by Tareq Hadhad, a Syrian refugee famous for founding the Nova Scotia-based chocolatier Peace by Chocolate.

“We cannot afford to lose the significance of this celebration of belonging nor can we diminish the value of Canadian citizenship,” Hadhad added.

Former Governor General Adrienne Clarkson came to Canada as a refugee from Japanese-occupied Hong Kong, and would preside over a few citizenship ceremonies herself as an Officer of the Order of Canada.

In a column for The Globe and Mail, Clarkson said she was “horrified” by the proposed change.

“The idea that Canada, which is perhaps the most successful immigrant nation in the world, would resort to a machine-oriented way of saying that you are now a citizen, is egregious,” she wrote.

Right up until the end of the Second World War, Canadians were considered British subjects and all citizenship rituals and protocols were dictated by the U.K.

But the 1946 passage of the Citizenship Act first demarcated Canadian citizenship as a distinct entity from that of the U.K. One of the more unique aspects of the bill was its provision that new Canadians should attend “appropriate ceremonies” in order to impress upon them the “responsibilities and privileges of Canadian citizenship.”

This is not a universal practice. While the United States maintains a similar swearing-in ceremony for new citizens, in many countries naturalization is a more bureaucratic process done without any official pomp.

The centrepiece of the Canadian ceremony is the Oath of Citizenship. After some modern refinements over the years, it’s now a 64-word recitation pledging allegiance to King Charles III, the “laws of Canada,” the “Constitution” and “the Aboriginal and treaty rights of First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples.”

Ironically, the Department of Immigration is looking to phase out citizenship oaths at a time when pledging allegiance to Canada has never been easier. 

With many citizenship ceremonies made virtual during COVID-19, thousands of new Canadians have already finalized their citizenship by speaking into a webcam.

However, it’s still against the law to deliver the oath by phone.

“Administering the Oath over the phone is not in keeping with the legislation,” reads an official guide for new Canadians living in remote areas.

Source: FIRST READING: Save the citizenship ceremonies!

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , , , , ,

Griffith and Omidvar: Canadian citizenship by individual click? That’s not a good idea

2023/03/08 Leave a comment

Written jointly with Senator Omidvar:

The federal government’s recent proposal to allow applicants to self-administer the citizenship oath instead of being required to do so before a citizenship judge or equivalent undermines the meaningfulness and significance of becoming a Canadian citizen with fellow new Canadians.

Citizenship ceremonies are one of the few special moments in which the federal government can connect with new Canadians and celebrate their becoming Canadian and furthering their integration journey.

From experience attending ceremonies and taking the oath, we know the impact on new Canadians is real and meaningful, as it is on existing Canadians in attendance. Having citizenship conferred is not transactional, unlike obtaining drivers’ licences, health cards or passports. Citizenship allows for political participation through voting and being able to run for office and thus directly influence the future direction of Canada.

The proposed change continues a trend of diminishing the value of Canadian citizenship in practical aspects. There has been the ongoing massive shift to virtual citizenship ceremonies, prompted by the pandemic but expanded (99 per cent since April 2020). As well, there is no updated citizenship study guide despite plans for one more than three immigration ministers ago.

The government justifies the proposed change on operational and financial grounds and is silent on the policy implications regarding integration of new Canadians. The previous government was similarly silent on the implications of its quintupling of adult citizenship fees in 2014-15, which we now know has resulted, along with other factors, in a significant drop in naturalization rates.

The current government is explicit that cost savings will come primarily from reduced citizenship ceremonies, both physical and virtual.

It is striking that a government so attuned to the importance of reconciliation and recognition of past and current injustices and the concerns of particular groups, can be so blind to the power of citizenship ceremonies to bring people of diverse origins together to celebrate them becoming part of Canadian society with all the rights and responsibilities that entails. And arguing, on inclusion grounds, that the change will save applicants two hours of ceremony time misses this broader aspect of inclusion.

Arguably, with pandemic measures largely over, the government should revert to in-person ceremonies as the default option, as these provide a greater sense of community and connection than virtual ceremonies.

The government, early in its mandate, made significant changes to residency and language requirements to improve inclusion, and more recently, changes to the oath of citizenship to recognize Indigenous and treaty rights. Reducing processing and ceremony time are insignificant in comparison.

We know from the recent Statistics Canada and the Institute for Canadian Citizenship analysis that naturalization has declined dramatically from 60.4 per cent in 2016 to 45.7 per cent in 2021, five to nine years after landing, reflecting a combination of factors, including the pandemic and high citizenship fees. A substantive inclusion measure would require the government to implement, at least partially, its platform commitment in the 2019 and 2021 election platforms to eliminate citizenship fees.

Citizenship 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.”

The 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.

Andrew Griffith is the former director general for Citizenship and Multiculturalism and is a fellow of the Environics Institute and of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. Sen. Ratna Omidvar is an independent senator from Ontario.

Source: Griffith and Omidvar: Canadian citizenship by individual click? That’s not a good idea

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , , ,

Clarkson: If Canada loses its citizenship ceremonies, we risk losing ourselves

2023/03/06 Leave a comment

Calls out the efforts by the government and IRCC to diminish the value and meaningfulness of citizenship and highlights their lack of understanding of the fundamental meaning and belonging of ceremonies (disclosure I am providing citizenship and related data to the ICC).

To date, op-eds from the left (Toronto Star), centre (Globe) and right (National Post). Tenor of reader comments is against the proposed change but how many will submit written comments through the Gazette process and will the government listen.

And will either the NDP or CPC deem it important enough issue to raise given the understandable fixation on the government’s handling (or mishandling) of Chinese government foreign interference allegations:

One of the most wonderful things about becoming a Canadian is the citizenship ceremony.

There, new citizens are surrounded by a little crowd of other people who want to become Canadian too. It might be held in a federal citizenship office or in some other location that Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada has found that can accommodate people, though at the Institute for Canadian Citizenship, we try to hold our citizenship ceremonies in public spaces: libraries, city halls, university campuses, places we hope these new citizens will return to. Always, there is incredible joy – the kind that comes with recognizing that something special is happening. Wearing a head scarf or a beard, or an embroidered vest in brilliant colours, these about-to-become citizens know that they are doing something meaningful.

When I became an Officer of the Order of Canada in 1992, I was told that I would be able to preside over these ceremonies in the way a citizenship judge does. I was delighted by the idea: For my family and me, who arrived as stateless refugees during the Second World War, the precious gift of Canadian citizenship that we received in 1949 was something we cherished and celebrated.

The first ceremony over which I presided was overwhelming: there was such excitement and warmth among people of different backgrounds – even though the whole thing was taking place at the Metropolitan Toronto Police headquarters!

When my husband John Ralston Saul and I founded the Institute for Canadian Citizenship, one of the first things we wanted to do was to have special ceremonies to acknowledge how important this moment is in people’s lives. For six years, as Governor-General, I presided over citizenship ceremonies, and invited people who already had Canadian citizenship to come specifically to meet the new citizens, to sit at roundtables with them and have discussions before the formal ceremony. Everyone shared coffee and doughnuts afterward. It wasn’t elaborate, but it was congenial and hospitable.

When I left Rideau Hall, I decided that this would be a feature of the institute, and for 16 years we carried this on with the wisdom and guidance of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada. With their help, we have ceremonies in which we have Indigenous speakers and music, and roundtables where people can share their experiences of Canada up to that point.

It’s not a big deal. But it is important. And everyone who is sworn in across the country as citizens recognizes that the others around them are people who, like them, have taken the risk of leaving their own country with the courage to come and make a new life in Canada.

We can’t overstate the significance of being able to be around each other when we take our citizenship vows, or of new citizens receiving the formal and yet warm welcome they get from professional and excellent Immigration officials, who leave no misunderstanding as to what a citizen is and how a citizen can contribute to their country. The citizenship judges, whether they are federal appointees or members of the Order of Canada, always take the ceremonies to heart, and it is so moving to see people from so many different countries at each ceremony joining together and saying that they will become part of Canada.

Now, there are reports that in order to get rid of an administrative backlog, new citizens will be given the option to take their oath online, rather than in a physical ceremony. Frankly, I’m horrified by this. I believe that people want ceremonies to mark important passages in their lives. I think welcoming people in person is the least we can do as a country. I feel that the people who work at the ministry understand that, and that they do put a human face on it as much as they can.

The idea that Canada, which is perhaps the most successful immigrant nation in the world, would resort to a machine-oriented way of saying that you are now a citizen, is egregious. In 2001, on my state visit to Germany as Governor-General, then-president Johannes Rau told me how deeply impressed he was that we inducted people into citizenship personally. He lamented the fact that Germany generally sent out citizenships by some form of registered mail.

I can’t help feeling very emotional when I talk about this, because I do believe that ceremonies are important stages of every human being’s life. There is a reason why we have birthday parties, for instance, or why co-workers often share a cake when someone leaves for another job. There is a reason why people go to city hall or to a religious institution to bring meaning to their marriage. There is humanity in marking milestones in each other’s company; it is the mark of a civilized society. And Canada should always think of itself as a society which not only knows how to welcome people, but shows that a personal welcome is only the beginning of belonging.

Adrienne Clarkson was Canada’s 26th Governor-General and co-founder of the Institute for Canadian Citizenship.

Source: If Canada loses its citizenship ceremonies, we risk losing ourselves

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , , ,

Yuan Yi Zhu: Canadian citizenship is embarrassingly cheap and online oath makes it cheaper

2023/03/06 Leave a comment

Apart from the unnecessary snark and playing to the gallery if the comments on Zhu’s article are any guide, he nails the substance of this misguided change. But hopefully he and others will take the time to file their objections to the proposal through the Canada Gazette process (I will share my input in a future post):
Newly published figures by Statistics Canada revealed that fewer than half of permanent residents now take Canadian citizenship within 10 years, a 40 per cent decline over two decades.
Cue soul-searching among the usual Ottawa think tankers, wondering why the world’s denizens no longer wanted to be on “Team Canada.” Why did so many recent immigrants, arriving in record numbers, refuse the citizenship we hand to them practically for free and after as little as three years’ residence, or 1,095 days spent within the country out of the last five years?

Source: Yuan Yi Zhu: Canadian citizenship is embarrassingly cheap and online oath makes it cheaper

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , , ,

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

2023/03/03 1 Comment

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

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , ,

Newer posts →