Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Feb. 19th, 2007

[Barry Devolin, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

The problem we have, Mr. Chair, is that the minister has done such a great job answering the questions that we're actually.... I think we've exhausted a lot of the points on this issue.

I want to make a quick comment before I turn my time over to Mr. Komarnicki. I think the notion is a good idea that in the short term you're going to deal with people who bring themselves forward on a case-by-case basis and use the tools and the discretion that you have as minister to try to resolve those issues. I can't imagine how somebody could disagree with that.

You've also expressed a willingness, at the same time, to look at long-term legislative solutions. I'm relatively new to this committee, but you're right that there are many people on this committee with a lot of experience. I appreciate your willingness to work with the committee--and I'm sure many of the committee members feel the same way--in terms of proposing something that kind of tidies this up. As I read some of the quotes from the 1947 and the 1977 acts, it reminded me of that old TV show This is the Law, where they showed you the little skit and you had to guess which arcane law was being broken.

I think trying to create a level playing field and trying to figure out a way whereby people can be treated fairly and consistently is long overdue, and I applaud you if that's a problem you're willing to tackle.

Anyway, Mr. Komarnicki...?

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Yes.

To Mr. Fadden, we've obviously heard about various categories and cases that come up. Some of them are referred to incorrectly or interchangeably. Can you set out for us the difference between resumption of citizenship and confirmation of citizenship? How many categories are there? What's the big picture? What are we dealing with in this area?

[Richard Fadden]

I can give it a try, Mr. Chairman.

To go back to one of the points the minister made initially, you have to start from the premise that most of the people who seem to be affected by these difficulties are likely Canadians who have lost their proof of that citizenship. I understand that for many of these people this is frustrating, but in many ways it's no different from the situation I am in. If I apply for a passport, I have to find a way of proving I was born in Canada. As it turns out, I was born in Quebec, and one of Mr. Gravel's colleagues gave me a baptismal certificate. That's no longer valid, so I got a certificate of birth from the authorities in Quebec.

So it is an administrative process to prove that you're already a Canadian.

The second broad category encompasses those who either were or could have been Canadians. For instance, with border babies, if they were registered within the two years provided by the statute, they were Canadians from the moment they were born. If they were not registered, either within the two years or the somewhat longer period provided by the statute, we have to find a way to make them Canadians. That was in part my answer to Monsieur Gravel. There is no other provision in the law short of the regular process. They are in Canada, they are permanent residents, and they apply. The minister has indicated that in those cases, she's prepared to use her extraordinary powers under subsection 5(4) to short-circuit the process and make it happen much faster.

For other circumstances, such as the Mennonite marriages, or people who lost their citizenship because their parents abjured their Canadian citizenship and therefore they lost theirs, I come back again to what the minister said. It's very difficult to develop a neat little chart saying there were six categories, nor more no less. What we're trying to do is that if there's a substantive connection with Canada, we'll make recommendations to the minister that she use her authority under subsection 5(4).

The difficulty of course arises with those cases where we're going to have to decide, if over the course of the last 30 years the person has been in Canada three months, whether that is a substantial connection or not. It's a conversation we started having with the minister. But in most of the cases we've had so far, people have been in Canada for a long time and in those cases we're able to make the recommendation to the minister.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Thank you, Mr. Komarnicki.

Mr. Siksay.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

Minister, I have a couple of questions.

A few weeks back we had several of the new appointees to the citizenship court judges appear. The senior citizenship court judge at that time told us about a screening process that had been in place to screen potential new citizenship court judges. But he also told us that none of the people we were examining that day had gone through that process--none of the appointees of the current government.

Can you explain to us why that process isn't being engaged?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

There are two issues.

First, a couple of years ago a process was put in place for selection of citizenship judges. It was supposed to be temporary, but it's still there. It's time to do a review of that process. One of the challenges with it from various reports is that it seems to be cumbersome and concentrates the decision-making power to an unacceptable degree. I have instructed that a review be done of that process to make sure it's open and transparent, but that could take some time.

We do have a shortage of judges at the moment, and there are more openings coming up. There is also a backlog of people needing citizenship swearing-in ceremonies and such, and the services of the judges. Those people deserve to have service, so we are moving forward making appointments as openly and transparently as possible based on the criteria that the appointees must be merit-based. The ones who've come forward have already gone through some processes. Going forward, we are going to make sure that it is competence-based and that we deliver the services Canadians need and deserve.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Minister, when that sort of process was already in place, when it seemed fairly transparent, when it was run by the senior citizenship court judge, can you tell us what process has replaced that in this interim period? Is there any kind of review or screening process in place?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

For starters, we have been recruiting from a broader talent pool. We've advertised extensively across the country in areas where we hadn't advertised before. Broadening the talent pool is number one.

In terms of evaluating them, there is a process. We're using part of that, and then going forward.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

It sounds a little skimpy, unfortunately, Minister.

I had another question about the 33 special grants that you've done so far. Can you characterize the circumstances of those folks? Can you give us any details on the kinds of cases that led to you granting the special grants of citizenship?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

As the deputy minister indicated, there was one common thread: most of these people had demonstrated a truly substantial attachment to Canada. They may have lived here all of their lives, or virtually all, or they live here currently. A wide range of circumstances got them into the situation--in some cases, administrative error. Perhaps coming back from the U.S., the baby's documents were stamped “Canadian citizen” when in fact they weren't.

So there was a broad range, but in every case there was a substantial commitment to Canada.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

What is the usual number of special grants per year or per period?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Very few.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

So 33 is an extraordinary number?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Yes.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

So it's less than ten?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Yes.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Thank you, Mr. Siksay.

Madame Folco.

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

First, I'd like to thank my colleagues opposite for the opportunity to ask the minister a question.

Welcome, Minister.

You've told us a number of times this morning that you want to review the Citizenship Act. I'd simply like to inform this committee of facts of which it does not appear to be aware.

I joined this committee in 1997 as Vice-Chair. The Liberal minister at the time had introduced a citizenship bill. Unfortunately, because the election was called, we were unable to table it in the House of Commons. However, it would really be necessary to take an overall and very specific look at citizenship rather than state clichés or good intentions. Minister, I urge you to do so as soon as possible. From what I understood from your comments, you intend to do so.

I want to know whether you intend to table a bill on citizenship very soon, and, if so, when.

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

At the moment, I don't have any plans to table a whole new citizenship act. As I explained earlier, we set our priority on Bill C-14. However, I have indicated that when it comes to a long-term solution for the citizenship anomalies, I'm willing to consider a wide range of solutions. They could be administrative, regulatory, or legislative. If it's legislative, then I'm seeking your input. Actually, I'm seeking your input whatever the solutions are that you come up with.

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

That's very nice of you, and I appreciate your kindness. However, with all due respect, Minister, I would like to remind you that you are the Minister of Immigration and Citizenship, that your mandate has been assigned you by the Prime Minister and that it is your responsibility to solve the problems, not to ask your colleagues to do it for you. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Thank you.

Before I go to Mr. Karygiannis, I should make the committee, and specifically the minister, aware of something. When the notices went out for the meeting, they indicated that the minister was to appear between 11 and 1 o'clock. It's been brought to my attention that when we decided to have these meetings, we said they would take place between 11 and 1:30 p.m. I realize this might place the minister in a bit of a dilemma.

Is the minister prepared to stay until 1:30, or does she have to go somewhere else?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Regretfully, I have other commitments.

[The Chair, Conservative, Norman Doyle]

Okay.

I will go then to Mr. Karygiannis as the last questioner for a five-minute round. It is now three minutes before 1 o'clock.

We have a point of order from Mr. Telegdi.

[Andrew Telegdi, Liberal, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Mr. Chairman, I'm going to have the officials stick around. The minister doesn't want to answer any more questions, and I can understand why. But the mistake was that....

We were supposed to be sitting until 1:30, so I want to have some of the officials stick around. We need information, information that has to be tabled with this committee.