Evidence of meeting #27 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was citizenship.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Bal Gupta  Chair, Air India 182 Victims Families Association
Salma Siddiqui  President, Coalition of Progressive Canadian Muslim Organizations
R. Reis Pagtakhan  Immigration Lawyer, As an Individual
Jonathan Chodjai  Chair, Governing Council, Immigrant Québec

3:35 p.m.

NDP

The Vice-Chair NDP Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe

We are resuming the 27th meeting of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration.

Is everyone ready? Yes?

We are continuing our study of the subject matter of Bill C-24.

I'd like to thank our two witnesses for accepting the invitation and contributing to this study. We have with us the chair of the Air India 182 Victims Families Association, Mr. Bal Gupta.

It's nice to see you.

From the Coalition of Progressive Canadian Muslim Organizations is Madam Salma Siddiqui, who is the president.

Thank you.

You each have up to eight minutes for your opening remarks.

Mr. Gupta, you have the floor.

3:35 p.m.

Dr. Bal Gupta Chair, Air India 182 Victims Families Association

I thank the committee for giving us an opportunity to testify.

From the perspective of victims impacted directly by the most heinous violent crime in Canadian history, namely the terrorist bombing of Air India flight 182 on June 23, 1985, Air India 182 Victims Families Association strongly supports two provisions of Bill C-24. I will talk about only two provisions.

The first provision reduces the residence requirement for Canadian citizenship by one year for permanent residents who serve in the Canadian Forces. The second provision strips Canadian citizenship from those dual citizens who engage in acts of terrorism or engage in armed conflict with Canada. These provisions, if enacted into law, will on the one hand encourage, acknowledge, and support those who put themselves on the front lines for Canada to protect our freedom and democracy, and on the other hand act as a deterrent against those Canadians who violently demonstrate their opposition to our freedom and democracy by engaging in acts of terrorism or acts of war against Canada.

I speak to you not as an expert in legal or constitutional matters but as a victim of the worst violent terrorist crime in Canada. In the AI-182 tragedy I lost my wife, Ramwati Gupta, to whom, at the time, I had been married for over 20 years. In a tragic moment, I was left a single parent, with two young sons aged 12 and 18.

The AI-182 tragedy was a result of a terrorist conspiracy conceived and executed on Canadian soil by criminals who brought their problems from India into Canada. The terrorist bombing of AI-182 killed 329 innocent persons. Most victims were Canadians, coming from every province except P.E.I. Others came from many states in India and the U.S.A. They came from almost all religious backgrounds, from atheism to Zoroastrianism.

Eighty-six victims were children under 12 years of age. Twenty-nine families, including husband, wife, and all children, were wiped out. Thirty-two persons were left alone; the other spouse and all children were gone. Seven parents lost all their children.Two children, around 10 years of age, lost both parents.

The terrorist criminals took away our Canadian democratic rights to life, liberty, peace, and prosperity. Sadly, even today, the real culprits are still roaming free in Canada and elsewhere.

As families of the victims of the terrorist bombing of AI-182, we have suffered and continue to suffer incalculable grief and pain, which we do not wish to befall any other Canadian due to future violent criminal or terrorist acts. Part of our mission is to speak out on crime, violence, and/or terrorism issues to ensure that our country is safer and more secure for its citizens.

One provision in the bill proposes to reduce the residence requirement for Canadian citizenship by one year for permanent residents who serve in the Canadian Forces. In the last few years our forces have been on duty in Afghanistan, Jerusalem, Egypt, Mali, and the Indian Ocean off the Somali coast. The Canadian Forces are not an occupying force. They are either working as peacekeepers or fighting on the front lines against terrorism and other violent crimes, like piracy on the seas, which fuel terrorism and lawlessness.

These overseas criminals and terrorists do not hesitate to export terrorism to Canada or to lure and embrace misguided Canadians into their causes. Thus, our soldiers on the front lines are defending our freedom, democracy, and democratic values and rights. This provision in Bill C-24 acknowledges, encourages, and supports the loyalty of those permanent citizens who have joined the Canadian Armed Forces and have put themselves on the front lines for Canada.

Another provision in the bill strips Canadian citizenship from those Canadians with dual citizenship who engage in acts of terrorism or in armed conflict with Canada. Such persons demonstrate clearly that they have no loyalty whatsoever to Canada and no value for the Canadian democratic system. Thus, they do not deserve Canadian citizenship, which they are using as a matter of convenience to further their criminal and terrorist activities.

A Canadian citizen engaging in acts of terrorism and/or war against the Canadian Forces is not a far-fetched scenario. Today, terrorism is an international phenomena, and the terrorists, in most cases, may have worldwide connections. The proven cases of Khawaja in Canada and the millennium bomber in the U.S.A. are well-known examples of Canadians connected to terrorist activities outside of Canada.

Also, in the last few years, there have been many reports of highly indoctrinated persons from different parts of Canada leaving our soil to join terrorist training camps or terrorist activities in other countries. I will give you some examples: two Canadians involved in the terrorist attack on a gas plant in Algeria; a Canadian sentenced to two years in prison for terrorist conspiracy in Mauritania; a Canadian with dual citizenship involved in a deadly bus bombing in Bulgaria in the summer of 2012; CSIS being aware of dozens of Canadians, “many in their early twenties, who have travelled or attempted to travel” overseas to engage in terrorism activities in recent years; a Canadian's lost bid to lead Syria's rebels; and one of Syria's rebel groups, the al-Nusra Front, formally pledging allegiance to al-Qaeda leader al-Zawahiri.

There are probably many more unreported cases of Canadians involved in terrorist activities around the world. Given the appropriate right or wrong circumstances, such individuals may engage in acts of war against Canadian Forces on duty abroad and may pose a potentially mortal threat and danger to our soldiers. This provision for revoking Canadian citizenship in Bill C-24 provides a deterrent against such a probability.

3:40 p.m.

NDP

The Vice-Chair NDP Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe

Mr. Gupta, I will ask you to conclude quickly, please.

3:40 p.m.

Chair, Air India 182 Victims Families Association

Dr. Bal Gupta

Such Canadians have no hesitation in importing their terrorist activities into Canada for their perceived just cause, just as it was in Air India 182.

In summary, we, with the first-hand experience of the aftermath of the Air India 182 tragedy, ask all members of Parliament to support these two provisions of the bill. We sincerely believe that these provisions will help in keeping Canada free from terrorism so that no Canadian may suffer what we have.

Thank you.

3:40 p.m.

NDP

The Vice-Chair NDP Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe

Thank you, Mr. Gupta.

Madam Siddiqui, you now have the floor.

3:40 p.m.

Salma Siddiqui President, Coalition of Progressive Canadian Muslim Organizations

Thank you.

Honourable members of Parliament, ladies and gentlemen, I am here today to speak to you not only as the president of the Coalition of Progressive Canadian Muslim Organizations, but more importantly as a proud Canadian.

I feel privileged to be invited back to offer my views on this very important bill. As a Canadian of immigrant background, I feel that we need to reform our system of immigration to close loopholes that have been abused over the years.

I came to this country from Pakistan as a child in 1967, years ago. My country of birth was experiencing much hardship. My parents, like any parents, wanted the best for their children. They brought us to safety and security in this country. What happened next is what makes Canada so great.

My experience is the embodiment of the immigrant experience. Nothing came easily to us. We worked, and we worked hard. With that hard work, doors opened, and opportunities came, and it is with great pride that I'm happy to say that we successfully built businesses here.

I know countless others from all over the world who have shared this immigrant experience in Canada. We all know too well that in this increasingly globalized competitive world we will continue to need immigrants from all stripes to spur our economy, to foster innovation, and to contribute, as did many countless millions before them, in building a stronger and more prosperous Canada.

Canada's stellar reputation is one way in which we can recruit the world's best and brightest. It is important, therefore, to ensure that immigrants to Canada possess not just the skills of tomorrow's economy but also a commitment to this country. We have to ensure immigration does not turn this country into ghettos. For too long, some new Canadians have turned this country's citizenship into a flag of convenience and have seen Canada's generosity as a sign of our weakness and lack of fortitude.

I believe that in this regard the proposal to extend the period of residency in this country to qualify for citizenship is a step in the right direction. Physical presence for four years out of the six years—or 1,460 days—and a minimum of 183 days of physical presence per year in four out of the six years is an important provision in this respect.

Anecdotally, there are far too many examples of people who have acquired citizenship through dubious means and without spending sufficient time in this country. Equally important, in my view, is the requirement that new immigrants demonstrate ties to Canada. The bill proposes to introduce an “intent to reside” provision, which will go some way in curtailing applications from those who have no desire to live and contribute to our great country.

The requirement for citizenship applicants to file Canadian income tax is a step in the right direction, but does not go far enough. I believe that even after the grant of citizenship, Canadians living abroad should be asked to demonstrate that they have contributed taxes to avail themselves of public services subsidized by the Canadian taxpayer. Who can forget the 50,000 Canadians who decided to flee Lebanon a few years ago as war erupted in that region, or, indeed, the people who come here as dependants and then are left on welfare funded by the taxpayer?

Some Canadians use this very citizenship and the passport that comes with it to engage in activities that are nothing short of absolutely contradictory to our strong Canadian values.

I think I'm boring Mr. Shory—

3:40 p.m.

A voice

You're not—

3:40 p.m.

President, Coalition of Progressive Canadian Muslim Organizations

Salma Siddiqui

We have heard stories of Canadians being involved in terrorist activities at different hot spots throughout the world. Some have killed and others have trained—as my colleague just before me mentioned—and are training with known terrorist groups and continue to plot attacks against our interests and those of our allies.

Then there are the “Canadians” who, after obtaining their Canadian citizenship, have departed to fight alongside the al-Shabaab jihadis. Others used their Canadian citizenship to fight in Afghanistan, while yet others have their citizenship and have stayed here to undermine Canada.

Indeed, it is an affront to our men and women in uniform who serve to protect Canadian values around the world that they should have to confront violence perpetrated by opportunistic and disloyal Canadians. The flow of young Canadians to terrorist training camps around the world is indeed a matter of concern. We cannot allow this to continue.

Canadians who are opposed to the values of our society should not be allowed to abuse the privileges that come with holding Canadian citizenship. We must act to strip Canadian citizenship from those who seek to exploit it for violent and illegal activities.

I am strongly of the view that immigration from failed state countries, where money can buy fresh identities, birth certificates, and genuine university degrees, along with police clearance security certificates, must be suspended while we ensure that terrorists, white-collar criminals, and hate-mongers do not contaminate our soil in Canada.

I have heard concerns that Bill C-24 represents a knee-jerk reaction or that it serves a—quote—political process. I disagree. Bill C-24 represents an assertion of the pride we hold in our values of an open, liberal democracy, where our freedoms are applied to all. Ladies and gentlemen, we must be reasonable.

In closing, I would like to thank you for your time and would ask that you support the passage of Bill C-24. It is an essential step in all of us taking a stand.

3:50 p.m.

NDP

The Vice-Chair NDP Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe

Thank you, Madam Siddiqui, for your opening remarks.

We'll start our round of questions with Mr. Menegakis.

Please go ahead.

May 14th, 2014 / 3:50 p.m.

Conservative

Costas Menegakis Conservative Richmond Hill, ON

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'd like to say a special thank you to our witnesses for being here with us today, and for coming back to this committee. I know you've appeared in front of us before.

Mr. Gupta, for me, born and raised in Montreal and growing up in this country, June 23 was always the last day of school. It was a day when kids were happy. We were all excited that it was the end of the school year. There we were, going into the summer, which was, for me and my family and my friends, generally a happy time. All of that changed, of course, on June 23, 1985, on that very bleak Sunday. I'm sure it was a lot bleaker for those families who were directly affected by the tragic and heinous crimes that took away so many lives, including, as you said, sir, 86 children and 29 families.

I want to thank you for sharing your personal story here with us today and for the courage you've shown in bringing up your boys and building a new life, if you will, moving forward but never forgetting, of course, the impact that the tragic event had in your family. I have to tell you that your being here so many years later, talking about it with such passion, is not only commendable but very inspiring to see. Thank you for being here and for appearing before us today.

I have to say, Madam Siddiqui, that your description in your presentation today of your story as an immigrant to this country is pretty well my mother's story and my father's story. Many of us on this committee can identify with the families who came here for a better life, always respecting and never forgetting the language, the traditions, and the culture of where they came from, but so appreciative of all the great things this great nation has to offer. I thank you for sharing your story with us today.

When Minister Alexander appeared before us on Bill C-24, the minister said that in his deliberations across the country, he was hearing uniformly from Canadians, those born here and those who immigrated here, in many instances new citizens, that the residency requirement and all of the measures to back up the integrity of Canadian citizenship, to make sure that the rules are followed for obtaining Canadian citizenship, are the right moves for today. That's generally what he heard going across the country and continues to hear, as do I and many other folks on this committee. But as we've been told, it's not only important to come up with a bill; it's also important that we enforce these rules and we make sure that the value of citizenship is enhanced.

I'll start with you, Madam Siddiqui. Can you tell me what you are hearing about this bill from Canadians, specifically from members of your organization?

3:50 p.m.

President, Coalition of Progressive Canadian Muslim Organizations

Salma Siddiqui

The reason I'm appearing today and why I've made my statement is that we are very thankful that this bill is coming.

We have to look at what the public says and how it affects certain.... In my case, I'm a Muslim and for the backlash that happens, we have to take that. The fact is that none of us are all criminals, and the fact that those who come here and talk about it.... Most of the people who have goodwill and who are genuine welcomed us. Those who have other stuff.... I can talk and talk about the investor program and how that is creating a lot of divisions within the people who are here and how the investor program is being abused.

Overall, I think I would say that we feel it could go a little bit further in making it stronger, but it's a move in the right direction.

3:55 p.m.

Conservative

Costas Menegakis Conservative Richmond Hill, ON

Thank you.

Mr. Gupta, would you like to weigh in on that, sir?

3:55 p.m.

Chair, Air India 182 Victims Families Association

Dr. Bal Gupta

Well, it's not anything new. When I came to Canada in 1968, at that time the requirement was five years, except that there was a loophole for Commonwealth citizens. For them it was three years. So it is not anything unusual.

Also, many countries around the world have a five-year residency requirement, so it is not unusual to have a requirement of four years. I don't think it is something that's unreasonable.

3:55 p.m.

Conservative

Costas Menegakis Conservative Richmond Hill, ON

Thank you.

I want to touch a little bit on the revocation aspects in Bill C-24.

I'll go back to you, Madam Siddiqui, with this. Do you think it's important to send a message to these terrorists who are Canadian citizens that their actions will not be tolerated and will be seen for what they clearly are, a violent renunciation of their loyalty to Canada and their citizenship?

Let's keep in mind, of course, that these are dual citizens who have another citizenship, and they also have all of the benefits of that other citizenship. So while they have the benefits of the other citizenship, here they are in this country perpetrating—this is who this would affect—an act of terror or an act of treason against Canada or our Canadian troops.

Can you comment on that?

3:55 p.m.

President, Coalition of Progressive Canadian Muslim Organizations

Salma Siddiqui

There is no room for that. If they are dual citizens and they choose to come to Canada, they can go back, as far as I'm concerned. Today's ruling, which many people must have heard about, I think is very good, the most successful thing I've heard since 9/11.

It's always being politically correct: we cannot do this, we cannot do that. Today, that decision has been made, so if someone comes here to carry out some actions and then they're crying that when they go back they'll treated badly, well, too bad.

3:55 p.m.

Conservative

Costas Menegakis Conservative Richmond Hill, ON

Thank you. You are referring, of course, to the Supreme Court of Canada decision today to uphold the decision of the government—

3:55 p.m.

President, Coalition of Progressive Canadian Muslim Organizations

Salma Siddiqui

In Harkat, yes.

3:55 p.m.

Conservative

Costas Menegakis Conservative Richmond Hill, ON

—regarding Mr. Harkat.

Thank you very much.

3:55 p.m.

NDP

The Vice-Chair NDP Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe

Thank you, Mr. Menegakis.

Mr. Sandhu, you have the floor.

3:55 p.m.

NDP

Jasbir Sandhu NDP Surrey North, BC

Thank you very much.

Thank you to the witnesses for being here this afternoon. I too remember the day Flight 182 went down and how it shook the entire country and all Canadians.

Mr. Gupta, I can't imagine losing a spouse, and I thank you for being here this afternoon to share your story.

You pointed out, Mr. Gupta, that you're not a lawyer or a constitutional matters.... I too am not a lawyer. Do you think any laws we draft should conform to the charter?

3:55 p.m.

Chair, Air India 182 Victims Families Association

Dr. Bal Gupta

Yes. There's no doubt that they should conform to the charter. The laws have to be obeyed.

The problem is that there has been a philosophy of political correctness in this country for the last few years, and also a philosophy of entitlement. People who become citizens want all the rights, but somebody has to obey the duties. Somebody has to do the duties. When they become citizens, they should add that they also take the lifestyle, which is a democratic lifestyle, and allow others to have peace and prosperity, and life and liberty.

3:55 p.m.

NDP

Jasbir Sandhu NDP Surrey North, BC

Thank you.

So you do believe that we should—

3:55 p.m.

Chair, Air India 182 Victims Families Association

Dr. Bal Gupta

For this bill, these provisions that I talked about, they are contained in there. There's a provision there that nothing will be contradicting international human rights. I can quote you the section that is there. If I read it right—again, I'm not a lawyer but I went to the bill—there is a separation for security cases. They will be dealt with by the Federal Court.

3:55 p.m.

NDP

Jasbir Sandhu NDP Surrey North, BC

Okay.

Madam Siddiqui, the same question to you: do you think any laws we draft should conform to the charter?

3:55 p.m.

President, Coalition of Progressive Canadian Muslim Organizations

Salma Siddiqui

I definitely agree with that.