Chris Alexander

[Citizenship and Immigration, March 27th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, no, we have no intention of imposing language requirements for spouses, but we will continue to study these issues and to hear from Canadians. It is irresponsible of the Liberal Party, as it does almost every day, to cite a comment at a round table and then suddenly fearmonger among Canadians about an important issue.

What we are trying to do here is to protect women in the immigration system from violence. Do the Liberals have any idea of what the issues are on that front, and will the member opposite agree that there are barbaric practices that should be called just that, which their leader still refuses to do?

[Citizenship and Immigration, March 26th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I can commit to doing two things: first, to continue to listen to Canadians, as we seek to update, modernize, and improve all of our immigration programs, which badly needed it in 2006, when we took them over from the Liberal government, which had left them in chaos, a shambles; and second, to continue to deliver those programs faster.

[Citizenship and Immigration, March 24th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, just because an issue was raised at a round table as part of the very extensive consultations that our government organizes across this country does not mean it is going to become government policy. We continuously review all of our policies.

Family reunification has skyrocketed under this government because we have been taking action to clean up the Liberal mess for parents and grandparents, by—

[Citizenship and Immigration, March 24th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, Canada and our government are very proud of Canada's record and of what we have done over the past three years to help the Syrian people, who are suffering so much. We are among the most generous donor countries, having contributed $630 million for development, security and humanitarian needs. We also welcomed over 1,100 Syrian refugees last year through our very generous system, which is unmatched in terms of generosity and asylum. We have nothing—

[Citizenship and Immigration, March 6th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, we were not aware of the situation of the parents of these two young children. We are keen to know the details and investigate this matter.

Canada is very proud of its role in Syria. We have invested more than $6 million to address the needs of the millions of refugees and displaced persons in Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria. We will continue to monitor their situation, their humanitarian needs, and their needs as potential immigrants.

[Citizenship and Immigration, March 5th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, we will very clearly do what we have always done on this side of the House: support refugees with quality health care funded by the federal government.

We have to put a stop to the rhetoric of both parties opposite concerning the health care that some provinces would like to provide to people who are not refugees. Rather, those are really people who have claimed refugee status in Canada, but have been rejected, and some provinces would like to give them very generous health care benefits that even exceed those provided to Canadians. We will never accept such a policy.

[Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act, February 27th, 2014]

With a few tweaks.

[Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act, February 27th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, it is rather incredible to hear that question. The member talks of sunny ways, and then he goes on to make one of the most partisan speeches I have heard in any debate in this place.

Is this the new Liberal Party, a party of ogres, a party of scaremongers, a party that talks down the Canadian economy, that talks about doom and gloom when we have had the top job creation record in the G7 and are the only country in the G7 to have an AAA credit rating from all agencies and a positive outlook?

The Liberals will not acknowledge these simple facts. It is terrifying to think of how newcomers to Canada would choose to understand this stream of consciousness presentation.

Is the member opposite aware of some simple facts? Is he aware of the fact that this government has admitted to Canada, on average, over 40,000 more permanent residents than his government ever did? Is he aware that, under our government, we have had 1.4 million new Canadians become Canadian citizens?

Is the member aware that his government slashed immigration to its lowest levels in the late-20th century, in 1983-84 and then again in 1998-99? Is he aware that it was his government that brought in these language requirements and made the residency requirement, during the vast majority of their time in government in the 20th century, five years, which is actually more than is proposed in this bill?

Is the member aware of those simple facts? Is he aware of his utter hypocrisy?

[Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act, February 27th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I am intrigued by my hon. colleague's remarks. I have a few questions for her, which I think may lead her to reconsider the amendment she has just proposed.

First, is the member aware that we have a legal obligation to charge the fees for the full cost of the service we are giving?

Is the member aware that the people whose emails she cites, Andreas, Sultan Ali, and there was a third, may actually have faster service by the time this bill becomes law? The processing times would be reduced from where they are today to under one year by 2016, which would mean that the four-year residency requirements combined with a speedy processing time would make them Canadian citizens even faster than they would be under the status quo.

Is the member not aware that there are cases where revocation of citizenship, above all, for fraud, for plain and simple proven fraud, is something that Canadians want us to undertake on the necessary scale to deter the kinds of abuses we have seen?

Is the member not aware that by proposing these amendments, by opposing this bill, she is opposing the will of the vast majority of Canadians who want to see their citizenship protected?

[Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act, February 27th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I agree with the minister entirely.

Let us take the example of Afghanistan. There probably were cases—and when this bill is adopted we will have to document them—of Canadians of dual nationality who joined the Taliban or the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, for some time or other, which operates from Pakistan in Afghanistan, which was responsible for suicide bombings, and which was responsible for the death of a large number of our finest, our best young men and women who wore the uniform.

That does constitute a crime in our eyes. It is a terrorist organization, and so Canadians who join such a group would already face prosecution, whether they have only one citizenship or two citizenships. It is reasonable, not just in our country but in all free, democratic, self-respecting societies, those that have made the NATO alliance the success it is, to draw a limit.

Most of us receive our citizenship from our parents via birth in this country, and we are proud of that and no one can take it away from us. However, there are hundreds of thousands who become citizens every year and we have a responsibility, when there are cases of fraud, to investigate those and when necessary to revoke.

When there are extreme cases of disloyalty, we have a responsibility to look at the option of revoking citizenship when there is dual nationality. Of course we are not going to create a new class of stateless persons. It was a Conservative government that undertook that obligation in the early 1960s and we are proud to continue upholding it today.

On the other point the minister made, about the consistency of Liberals on citizenship and other matters, I think we have heard—