Bill C-6 (Historical)

An Act to amend the Citizenship Act and to make consequential amendments to another Act

This enactment amends the Citizenship Act to, among other things,
(a) remove the grounds for the revocation of Canadian citizenship that relate to national security;
(b) remove the requirement that an applicant intend, if granted citizenship, to continue to reside in Canada;
(c) reduce the number of days during which a person must have been physically present in Canada before applying for citizenship and provide that, in the calculation of the length of physical presence, the number of days during which the person was physically present in Canada before becoming a permanent resident may be taken into account;
(d) limit the requirement to demonstrate knowledge of Canada and of one of its official languages to applicants between the ages of 18 and 54;
(e) authorize the Minister to seize any document that he or she has reasonable grounds to believe was fraudulently or improperly obtained or used or could be fraudulently or improperly used;
(f) change the process for the revocation of Canadian citizenship on the grounds of false representation, fraud or knowingly concealing material circumstances; and
(g) remove the requirement that an applicant be 18 years of age or over for citizenship to be granted under subsection 5(1) of that Act.
It also makes consequential amendments to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

Citizenship Act

[Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby South, BC]

Mr. Speaker, language should never be an unfair barrier to participation in political life. The 1965 Voting Rights Act in the U.S. was all about that. Language tests were put in before one could be registered to vote there. The Supreme Court struck that down. I think that is the case here.

I do not understand. If people consider themselves to be Canadian but the government does not provide enough resources to allow them to become fully fluent in either language, then I do not see why that should be any kind of barrier to full citizenship. As my hon. colleague said, an individual can contribute even if that individual's language skills are not as good as those of others.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Resuming debate. Is the House ready for the question?

[Some hon. members]

Question.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

No.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

[Some hon. members]

Yea.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

All those opposed will please say nay.

[Some hon. members]

Nay.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

In my opinion, the yeas have it.

And five or more members having risen:

Call in the members.

[Andrew Leslie, Liberal, Orléans, ON]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to subsection 45(5), I request that the division be deferred until Monday, March 21, at the end of the ordinary hour for daily adjournment.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Accordingly the recorded division is deferred until Monday, March 21, at the ordinary hour of adjournment.

[Andrew Leslie, Liberal, Orléans, ON]

Mr. Speaker, if you seek it, I think you would find consent to see the clock at 6:30 p.m.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.