An Act to amend the Citizenship Act (2025)

Sponsor

Status

In committee (House), as of Sept. 22, 2025

Subscribe to a feed (what's a feed?) of speeches and votes in the House related to Bill C-3.

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament has also written a full legislative summary of the bill.

This enactment amends the Citizenship Act to, among other things,
(a) ensure that citizenship by descent is conferred on all persons who were born outside Canada before the coming into force of this enactment to a parent who was a citizen;
(b) confer citizenship by descent on persons born outside Canada after the first generation, on or after the coming into force of this enactment, to a parent who is a citizen and who had a substantial connection to Canada before the person’s birth;
(c) allow citizenship to be granted under section 5.1 of that Act to all persons born outside Canada who were adopted before the coming into force of this enactment by a parent who was a citizen;
(d) allow citizenship to be granted under section 5.1 of that Act to persons born outside Canada who are adopted on or after the coming into force of this enactment by a parent who is a citizen and who had a substantial connection to Canada before the person’s adoption;
(e) restore citizenship to persons who lost their citizenship because they did not make an application to retain it under the former section 8 of that Act or because they made an application under that section that was not approved; and
(f) allow certain persons who become citizens as a result of the coming into force of this enactment to access a simplified process to renounce their citizenship.

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Bill numbers are reused for different bills each new session. Perhaps you were looking for one of these other C-3s:

C-3 (2021) Law An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Canada Labour Code
C-3 (2020) Law An Act to amend the Judges Act and the Criminal Code
C-3 (2020) An Act to amend the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act and the Canada Border Services Agency Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts
C-3 (2015) Law Appropriation Act No. 4, 2015-16

Votes

Sept. 22, 2025 Passed 2nd reading of Bill C-3, An Act to amend the Citizenship Act (2025)

Debate Summary

line drawing of robot

This is a computer-generated summary of the speeches below. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.

Bill C-3 amends the Citizenship Act to address citizenship by descent, restore citizenship to "lost Canadians," and grant citizenship to some adopted individuals. A "substantial connection" to Canada is required.

Liberal

  • Rectifies unconstitutional law: The bill fixes an unconstitutional problem created by the Harper government's first-generation limit on citizenship by descent, which was deemed a Charter violation by the Ontario Superior Court.
  • Restores citizenship for lost Canadians: It restores Canadian citizenship to those who lost it due to the repealed age 28 rule and grants citizenship to second or subsequent generations born abroad before the new law's enactment.
  • Defines future citizenship by descent: For future generations born abroad, citizenship by descent beyond the first generation requires the Canadian parent to prove a substantial connection, defined as three cumulative years of physical presence in Canada.
  • Urges speedy passage by deadline: The party stresses the bill's urgency, noting a November 2025 court deadline to implement amendments and prevent a legal gap, urging cross-party collaboration for swift enactment.

Conservative

  • Opposes unlimited citizenship by descent: The party opposes the bill's provision for unlimited, multi-generational citizenship by descent, criticizing the weak 1,095 non-consecutive day residency requirement and absence of criminal background checks.
  • Supports adopted children and lost Canadians: Conservatives support the bill's elements granting citizenship to adopted children from abroad and restoring citizenship to "lost Canadians" affected by past legislative errors.
  • Raises concerns about impact and costs: The party is concerned the government lacks estimates for the number of new citizens and the significant financial implications for taxpayers and social services.
  • Demands key amendments: Conservatives demand amendments to include a substantial, consecutive residency requirement and mandatory security vetting for all applicants to uphold citizenship integrity.

NDP

  • Supports bill C-3: The NDP supports Bill C-3 to correct Canada's citizenship laws, making them charter-compliant after the Harper government stripped rights for second-generation born abroad.
  • Addresses discriminatory impact: The bill remedies discrimination against first-generation born-abroad women, who faced difficult choices regarding family planning and their children's citizenship, as ruled unconstitutional.
  • Rejects conservative opposition: The NDP rejects Conservative proposals for a "criminality test" for Canadian citizenship, asserting that birthrights are not contingent on such conditions and are handled by the judicial system.

Bloc

  • Supports Bill C-3: The Bloc Québécois supports Bill C-3 as it corrects historical injustices and oversights in the Citizenship Act, particularly for "lost Canadians" and in response to a court ruling.
  • Calls for swift, non-partisan passage: The party urges swift passage of the bill after thorough study in committee, without using closure, and stresses the importance of cross-party collaboration to achieve results.
  • Criticizes departmental dysfunction: The Bloc criticizes the Department of Citizenship and Immigration as dysfunctional, citing long processing times and one-size-fits-all immigration policies, and calls for a comprehensive overhaul of the Citizenship Act.

Green

  • Supports Bill C-3 to restore citizenship: The Green Party celebrates the return of this legislation as Bill C-3, supporting its goal to redress past legislative mistakes and restore citizenship to "lost Canadians" in a Charter-compliant manner.
  • Calls for proper committee review: The party advocates for thorough committee hearings to address concerns, consult experts, and ensure the bill is properly scrutinized rather than rushed through Parliament.
  • Proposes citizenship as a right: Elizabeth May suggests adding an amendment to Bill C-3 to explicitly state that Canadian citizenship is a fundamental right, protecting it from arbitrary actions by those in power.
Was this summary helpful and accurate?

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

September 15th, 2025 / 1:25 p.m.

Conservative

Frank Caputo Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola, BC

Madam Speaker, what I appreciate about the member for Winnipeg North is not what he says, but how loud he says it.

I have watched here all morning and have seen countless Liberals, many women, standing behind him, who do not get to ask a question of the government or of us here, when all the while he stands and speaks. If this is going to be a discussion and the government is going to put its money where its mouth is, this is the reality. There is one member who speaks on behalf of the government. I take issue with the fact that he is asking all the questions on behalf of the government when there are countless individuals, some newly elected, who would love to participate in this debate, and they have to take a back seat to that one member.

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

September 15th, 2025 / 1:30 p.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès) Alexandra Mendes

I would remind the hon. member that that is not correct. There have been other members asking questions. Also, it is not the tone of the debate to remark on who asks the questions.

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

September 15th, 2025 / 1:30 p.m.

Bloc

Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

Madam Speaker, I find it interesting that this member should lecture us on the tone and volume of speech in the House. That said, it is evidently the tone and volume to be expected in the coming year.

In practical terms, I believe that one question remains, a question that was raised by the member for Winnipeg North: What will be studied in committee? I need to understand the loophole because I cannot imagine that the government would not conduct any background checks. If so, then we would definitely have to clarify the legislation to make these checks mandatory. That said, mounting a fearmongering campaign by saying that it will allow in people who are going to threaten our security is a dubious conflation.

I would like to hear what my colleague has to say about the amendments that the Conservatives are going to propose in committee.

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

September 15th, 2025 / 1:30 p.m.

Conservative

Frank Caputo Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola, BC

Madam Speaker, I do not believe that we as Conservatives have spoken about propaganda and fear. In fact, I spoke about the Canadian dream and how amazing it is to be here speaking about this.

At the end of the day, we want an immigration system that is just, is appropriate and reflects that those who should be coming to Canada, those with an appropriate connection, would actually come here. The reality is, when it does come to consideration at committee, we should be looking at a number of different things. We should be looking at the substantial connection. How much time does that really mean? How many generations beyond the current generation are we looking at?

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

September 15th, 2025 / 1:30 p.m.

Conservative

Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB

Madam Speaker, how is it that the bill provides a system for people to obtain citizenship in a way that the government cannot even estimate how many people would be eligible over a set period of time? That is problem one.

Problem two is that the bill does not have any language requirements for people who are obtaining citizenship by descent, whereas we do for citizenship by naturalization. The third problem is that the bill has no criminal record check, and the fourth problem, as my colleagues have already talked about, is that the presence in Canada test is probably not adequate.

What is important to understand is that the Liberals, in their debate, are trying to move away from the fact they have broken Canada's immigration system. Can my colleague talk about how Conservatives have been putting forward common-sense proposals to fix the immigration system the Liberals have broken and restore order and fairness to a once great system that served our country well?

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

September 15th, 2025 / 1:30 p.m.

Conservative

Frank Caputo Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola, BC

Madam Speaker, I believe it was Senator Martin who put forward a bill that would have rectified so many of these issues, yet the Liberals, as I understand it, voted against it.

When we are talking about who is on what side and how we are doing this, a Conservative senator put forward this bill and it was voted against, and that should be remembered.

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

September 15th, 2025 / 1:30 p.m.

Conservative

Jamil Jivani Conservative Bowmanville—Oshawa North, ON

Madam Speaker, I rise today to raise very serious concerns about Liberal legislation, Bill C-3. This legislation proposes to create a new system of unlimited chain migration into Canada at a time when Liberal immigration policies have already skewed population growth to the point where public services are under great strain. I believe this is not only bad policy, but also immoral policy.

The Liberals would like to make it easier for people who have never stepped foot in Canada to obtain Canadian citizenship. It is absurd. It is outrageous. The population growth the Liberals have already inflicted upon our country has put us in a vulnerable position on many fronts. The reality is that they want to hand Canadian citizenship out like candies at the counter.

By treating Canadian citizenship this way, the Liberals will further increase the number of people who are trying to access social programs, housing and health care. This is already a growing problem where we have more people than we have services available for the people who are here. The quality of life for Canadians is threatened to be further eroded by Bill C-3. It would make many of the problems in our country even worse.

I am particularly concerned about the implications this would have for our health care system, which is already in a state of degradation because of the surge in population growth across the country. We do not have enough hospitals. We do not have enough beds. We do not have enough doctors. We do not have enough nurses. The prospect of Liberals wanting to bring even more people into Canada is truly concerning to many.

I would like to share with the House a story to illustrate just how population growth is lowering the quality of life for Canadians across this country, and it is a personal story of my family dealing with the hospital system. On Monday of last week, my dear mother, who I love, went into the hospital for hip replacement surgery.

As has become the norm across Canada, she had to wait far too long for her surgery date. In fact, by the time my mother went in to have her surgery, the surgeon said the damage to her hip had reached the point of being a 10 out of 10. That means that my dear mother was dealing with a lot of pain for a long period of time while waiting for the chance to have a surgery that everybody in the health care system acknowledged she needed much more urgently than it was provided.

The state of our health care system becomes even more clear with the experience we had in the hospital itself. The morning of the surgery, everything went smoothly. I was with my mom. The surgeon was awesome. The nurses were awesome. They took great care of her. We are very thankful for the excellent work they did. We are also very grateful to be in a country where someone does not have to go into debt to see a doctor. It was a very good experience in the morning.

I was with my mom in the afternoon and in the evening. Around 10:00 p.m., I decided I was going to go home to get some sleep. I hit the 401. I was driving east on my way back home, and I got a phone call from my mom, who was frantic and upset. My mother is a very calm, cool and collected lady. She does not get upset easily, but she was freaking out. She was freaking out because she awoke from her rest while recovering from surgery to the sounds of hospital staff moving a male patient into her room.

I appreciate that some people in the House might not see that as a big deal, but a lot of people across Canada would. When someone is recovering from a surgery in a hospital, they are in a physically vulnerable state and can barely move. The idea that hospital staff would move a dude into my mom's room in the middle of the night with no notice and no acknowledgement, and not even recognize that this was a bizarre and weird action to take to begin with, made my mom quite unhappy. The male patient who was moved into the room was also very uncomfortable with the situation. The only thing dividing them was a thin curtain pulled between the hospital beds.

Naturally, when my mom is upset, it is like the bat signal going up. I got off the highway, headed westward and got back to the hospital. I went to speak to the supervising nurse. After some persistence, and I think, Madam Speaker, you know me well enough to know what my persistence might look like, the staff did move my mom to a new hospital room with a female patient.

I asked the supervising nurse what the hospital policy was that allowed it to force a male patient and a female patient to share a room without their consent. The supervising nurse printed the policy off and handed it to me. I looked at it, and it was a policy that said that, due to overcrowding and under-resourced hospitals, the hospitals in Toronto had made the decision that they would have to give themselves that power.

I am not of the belief that this makes it a good choice for them. I do not like the policy, but in that moment, I could see very practically what population growth has done to our hospitals. I did some research, and I found that this has become a common practice in hospitals all across Canada. They give themselves the ability to pair male and female patients in the same room against their will because they do not have enough space.

A week later, after that whole ordeal, I came back to Ottawa, and what was the first thing on the legislative calendar? The Liberals want to make it easier to bring even more people into our country, increasing the demands on our health care system even further and continuing to demonstrate a quite objectively observable pattern of policy-making that indicates the Liberals would rather bring new people into this country than take care of the people who are already here.

My mom and seniors like her built this country, paying taxes for decades on the promise that they would be looked after when they needed it. However, we have a series of policy choices continuously being made by the Liberal government to make life harder for people like my mom. Forgive me, but I cannot get down with that. It is not right.

I appreciate that Liberal MPs may want to dismiss or deflect this. They might say this is a provincial issue, asking why we do not take it to the provincial government and claiming they have no responsibility. Well, my response to that would be this: Maybe that is a message they could deliver to the Prime Minister, as he is the one having fireplace chats with the Premier of Ontario. He is the one sipping Chardonnay by the fire with the man who is in charge of the government in this province. If the Liberals want to make health care funding an issue, by all means they should encourage the Prime Minister to do so. I am not able to. I do not get invited to the fireplace. I do not think the Speaker does either. Most Canadians do not get to go to the fireplace.

What do we have control over in this House? We have the ability to control what we vote for and what we stand for. We get to represent our constituents and say to them that we are going to take a stand for what is right and what is good for the people of this country. With Bill C-3, the Liberals cannot even tell us how many new people they would bring into the nation. They cannot give us an answer. They expect us to just rubber-stamp their legislation when the basic information required to know how it would affect our families, our communities and the people who send us here to Ottawa is not being provided by the Liberal government.

It is unacceptable. It is an unacceptable way to do business, and the reality is that the Liberals are going to continue this approach of valuing bringing more people in instead of taking care of the people who are already here. We will all lose. That is what will happen. We will all lose in that situation.

My request of every Liberal MP here and every Liberal MP who might hear my words is for them to please do their job, please take care of the people of this country, join the Conservatives in pointing out how reckless Liberal policies are in growing our population and join the Conservatives in pointing out that, at minimum, the Canadian people deserve to know how many new people will be entering this country.

My mother did not deserve what happened at the hospital. I do not think anybody's mother deserves it. That is a good enough reason to say this legislation is just not good enough.

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

September 15th, 2025 / 1:45 p.m.

Liberal

Peter Schiefke Liberal Vaudreuil, QC

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague chose to spend his time talking about the health care system, and it is the hon. member's right to do so. He shared a story about his mother. I appreciate that, because I too have a story, with my mother recently being in the hospital for emergency surgery. My mother and I actually had a similar conversation about the state of our health care system, and I shared with her that I was very proud of the fact that I voted in favour of providing even more money for transfers to the provinces, record funding of $200 billion, which we know is going to have a very positive impact on the health care system. I am wondering if my hon. colleague can say the same.

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

September 15th, 2025 / 1:45 p.m.

Conservative

Jamil Jivani Conservative Bowmanville—Oshawa North, ON

Madam Speaker, with every dollar the Liberals claim to be spending, they are bringing more people here. There is a pretty basic way of understanding how the math works: When money is added to a system, demand is also added to that system, and then we expect to get better results. It is illogical, immoral and dishonest to pretend the Liberals' immigration policies are not adding to the burden of our health care system and making it harder for Canadians to get the health care they deserve.

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

September 15th, 2025 / 1:45 p.m.

Bloc

Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC

Madam Speaker, I think there are some very good things in this bill that will correct some injustices. I am sure other changes need to be made too. The Citizenship Act as a whole is very confusing.

Does my colleague agree that the Citizenship Act is in need of a complete overhaul?

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

September 15th, 2025 / 1:45 p.m.

Conservative

Jamil Jivani Conservative Bowmanville—Oshawa North, ON

Madam Speaker, I do not understand why the first question everybody is not asking is “How many people?” This is the primary point I am trying to make here today. We do not have basic information on the number of people. We can make this more complicated and dress it up in political language if Liberals would like, but all I want to know is how many people they are planning to bring into our country, so that when we go back to our constituents, we can at least say that we made an informed decision.

I would encourage my hon. colleague from the Bloc to ask that very same question and make it the number one priority in this conversation. How many people are coming here, and how many hospital beds, jobs and houses will not go to Canadians because of this legislation?

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

September 15th, 2025 / 1:45 p.m.

Conservative

Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB

Madam Speaker, I want to ask a follow-up question on something my colleague said about the spending of health care dollars and the number of people coming into the country.

I am looking at an article from December 12, 2024, that says, “Canadians faced longest ever health-care wait times in 2024, study finds”. We had one colleague get up and say that we are spending all this money on health care, but at the same time, we have a vertical hockey stick increase in the number of people who are coming into the country. The government cannot even say how many people it will allow into the country through this bill.

The government is trying to claim it is spending enough money on health care while exponentially juicing the immigration numbers. It is not an immigrant's fault for wanting to come to Canada. It is the Liberal government's fault for burdening our already broken health care system with numbers of people that our country cannot support. Does the member agree?

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

September 15th, 2025 / 1:45 p.m.

Conservative

Jamil Jivani Conservative Bowmanville—Oshawa North, ON

Madam Speaker, absolutely, I agree.

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

September 15th, 2025 / 1:45 p.m.

Liberal

Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Madam Speaker, as I said earlier in my speech, debate on a subject as serious as access to citizenship merits accuracy and discipline on our part. When I said that, I was referring to this type of speech. I think we should avoid exaggeration, oversimplification and provocative slogans designed to rile up social media. We should take our responsibilities as legislators seriously and focus on studying Bill C‑3, which is about access to citizenship.

Here is my question for my colleague. What so-called amendments would his party make to Bill C‑3?

Citizenship ActGovernment Orders

September 15th, 2025 / 1:45 p.m.

Conservative

Jamil Jivani Conservative Bowmanville—Oshawa North, ON

Madam Speaker, we have yet another example of a member of Parliament saying that he is concerned about information and studying the legislation and that he really wants to make an informed decision and elevate the discourse. However, when I ask basic questions like how many people would be brought into our country, that is crossing a line somehow.

This is basic stuff. People deserve to know, with the scarce resources our country has, how many people the Liberal government is going to bring in to further divide what is a finite pie of resources and opportunity. This is a basic element of managing a country, an economy and a health care system. The Liberals want to make it more complicated than that, but it is very simple.