With regard to citizenship, the bottom line started in 2005 with the provision requiring that one has to apply within 28 years in order to retain citizenship. Some problems also arise in view of the fact that under the new regulations and the need to harmonize our policies to those of the United States, people must apply for a passport. The problem is more recent but it nevertheless has been in existence since the implementation of the legislation in 1977.
I think that we would really limit the scope of our study by asking these people to testify. Although it existed at the time, the problem was perhaps less significant. The legislation should have been rewritten in 1997 or 1998, but the legislator never introduced a new bill on citizenship. According to my experience in this committee, I would say that as of 2004, we really thought that a new bill on citizenship would be introduced.
Under these circumstances, we don't want to pursue the idea that we should request previous ministers and a limited number of ministers to come and testify before this committee. That might not be fair, in view of the fact that some problems which go back to a much longer time, should also have been dealt with by previous ministers. This is the reason why I do not support this motion.