Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Dec. 8th, 2010

[Ujjal Dosanjh, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

No, it's fine. I don't have a problem, actually.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I know. I think we've covered that area.

Monsieur St-Cyr.

[Thierry St-Cyr, Bloc, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

I will start by responding to the question initially asked by Mr. Wrzesnewskyj, in other words, whether there are other places where this sort of consideration based on employment exists. My understanding is that it is already in the Citizenship Act. An individual who is working for the Canadian government abroad can pass on their citizenship to their children by descent.

What Mr. Dosanjh's bill seeks to do, in my view, is allow those children to pass on their citizenship by descent, as well. Without commenting on the heart of the matter right now, let's just say that, legally speaking, this is not something new. It is already set out in the Citizenship Act. It simply has to do with extending the right to pass on citizenship by descent to the unborn child.

I have one last question.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Why don't we ask the analysts to prepare something for another meeting on that subject?

[Thierry St-Cyr, Bloc, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

If I am mistaken, that could always be indicated, yes.

Mr. Dosanjh, you mentioned that the legal analysts and civil servants you met with had pointed out some adverse effects of the bill and had proposed some amendments.

For our benefit and understanding, could you tell us what they identified as being the problems with your bill and what they proposed as possible solutions, which you said you were amenable to?

[Ujjal Dosanjh, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

I'm not really fully equipped to deal with that issue. You should ask the analysts. They will be appearing before you. As a result, they've prepared the amendments, copies of which I have, and I'm sure they'll share those copies with you. Let them explain to you why they suggested the amendments.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I think we're finished, Mr. Dosanjh.

[Ujjal Dosanjh, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I thank you for coming and explaining your bill.

We're going to suspend for a moment. We're going to hear from some of the ministry people.

Mr. Dosanjh, you're quite welcome to stay, if you wish.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Welcome back. I think we'll go for about up to an hour, and then we're going to go in camera to discuss some committee business.

We now have with us some officials from the Department of Citizenship and Immigration. We have: Mr. Andrew Griffith, director general of the citizenship and multiculturalism branch; Ms. Nicole Girard, director of legislation and program policy; and we have Monsieur Alain Laurencelle, legal counsel, integration and admissibility team, with legal services.

Do you want to make an opening statement, Mr. Griffith?

[Andrew Griffith, Director General, Citizenship and Multiculturalism Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration]

Yes, please.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Go ahead, sir.

[Andrew Griffith]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for the invitation to appear before you today.

My name is Andrew Griffith. I am the director general of the citizenship and multiculturalism branch, as you mentioned, and I'm accompanied by my team, Nicole Girard and Alain Laurencelle.

I am pleased to be here to discuss Bill C-467, a private member's bill.

Over the course of the next few minutes, I would like to briefly review the changes made in the Citizenship Act of 2009, which implemented a first-generation limit on citizenship for those born abroad, and I will briefly describe what Bill C-467 proposes in relation to those changes. I will also outline some changes that we believe are needed to ensure the current bill achieves its intent.

Let me begin by talking about the changes that were made to the Citizenship Act in 2009. These changes gave a restored citizenship to most “lost Canadians”, persons who lost or never had citizenship.

Also introduced at this time was a first generation limit to citizenship by descent for those born abroad. The intent of this limit was to protect the value of Canadian citizenship for the future and to ensure citizens have a connection to Canada.

These changes meant that children born to Canadian parents in the first generation outside Canada would be Canadian at birth only if one parent was born in Canada, or one parent became a Canadian citizen by immigrating to Canada and later being granted citizenship, or naturalized.

These changes also include an exception to ensure that children born or adopted outside Canada to a parent serving abroad with the Canadian armed forces, the federal public administration, or provincial public service would be citizens, even if they were born outside Canada, in the second or subsequent generation. However, like all children born outside Canada to a Canadian parent, children of crown servants cannot pass on citizenship to children they might have or adopt abroad as a result of the first-generation limit.

Other countries with a first generation limit, like the United Kingdom and New Zealand, have dealt with this issue differently by ensuring that children born abroad to crown servants are able to pass on citizenship to their children born or adopted abroad. This is what Bill C-467 seeks to do.

Bill C-467 proposed to treat children born abroad or adopted outside Canada by crown servants and Canadian Forces personnel as children born in Canada, such that they would be able to pass on citizenship to any children they may have or adopt abroad. The government fully supports the intent of this bill in that it recognizes and values the strong contributions, commitment, and sacrifice of crown servants working abroad and of their families.

Crown servants, including our military, work to serve Canadians abroad. Crown servants serving abroad demonstrate ongoing attachment to Canada in several ways.

First, they are considered residents of Canada.

Second, crown servants pay Canadian taxes while serving abroad.

Third, they rotate regularly back to Canada. This is different from the situation of Canadian expatriates who in many cases are not considered residents of Canada, do not pay Canadian taxes, and may or may not regularly rotate back to Canada.

All of these things demonstrate a strong ongoing connection to Canada.

The government does, however, have concerns with the bill, as it is currently drafted, since it does not achieve its intended objective and would have unintended consequences. I now want to briefly outline these concerns.

As I have said, the intent of Bill C-467 is to enable the children of crown servants to pass on citizenship to any children they have or adopt outside Canada. As currently drafted, however, it does not enable the children of crown servants to pass on citizenship.

At the same time, the bill removes the section of the act that currently provides an exception to the first-generation limit for children born abroad in the second and subsequent generations. Effectively, this would deny citizenship to the children of crown servants in situations where the crown servant parent was also born abroad to a Canadian parent.

The bill also poses problems with respect to adopted persons. Specifically, the bill proposes to confer citizenship automatically to children adopted abroad by crown servants who are born or naturalized in Canada, without regard to the international obligations and requirements under the current law.

The current act already allows anyone who is born abroad and adopted by a Canadian parent who was born in Canada, whether or not that parent is a crown servant, to apply for a grant and become a citizen. The criteria for such a grant respect the international obligations that are there to protect the best interests of the child: for example, to protect against child trafficking and to respect provincial jurisdiction on adoptions.

The problem is that under Bill C-467, children adopted abroad by crown servants would no longer need to apply for a grant in the current manner, meaning they would no longer be subject to the safeguards aimed at protecting the best interests of the child.

For the reasons I have just outlined, Bill C-467 does not achieve its intended objective and would have negative unintended consequences.

The changes, however, that would be required to ensure the benefits of Bill C-467 are achieved would be relatively minor. The intent of the bill could be achieved by expanding the current exemption to ensure the children of crown servants, including the Canadian Forces, like children born in Canada, would be able to pass on citizenship to any children they have or adopt outside of Canada. Recognizing their sacrifice, commitment, and strong connection to Canada, there should be no questions about the citizenship of their children, no matter where they are born.

Just to add to this, Mr. Chairman, in June 2010, of course, as people know, the government did introduce Bill C-37, the Strengthening the Value of Canadian Citizenship Act. This bill contains a number of amendments that would strengthen the process of applying for citizenship, improve measures to address citizenship fraud, and streamline the revocation process.

Specifically, Bill C-37 proposes to: add legal authority to regulate citizenship consultants and to crack down where they help people gain citizenship fraudulently; increase penalties for fraud; strengthen residency requirements to require a physical presence; improve the government's ability to bar criminals from becoming citizens; and ensure the law supports the implementation of the first-generation limit.

Similar to Bill C-467, Bill C-37 also proposes changes to the current crown servant exception to the first-generation limit. Consistent with the objective of Bill C-467, the proposed changes to the crown servant exception in Bill C-37 would ensure that the children of crown servants serving abroad are not disadvantaged by their parents' service to Canada and are able to pass on citizenship to their children born or adopted abroad.

Thank you again for the opportunity to speak before you. I would be happy to take any questions you may have.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Trudeau.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Griffith.

I'd like to first start with a question that has come up a couple of times. The intent of this private member's bill, and of the element of Bill C-37 that achieves a similar goal, is basically to say that for someone serving Canada who is working as a crown employee--military and such--outside of Canada, when they have kids, it's as if they had kids in Canada, on Canadian soil. Is that basically the core of the issue?

[Andrew Griffith]

Yes.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

There's one thing that came back a number of times here. I was interested to see the highlights that they are considered residents of Canada when they live abroad. People working for private companies, no, but for the UN, for example, and international organizations of that magnitude, was there a look at or perhaps a reflection around the Red Cross, perhaps, or the UN or certain big organizations that have always had strong Canadian participation? Was there a reflection this might be something that was interesting?

[Andrew Griffith]

Thank you for the question.

We actually have looked at that. We've tried to distinguish the different categories of people in those situations abroad. In terms of Canadians working abroad for international organizations, there are different categories. The first one, really, is those who are long-term employees of those organizations, so they're employed by the UN, by the World Trade Organization, or by the ICRC. Essentially, they're usually like other expatriates in terms of, usually, their tax status and their residency status. They're like residents abroad.

There are other categories as well. There are times when we will temporarily second somebody to an international organization, and in that case sometimes they're actually under a secondment where we pay the salary and we pay the benefits and everything like that. In that case, it would be almost deemed like a crown servant, because again, the same kind of connection test would be there.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

Would they be crown servants under this evaluation?

[Andrew Griffith]

Largely they would be, because again, the employer relationship remains. The secondment is an agreement between the government and the international organization.

Then there's a third category, which is more of a case-by-case determination, and that's the category where people take a leave without pay. They're not really sent by the government; they're taking a leave without pay to pursue that, and that's more case by case.

But the first two categories are fairly clear. The first one is like any other expatriate; the second one would be treated like a crown servant.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

You mentioned the case-by-case basis. What is the recourse issue? You briefly mentioned “lost Canadians” in your brief. There's always an issue of people who fall through the cracks, people who are exceptions. What is the structure for people who say they really think they're Canadian, that they should be Canadian, that they have an attachment to Canada? They turn to the CIC. What sort of process do you have in place for them?

[Andrew Griffith]

The main process we apply is subsection 5(4), the exception, which requires ministerial recommendation and the like. That's the main process that is actually used. We receive a number of those applications per year, and those are processed accordingly. There are some other processes available, but that's usually the main one used for these kinds of exceptions.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

What's the percentage of acceptance? Is it reliable? Does the ministerial process work as a section? Is it overloaded? Is there a backlog? Is it fairly efficient? Is it deemed fair? Are there a lot of appeals?

[Andrew Griffith]

Well, we actually did a bit of digging into that, because we were sort of curious ourselves. If we look at the statistics, we see that over the past two years we've had something like 90 applications. The approval rate is around 90%, so it works fairly well.

The processing time is comparable to our other processing times, which is probably less than ideal, but it's no worse than our current processing times in the other areas.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

I have a question that almost goes against the grain of this, but it's something I was wondering about. You have a crown servant who is working abroad and has a child. That child grows up, lives his or her life, ends up being abroad, and has a child. That child, because of this exception, would be a full and total Canadian citizen. But would that person have the right to pass on citizenship?