Evidence of meeting #38 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was naturalization.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Nicole Girard  Director, Legislation and Program Policy, Citizenship and Multiculturalism Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Rénald Gilbert  Director General, International Region, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

3:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative David Tilson

I call the meeting to order.

Good afternoon. This is the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, meeting number 38. Today is Monday, December 13, 2010.

The orders of the day, pursuant to the order of reference of Tuesday, September 28, 2010, are for an examination of Bill C-467, an act to amend the Citizenship Act (children born abroad).

We have three witnesses today who are going to talk about adoption abroad. They're all from the Department of Citizenship and Immigration. We have Rénald Gilbert, director general for the international region; Nicole Girard, director of legislation and program policy, citizenship and multiculturalism branch; and Alain Laurencelle, legal counsel in the integration and admissibility team, legal services.

Good afternoon to you.

Ms. Girard, you have a presentation, so please proceed.

December 13th, 2010 / 3:30 p.m.

Nicole Girard Director, Legislation and Program Policy, Citizenship and Multiculturalism Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for the invitation to appear before you today. I'm accompanied by Rénald Gilbert and Alain Laurencelle.

Over the course of the next few minutes, l'd like to discuss the citizenship route for adoption in the context of the proposed Bill C-467. I will begin with a brief overview of CIC's role in intercountry adoption.

Intercountry adoption is a three-step process involving the provinces or territories, the country of origin of the child, and the Government of Canada. Citizenship and Immigration Canada's role is to give the adopted child status to enter Canada, either as a permanent resident or as a citizen.

I'll begin with Bill C-14. The citizenship route for adoption introduced through Bill C-14 was implemented on December 23, 2007. Before these changes were implemented, parents who adopted a child outside Canada first had to bring their child to Canada as a permanent resident and then apply for citizenship, whereas children born outside Canada to Canadian parents were Canadian from birth.

This process meant an additional requirement for children adopted abroad by Canadians and thus treated them differently from children born abroad to Canadians. Bill C-14 aimed to rectify the situation by minimizing the difference in treatment between children born abroad to a Canadian and children born abroad and adopted by a Canadian. As a result of Bill C-14, foreign-born adopted children are able to acquire citizenship directly. This is without having to go through the sponsorship process for permanent residence in Canada.

The direct route to citizenship for adopted children is by grant of citizenship, rather than automatically by operation of law. This ensures that Canada's international obligations with regard to intercounrty adoption and provincial jurisdiction are respected. Throughout the grant approval process, CIC's first priority is to ensure that adoptees are subject to the safeguards aimed at protecting the best interests of the child.

In some parts of the world, child trafficking is a serious concern. Documentation may be non-existent or unreliable, or there may be limited infrastructure existing to support the protection of children, so we have international adoption requirements. For adoptees to be granted citizenship under Bill C-14 and under the Citizenship Act, the adoption must meet four criteria.

These are as follows: the adoption must conform to the laws of the province or country where the adoptive parents live and to the laws of the country where the adoption has taken place, there must be a genuine parent-child relationship, the adoption must be in the best interests of the child, and the adoption must not have taken place for the primary purpose of acquiring Canadian immigration or citizenship status, also known as an adoption of convenience.

The criteria for granting citizenship to foreign-born adopted children of Canadian citizens under the Citizenship Act and Regulations are similar to those for granting permanent resident status to adopted children under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and Regulations.

On April 17, 2009, changes to the Citizenship Act were implemented, including a first-generation limit to citizenship by descent to preserve the value of Canadian citizenship by ensuring that citizenship can no longer be passed on endlessly to generations born outside Canada. Since that date, only those who are born or naturalized in Canada are able to pass on citizenship to children born or adopted outside Canada.

To be fair, the first-generation limit on citizenship by descent applies equally to those who are citizens through birth outside Canada to a Canadian parent and to those who become citizens through the direct route to citizenship available to children adopted internationally by a Canadian parent.

The objective of Bill C-14 was to minimize the difference in treatment between children born abroad to a Canadian parent and children born abroad and adopted by a Canadian parent. Applying the first generation equally to both groups continues to minimize the difference in treatment between these two groups.

The exception to the first-generation limit for children of crown servants born abroad, as proposed in Bill C-467, would also apply equally to children adopted by a crown servant. Government fully supports the intent of this bill and recognizes and values the strong contribution, commitment, and sacrifices of crown servants working abroad and of their families. However, Bill C-467, as currently worded, poses some problems with respect to adopted persons. Specifically, the bill proposes to confer citizenship automatically on children adopted abroad by crown servants born or naturalized in Canada, and this is without regard to the international obligations and safeguards that are in place under the current law, the Citizenship Act.

The criteria for grant of citizenship under the adoption provisions of the Citizenship Act respect these international obligations. They're there to protect the best interests of the child--for example, to protect against child trafficking--and also to respect provincial jurisdiction on adoptions.

The problem is that under Bill C-467, as it is currently drafted, children adopted abroad by crown servants who are born or naturalized in Canada would no longer need to apply for a grant of citizenship in the current manner, meaning that they wouldn't be subject to the safeguards aimed at protecting the best interests of the child.

For the reasons mentioned, Bill C-467 would have unintended adverse impacts on intercounrty adoption and the best interests of the child. Some amendments would need to be made to the bill in order to ensure that the benefits of Bill C-467 are achieved. In addition, in June 2010 the government also introduced Bill C-37, strengthening the value of the Canadian Citizenship Act. Similar to Bill C-467, Bill C-37 also proposes changes to the 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.

I'd also like to mention briefly that adoptive parents continue to have two options to obtain citizenship on behalf of their adopted children. One is the regular immigration process and the other is naturalization, or the direct citizenship grant route. Parents may still choose to sponsor their child through the immigration process. Those who go through the immigration route and then obtain a regular grant of citizenship will be able to pass on citizenship to any child they may have or adopt outside Canada. This option is available for adoptees and does not apply to children born abroad to a Canadian parent. In this way, adoptees have an option that children born abroad in the first generation to Canadians do not.

Intercountry adoptions are complex, and CIC is working to help parents through the intercountry adoption process. CIC is currently working on improvements to the departmental website to assist parents in navigating the international adoption process.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak before you. We'll be happy to take your questions.

3:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative David Tilson

Thank you, Ms. Girard, for your presentation. It was an excellent presentation.

I believe the human resources committee is studying adoption. I think this paper would be very useful to send to that committee, and I'm sure that will be done.

Thank you very much. The committee will have some questions for you, and Mr. Trudeau is first.

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC

Thank you, Chair.

I'm very pleased that we're able to talk about this situation today, primarily because less than two weeks ago I received the case of a woman in my riding who is wrangled up in the challenges of the adoption process, the naturalization process. I won't go into too many details of her specific case, but they've given rise to a number of concerns.

First of all, in the case of adoption through New Delhi, the New Delhi high commission is talking about a 59-month delay for treatment in the naturalization process. This is not through the adoption process but through the naturalization process. This woman has been legal guardian for a year, and she wanted to bring her nieces over because the kids are orphans.

A 59-month delay to bring over orphans for whom you have legal guardianship seems to be a little excessive, but it doesn't fall into the priority of dependent children and spouses. I'd just like to hear from you guys why we've allowed it to be that long and what the reasons are behind the 59-month delay.

3:40 p.m.

Rénald Gilbert Director General, International Region, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

That would be for me to answer.

You said 59 months, but 80% of the cases are done much faster. We see two types of adoption--

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC

You can speak in French if you wish.

3:40 p.m.

Director General, International Region, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Rénald Gilbert

We see two types of adoption in India. First, there are children who, as you described, are orphans and are either in an orphanage or in the custody of family members. These applications are generally given priority, like applications for spouses and natural children.

The second type of adoption, which has a very high refusal rate, involves mainly individuals who are still living with their natural parents but are then adopted by an uncle or aunt. Very often, these people are adolescents or even young adults. In these cases, we meet with the children and the adoptive and natural parents in an interview. The process is therefore longer.

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC

So if the children really are orphans, the process generally takes less than 59—

3:40 p.m.

Director General, International Region, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC

The woman in my riding said that she did not know there were two options and that she found out later. Clearly, each option has its advantages. Unlike children born abroad, children who are naturalized are not subject to the second-generation restriction. But the process can take longer than just bringing the child into the country.

You mentioned improvements to a website. Are you promoting these options and letting people know what they involve?

3:40 p.m.

Director General, International Region, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Rénald Gilbert

That is the purpose of the changes to the website. The information is already on the site, but it may not be as easy to find as we had hoped. When children are adopted through agencies, the agency officials are well aware of these options, but that is not necessarily the case when children are adopted within a family.

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC

I recognize that for certain reasons, the family I mentioned did not want to go through the orphanage and the adoption process for orphans, because the children are still living with members of the extended family. I hope we are going to be able to clarify things, because this is a very difficult situation.

I would like to talk about the difference between the two categories. Children born abroad who are then naturalized have more rights than children born abroad to parents who were born here. Even though they were not born in Canada, the transmission of their Canadian citizenship does not stop at the second generation. Is this inequitable?

3:45 p.m.

Director, Legislation and Program Policy, Citizenship and Multiculturalism Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Nicole Girard

The explanation goes back to the amendments to the law that I described. These amendments were made in response to criticism from adoptive parents. Before the law was first amended in 2007, some parents were critical of the fact that they had to go through the immigration process and then the citizenship process. With Bill C-14, the comparable groups were children born abroad to Canadian parents and children adopted abroad. With the subsequent changes to the law, including the first-generation limit, the two groups were treated the same way. We continue to minimize the difference between these two groups of people born abroad. Moreover, I think that before the 2007 changes, the court had ruled that the two groups were comparable.

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC

An application from someone who wants to sponsor and have legal custody of a child therefore takes priority, as in the case of a dependent child or a spouse. Is that correct?

3:45 p.m.

Director General, International Region, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC

The information we gave my constituent was incorrect, then. I am glad to be able to tell her that.

Can my colleague come back to the issue of adoption?

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative David Tilson

No, we can't do that. You can come back to it next time.

Go ahead, Monsieur St-Cyr.

3:45 p.m.

Bloc

Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC

I will come back to the issue of the two types of adoption. I know that they are handled differently from a bureaucratic standpoint. The situation of those who acquire citizenship directly is a bit like that of a Canadian child born abroad who acquires citizenship directly at birth. A child who is adopted and then naturalized is treated just like any naturalized person. I understand the principle from a bureaucratic standpoint, but I do not understand it from a public policy standpoint. The government has established two categories, but I do not see what social value that has or even what value it has to the state.

For example, why are parents encouraged to opt for naturalization rather than direct citizenship? From a societal perspective, what is the point of giving parents such a choice? Is there some benefit to the state? Is naturalization less expensive than direct citizenship? It the naturalization process considered more efficient, more useful, more transparent or whatever? How do we as a society benefit by forcing parents to make this choice?

3:45 p.m.

Director General, International Region, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Rénald Gilbert

I should explain that this choice is not available to everyone. It applies only to children adopted by Canadian citizens. Permanent residents who adopt children do not have this choice. There is a second category of people for whom adoption is not possible in the country where the adoption takes place. These people can gain custody and then complete the adoption process in Canada. In that case, the child is not yet adopted. A fairly large percentage of people are in this situation. So we need to keep both choices. There are countries where it is not possible to adopt a child in certain situations. I myself adopted a child in India. I could not complete the adoption process in India because I am Christian and only Hindus can adopt. There is that sort of restriction.

The difference was not created deliberately. The two choices parents have are more or less the same to us from a bureaucratic standpoint. There are not really any advantages or disadvantages.

3:50 p.m.

Bloc

Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC

Let us talk about a case where two Canadian parents who were born in Canada adopt a Chinese girl. Once the adoption is finalized, the parents have to choose between direct citizenship and naturalization. Naturalization strikes me as being more complicated. Moreover, that is why direct citizenship is offered as an option. But it is as though we offered parents a way to facilitate adoption, but penalized them from a bureaucratic standpoint by making this situation comparable to the situation of a child born abroad.

What would we lose as a state if we allowed the children of people who opted for direct citizenship to pass on their citizenship by descent, as in the case of naturalized children?

3:50 p.m.

Director General, International Region, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Rénald Gilbert

It would create a difference between children born abroad to Canadian parents and children adopted abroad. It would give them an additional right. It would probably correct a... How can I say...

3:50 p.m.

Director, Legislation and Program Policy, Citizenship and Multiculturalism Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Nicole Girard

It would create a reverse inequity. The type of system you are describing would disadvantage other parents living in Canada who do not adopt but whose child is born abroad, in all sorts of circumstances. For example, a child can be born when the parents are travelling. There was also the example of women who are sent to the United States to give birth.

3:50 p.m.

Bloc

Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC

In fact, they would lose nothing. The issue lies in the fact that these parents would have an advantage, because they could really make a clear choice to opt for direct citizenship. In a way, we are telling them that they will have to suffer equally, that they too will have to make a heartrending choice between naturalization and direct citizenship.However, something is lost, but why? So that people will have more compassion for parents who give birth abroad?

I do not want to get too far into this. I understand that I am taking you into political territory. We will have the chance to debate this in this committee. But I wanted to have a better understanding of the mechanics and compare the impact of these two options on parents.

Let us say that a parent obtains the necessary authorizations to adopt a child and the adoption is finalized. The parent has the choice and decides to opt for direct citizenship. When can he return with the child? Does he have to wait until he has obtained citizenship? How long will it take for him to obtain citizenship?

3:50 p.m.

Director General, International Region, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Rénald Gilbert

That depends on when you ask. I can tell you that at present, the processing time differs very little from one place to another.

It is a two-step process, whether you are talking about sponsorship or naturalization. Parents who apply for naturalization must first apply to our citizenship office in Sydney. The second step in the process takes place at the embassy abroad. Sponsorships go through our usual sponsorship process, which is handled by our office in Mississauga.

In terms of processing, if someone were to ask me whether one way is better than the other, I would say there is not much difference.

3:50 p.m.

Bloc

Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC

So how much time does it take?