In fact, I think the most frequent criticism that I've seen in public commentary against Mr. Shory's bill and suggested amendments is the idea that the bill somehow creates two-tier citizenship, one for naturalized Canadians and another for those who obtain their citizenship through birth on Canadian soil. This is a complete misunderstanding.
The bill, either as drafted or as potentially amended, would apply equally without respect to whether people are born in Canada or were naturalized as Canadians by immigrating here. But there is a limitation because of our obligations under the international Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, which we ratified in 1978, which convention does not allow acceding states to take an action that would result in someone becoming stateless. That's a legal limitation we have.
In principle, I would prefer for us to be able to deprive traitors and terrorists of citizenship regardless of whether or not they are dual citizens, but we cannot take that step, based on the legal advice I have, because of our obligations under the convention.
But you could be born in Canada and inherit citizenship from your parents, or you could go out and become naturalized in a second, third, or fourth country, or multiple countries, or you could immigrate to Canada, having retained the citizenship of your country of origin, or you could immigrate to Canada and renounce that original citizenship and go out and seek citizenship in a third country. So the notion that this is discriminatory vis-à-vis naturalized Canadians is completely inaccurate.