Citizenship and Immigration Committee on April 28th, 2014

[Nicole Girard]

It's more in line with what these other countries do. Canada's the only country that has this three-step process, which results in the vast majority of applicants being accepted at the end of the day. Most of those have a more streamlined process in line with what's being proposed in this bill.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you.

I have a question with respect to the discretionary grants of citizenship.

Am I taking somebody's time?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Opitz's.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

Oh, I'm sorry.

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

I'll let Mr. Menegakis finish his question.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

No, no, I'll pass it on to you. I'm fine.

Thank you.

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Okay.

We talked about people in the CF being given the opportunity to become citizens, but what about folks like police officers and crown servants? Is there a reason they're not being included in this?

[Nicole Girard]

The proposed measures in the bill are limited to permanent residents and individuals on exchange to recognize their extraordinary service to the country. It doesn't extend to others. This is a function of the fact that when we did our homework and our comparative research on what other countries do, in the U.S., Australia and New Zealand they offer a fast track to individuals who work in their military only. Canada's proposed approach under Bill C-24 is in line with what those comparator countries do.

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

As I think we talked about earlier, it also extends to folks who are on attachment to the Canadian Forces basically. I know we don't want to be accused of poaching from other country's militaries, but definitely some people want to change where they live.

That's one of the reasons my father came to Canada. He served alongside Canadians in the Second World War. He had to go somewhere, because he couldn't go home, and he decided that those Canadians were pretty good guys. That's one of the reasons he decided to make his new home Canada.

That's in line with all our allies in terms of what they do with people who are on attachment to foreign serving militaries. If they state that they would like to remain in Canada, would we fast-track that?

[Nicole Girard]

The fast track for individuals working in the military is broadly in line with the allies. The proposal under Bill C-24 to extend that not only to permanent residents but also to individuals on exchanges is the most closely aligned with what they do in the United States, where they don't require you to have permanent resident status in order to have the opportunity to be fast-tracked for citizenship.

[Ted Opitz, Conservative, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Great.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Ms. Sitsabaiesan has one brief question.

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

I'm going to pass my time to Madame Blanchette-Lamothe.

[Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe, NDP, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Thank you.

I have a question for Madam Afshar.

If my understanding of the bill is correct, individuals who only have Canadian citizenship and who are accused of terrorism are liable to sentencing by the court. But dual citizens accused of the same charge would be liable to the revoking of their citizenship and removal from Canada.

In your view, is that measure constitutional and is it consistent with human rights? Two Canadians could receive two different sentences for the same offence. That doesn't seem constitutional to me.

I'd like to hear your thoughts on that, given that your're a lawyer.

[Mory Afshar, Senior Counsel, Department of Citizenship and Immigration]

Thank you for the question.

As you know under the Department of Justice Act, the Minister of Justice is required to examine bills that are to be presented to the House in order to ascertain whether or not they are inconsistent with the purposes or provisions of the charter. This examination process has taken place, and the bill wouldn't be before you if the Minister of Justice had determined that the provision was inconsistent with the charter.

In terms of your question with regard to the revocation provision on the new grounds, which would apply to dual citizens only, it raises a question of section 15 of the charter, which protects individuals from discrimination on certain grounds. A charter analysis is very contextual. Courts will look at a non-exhaustive list of factors. Very important are the policy objectives behind the proposed provision, in this case to reinforce the values of citizenship and to protect the security and safety of Canadians.

The provision applies equally to all dual nationals whether they were born in Canada or they were naturalized. The distinction is between those who are dual nationals and those who have only Canadian citizenship. As you may know, Canada has ratified the Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness. This convention prevents state parties from taking away citizenship from a person if that would render them stateless. There are limited exceptions, for example, if the citizenship was obtained by fraud. It's by virtue of Canada abiding by its international obligations that this distinction is part of this provision.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Orr, and your colleagues, thank you very much for appearing before us. It has been a big help. Thank you kindly.

This meeting is adjourned.