Mr. Chair, indeed clause 3 is a comprehensive clause, but we feel it deals with some very key points that are fundamental to citizenship of any country.
Regarding the intent to reside, I think all Canadians would expect that someone who is granted citizenship rights, the same as their rights, has an intention to reside in the country. I don't think it's asking an awful lot to ask someone to speak, at an elementary level, either of our two official languages. It's reasonable to ask someone to have a physical presence in the country as an expression of their intention to live here.
To look at these things as barriers, as some of the opposition members might have us believe, is bordering on the illogical, to use one of the terms they used earlier today. They don't even speak about the provisions in the bill for exemptions for family emergencies and so forth.
They do have the same mobility rights as all Canadians. They come and go as they please. We've given them flexibility here, in this particular clause in this bill. We want to ensure that new Canadians have a real connection to Canada.
This government is making it clear that citizenship is for those who intend to make Canada their home. I have an extensive list of witnesses, who appeared before us and who supported, in a big way, many elements in this bill.
I would refute the argument that the majority, or most, or so forth.... I don't want to highlight that in the interest of time. I guess I'm done with my explanation of why we are supporting this clause.