Citizenship and Immigration Committee on April 14th, 2016

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Mr. Tilson.

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I support the motion. It's an issue we have discussed in the past. It's an issue that is of great interest to Canadians, and to new Canadians. There's no question we should spend some time, as has been suggested in the motion, with respect to debating it, hearing witnesses, hearing clarification from the department, and possibly even the minister as to what his intention is. I think it's an issue we should continue to look at, and it's most important that it be given priority over some of the other issues we've been looking at.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Thank you, Mr. Tilson.

There's no one else on the list. I will call the vote on the motion.

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Recorded vote.

(Motion negatived: nays 5; yeas 3)

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Ms. Rempel, you have three minutes and 38 seconds left.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My question would be to Ms. Douglas.

How many people your organization would work with come in through the caregiver class of immigration?

[Debbie Douglas]

OCASI is the umbrella policy, advocacy, and research body, but my member agencies across the country, particularly in large urban centres, work with I would say hundreds of live-in caregivers per year.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

What are some of the challenges that they face when they come to Canada?

[Debbie Douglas]

Long waiting times in terms of being able to access citizenship, and eligibility issues around accessing services before becoming permanent residents.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Given that you were able to watch us vote on a potential study to look at the caregiver class and whether or not changes would allow increased backlogs—I had hoped that this was going to be a non-partisan one—do you think that that perhaps would have been a potentially good study to do?

[Debbie Douglas]

We are very much in support of evidence-based policy-making.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Great. Thank you.

Mr. Gardee as well, I'm just wondering if your organization has any affiliation or ties to the caregiver class of immigration and if you would like to comment on that particular program or any of the changes that have been made, which will be affected as well by some of the changes to Bill C-6.

[Ihsaan Gardee]

Again, I would repeat that we take no position on the other aspects of the bill. Thank you.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Great.

Mr. Bissett, I know that in the past you've talked about changes to what should be the amount of time that people have to have in terms of residency requirement. I firmly believe that Canada benefits from immigration. I think that we are a nation of immigrants who stand shoulder to shoulder with our first nations people on their traditional territory and I think that for somebody who wants to come to Canada and obtain citizenship, their intent to reside here is a statement that they want Canada to make them better and vice versa, that they want to contribute to the country.

Could you comment a little bit on the efficacy of this change in the bill and give us your opinion?

[James Bissett]

I've always felt that five years should be the minimum number of years of residence before people are qualified to apply for citizenship. A five-year period seems to be, I would guess, the average of most other countries. Switzerland and Germany require eight years, and some countries, of course, don't allow people to apply for citizenship. The five-year period, I think, was in the original legislation, the Citizenship Act of 1947, and the idea was that immigrants coming to Canada would have to acquire domicile before they were eligible to apply for citizenship, and to acquire domicile meant they had to be legal residents for five years. After they had the five years domicile, they were then eligible to apply for citizenship.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

In your estimation, what evidence would be necessary in order to precipitate such a change as we see here in Bill C-6?

[James Bissett]

The first change in the Citizenship Act came in the 1970s, when the domicile requirement was reduced basically to three years. Bill C-24 extended that. I didn't think it extended it quite long enough. I still would have preferred five years, but I think if you value your citizenship and allow it to other people to apply for, shortening the time period somewhat devalues the concept of citizenship—

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Thank you, Mr. Bissett.

[James Bissett]

—and we shouldn't do that, in my view. Five years is time enough for people who have come here.

Let's take the 25,000 refugees who have come from Syria—

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Thank you, Mr. Bissett.

Ms. Zahid, five minutes.

[James Bissett]

Very few of them speak the language...sorry—

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Mr. Bissett, you are now 25 seconds over time.

[Salma Zahid, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair, and I would like to thank our witnesses for their patience today.

My question is for Mr. Gardee. Your organization, the National Council of Canadian Muslims, includes as one of its objectives “protecting the human rights & civil liberties of Canadian Muslims (and by extension of all Canadians), promoting their public interests, building mutual understanding and challenging Islamophobia and other forms of xenophobia.”

In this context, could you discuss the impact that the two-tier citizenship aspect of Bill C-24, which Bill C-6 seeks to revoke, has had on the Muslim community in Canada and its perception by other Canadians?

[Ihsaan Gardee]

In terms of the impact, many immigrants to the country from the Muslim community are dual citizens and they're citizens of another country by birth. They may not even want to keep the citizenship. They may not even have the option of revoking that citizenship. So this previous bill, this legislation, Bill C-24, when it was introduced, it made them feel like second-class citizens, and it stoked fear in the Muslim community about being treated as second-class citizens.

As I said earlier, Canadian Muslims are as committed to national security as our fellow citizens and they've paid a disproportionately high price for anti-terrorism measures enacted in the name of national security. We just need to look at the case of Maher Arar, which is emblematic of everything that can go wrong when the balance between legitimate security concerns and civil liberties is treated as a zero-sum game. It's important, from our view, that we move towards a comprehensive and balanced pursuit of safeguarding national security while promoting Canadian citizenship in a manner that upholds the rule of law and protects the human rights of all.

[Salma Zahid, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

My next question is for you, Ms. Douglas. I would like to focus on the changes to the age range for the demonstration of language proficiency as proposed in Bill C-6, which is under discussion, and discuss the work of your member organizations with immigrants and permanent residents on a path to achieving citizenship, which I am sure has included language support and services.

First, with regard to teenagers between the ages of 14 to 18, what has generally been their experience with gaining a knowledge of English or French?