Madam Chair, when the Conservatives brought in this second class of citizenship, there was an uproar in many different communities. I still remember that, and there were people who lost their citizenship because of this particular class that was brought forward.
Now, putting 1,095 days.... I still am not very happy, but I will be able to support the subamendment. The way I see it is this. Canada is a knowledge-based economy. Let me say, one professional—and it's perfectly known in my own home—an engineer, a doctor, an accountant or a consultant, goes and works for a Canadian company overseas for many years, and their child is born there. How will that child be able to come back and prove that they were able to live for three years in Canada? Basically, we still consider them second-class citizens. The child can't leave their parents until they are an adult.
I can give you a perfect example in my home. My brother is a professional engineer who works for a Canadian company. He has worked in many countries, and his son was born in Suriname. At that time, this law didn't exist, so he became a Canadian citizen right away because his parent was a Canadian citizen. My brother is still a Canadian citizen, and he's been stationed in different places by that engineering company to manage their offices.
I'm sure that there are many others like that, and it still bothers me that we are considering 1,095 days. Even though I will be able to support this, at the same time, it comes off to me as second-class citizenship. Can someone respond?