Citizenship and Immigration Committee on May 3rd, 2023

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

How much [Inaudible—Editor]?

[Nicole Girard]

It's 40,000 to 60,000 applications for proof of citizenship that we receive yearly in the department; this is for the first generation born abroad, to prove their citizenship. It's the children of those people who can benefit from this change that's under discussion and consideration. What we don't know is how many may come forward to request it in the future; that can't be estimated at this time.

Thank you.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

The 40,000 to 60,000.... Is that annual?

[Nicole Girard]

Yes, that's correct. We receive in the range of 40,000 to 60,000 applications for proof of citizenship for the first generation born abroad, who are citizens by law and because their parent was either born in Canada or naturalized in Canada prior to their birth.

Thank you.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

I'm going to back to the Senate testimony on Bill S-230, which is the original version of this bill. During that testimony, there were numbers. Alec Attfield, director general, citizenship branch, strategic and program policy, IRCC—your predecessor, if I am correct—said that as a result of the 2009 changes and the subsequent 2015 changes, “As a result of the communications there, in the range of 17,500 people became Canadian citizens or regained their citizenship.... There was extensive and sustained communication at that time. With the 2015 amendments, another 600 cases were identified and became Canadians as a result of the changes in the law and the communication that resulted from that.”

The 40,000 to 60,000 annually now who request proof of citizenship—so the certificate or the number or the microfiches that we talked about last time—to get their number.... Those 17,500 at some point were requested from the department. Are they included in that, or is that separate? If the department, after the fact, was able to estimate for the 2009 changes and the 2015 changes, why can't the department provide a stronger estimate now?

[Nicole Girard]

Those are also numbers that I've mentioned in my previous testimony. The 17,000-some from 2009, plus the lost Canadians remedied in 2015.... In fact, our updated numbers are in the range of just under 20,000 who came forward to request proof of citizenship.

The difference is that those are actuals. Those are persons who were remedied by the law and who actually came forward and applied since those legislative changes were passed. We continually update the numbers for these purposes, to provide up-to-date testimony at committee.

Those lost Canadians who came forward in those numbers that the member referenced, would be up to the first generation born abroad. The descendants of those people—should the committee and should Parliament legislate and pass this bill—would also have access to the connection test. However, they would be included in the rough estimate that I've alluded to—in the thousands, although it's difficult to know how many came forward—because those are actuals, as I mentioned, that you were provided at that time and that I mentioned, I think, during my first appearance before this committee.

Thank you.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

Just so I make sure.... Back then, Catherine Scott, associate assistant deputy minister, strategic and program policy, IRCC—I made a note here because I went through all the testimony again—said, “legislative amendments gave citizenship back to almost all Lost Canadians.”

If this passes—this subamendment and amendment—right now, will this include most of those lost Canadians who were not included in the 2009 changes and in the subsequent 2015 changes as well? Are this amendment and subamendment with regard to a large group of people whom we would consider lost Canadians who will be included, or is this a smaller group? Is this more like 2009 or more like 2015?

[Nicole Girard]

The correct summary is that the vast majority of lost Canadians were remedied in 2009, the caveat being that up to only the first generation born abroad were included in those previous remedies, for consistency with the first generation limit.

As we've mentioned, this bill was initially dealing with the small cohort who were left out, the section 8s, because they were the second generation born abroad. The topic of this particular amendment and subamendment is about others who see themselves as lost Canadians, because there's not a direct avenue or mechanism to access citizenship for the second generation born abroad—the larger cohort estimated to be in the thousands, where the parent has a strong connection to Canada and can demonstrate that they have been in Canada for at least three years.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Ms. Kayabaga.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Thank you.

Madam Chair, I originally wanted to comment on the question that Ms. Rempel asked, but based on Mr. Kmiec's questions it sounds like it makes sense. What we're trying to do is to bring an amendment to NDP-3. I think the questions you asked bring me to believe that you understand what we're trying to do here. I don't want to add too many comments.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you.

Any there any further questions?

Hearing none, we will go to a vote on the subamendment proposed by Ms. Kayabaga. The clerk will take the vote.

(Subamendment agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

We have NDP-3 as amended.

Ms. Rempel Garner.

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

Could somebody read it out as amended?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Everyone is taking a deep breath.

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

Could we see a copy of it?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

The legislative clerk would need a few minutes. We could suspend for a few minutes, so we can have NDP-3 as amended....

Ms. Kwan.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

I wonder if it would suffice, instead of reading the amendment, to just actually summarize what it does. We could have it read, but it would be citing (i) and (f), and this and that. It would be hard to follow in any event.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

We can have him read it, and if there's any explanation we can go to that.

Ms. Rempel Garner.

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

I love all of my colleagues. I know we work in the spirit of non-partisanship, but this is significant legislation. I would actually like to have the opportunity to review what we're voting on, given the change in the substantive motion, and just because it's so technical and there have been so many changes to it. That would be my preference.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Let's suspend the meeting for a few minutes so we can have the amendment as amended...and then we can go for a vote.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I call the meeting to order.

We have the legislative clerk ready, as requested by the members, to read the amendment as amended.

Thank you.

[Philippe Méla, Legislative Clerk]

Thank you, Madam Chair. Hopefully, the attempt is successful.

The amendment would read, once amended three times over, like this:

That Bill S-245, in clause 1, be amended by adding after line 14 on page 1 the following:

(2.1) Paragraph 3(3)(a) of the Act is replaced by the following:

(a) if the person was born before April 17, 2009 and, at the time of his or her birth, only one of the person's parents was a citizen and that parent was a citizen under paragraph (1)(b), (c), (e), (g), (g.1), (h), (o), (p), (q) or (r) or both of the person's parents were citizens under any of those paragraphs;

(a.01) if the person was born after April 16, 2009 and, at the time of his or her birth,

(i) only one of the person's parents was a citizen and that parent was a citizen under paragraph (1)(b), (c.1), (e), (g), (g.1), (h), (o), (p), (q) or (r) or both of the person's parents were citizens under any of those paragraphs, and

(ii) neither of the person's parents was a citizen who had a substantial connection with Canada;

(A) had a substantial connection with Canada, or

(B) had a parent who was a citizen with a substantial connection with Canada.

(2.2) The portion of paragraph 3(3)(b) of the Act before subparagraph (i) is replaced by the following:

(b) if the person was born before April 17, 2009 and, at that time, only one of the person's parents was a citizen and that parent was a citizen under any of the following provisions, or both of the person's parents were citizens under any of the following provisions:

(2.3) Subsection 3(3) of the Act is amended by striking out “or” at the end of paragraph—

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

I have a point of order, Chair. I don't think the information that the clerk is reading right now matches with the subamendments that we have made.

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

That's my concern.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Can we review that again, Madam Chair?

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Okay. We will have to suspend the meeting so that we can incorporate and make sure everything is there.

The meeting is suspended.