Thank you, Madam Chair. I would like to move amendment G-5.
I move that Bill S-245, in clause 1, be amended by adding after line 18 on page 1 the following:
(4) Section 3 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (4.1): Exception — transitional provision (4.2) Subsection (3) does not apply to a person who, on the coming into force of this subsection, was a citizen. However, subsection (3) applies to a person who, on that coming into force, would have been a citizen under paragraph (1)(b) only by operation of paragraph (7)(n) in respect of one of their parents. (5) Subsection 3(5.2) of the Act is repealed. (6) Section 3 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (6.3): Citizenship other than by way of grant — paragraph (1)(g.1) (6.4) A person referred to in paragraph (1)(g.1) who, before the coming into force of this subsection, was granted citizenship under section 5 or 11 is deemed never to have been a citizen by way of grant. (7) Subsection 3(7) of the Act is amended by striking out “and” at the end of paragraph (l), by adding “and” at the end of paragraph (m) and by adding the following after paragraph (m): (n) a person referred to in paragraph (1)(g.1) is deemed to be a citizen under that paragraph from the time the person ceased to be a citizen.
Madam Chair, I know this is very technical. I want to add a bit of an explanation to help my colleagues understand this, because as we said, this is a very complex piece of legislation.
I want it to be clearly understood that all of the government's amendments relate only to the people we're calling the “former section 8”. These are the folks who were born in the second generation abroad between 1977 and 1981. They are the people Senator Martin talked about and wanted to help with the original wording of the bill. These are the people who lost their citizenship when they turned 28 years old, either because they didn't apply to retain it or they applied and the application failed.
We all agreed they should be scoped into this bill when we unanimously adopted amendment G-3.
Further, any time our amendments mention the letter-number combination of “(g.1)”, they refer to those former section 8 people who will now be citizens because of this bill. In several instances, these (g.1) former section 8 people have to be added into the current act to ensure that they are treated the same as all other citizens who were born abroad and got their citizenship because it was passed down to them from a Canadian parent.
Amendment G-5 proposes new text to clarify three things.
One is the people whose citizenship is being restored by the bill. By that, I mean the former section 8 people are being restored back to the date of their loss.
Two is if, since losing their citizenship at age 28, they received a grant of citizenship, they are now deemed to have never received that grant and are a citizen by operation of this bill.
Three is that their child, if born abroad, would not automatically be a citizen. The reason I say “automatically” is that earlier, we adopted the NDP amendments that modified the first-generation limits to say that the limitation doesn't apply if the child is born after 2009 and the parent has that substantial connection of physical presence in Canada for three years. Through this amendment, a former section 8 person being restored by the bill who meets the substantial connection would be able to pass their citizenship to a child born abroad. Again, though, the substantial connection would have to be made before the child is born.
This amendment is also really important, because it would protect any unintended loss of citizenship. This amendment is needed to ensure that anyone who was already a Canadian citizen when the bill comes into force will remain a Canadian citizen.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
