Gerald Keddy

[International Trade, June 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is talking about the Prime Minister's record, but she is obviously trying to ignore her own. I would like to welcome her to the trade file and to the international trade portfolio. I offer her my congratulations. This is her first question on a trade file. It certainly is not a priority of the third party. I also note that she missed 20 meetings of the international trade committee and missed 69 witnesses.

Come on. Now you want to ask questions on a trade file? You should learn it first.

[Housing, May 29th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I can only say again that the Government of Canada is sympathetic to the difficulties facing homeowners in the Trois-Rivières area whose foundations are deteriorating due to pyrrhotite. However, this is an area of provincial responsibility. The federal government has no involvement in Quebec's pyrrhotite assistance program. Construction standards concerning the quality of the aggregate to be used in concrete were in place in 1994, prior to the emergence of this problem.

I would encourage the member, in all honesty, to stop playing politics with the victims of a very serious and very real tragedy that he knows all about and to focus on helping his constituents focus their efforts on the Government of Quebec, which is responsible for dealing with this issue.

[Housing, May 29th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Trois-Rivières for bringing this subject up and staying here at this late hour.

Obviously, this is an important issue in the member's riding. I agree with him that it is a significant issue. A lot of families are affected, and it is a very serious problem. However, where we disagree is over jurisdiction, and I will explain my reasons behind that.

It is not the first time the member has brought this up, but let me indulge the House for a moment to specifically outline why this is a provincial issue.

The provinces and territories regulate the design and construction of new houses and buildings and the maintenance, operation, and fire safety systems that exist in buildings. The national model construction codes, which include the national building code, are prepared essentially under the direction of the Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes made up of industry stakeholders with broad technical and geographical representation. They promote technical consistency of provincial-territorial regulations and market uniformity.

The Canadian Standards Association has developed the standard for concrete materials and methods of concrete construction. The 1994 edition of the CSA standard A23-1, which is referenced in the 1995 national building code, specifically prohibited the use of expansive aggregates such as pyrrhotite in concrete. In other words, construction standards were available governing the quality of aggregate to be used in concrete prior to the emergence of the pyrrhotite problem.

The adoption and the regulatory enforcement of the codes are the responsibility of the appropriate provincial and territorial authorities that publish provincial or territorial building codes. In this case, it was Quebec's choice on whether to adopt the national construction codes as is or to adapt them to better reflect its needs. In the case of pyrrhotite, construction standards have long been available governing the quality of aggregate to be used in concrete.

The Government of Quebec has launched a program to offer financial assistance to help homeowners struggling with damage caused by pyrrhotite. This program has been in place since August 2011. It is administered by the Société d'habitation du Québec. It provides financial assistance to affected homeowners to enable them to undertake the repairs needed to ensure the integrity of their foundations.

I want to ensure the hon. member that the Government of Canada appreciates the difficulties, the very real and serious difficulties, faced by the families whose homes have been damaged by this problem. However, as I have already noted, this issue falls under provincial jurisdiction. I would encourage affected homeowners to contact the Société d'habitation du Québec if they have not already done so.

Should homeowners who are impacted by pyrrhotite have CMHC-insured mortgages and experience some financial hardship as they repair or rebuild their homes, CMHC encourages them to contact their financial institutions at the first sign of financial difficulty to discuss their specific situation. CMHC provides approved lenders with a series of default management tools that they can use to assist borrowers with CMHC-insured mortgages who are experiencing financial difficulties.

In closing, this is a serious problem. It is not a matter of passing the buck. The rules are very clear. This is a problem for the Government of Quebec. It is not a problem that is under federal jurisdiction.

[Canada-U.S. Relations, May 29th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, again, I respect the hon. member's passion for this subject, but passion cannot be mistaken for facts.

The facts are that any American citizen living outside the United States has a tax obligation to the IRS. They have always had that, because the United States is one of two countries in the world where tax is based on citizenship. We can argue that that is right or wrong, but that is American tax law and American policy, and it has always been American policy.

We have to find a way to accommodate that without the United States being intrusive in Canada's laws and tax regime. We have been able to do that, and so have a number of other G7 countries and another 36 countries around the world.

Whether or not we agree with this policy is immaterial. The fact is we have to find a way to comply with it without being overly intrusive to Canadian citizenship.

[Canada-U.S. Relations, May 29th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the intervention by the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands and the fact that she stayed here this evening to pursue this, because the hour is late.

I disagree, of course, with her interpretation of the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act. The reality is, and the hon. member would know from having American relatives and family members, that Americans have always been taxed based on citizenship. There is nothing new here. An American citizen living outside of the United States is supposed to pay taxes in the states. That is the law and it has always been the law. Enough of my own relatives are American citizens, so I know that for a fact. To say that this changes those rules is simply incorrect.

The unfortunate part of this is that there will be some citizens who, by default or by accident of birth, will be American citizens, such as Canadians, for all intents and purposes, who happen to have been born in the states. They will have to correct their citizenship. However, dual citizens have always had a tax obligation. American citizens living in Canada who have permanent resident status have always had a tax obligation. This is not new.

One key concern was that the reporting obligations with regard to accounts in Canada would force Canadian financial institutions to report information on account holders who were new residents and U.S. citizens, including U.S. citizens who were residents or citizens of Canada, directly to the IRS, thus potentially violating Canadian privacy laws. That was a key concern. Without an agreement in place, obligations to comply with FATCA would have been unilaterally and automatically imposed on Canadian financial institutions and their clients as of July 1, 2014. As I said earlier, this would be based on the fact that they were American citizens living outside of the United States.

To directly address these and other concerns, our government signed a Canada-U.S. intergovernmental agreement, or IGA, in early February of this year. Under the intergovernmental agreement, financial institutions in Canada will not report any information directly to the IRS. Rather, relevant information on accounts held by U.S. residents and U.S. citizens will be reported to the Canada Revenue Agency.

The hon. member talked about Canadian citizens. Canadian citizens are not caught in this loop. Dual citizens will have to pay taxes in the U.S. or, properly speaking, for the hon. member's benefit, they have to file tax returns. They may not have tax debt, they may not have to pay taxes in the states, but they do have to file returns, which they have always had to file. The CRA will then exchange the information with the IRS through the existing provisions and safeguards of the Canada-U.S. treaty, consistent with our privacy laws.

I would also like to note that under the intergovernmental agreement, the IRS will provide the CRA with information on certain accounts of Canadian residents held at U.S. financial institutions, so we have some reciprocity.

This is an extremely complex intergovernmental agreement and treaty. It covers a lot of issues. However, the bottom line is that no one will be taxed who has not already taxed.

[Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act, May 28th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, again, I thank the hon. member for that question. I think that is a pertinent question.

My understanding is that we will be moving from the old system, where we had a three-step process, to a new system, where we will have a one-step process. Quite frankly, there will be more decision-making powers in the hands of the highly trained civil servants who will be looking at this aspect of the act.

It should allow us, and it may take a bit of time to put it in place, to go from a 22- or 23-month backlog to a 12-month process for applying for citizenship and having it granted, if one qualifies.

[Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act, May 28th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for that question, because it is a serious question. It is one that was struggled with in the last incarnation of the bill.

My understanding is that this part of the bill, and I am not an expert on the bill, is for dual citizens. It would only affect dual citizens who actually are citizens of Canada but are also citizens of another country in the world. If people in that class of individuals commit treason against this country, they cannot expect to keep Canadian citizenship. I think that is fair and understandable, and I think most Canadians would agree with that approach.

[Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act, May 28th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I think what we have to look at is that this is a bill that would be results driven. I think the hon. member would concur and agree with me that we have to improve the Citizenship Act. This would allow citizenship applications to be approved within a one-year timeframe. Canadian citizenship is valuable. We have more applications now, 330,000, than we have ever had before. We are processing them more quickly. However, we understand, as a government, that we have a responsibility to do a better job.

This would not penalize any one group of immigrants to Canada. It would not penalize any ethnic group. This would be a fairer, rules-based citizenship act that would treat all immigrants the same.

[Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act, May 28th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise on debate this evening on Bill C-24. I have been listening to the debate. It has been a fairly animated and lively debate. This is second reading of the legislation and it is on fast-track and citizenship by descent. I rise today to speak in support of the proposed changes to the Canadian Citizenship Act that would strengthen the value of Canadian citizenship.

Since 2006, Canada has enjoyed the highest sustained levels of immigration in Canadian history, an average of 257,000 newcomers each year, and accordingly, the demand for citizenship has increased by 30%. Furthermore, Canada has the highest rate of naturalization in the world; 85% of eligible permanent residents become citizens.

Last year, Citizenship and Immigration Canada received more than 330,000 citizenship applications, the highest volume ever. Canadian citizenship is highly valued around the world and with the balanced set of reforms in Bill C-24, the government is taking steps to ensure that it stays that way.

Lengthier residency requirements and requiring more applicants to meet language and knowledge criteria would ensure new citizens will be active and contributing members of our communities and our economy. Since the first Canadian Citizenship Act of 1947, it has always been a requirement that new citizens have an adequate knowledge of Canada and of one of our official languages. The language level required is not changing and it is a basic level of English or French, sufficient for everyday communication.

Overall, these changes would mean that new citizens have a strong connection to Canada and are better prepared to assume the responsibilities of citizenship and become active members of Canadian society.

Canadians take great pride in our citizenship. We are taking action to further strengthen that pride and the value of Canadian citizenship with the first comprehensive reforms to the Citizenship Act since 1977. The strengthening Canadian citizenship act would deliver on our government's commitment to reduce backlogs and improve processing times while strengthening the integrity of Canadian citizenship.

Our Conservative government has welcomed over 1.4 million new citizens. That is a record to be commended. These new citizens come from all over the globe. Some of them come here for economic improvement and some of them are refugees who faced difficult times in their home country and have been forced to leave. Canada is a haven for these people and we are accepting more immigrants and more refugees than any other government in Canada ever has. Therefore, we need these changes to the Citizenship Act to modernize it, to allow that backlog to become smaller, and to streamline the process. That is what we are talking about here.

I have heard a lot of questions, and I am sure I will get some after I finish my own speech, saying something is wrong here, in section a, line 3, paragraph 7. We have been told that we have to make that change or the bill is no good, throw the whole thing out. This is the proverbial baby being thrown out with the bathwater.

At the end of the day, these changes are going to be brought in. We are going to streamline the system. We are going to make it faster and more efficient. All of us on both sides of the House have immigration files involving people who want to come to Canada, who want to contribute to our society. We are going to be able to move them through faster. However, we will see who votes in support of this legislation and who does not.

We want newcomers to be welcomed as full members of the Canadian family of citizens, fully contributing to our economy and our communities from coast to coast to coast. With Bill C-24 we propose to strengthen the rules around access to citizenship to ensure that they reflect its true value and that new citizens are better prepared for full participation in Canadian life.

More specifically, Bill C-24 will resolve the vast majority of the lost Canadian cases once and for all.

The Liberals claim to care about the lost Canadians, yet they did nothing to fix the problem of any cases of lost Canadians over 13 long years in their government. Our Conservative government will right a historical wrong by granting citizenship to children born abroad to Crown servants and will honour the service of permanent residents who serve in the Canadian Armed Forces by granting them quicker access to Canadian citizenship. In addition, members of the Canadian Armed Forces would have a fast-track access to citizenship through a reduced qualifying period as a way of recognizing their important contribution to Canada. The bill would ensure that children born outside Canada to, or adopted outside Canada by, a Canadian parent who was serving abroad as a Crown servant are able to pass on citizenship to children they may have or adopt outside Canada.

Members of the Canadian Armed Forces put their lives on the line in order to honour the interests and security of our country and protect the safety of our citizens. This legislation would accelerate citizenship for permanent residents serving in the Canadian Armed Forces. It would also provide for a grant of citizenship for individuals on exchange with the Canadian Armed Forces. Under the proposed changes to the Citizenship Act, those who have served for one year less than the residence requirement would be eligible to apply for a grant of citizenship. Once the new legislation comes into force, the residence requirement would be four years out of six, that is representing three years of service for the fast-track provision.Those who served in the qualifying period and have been released honourably would also be eligible for the fast-track to citizenship.

Generally speaking, Canadian citizenship is a requirement for enrolment in the Canadian Armed Forces, but permanent residence may also be employed in exceptional circumstances. The problem is that one's lack of citizenship gives rise to challenges related to security clearances and passport arrangements and can therefore make it difficult to deploy him or her for service abroad. The United States and Australia already have a similar fast-track mechanism for members of the military as a way of honouring their service and addressing deployment challenges.

Introducing a fast-track citizenship for permanent residents serving in and for individuals on exchange with the Canadian Armed Forces as proposed in Bill C-24 would honour their service to Canada and make their deployment abroad much easier.

Another advantage is that it could provide an incentive for newcomers to Canada to enlist in the Canadian Armed Forces.

Citizenship legislation is extremely complicated. Many of the amendments that came into force in 2009 were retroactive, adding another layer of complexity. Amendments are desirable under Bill C-24 to ensure that the law supports consistent implementation of the first generation limit to citizenship by descent and it does not bar access to eligible applicants.

Currently, the Citizenship Act contains an exception to the first generation limit for children born to or adopted by a parent who is a Crown servant. The exception means that children born outside of Canada to serving Crown servants, including military personnel, would always be Canadian at birth, irrespective of what generation they were born outside of Canada. However, these children are not able to pass on citizenship to any children they have or adopt outside Canada as a direct result of their parents' service to Canada. This includes children born prior to April 17, 2009, such as the nearly 4,000 children born between 1983 and 1994 at the Canadian Forces base in Lahr, Germany. Under the current law, these children are not able to pass on citizenship to the children born or adopted abroad.

The first generation limit creates distinctions between family members of Crown servants depending on where the parents were serving when the child was born. It also acts as a disincentive to serving outside Canada for persons of childbearing age and creates a disadvantage when compared to public servants serving in Canada.

For all these reasons, we propose to amend the Citizenship Act to ensure that children born or adopted outside Canada to serving crown servants, including military personnel, are able to pass on citizenship to any children they have or adopt outside Canada. It is that simple. It truly is.

We have this huge gap out there, from 1983 to 1994. Children born to Canadian parents serving in Lahr, Germany, were not Canadian citizens, even though they were born on a Canadian Forces base to Canadian parents. That is the lost generation. Somehow we have to correct that. The bill would do that.

[Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act, May 28th, 2014]

Name one.