Citizenship and Immigration committee  Every country handles these kinds of situations a little bit differently, but as I recall, the Americans actually do not have a security and criminality provision. I'm saying this with a bit of a question mark in my own mind. I know that the Americans actually don't have a direct mechanism like this for citizenship, because the individuals have to apply first under the immigration provision, and it's only by their arriving with an immigrant visa can they actually become a citizen.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Again, we have to go back to the era of the acts. The Citizenship Act has far more meat in it than IRPA. IRPA, when it was created, was very much a framework act. If we take the case of adoptions, that's a classic example. Adoption or adoptees are not mentioned at all in IRPA. I don't think you'll find any provision in the act itself that makes a reference to adoption or adoptees, whereas, with Bill C-14, a lot of the rules will actually be placed in the act.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I'll give the policy answer first, but I'll ask my colleague Alain Laurencelle to speak, as well, from the legal side. The idea would be, as I hear it, that we would have two rules, one for adoptees who are over 18, where they would be subject to criminality or security prohibitions...but not for adoptees under 18.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  As was explained previously, there are other kinds of decisions comparable to this decision; in other words, a grant of citizenship where the minister or the minister's delegate is making the decision. The way the present Citizenship Act is structured--and we have to remember the act has been in place fundamentally since 1977--the review mechanism that exists for that kind of decision is judicial review without the requirement for leave.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Just to answer the final question first, we have been discussing this bill and the ultimate regulations with stakeholders, primarily the provinces. We've been having that conversation with provincial governments for a number of months, if not years. The bill was drafted particularly in concert with the Province of Quebec in order to guarantee that extra step that's necessary in Quebec adoptions.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  If the first individual was either adopted by a Canadian citizen after the 14th of—

Citizenship and Immigration committee  There certainly is a review in the immigration context for long-term permanent residents who may be subject to deportation because of the provisions of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. For those cases there is a fairly careful review that goes through before those individuals would be subject to removal from Canada.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  We have seen the submission, thanks to the CBA having sent it to us. The kind of decision we're talking about here is a decision of the minister or the minister's delegate. The review mechanism that exists presently in the Citizenship Act is a judicial review. Unlike judicial reviews that exist in the immigration context, there does not have to be a leave to the Federal Court for the individuals to have direct judicial review.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Mr. Chair, the statement is here. We've looked at the issue of how far we should go in reducing the distinction between natural-born children and adopted children and whether we can reduce it to this extent. The feeling after looking at court cases, particularly a case a number of years ago that started with the human rights tribunal and eventually led to the Federal Court of Appeal, was that we had to reduce as much as possible distinctions between natural-born and adopted children, and that would include reducing or eliminating the prohibitions under citizenship.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  The short answer is no. The slightly longer answer is that the vast majority of these cases are the classic Canadian family adopting minor children, under four or five years, and the vast majority of those cases are processed very expeditiously. There is no evidence there is a problem.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  The process would normally start where the parent resides in Canada. The province would do the first review. The Canadian citizen parent would apply for a grant of citizenship for this individual. If we had concerns that there was an adoption of convenience—for instance, that the purpose of coming into Canada was to circumvent the immigration or citizenship rules, or even the rules around security or criminality in the context of citizenship—the application could theoretically be refused.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  My understanding of the presentation today, Mr. Chair, was that we were to provide a brief overview of the bill, not to go into details.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Absolutely.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  The bill before Parliament was developed for a number of years by parliamentarians, by the government, and by the department.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. The bill that the minister introduced this afternoon, which is an amendment to the Citizenship Act that has been in place since 1977, is intended to minimize the distinction that presently exists in the context of citizenship between children born to and those adopted by Canadian citizens abroad.