Citizenship and Immigration committee  The department, at the time, would have had procedures in place in terms of various kinds of evidence that could be accepted to demonstrate residence. To my knowledge, it likely would have included the kind of proof you mentioned.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  The requirements were repealed in 2009, so I can't really speak today to what would have been required.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Thank you, Madam Chair. Before begin, I would like to acknowledge that I work on the traditional—

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Members, good afternoon. Before I begin, I'd like to acknowledge that I work on the traditional unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people. We are pleased to be here today to support the committee's work on Bill S-245, which seeks to address the remaining lost Canadians.

Public Safety committee  Thank you, yes. The provisions in the Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act, which enable revocation of citizenship from dual citizens who have done these actions against the national interest that I referred to, are broadly similar to provisions that exist in the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand, and other democratic European countries that we looked at including France, Italy, Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland.

Public Safety committee  Thank you for your question. I would just respond by stating that the two provisions of this bill are distinct. They are not intended to be related, other than that they both support the objective of the safety and security of Canadians. Then the other point, more directly in response to your question, is that citizenship revocation cases would be initiated based on objective, open-source information to determine whether the provisions apply.

Public Safety committee  There is not, as contemplated by Bill C-44 nor the changes under the Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act.

Public Safety committee  Thank you very much for your question. I would just note at the outset, as mentioned earlier, that the provisions in Bill C-44 are technical amendments that would not bring any changes to the provisions of the Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act, which received royal assent in June earlier this year.

Public Safety committee  I don't have much to add to what the minister said. He provided a very good description of two separate elements of Bill C-44. The objectives are complementary insofar as the proposed technical changes to the Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act will help attain the same objective, which is to strengthen the safety of Canadians, the value of Canadian citizenship and the integrity of the program.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  The proposed measures in the bill are limited to permanent residents and individuals on exchange to recognize their extraordinary service to the country. It doesn't extend to others. This is a function of the fact that when we did our homework and our comparative research on what other countries do, in the U.S., Australia and New Zealand they offer a fast track to individuals who work in their military only.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  The fast track for individuals working in the military is broadly in line with the allies. The proposal under Bill C-24 to extend that not only to permanent residents but also to individuals on exchanges is the most closely aligned with what they do in the United States, where they don't require you to have permanent resident status in order to have the opportunity to be fast-tracked for citizenship.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  —to delegate that decision on revocation.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  The minister did make the point earlier that for any overseas terrorism conviction where a five-year sentence or more has been imposed and the person is a dual citizen, which may give rise to revocation consideration, the department will have to do a two-step equivalent process.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Thank you for question. We anticipate that if this bill passes, we would like to be in a position, and we are working to be in a position, to implement the streamlined decision-making provisions of the bill at the earliest opportunity in order to benefit those significant number of cases in the backlog that the minister mentioned.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  It's more in line with what these other countries do. Canada's the only country that has this three-step process, which results in the vast majority of applicants being accepted at the end of the day. Most of those have a more streamlined process in line with what's being proposed in this bill.