Citizenship and Immigration committee  I don't want to speculate on the form in which the bill could be passed with or without amendment by the committee, but it would create differential treatment by those affected by those former section 8 provisions. In that, you are correct. From the perspective of the experts at

Citizenship and Immigration committee  It's difficult for the department to know exactly what that number would be since we only have data with regard to people who come forward and apply. Currently, those who lost citizenship under the former section 8 provisions can come forward and apply for something called a dis

Citizenship and Immigration committee  It is the latter. The rule is applying to everyone as of 2009. What it means is that for children born abroad after that date in 2009, they will be Canadian from birth automatically if they have one parent who was born in Canada or one parent who immigrated to Canada and became a

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I'm sorry. Does the member have a specific question in that regard?

Citizenship and Immigration committee  As I mentioned in my remarks, pushing out the date of the application of the first-generation limit from 2009 to 2015 will essentially seek to delay the implementation of the first-generation limit to the later date. That means that those born abroad in the second generation or b

Citizenship and Immigration committee  The intent of the bill, to remedy lost Canadians, is one that the department or the government agrees with and can support. The issue is, as mentioned, that some who lost their citizenship automatically as a result of section 8 are included in the bill, and some others are not. T

Citizenship and Immigration committee  That's correct. It's those impacted by the former retention provisions.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  There is a second clause in the bill that's seeking to move the first-generation limit for those born abroad in the first generation. Again, there are concerns with that provision in the bill because it's addressing only those born between 2009 and 2015. It's not addressing those

Citizenship and Immigration committee  I don't think we're in a position to estimate how many untold numbers of Canadians were born abroad since 2009 who could, in the future, become lost Canadians as a result of the bill as drafted, but it is a concern that could be addressed by amendments at the committee stage.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  What I'm saying is that the bill as drafted would convert some persons who were granted citizenship since 2009 to become automatic citizens by operation of law under the bill as drafted. This would remove their ability to pass on citizenship to their children who may be born abro

Citizenship and Immigration committee  Yes, that's correct.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  You are correct. The bill excludes those who applied and who were rejected. We don't have any way to know what the reason for the rejection was, but the concern is that the bill has a differential impact in addressing some of these lost Canadians and not others. Those who applied

Citizenship and Immigration committee  The department does maintain information. Those who are impacted by the retention provisions were born abroad in the second generation since 1977. We may not necessarily have access to files going back that far in time in order to access the reasons not all those cases were accep

Citizenship and Immigration committee  In most cases applicants who were applying to retain their citizenship had to demonstrate they were resident in Canada for one year. That would have been the connection.

Citizenship and Immigration committee  That's correct.