Socialists, Separatists, and Immigrants, Oh My!

a little of matt good's excellent lyrics:

i'm surfacing. i'm surfacing.

..speaking of under the radar, these are not the full changes to the Citizenship Act, which basically can repeal citizenship of ANY first generation Canadian at ANY time if they have a "history" that is deemed "inappropriate" by the authorities, but hey:

"....This means that the children of adopted children who are born overseas will not be granted citizenship “naturally”.

For immigrants, the citizenship will be cut off at second generation. This means that if your son/daughter has acquire Canadian citizenship through immigration, and he/she decides to give birth to a child outside of Canada, that kid would not “inherit” Canadian citizenship as it could be now (though you have to go through some registration process).

This is a HUGE change to the Citizenship Act and it has gone unnoticed! By now Bill C-35 has long passed by the parliament, gained royal assent and the accompanying regulations have already published in Canada Gazette, it means no one will be able to refute it. In fact, the new regulations will come into effect no later than April 17, 2009.

One point to note, though, if these kids are born in Canada, there will be no citizenship problem.

Does our government not know the effect of this amendment? That they are too naive to truly believe they are protecting the value of our citizenship? Well, the answer is no again.

The analysis/commentary accompanied the online publication of Bill C-37 hosted on the parliament website, it says:

A second contentious issue raised by the bill relates to citizenship by descent. Under Bill C-37, the child born abroad to a parent who derived his or her citizenship from a Canadian parent who was also born abroad will not automatically become a Canadian citizen. In other words, Bill C-37 cuts off citizenship by descent after the first generation born abroad. The benefits of this approach include clarity and certainty; the opportunity to repeal retention and registration requirements that the Government has no way of communicating to those at risk of losing their citizenship; and an end to the possibility of Canadian citizenship being passed down indefinitely to people who have little or no connection with Canada. The major problem with this approach is that it may result in some people not being Canadian citizens at birth even though they and their parents have a substantial connection with Canada.

A third criticism the bill is likely to attract arises because of the proposed cut-off described above. Under the bill, a person who is the second or subsequent generation born abroad to a Canadian parent may be stateless if he or she does not acquire citizenship of the state of birth, or through his or her other parent. Canada is a contracting state to the United Nations’ Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness.(32) Under article 4 of that Convention, a contracting state is required to grant its nationality to a person not born in the territory of the contracting state, who would otherwise be stateless, if the nationality of one or both of the person’s parents at the time of the person’s birth was that of the contracting state. Such a grant of nationality may be subject to certain stipulated conditions, however. The provision included in Bill C-37 to deal with statelessness is compliant with the Convention, but only minimally so.

It is not that I do not support our government to take steps to protect the values of Canadian citizenship, but I really do not like the way this government does thing — slipping through cracks. What is accountability and transparency this government advertised when it took office in 2006? Where were Raymond Chan, Olivia Chow, Libby Davis etc when they were supposed to be scrutinizing every act of the government?

Read the rightwing-friendly article by the National Post titled “New immigration rules create two-tier Canadians: critics.” The article provides an explanation for the motive of this amendment and why the government doesn’t want us to notice:

The issue of so-called “Canadians of convenience” was highlighted during Israel’s 2006 military action in Lebanon, when the federal government conducted an emergency evacuation of Canadian citizens from the Middle East, including some who were living there permanently.

So whenever the government gives you some goodies, always keep your eyes at what it is taking away from you.

Donald Galloway, a law professor at the University of Victoria specializing in immigration and refugee law, says it is odd that the Harper government would make it easier for adopted children to become Canadians, then propose a new regulation that would take away the citizenship rights their parents enjoyed.

“They’re giving benefits with one hand and taking it away with the other,” said Mr. Galloway, who is the father of a nine-year-old girl adopted from China. “You now have to worry about where your kids are born.”