SOCI – Legislative Summary Report – December 5, 2024

[This message is being sent to the IRCC Parliamentary Affairs Distribution List]

Dear Colleagues,

On May 23, 2024, Bill C-71, An Act to amend the Citizenship Act (2024) was introduced and read for a first time in the House of Commons.

Today, the Bill was debated at Second Reading. A summary of the debate can be found below.

Key Takeaways

• The Second Reading debate on Bill C-71, An Act to amend the Citizenship Act (2024) took place in the House of Commons. The Liberal Party (LPC), New Democratic Party (NDP), and Bloc Québécois (BQ) all spoke in support of the Bill and highlighted the importance of Canadian citizenship. The Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) is opposed to the Bill, with some of their main concerns being the need for police checks before people gain citizenship and changes to the substantive connection test.
• At the expiry of the time allotted for debate, there were four minutes remaining for the speech of Member of Parliament (MP) Chagger (LPC). The debate will resume at 10:30 a.m. tomorrow, Tuesday, September 17, 2024.
• A complete transcript of the debate will be available tomorrow morning in Hansard.

Summary of Remarks

Liberal Party of Canada

• The LPC is in favour of the Bill and places blame for the issue on the Harper government for creating the Lost Canadians that this Bill seeks to restore citizenship to.

The Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship (IRC) delivered opening remarks in which he described the key elements of Bill C-71, which remedies a number of injustices that cause some Canadians to lose, or never have, their citizenship due to being born abroad. He also discussed Bill S-245, An Act to amend the Citizenship Act (granting citizenship to certain Canadians), and how it has not moved in the legislative process due to the CPC. He concluded by explaining the urgency of moving this legislation along due to the court ruling, and noting the cross-party support for the Bill.

Questions and answers of note:

• MP Tom Kmiec (CPC) asked how many people would be impacted if Bill C-71 were to pass. The Minister of IRC responded that it is important to know the numbers, however, there isn’t time to figure it out due to the court decision.
• MP Louise Chabot (BQ) stated the BQ will support studying this Bill at committee, and then asked how the government plans to address the need to have clear data in terms of who will be affected by the Bill.
• MP Jenny Kwan (NDP) and MP Elizabeth May (Green Party [GP]) asked if the Bill would be put in place as soon as it receives Royal Assent. The Minister of IRC responded that he hopes this will be the case.

MP Mark Gerretsen (LPC) reiterated the important steps Bill C-71 would take in restoring citizenship to the remaining Lost Canadians due to the outdated legislation from 2009. He spoke on the importance as Canadians to be committed to inclusion, to fix past wrongs, and to share the benefits of being citizens to all.

Questions and answers of note:

• MP Ziad Aboultaif (CPC) noted how the current mismanagement of the immigration department has caused stress on the housing market and MP Andréanne Larouche (BQ) spoke to the importance of Bill C-71, however, noted that it may be more beneficial to review the immigration act in its entirety. MP Gerretsen reiterated that the debate is on Bill C-71, and not on the immigration system as a whole.
• MP Lisa Marie Barron (NDP) highlighted the issue of Lost Canadians born abroad now having stateless children, and the importance of Bill C-71 to remedy this.

MP Francesco Sorbara (LPC) spoke to the importance of addressing the issue of Lost Canadians that began during the Harper administration. He highlighted the importance for previously excluded groups to be treated with respect. MP Sorbara noted that Bill C-71 took into consideration all changes and suggestions made to Bill S-245.

Questions and answers of note:

• MP Ziad Aboultaif (CPC) inquired about the level of stress the passing of the Bill will cause to the immigration department. MP Sorbara noted that the immigration department has hardworking people and will be able to work at full capacity.
• MP Heather McPherson (NDP) asked when the government plans for the Bill to receive Royal Assent. MP Sorbara assured that the intent of the government is to have the Bill receive Royal Assent as soon as possible.

MP Bardish Chagger (LPC) framed Bill C-71 as a new chapter of equity and inclusion for the Canadian immigration system. She noted that Canadian citizenship should not be a partisan issue, and that the CPC should not be asking how many people will be affected by the Bill, as these people are Canadian and entitled to citizenship. She said that this legislation aims to right the wrongs of the past, and that all parties other than the CPC are in support of this.

Conservative Party of Canada

• The CPC opposes the Bill, and is concerned with a lack of knowledge by the Minister and Department on how many people will be impacted by the Bill. They would like all applicants to require a criminal record check before being granted citizenship and to require three consecutive years in Canada rather than three cumulative years.

MP Tom Kmiec (CPC) explained that the CPC is concerned with the number of people being affected by this legislation, noting that this will impact processing backlogs. He explained that the CPC would be in favour of amending the Bill so that someone has to have lived in Canada for three years consecutively, rather than the proposed three cumulative years before birth. He also stated that the CPC would like criminal record checks to be required before citizenship is granted. He noted that the LPC and NDP voted in favour of the Bill that created the issues being remedied by this new legislation, and that the Minister of IRC is responsible for the actions of his Department. He stated the CPC will be opposing the Bill unless there are a number of amendments.

Questions and answers of note:

• MP Bardish Chagger (LPC) asked why the Member felt he should be the one deciding who is and is not a Canadian. MP Kmiec responded that the LPC voted two times in favour of the law that created this issue.
• MP Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe (BQ) questioned why the CPC does not vote in favour at Second Reading, so the Bill can be sent to committee and amendments can be made to improve the Bill. MP Kmiec responded that the last time this issue was discussed at Committee with S-245, all CPC amendments were voted against.
• MP Jenny Kwan (NDP) read a letter that was sent by the CPC to the families impacted by the legislation, in which they stated the CPC would support S-245 so that it could move to Third Reading. She asked why the CPC lied to this family. MP Kmiec explained that the CPC voted in favour of 10 amendments made by other parties for S-245, while all their amendments were voted down.
• MP Kevin Lamoureux (LPC) asked if the Member would assure the CPC won’t use the notwithstanding clause to oppose this Bill. MP Kmiec responded that the notwithstanding clause will only be used on justice bills, which this is not.

MP Ziad Aboultaif (CPC) noted that Bill C-71 devalues the idea of citizenship by giving the notion of granting citizenship to “tourists”. MP Aboultaif highlighted the importance for all citizens of Canada to commit to the culture and community, and said the Bill must tighten not loosen immigration. He concluded by reiterating that Bill C-71 is hastily written and needs more work.

Questions and answers of note:

• MP Francesco Sorbara (LPC) reiterated that Bill C-71 intends to correct current unconstitutional injustices. MP Aboultaif noted that the immigration system is currently in shambles and must be fixed first.
• MP Monique Pauzé (BQ) highlighted that the current debate is on Bill C-71 and not the immigration system as a whole. MP Aboultaif noted that he does not understand why the BQ is interested in the Bill and said that all evidence towards their arguments cannot be proven.
• MP Heather McPherson (NDP) claimed that the Member’s speech was disappointing and that many constituents in Alberta are disappointed in the CPC’s lack of action on the issue. MP Aboultaif noted that the MP should spend their time talking to more Canadians, who believe that the immigration law is currently a disaster.
• MP Elizabeth May (GP) asked how the CPC knows that Canadians of convenience can choose their parents to get Canadian citizenship. MP Aboultaif noted that there is a much bigger problem and reiterated the importance of one’s allegiance to Canada.

MP Brad Vis (CPC) described conventional paths to earning citizenship, and remarked upon media reports suggesting non-residents are intentionally giving birth in Canada for “birth right citizenship” and “citizenship of convenience.” He argued this trend is a burden on Canadian taxpayers, as those delivering children in Canada incur healthcare costs.

MP Vis broadly cast Canada’s immigration system in a negative light throughout his remarks, expressing concern about security screenings, health care costs incurred by new Canadians, and the financial cost of Bill C-71. Overall, MP Vis was not supportive of Bill C-71.

MP Garnet Genuis (CPC) argued against Bill C-71. He said the Bill dilutes the integrity of Canadian citizenship, and lamented that the Bill does not require a robust criminal record check. He remarked C-71 will encourage tens of thousands of new Canadian immigration applicants of dubious backgrounds, incurring a significant cost. He further argued the Bill would harm social cohesion in Canada, and stated a future Conservative-led government would reform Canada’s immigration system and reinstate public trust in the immigration process. He concluded by stating that citizenship is important and there needs to be democratically set parameters around what it means to be a citizen.

Questions and answers of note:

• MP Mark Gerretsen (LPC) encouraged the CPC to vote for the Bill to go to committee, where they can raise their concerns, rather than dragging on debates in the House. MP Genius stated that he does not agree with the central change addressed in the Bill, and therefore will not vote in favour of it.
• MP Mario Simard (BQ) asked how the Member could say that if someone lives in Canada and identifies as Canadian, that they are not Canadian. MP Genuis said he was referring to the individuals this Bill pertains to, who live outside Canada and are the descendent of Canadian citizens, but self-identify as Canadians. He said self-identification should not be a decisive matter if the citizenship laws do not make them a citizen.
• MP Tom Kmiec (CPC) raised concerns that the Minister of IRC could not give numbers of how many people this Bill would impact, which was the same issue seen with Bill S-245. He noted the administrative burden and costs that this will put on the immigration system, arguing it would be irresponsible to vote in favour of this Bill.

Bloc Québécois

• The BQ spoke in favour of the Bill, and used the discussion to promote separatist views. The party will vote on amendments on a case-by-case basis.

MP Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe (BQ) described how the discussion would be different if Quebec were an independent state. He shared his disappointment in S-245 being blocked by partisan politics. He stated that the BQ is in favour of Bills C-71 and S-245, and that no one should be stripped of their citizenship.

He encouraged the CPC to come to committee with all of their amendments so they could be reviewed. He concluded by saying that Quebec will one day be an independent state and will be better at dealing with this type of issue.

Questions and answers of note:

• MP Tom Kmiec (CPC) asked if the BQ would be in favour of an amendment requiring all applicants to have a police record check. MP Brunelle-Duceppe stated they would need to look at the potential impacts of this amendment before deciding.
• MP Jenny Kwan (NDP) asked if the Member agrees the issue was created when the Harper government forced MPs to support Bill C-37 in its entirety, or not support it at all. MP Brunelle-Duceppe said he was not an MP at the time, and reiterated the importance of studying the Bill at committee.
• MP Yves Perron (CPC) asked if the Member would agree that all immigration files should be reviewed by all parties. MP Brunelle-Duceppe said that Bill C-71 will be a good example of how an independent Quebec could manage their own immigration files when they are an independent state.
• MP Kevin Lamoureux (LPC) asked the BQ’s view on the fact that the ruling of the Ontario Court was unconstitutional. MP Brunelle-Duceppe requested the Member not use parliamentary traps in his questions.

New Democratic Party of Canada

• The NDP is in favour of the Bill and shared concerns on the amount of time it will take for the Bill to receive Royal Assent. They also place blame on the Harper government for creating this group of Lost Canadians.

MP Jenny Kwan (NDP) put the history of the issue on record and reiterated the importance of this Bill. She stated that she doesn’t believe the government would have addressed this issue if they were not pressured by other parties and the Court ruling. She argued the government had to bring this issue forward as a government bill because CPC would not bring S-245 to third reading debate. She also noted that women are particularly impacted by the first-generation limit, which discriminates on the basis of gender. MP Kwan requested unanimous consent to have Bill C-71 deemed as read a second time and referred to committee. The motion was defeated.

Questions and answers of note:

• MP Kevin Lamoureux (LPC) noted that the CPC does not see the value of bringing the Bill to committee stage. MP Kwan reiterated the importance of making Lost Canadians citizens by law to restore rights to citizens who were unconstitutionally stripped of their status.
• MP Ziad Aboultaif (CPC) asked how one can talk about better immigration when the current government has made a mess of the system. MP Kwan highlighted that it was the CPC who created the unconstitutional law.
• MP Luc Theriault (BQ) reiterated the importance of passing the Bill. MP Kwan agreed with the Member and stated that Lost Canadians have already suffered for over 15 years.
• MP Elizabeth May (GP) noted that Bill C-71 is a matter of restoring rights and not about creating new rights or a new class of people. MP Kwan thanked the GP, BQ, and the LPC for their continued efforts to restore citizen rights in a non-partisan manner.
• MP Lisa Marie Brown (NDP) highlighted the Conservative trend of delaying any provisions and voting related to the current unconstitutional law. MP Kwan noted that Conservatives have been misleading families on the issue for both Bill S-245 and C-71.
• MP Bardish Chagger (LPC) highlighted that Bill S-245 was sponsored by a Conservative member, however they continue to delay debates and votes on the matter. MP Kwan noted that the CPC has delayed the debate of third reading eight times.

At the expiry of the time allotted for debate, there were four minutes remaining for the speech of MP Chagger (LPC). The debate will resume at 10:30 a.m. tomorrow, Tuesday, September 17, 2024.