Again, cross-posting from Maple Sandbox this relevant information:
http://maplesandbox.ca/2014/canadian-government-proposing-changes-to-citizenship-act/
According to several sources this morning, our government is going to be announcing changes to our citizenship act today. I think we will all be anxiously waiting to see how this affects us.
( links at Maple Sandbox article )
Conservatives set to announce ‘comprehensive’ changes to Citizenship Act
“Citizenship and Immigration Minister Chris Alexander will detail the changes at a Toronto news conference. The government is calling the overhaul the first comprehensive reform to the Citizenship Act in more than a generation. Alexander recently said the government planned to implement new rules that will ensure Canadian citizenship “has value.” Among the reported changes is one that would allow Ottawa to revoke the citizenship of dual nationals in “extreme cases,” such as in cases of treason or acts of terrorism.Alexander also suggested recently the government will try to give citizenship to those who have been wrongfully denied it in the past, such as the children of war brides.”
Don’t know about anyone else, but I am very afraid, considering how they caved so absolutely yesterday.
I have been following this one. They want to increase the time in country to five years before PR’s are allowed to apply for citizenship and they want to focus their residency and citizenship recruitment on “useful” people ie: not old people like your grandparents.
They have already cracked down on residency fraud by targeting citizenship applicants whose countries of origin, religion and travel habits are decidedly non-white (though they would deny this is the case that is not what I read in the related forums). These changes are part of the reason that it takes so much longer to process applications of all types.
They want to make it easier for skilled workers to come and live here. Goal is six months to process them and you can bet that will be at the expense of people already in the queue.
They already revamped the citizenship test but that might be retweaked. They want stricter language proficiency tests. They are talking about shoring up efforts to help newbies acclimate b/c too many now are unemployed or under-employed.
The aim is to be “competitive” with other countries that are more preferred by the coveted professional crowd.
Yes, you should probably be a bit suspicious but I am not expecting anything nefarious. But this is the Tories. They are not a “common folk” crowd. We are the serfs upon which the more important people build and upon whose backs “progress” happens.
I think there is a lot about this initiative that is questionable, however I think it is irrelevant to the issue of FATCA.
What is citizenship worth when your government sells your private information to the IRS. They have just ensured that Canadian citizenship is not of value. I don’t believe them.
Perhaps some section of this new Citizenship Act will redefine Canadian citizenship.
1st class. (With full rights and freedoms) All Canadian citizens born in Canada or elsewhere; except:
2nd class. (Limited citizenship) Canadian citizens born in the US or otherwise deemed by the US govt to be a US person.
@YogaGirl –
The issue seems to be that the Tories cracked down on some existing abuse of the residency rules (http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/09/10/the-hunt-for-false-citizens-cbsa-crackdown-comes-after-years-of-investigation/), which was fine, but didn’t staff up the screening system to cope with that, which is why we’re seeing these extreme wait times.
This story is very much related to yesterday’s FATCA IGA in that the Tories have now managed to violate the Charter twice in two days. Both yesterday’s news and now this Citizenship reform create tiered Canadian citizenship levels, which are clear Charter violations in each case. If they can strip away the citizenship of naturalized and dual citizens, but not the citizenship of single-nationality, Canadian-born citizens, then that is a clear discrimination based on national origin and is not allowed under the Charter. The FATCA IGA also says that certain citizens can be discriminated against based on nation origin, hence violating the Charter in the same way. Also, who decides what “terrorist” and “extreme cases” mean? Perhaps, they could come to mean troublesome Americans who question out FATCA IGA if we protest these things too loudly! If the Supreme Court of Canada doesn’t strike both of these down, then our Canadian citizenship certificates aren’t worth the paper they are printed on.
@RefugeeFromAmerica
Canada is a party to international treaties designed to prevent statelessness under which we can’t make anybody stateless, or allow someone to make themselves stateless. This is why you can’t renounce Canadian citizenship unless you show you have another citizenship. The U.S., as always, is different (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Gogulski).
NorthernShrike, it is relevant for those of us who are still trying to naturalize in our countries. Anything they do to rig the process in favor of skilled workers at the expense of spouses/partners slows the process, which is slower and slower all the time.
A broken man on a Halifax pier, yep. The fact that the crackdown breaks down ethnically/racially is problematic as well
Citizenship, whether intentional or not, is tiered with native born at the top and gradually diminishing down to PR’s and then those who simply have work or student or other visas. I haven’t seen the new changes yet though I have been keeping up with announcements and reading committee notes. The fixation on young skill/professional types mirrors what is going on in other countries but it makes me uneasy b/c it is a symptom of the growing mania about “progress” and “growth” and our govts obsession with money/economy over people and their lives.
Sometimes I wish I believed in god and hell b/c then I would know that those who are driving this nonsense would be judged and sentenced one day, but that is fairy tale nonsense. The harm that is being done to real people and their lives will never be addressed.
FATCA IGA then raise the years required to become a citizen, that’s nice.
“Under the new rules, newcomers must reside in Canada for four out of six years to be eligible to apply for citizenship and must show proof that they’ve filed income taxes during that period. The current threshold is three years out of four; however, residency is not currently defined as physical presence, nor are there any tax requirements.”
http://www.canada.com/citizenship+bill+will+make+harder+become+Canadian/9476510/story.html
@RefugeeFromAmerica: In the UK the Home Secretary wants the power to strip a person of British citizenship even if the act would render the person stateless. The same imprecise definitions of who would be a sufficient threat to the nation to justify doing so are being used to say this would only happen in extreme cases of danger to the nation. (To be decided by the Home Secretary, of course. This, in the same week that an innocent man died at Guantanamo after more than a decade there without ever having been charged with anything. And no one seems to notice the irony.)
How nice of the Conservatives to teach ME the value of Canadian citizenship after they just SHIT on some of their own by signing an IGA!
Pfffft!!
Hypocrites! There is nothing that they can teach me!
@ Stateless Man: Exactly, two body blows in two days. I literally am sick to my stomach at the developments. I need to renounce ASAP so that I can continue living my life as a human and not as a possession of the US government. I was counting down until July of 2015, now it looks like I’ll have to wait until July of 2017.
Watch, between now and then the US will increase the cost for renunciations to levels that will make it impossible for regular people to afford, or throw other stumbling blocks in our paths in order to keep us on the gulag. I’m crushed, but that’s how my luck goes. Maybe I should try to live stateless.
@arjan Going Stateless hasn’t caused me any issues, I enjoy where I live, I have a business, own land, have a drivers license, haven’t ever been refused a new bank account, so the only thing citizenship really seems to offer is a nice passport with visa free travel.
Being a U.S. citizen with residency in a foreign country offers one unique opportunity and that’s going Stateless as most countries do not allow you to renounce and become stateless.
@RefugeeFromAmerica
By making citizenship to be two-tier, the Harper government couldn’t possibly cheapen Canadian citizenship more.
Sure, I could shed my unwanted US citizenship, but for what? To always be a second class Canadian?
Why even bother then? I’m not going to cheapen myself for the toady Harper government! This was not the new start that I was looking for, to always be looked at as some foreigner in spite of going through all of the work and effort to assimilate into this society.
If it tries to define citizenship as residency, you might as well put on striped pants and shirt because you’ll be a prisoner. Another closed loop hole may require Canadians to report back to Canada after their vacation visa expires — no more hoping over a 3rd country border to get a renewal so you can extend your “tourist” visit. I-ll be looking if these are some of the changes….
Stateless Man says
February 6, 2014 at 4:28 pm
You seem to be selling this option pretty boastfully. It sounds interesting. But surely you know the down side. Please elaborate…
@mdean Going Stateless is not for everyone, the downside is no easy return to the United States, no easy travel outside the country of residency, though most countries will issue you a certificate of identification which can be used to travel internationally to countries you obtain a visa from in advance.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certificate_of_identity
It all comes down to what you value, I valued disconnecting from the United States more than having a 2nd citizenship in the bag first or being able to travel easily internationally.
Let me know if you have specific concerns or questions, clearly I would not want to be a stateless person in a 3rd world country but being Stateless in a country like Canada would not bother me.
Stateless Man says
February 6, 2014 at 6:25 pm
As a stateless person do you have official residency status, as defined by an array of provincial authorities? I am imagining you would also be ineligible for medical service plan, child tax credit, or other benefits in your province.
@mdean I obtained perm residency before renouncing my U.S. citizenship doing anything other than that would be a VERY BAD IDEA, I also checked with local immigration before renouncing to make sure they had no issue with me becoming Stateless, they did not believe I could do it but said if I did become Stateless it was of no concern to them.
I can vote though I can not run for office, I have access to the State funded medical system, I’m taxed as a resident, so no difference in what I can claim than everyone else.
The Canadian Government is tired of 1 worker bringing in 2 sets of 70 year old grand parents who will cost our Health care system a fortune. To me this whole dual citizenship is BS one citizenship and that is it.18 years old can choose or there guardian if they are unable to choose (Calgary 411 rule)
Goerge3rd says
February 6, 2014 at 11:09 pm
Residency is the only requirement for health care, so if the 2 sets of grandparents are accepted into the country, no matter their citizenship, they qualify. How do you propose to prevent that? Of more concern to me, as far as health care ripoffs go, is the provinces that are constantly undermining the Canada Health Act in numerous ways for everybody.
The Government want to bring in people who are net taxpayers ( they pay more in taxes than they take out)
But there is still more our Government can and will do.
We know that a job is the best path to social integration. Our Government will introduce a new model to select immigrants based on the skills Canadian employers need.
http://www.speech.gc.ca/eng/full-speech.
They do not want any more 2 sets of grandparent. Who will become citizen and bring in more people that will not pay taxes but cost our healthcare,
Let’s not get too carried away and paranoid here. I don’t like much of what is in this new citizenship act, but I don’t think that it is related to FATCA. The government is not going to strip hundreds of thousands of Canadians (who have Canadian families and children and pay taxes to the CRA) of citizenship and make them stateless persons. I just found out a month ago that I am a “U.S. person” for tax purposes and am as concerned as anyone, but I am seeing a lot of panic on this board and I think we need to have some perspective. The new citizenship act is clearly in line with the Tories’ ideological agenda, I see it as no surprise and would have expected this of them, FATCA or not.
@Nick
Seriously?
If the Conservatives REALLY have NO intentions of stripping citizenship from people, then why in the fuck are they talking about it in the first place?? And sure, they’ll say it’s limited to ‘terrorism’, but how will they define it? Dissent against the government, perhaps? Maybe we should ask the scientists here how the Conservatives are treating them?
These are the same backstabbing, hypocritical assholes that are trying to teach ME the value of citizenship HERE, right after they’ve SOLD OUT some of their citizens to the Americans! Yeah. I don’t need to learn anything from those kind of people!
Paranoid? Damn straight! Momma didn’t raise no fool here!
From: Letters to the Editor, National Post: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014/02/08/todays-letters-you-cant-separate-canada-from-quebec/
Dual allegiances
Re: Strengthening The Value Of Citizenship, editorial, Feb. 7.
I have always had difficulty understanding the principle of dual citizenship. Surely, if we attach any value to being a citizen of Canada, we must insist, as a precondition of granting citizenship to applicants, that they renounce any citizenship they currently hold.
Elliott G. Posen, Toronto.