CIMM Committee Report

APPENDIX A
LETTER FROM MINISTER VOLPE

Minister of Citizenship and Immigration

Ministre de la Citoyenneté et de l’immigration

Ottawa, Canada  K1A 1L5

FEV 1 8 2005

FEB

The Honourable Andrew Telegdi, P .C., M.P.

Chair

Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration

House of Commons

Ottawa ON KIAOA6

Dear Mr. Telegdi:

            l would like to express my appreciation to you and to all the members of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration for the work that you have undertaken with regard to citizenship and immigration matters.

            I look forward to hearing from you on the results of your upcoming public consultations on the important and challenging areas of citizenship legislation, recognition of the foreign experience and credentials of immigrants, and family reunification. Each of these issues is of significant concern to me and my department, and your recommendations will be important input to our efforts to make progress in these areas.

                        As you well know, citizenship law is of vital importance to all Canadians. The Government has made a commitment to modernize Canada's Citizenship Act to reaffirm the responsibilities and rights of Canadian citizenship and to reaffirm the values of multiculturalism, gender equality and linguistic duality that we share as Canadians. Any new bill has to be carefully written to reflect these shared Canadian values and to respect the views expressed by Canadians in public polling as well as the findings of Committee members during consultations.

                        I would like to ask you to assist me in exploring certain fundamental questions on the notion of citizenship that should be reflected in new citizenship legislation through your conversations with groups and individuals across Canada. More specifically, I would appreciate hearing from you on the following principles which are the foundations for citizenship in Canada:

Canada

1.	Should new citizenship legislation include a preamble in which the rights and responsibilities of citizenship are clearly addressed?
	•	Citizenship legislation is perhaps the most concrete instrument with which to articulate our collective understanding of the meaning of citizenship, for all Canadians. Is a preamble the most effective way of expressing this?
2.	Should legislation limit the ways citizenship can be obtained by birth?
	•	Under citizenship law, citizenship by birth can be obtained in one of two ways: by birth on soil, jus soli, or through a bloodline connection, jus sanguinis. Does Canada need to consider and possibly re-evaluate how Canada bestows citizenship by birth giving consideration to both Canadian values and today's global context?
3.	What criteria should there be for granting citizenship to newcomers to Canada?
	•	Requirements for naturalization become the standard newcomers must meet in order to gain full membership into the Canadian community. It is therefore important that these requirements accurately reflect the values with which Canadians imbue their citizenship. What should be expected from individuals who seek to become citizens?
4.	What are the appropriate reasons to remove citizenship and what is the most appropriate process to follow?
	•	Currently in Canada, the only basis on which someone can have their citizenship taken away is if they engaged in misrepresentation about important facts before they obtained it. Actions after becoming a citizen have no consequence on citizenship, even if those actions are highly reprehensible (e.g. murder or terrorism). Should Canada consider other grounds for revocation?
	•	Under current legislation, those who have misrepresented themselves to obtain Canadian citizenship can only have their citizenship removed in one way: revocation. Having one method for removing citizenship is a clear way of dealing with citizenship application fraud, and ensures that all individuals subject to removal of citizenship undergo the same process. However, lack of flexibility can also constrain the government's ability to deal with fraud that involves more serious activities or more clear-cut facts. Given differing circumstances, what is the best process or processes for removing citizenship? Should citizenship be removed solely via a revocation process, or should a simpler process such as annulment be considered for objective factual errors?
5.	What is the most appropriate text for a new oath of citizenship?
	•	In the current Citizenship Act, new citizens swear or affirm their allegiance to the (Queen, Her Heirs and Successors, and pledge that they will observe Canadian laws and fulfil the duties of citizenship. Is pledging loyalty to these ideals and institutions sufficient for a new oath of citizenship or should different principles be included?
6.	What kind of citizen engagement strategy does Canada need to make sure that all Canadians are encouraged to recognize and celebrate the value of our shared citizenship?
	•	A new Citizenship Act brings with it the opportunity to create and strengthen bonds between all Canadians, and to elevate and celebrate our core principles. What are reasonable, cost-effective strategies to engage all Canadians on the rights as well as responsibilities of citizenship?

                        Thank you again for all your efforts to assist with the improvement of citizenship and immigration legislation. I look forward to discussing the results of your consultations with you.

Sincerely,

cc: Members of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration