hazylavender/hi huggingface dataset:
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Ms. Ya'ara Saks: I will share with the member that I am quite familiar with the process, having successfully passed with my colleagues Keira's law, Bill C-233 , and understanding the immense value of unanimous consent and when members work across party lines because issues are so important. I do not think any of this is partisan. I think this issue affects many families, including my own, and many constituents in my riding of York Centre. As a matter of fact, the member for Thornhill would attest to that as well, as we share similar constituency demographics in that sense. She is a member on his benches, and I would encourage him to perhaps speak to her about the many families in similar situations. There is always an opportunity to work collaboratively, and I certainly hope the member will consider it.
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Ms. Jenny Kwan: a situation with the cut-off rule for first-generation born Canadians has been in place for 14 years now, and many families have suffered during this period. It is true that the government could have brought in legislation to make that change, but that has not happened. With that being said, we now have an opportunity before us through a Senate bill, Bill S-245 , to fix the lost Canadian rules once and for all. If we all care about this issue as we say we do, should we not then seize this opportunity to expand the scope of the bill, fix the lost Canadian community that has not been addressed in this bill and fix those issues once and for all?
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Ms. Ya'ara Saks: as I mentioned in my opening remarks, I believe there is room for further discussion and expansion. I share the member's deep concerns in terms of lost Canadians. I read into the record the letter of Wednesday Coulter, who submitted her thoughts to committee as an indigenous woman and her story of being excluded from Canada, being denied the ability to be with her mom as she ages in Haida Gwaii. This is one of many heartbreaking stories that we need to address through the contemplation of the work that the committee is engaged in right now.
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux: Canadian citizenship is undoubtedly one of the most important things we have here in Canada. It is held with a great amount of pride, and there are all sorts of benefits to it. More and more, the world is becoming a smaller community, with people working abroad. Some people have concerns regarding whether they should return to Canada to give birth and ensure the baby is born a Canadian. Two Canadian parents who go abroad, especially on a short-term basis, should not be obligated to come back to Canada for the birth of their child. Could the parliamentary secretary provide her general thoughts on issues of that nature?
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Ms. Ya'ara Saks: as I mentioned in my comments today, I was a mother faced with that exact dilemma with the birth of my eldest daughter abroad. There was much discussion in my household as to what to do and how to do it, as well as checking things and concerns about how to ensure that my daughter would hold the same Canadian citizenship that I was and still am so proud of holding. A pregnant woman can only travel up to a certain number of weeks, especially on flights. To me, it is not acceptable to contemplate putting a mother and potentially a pregnancy at risk in order to hold on to something that is a right for Canadian citizens to have and pass on to their children.
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Mr. Tom Kmiec: I wonder if the member could perhaps answer the following question: Since we know that Bill S-230 passed in the previous Parliament and was debated at Senate committee, where witnesses came forward from a government department, why has the government not acted on this? It has been over two years that it has known there are several groups of lost Canadians affected. Why has the government not tabled government legislation through the House of Commons, or starting in the Senate, that would have closed up all these different situations for them? The government did not act when it should have; instead, it waited for a senator on the Conservative benches to fix a problem that the Liberals admit exists. Why did this occur?
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Ms. Ya'ara Saks: I will simply say to the member that there are many "why?" questions, but I do not see a lot of talk on working collaboratively for the sake of lost Canadians, and that is really what we are engaged with here today. We could bring up a lot of "whataboutisms", but we are engaged in the issue right now. We are being asked to do this work on behalf of lost Canadians. I would simply ask the member this: Why would he or his benches be unwilling to do that work right now?
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Ms. Jenny Kwan: I am just going to build on that last question. Here we have the Conservatives, who say that they want to fix this problem once and for all. We know that the Bloc is very sympathetic and wants to ensure that people's dignity is recognized. The NDP wants to address this issue, and I have been wanting to do so ever since I was elected as a member of Parliament. The government side wants to do this as well. We have a unique opportunity, at least in words, where all parties are saying they want to address this issue. Should we not actually be seizing the opportunity, supporting the expansion of the scope and addressing the lost Canadians issue once and for all?
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Ms. Ya'ara Saks: I will reiterate what I have said time and time again during the precious time that I have in this debate. This is the power of collaborative work when it is done. I have seen it in my own work on Bill C-233 , and I know that when there is the will of members of the House to get good work done on behalf of Canadians, lost Canadians in this case, it can be done.
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
The Deputy Speaker: Before we continue, it is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for North Island--Powell River , Seniors; the hon. member for Kitchener Centre , Persons with Disabilities; the hon. member for Leeds--Grenville--Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes , Ethics.
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux: I think it is important for us to recognize, at the end of the day, what we are really talking about. I can imagine two Canadians going abroad, maybe it is work-related, and they have a child. Now, they come back to Canada, and that child could completely grow up here in Canada. If that child were to go abroad, get married and have a child, that child would not be deemed Canadian. What is being suggested here, from what I understand, is that the sponsor of the legislation was supportive of the changes. I am wondering if the member can provide his thoughts on the principle of what it is I have said about the changing of the scope. Does the member support the idea of that particular child I just described being allowed to be considered a Canadian citizen?
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Mr. Tom Kmiec: the member misunderstood what the sponsor of the Senate bill had suggested at committee, which was that, while the principle is a good one and should be investigated further, there are different ways to regain Canadian citizenship. Someone could have a grant of citizenship; they could have citizenship by birth in Canada; and they could have citizenship passed on because they have a substantive connection to Canada, like parents or grandparents who are Canadian. There are situations in the Citizenship Act, because there are multiple versions of the Citizenship Act that have been changed over many decades. Every time we think we have plugged a hole, we usually create new exceptions, but the mover and sponsor of this Senate bill is very specific in that she was okay with changing the wording in her bill, and the current group of lost Canadians would be addressed. However, any new lost Canadians would have to be addressed in new legislation.
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Ms. Jenny Kwan: on the substance of the issue that is in question, the Conservative members keep saying that we cannot do this because it is going to take too long. Of course, it has been 14 years since the Conservatives passed the legislation to strip the rights of second-generation-born Canadians to pass on their citizenship to their children. By doing this, we now have an opportunity to fix that, 14 years later, to make those families whole, so that they do not have to be separated from their loved ones. If the Conservatives say they support fixing this problem, why would they not seize this opportunity instead of actually just putting it further down the road?
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Ms. Elizabeth May: I am pleased to be able to take the floor to let my hon. friend from Calgary Shepard know that the hon. member for Vancouver East did in fact bring in a private member's bill to that effect and has been vigilant on this point. I certainly want to associate myself with her comments. Also, I have been honoured to work with Don Chapman, who has been a leading champion to resolve the injustices that affect lost Canadians. How would the hon. member suggest that we take this to a vote, that we get it on the record, that we make sure we are improving the situation and not letting Canadians keep falling through the cracks of increasingly Byzantine errors and gaps?
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Mr. Tom Kmiec: that is the matter. That is the question. Senator Yonah Martin has been working with the particular gentleman the member referred to on this piece of legislation to address a particular group of lost Canadians who, we can all agree, have a very legitimate case for having their citizenship restored so they can regain their citizenship. As the member said, using exactly the right term, the Citizenship Act, because of the way it has been drafted over many decades, has become a Byzantine piece of legislation. Every single change that we make, dates that are changed or moved from one decade to the next, has a big impact. The first-generation rule that was introduced was meant to address a particular policy issue that existed at the time. I think we have to be mindful, when we make quick changes to legislation as important as the Citizenship Act, that it should be primarily done through government legislation. What we are talking about here is a small group of lost Canadians who need to have their citizenship restored quickly.
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Hon. Michelle Rempel Garner: the debate that is happening here today, to me, seems to be a repeat of the debate that happened at the immigration committee on a motion that went through the immigration committee. It is also happening on a day when the budget is being debated and I am wondering if my colleague thinks that the reason this is happening is because the Liberal-NDP coalition actually does not want to debate its big budget deficit spending item. Maybe it is cutting down--
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Mr. Tom Kmiec: I entirely agree with the member. They are delaying debate on the budget implementation act, which is supposed to be the keynote piece of legislation of any government. It has all of its spending and policy measures in it. I would be embarrassed too if I was tabling a $40-billion deficit after promising $30 billion, which should be embarrassing as well, but is now $40 billion more, deficits as far as the eye can see, and now we have this concurrence debate that was started just as the immigration committee was sitting down to consider a report that is now going to be delaying further the debate of the budget implementation act. The situation could have been avoided. The parliamentary secretary who spoke in the House before me mentioned that we should work collaboratively. That is what we are looking forward to doing, but it did not happen because of the governing party.
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Ms. Jenny Kwan: I want to go back to the comment about Don Chapman. Don Chapman came to committee and said very clearly that he wanted to see the scope of Bill S-245 be expanded to incorporate amendments for lost Canadians and the first-generation cut-off rule the Conservatives brought in be rectified so that the families of lost Canadians would not be lost anymore and be supported through this process. The Conservatives say they support what Don Chapman would like to see done. Would they then pass this expansion of scope request in this House and not filibuster the work that needs to be done at committee?
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Mr. Tom Kmiec: the member knows that when the committee was considering this particular motion that has now been brought to the House, I offered an amendment that would have given about two and a half more weeks for new amendments to be tabled before the committee, those amendments that would be out of scope. I will remind the member that she voted against my motion when we could have had those extra amendments that were out of scope to be considered. The NDP did not want to see what other potential amendments there would be. Conservatives had no amendments because we agree with the substance of this piece of legislation, with the words that were introduced by the Conservative member in the Senate, Senator Yonah Martin, who had worked with Don Chapman on this particular group of lost Canadians. She is saying accurately that Don Chapman would like it to be expanded to others, and that could be done in government legislation, in private members' bills or in other Senate bills.
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Mr. Damien Kurek: we have heard a number of examples of those who have been impacted by this long-standing gap in Canada's citizenship legislation. Could this member specifically articulate how that affects especially members of the military who may have had children abroad over the course of the last number of decades and how the bill could fix some of those gaps that currently exist?
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Mr. Tom Kmiec: the member for Saanich--Gulf Islands mentioned before how Byzantine parts of the Citizenship Act can be. It is difficult for me to answer that question from the member for Battle River--Crowfoot because it is just that complicated. There are so many exceptions, going back to 1977, of how different groups of Canadians are treated with respect to whether they can pass on their citizenship or they cannot pass it on and how we treat members in the military but also how we treat diplomats who work in the foreign service on behalf of Canadians. This is where we run into a great risk that this bill will not pass in this Parliament and it will be dropped off the Order Paper again because there will be another federal election called.
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Ms. Jenny Kwan: I just heard the member say again that he is in support of ensuring the lost Canadians issue is addressed. The Conservatives say that, and I hope it is actually true. If it is true, we have an opportunity to do it. It is a rare moment when all the parties in this House say they want to do this, and we can seize this opportunity to make those necessary amendments, through Bill S-245 , and also indicate to the Senate that this is the direction we want to go. I believe Senator Yonah Martin, who has done this work and put this bill before us, would support it if the Conservative members would join the NDP, the Bloc and the Liberals to say that we need to go out of scope to address the lost Canadians issue once and for all, particularly because of the first-generation rule cut-off the Conservatives brought in, which hurt so many families and which we need to get rid of.
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Mr. Brad Redekopp: the member and I have a good relationship at the immigration committee and I enjoy working with her. I agree with her, but the problem in what she is saying right now is that I do not believe it is possible. I do not believe it is possible to achieve what she is talking about. We do not have enough time to deal with this. What she is talking about is wishful thinking. I have wishes and hopes and dreams too. I wish Canadians could afford groceries and I wish we did not have a strike going on right now, but these are not the realities of our life today. We want to be the most pragmatic we can be. We have the opportunity to at least solve this problem for a group, for a subset of these lost Canadians, so we see the opportunity to push it forward and solve that part of the problem. I would also like to mention that the government and this member have had many opportunities to present legislation on this subject before, so there is no reason we could not see other legislation on this. There is no reason the government could not put forward legislation to plug the rest of the holes that are here.
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux: I want to bring it back to the simplicity of what we are talking about by using an example. Imagine that a couple living in Canada is requested by their company to go live in, let us say, France. They are in France and they have a child, and that is not a problem. They come back a couple of years later and the child grows up. At 19, the child joins the military, goes abroad and marries someone. The child of that individual would not be classified as a citizen, as a direct result. Would the member or the Conservative Party support the principle of allowing that child to be a Canadian citizen?
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Mr. Brad Redekopp: as I said before, Conservatives are committed to solving this problem and fixing these gaps. This was actually a very good explanation, and I appreciate it. The member was giving one example, so let us just assume that this is the one we are trying to fix with this legislation. We want to get it through and pass it, and then that person would be a Canadian and the problem would be solved. Imagine that example, and now add family number two, with a slightly different situation, then family number three with a slightly different situation, family number four, etc. It complicates everything and all of a sudden this simplistic solution becomes a very complex solution. We are trying exactly that, which is to solve this problem for a group of lost Canadians. We are fully willing to work with the government, the NDP or whoever else wants to put forward legislation to try to fix the rest of them.
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Mr. Brad Redekopp: I believe that question is better suited for the next debate. Let me take this moment to reiterate one more thing. The government has had many opportunities to solve the problem of lost Canadians. The government has been here eight years. Canadians are tired, in fact, of the government. It has had many opportunities. It has heard of this many times. It has heard lots of speeches and heard about lots of situations and examples. It has had ample opportunity to solve this problem, yet it has not. Now the government wants to take over a private member's bill, hijack it and put its legislation into that member's private bill. That is simply not right.
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Hon. Mike Lake: I am not sure whether the offensive reference was "old" or "Muppets". Usually they get their back up when I start talking about the Trudeau legacy. We have had this happen on multiple occasions as we talk about budgets and disastrous Liberal economic policy. We get talking about the Trudeau legacy. Of course, I am talking about the Pierre Trudeau legacy.
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
The Assistant Deputy Speaker: I want to remind members that it is not proper to refer to other members by such names. I think the hon. member actually answered the question the hon. parliamentary secretary was going to ask about. I would ask members to please be respectful in the House and be mindful as to the references being made. The hon. member for Shefford on a point of order.
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Hon. Mike Lake: since we are having this conversation, I have a couple of points on this. It is interesting that we are supposed to be talking about the budget today. The NDP and Liberal members have agreed to have this debate here in this House because they do not want to talk about the budget, including all the challenges with the budget and the economic disaster that reflects the previous approach taken by a different Prime Minister Trudeau back in the seventies and eighties. It is also interesting that the debate we are talking about today is something that the coalition could decide to have any day, if they wanted to. Any day, NDP and Liberal members could decide to move legislation to accomplish exactly what we are talking about today. Instead, they have chosen to do this in a different way, using up valuable House time when we could be talking about the budget. If it was something that was important to them, they could do it on their own through their coalition. I am not on the immigration committee, but my understanding is that parties have worked collaboratively on that committee. I understand that the senator who moved this Senate public bill did not want to move beyond the scope to the degree that we are talking about right now. This goes way beyond the scope of the bill. It is very unusual to see this approach. It is sad. First of all, it is an important issue that deserves to be discussed seriously. The bill itself is a bill that members from all parties of the House should be able to support. Instead, we have this political gamesmanship of sorts today. It seems that this is all because the NDP and Liberal members do not want to talk about a disastrous budget. What we are not talking about today, because we are talking about this, is an approach with the budget that projects endless deficits into the future. If we look at the impact of this budgeting approach, again, we only need to look back to the Trudeau government of the seventies and eighties to see what that disastrous approach would look like. In those years, there was a deficit in 14 out of 15 years. The then Trudeau government came into power with almost no debt in Canada and left with a generational debt. It was a debt that, a generation later, required another Liberal government in the late nineties, the Chretien-Martin Liberal government--
Government Response to Petitions
Date: 2023_04_24
Chamber: HOUSE OF COMMONS
Hon. Mike Lake: of course, but I will point out that the hon. member who just rose on this point of order speaks more and uses more words in the House than almost any other member of Parliament. He has the opportunity to stand any time he wants. He is getting applause. I cannot say how many members he was getting applause from, but it was very quiet. I will point that out--