CANADA House of Commons Debates VOLUME 138 Ï NUMBER 085 Ï 2nd SESSION Ï 37th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Monday, April 7, 2003 Speaker: The Honourable Peter Milliken CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) All parliamentary publications are available on the ``Parliamentary Internet Parlementaire´´ at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 5143 HOUSE OF COMMONS Monday, April 7, 2003 The House met at 11 a.m. It being 11:08 a.m., the House will now proceed to the consideration of private members' business as listed on today's Prayers Order Paper. Ï (1105) [English] PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS POINTS OF ORDER STANDING COMMITTEE ON ABORIGINAL AFFAIRS, NORTHERN [English] DEVELOPMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES CITIZENSHIP ACT Mr. Raymond Bonin (Nickel Belt, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I rise in response to a point of order raised by the member for Saint- Mr. Darrel Stinson (OkanaganShuswap, Canadian Alli- HyacintheBagot pertaining to comments made during the last in ance) moved that Bill C-343, an act to amend the Citizenship Act, be camera meeting of the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs, read the second time and referred to a committee. Northern Development and Natural Resources. He said: Mr. Speaker, it is an honour and a privilege to be standing I wish to withdraw any comments made with which the member here this morning regarding this issue. I would like to thank the has taken exception. Out of respect for you, Mr. Speaker, and the member for West VancouverSunshine Coast for initiating this House, I wish to take it up a notch and apologize to all members of private member's bill, Bill C-343, an act to amend the Citizenship the House of Commons, especially to the members of the standing Act. committee. In such matters, context is essential to understanding and I now I ask Canadians, especially the government, to listen carefully to wish to raise my own point of order. It is important to share with the what the bill is about because what I am about to disclose is an eye House the comments made by the member for Saint-Hyacinthe opener. It is an eye opener that may put into question whether an Bagot, which prompted my reaction. The member had repeatedly individual is truly a Canadian citizen because being born in Canada confronted the chair of the committee with the angry warning, On may not necessarily mean that one is a citizen. va t'avoir. On va te fixer. Roughly translated, it means, We will get you. We will fix you. I consider those words to be of a most serious We never question our birthright. We take it for granted. We nature. assume that because we are born here we are automatically a Canadian citizen for life. This may not be the case for some, I request that you ask the member to explain who he meant by especially if they were born in Canada between 1946 and 1977, if we and what he meant by We will fix you. I am sure Mr. their parents moved to another country and while in that other Speaker will note that the use of fixer in this context does not have country became citizens of that country. This could happen to its traditional meaning of to stare at something. someone we know: a neighbour, a friend or a relative. If I am to chair a committee of the House with three mandates, aboriginal affairs, northern development and natural resources with This private members bill, Bill C-343, would correct a wrong that five political parties at the table, I do not believe that I should be should have been resolved when the Citizenship and Immigration required to discharge my duties with the added burden of concern for Act, replaced in 1977, allowed dual citizenship, but the dual my safety. citizenship allowed in 1977 was not retroactive. Mr. Speaker, I leave my point of order in your capable hands and Let me go back to the provisions of the first Citizenship Act that defer to your judgment and wisdom. was introduced in 1946. The 1946 first Citizenship Act meant that The Speaker: I thank the hon. member for his assistance on this children born in Canada could lose their citizenship if their parents point, which the Chair has under advisement at this moment. I will became citizens of another country. This private member's bill would take his comments into consideration in the ruling that I will be amend the existing act to recognize Canadian born children who left giving on this matter in due course. the country between 1946 and 1977. 5144 COMMONS DEBATES April 7, 2003 Private Members' Business A person born in Canada today is a Canadian citizen for life but sons. She was informed by a Citizenship and Immigration official in there are thousands of people who do not have this right. Why? It October 2001 that she had ceased to be a Canadian citizen in 1975 because these people, through no fault of their own, lost their when her father became a U.S. citizen. Canadian citizenship. They are called lost Canadians. Not only have they lost their Canadian citizenship, the government has made Ms. Castro-Gyr is living in Canada. She has a Canadian passport. these children stateless because at that time children did not She has a social insurance number and she has a job as a teacher. automatically become U.S. citizens when their parents did. Some people, like Ms. Castro-Gyr, may not know they are not Let me take a few minutes to outline the gist of this private legally Canadians until they apply for a passport and are turned member's bill. Bill C-343 is designed to remedy the situation where down. people were, as children, deprived of their Canadian citizenship as a result of the operation of section 18 of the Canadian Citizenship There are many other lost Canadians, like Mr. Charles Bosdet who Act, chapter 15 ofthe Statutes of Canada, 1946. This provision was was born in Manitoba in 1956. His father became a Mexican citizen in force until February 14, 1977, and provided that a minor child and, in 1965, his mother and father became U.S. citizens. Mr. Bosdet ceased to be a Canadian citizen upon the responsible parent discovered that he was not a Canadian because his father became an becoming the citizen of another country. American citizen. In fact, Mr. Bosdet is stateless. Bill C-343 would make it easier for those people to regain their Canadian citizenship as they would no longer have to be established There are many hundreds more Canadians who believe they are as a permanent resident in order to do so. legally Canadian citizens but have actually lost their citizenship because of one or both of their parents moved and became citizens of Many do not meet the landed immigrant entry requirement which another country. is required in order to be considered lawfully admitted. People like Mr. Don Chapman, a U.S. airline pilot, does not meet the resident I strongly urge that Canadians born in Canada between 1946 and requirement of one year to resume his citizenship because of the 1977, whose parents became citizens of another country, to check nature of his employment. their documents. They may discover they are no longer Canadians. Bill C-343 makes reference to amending Section 11 of the Under the 1947 Citizenship Act women were, in essence, property Citizenship Act by adding the following after subsection 1(1): of their husbands and children were property of their fathers. The requirement set out in paragraph 1(d) does not apply to a person who ceased to be a Canadian citizen as a result of a parent of that person acquiring the citizenship or nationality of another country before February 15, 1977. In Bill C-18, presently before the House, the government has addressed the women affected by the original Citizenship Act of Ï (1110) 1947 saying that they should be allowed back into Canada as full- Further, the Liberal bill, Bill C-18, introduced in the second fledged citizens. session of the 37th Parliament entitled the citizenship of Canada act, fails to remedy the problem faced by lost Canadians. What about the lost Canadian children? Should our lost Canadian children not also be allowed full-fledged citizenship? Bill C-343 is about lost Canadians, Canadians like Don Chapman, who I mentioned earlier. Don is presently a pilot for a U.S. airline. Let me restate that Bill C-343 is exclusive to those individuals He was born in Canada of Canadian parents. In 1961 he moved with who fall within the parameters of losing their citizenship through no his parents to Seattle. He was seven years old. fault of their own, as a consequence of their parents taking out citizenship in another country. These lost Canadians did not Mr. Chapman lost his rights as a Canadian because his parents voluntarily choose to be citizens of another country. Their parents swore allegiance to the United States. Mr. Chapman wants to return did. to his homeland where he was born, but Canada will not give him his citizenship back. We should adopt this private member's bill, Bill C-343, and Federal immigration officials said that Mr. Chapman's parents had welcome our lost Canadians home. effectively forfeited his Canadian citizenship in 1961 when they (1115) moved to the U.S.A. and took out American citizenship. To me, this Ï is ridiculous. Don Chapman did not apply for American citizenship.