Get on Canada's team
Bill C-6, which proposes changes to the Citizenship Act does a number of troubling things:
- removes the right to revoke citizenships from dual nationals convicted terrorists;
- ends the obligation for new citizens 14-18 and 55-65 to know either English or French or even pass a citizenship test;
- reduces the number of days someone must spend in Canada before they are eligible for citizenship;
- eliminates the obligation that a new citizen will have to “intend” to reside in Canada.
Canada is a generous country. We allow new citizens, under most conditions, to retain the passport of their birth. These individuals become fully eligible for all the benefits from our generous social safety net that Canadians have worked so hard over generations to provide.
These benefits include but are not limited to our universal health care system, Old Age Security, Guaranteed Income Supplement, as well as access to our education system.
Canadians ask that their new neighbours learn one of the official languages, have some knowledge of Canada and our geography, and have a clear understanding of their rights as Canadians as well as their responsibility to our country as per the oath they swear.
Bill C-6 alters radically these terms and conditions, shifting and disturbing in revolutionary ways the "contract" that has so successfully managed the expectations and understandings between new arrivals and existing citizens.
The government's own statistics confirm that 300,000 individuals over 10 years will be exempt having to learn one of the two official languages, that is if the government rejects the minor amendment passed by the senate last week. This will make integration into English Canada or French Quebec harder while promoting ghettoization.
I am most concerned about the radical liberal view that once a dual national is granted citizenship, Canada should not revoke it, especially if the individual is convicted of a serious terrorist offence.
The current law allows for the revocation of citizenship if someone lies or commits a war crime. But if an individual is convicted for terrorism, they will be able to keep Canadian passport and all the benefits that go with it.
It is ironic that the government supports the view that if you lied to get into Canada, you can lose your citizenship, but if you are a dual national Canadian who is convicted for a serious terrorism offence, you cannot have your citizenship revoked.
The terrorist threat in Canada is real. Of the 218 counter-terrorism targets under investigation by CSIS today, approximately 60 are either dual nationals or permanent residents (not yet citizens). Approximately 180 individuals with a nexus to Canada are engaged in terrorist activity abroad and an additional 60 have returned and are on our streets.
That is why I will be introducing an amendment to strengthen our citizenship laws by allowing a sentencing judge to be able to, at his or her discretion, revoke the citizenship of someone convicted of a serious terrorism crime.
This amendment will remove political discretion and leave revocation to the sentencing judge. The individual will have the right to appeal; however, my amendment will preserve the principle that citizenship is a privilege, not a right.
Putting Canada first is not a partisan issue. It is about what type of country we wish to have and what values we wish to remain intact. 86% of Canadians support revocation of citizenship for terrorism.
Join me in urging all senators to get on Canada’s team by ensuring we can revoke the citizenship of convicted terrorists, like 34 other countries presently do.
Daniel Lang serves as the Chair of the National Security ..
