Child born in Canada

[Fencesitter]

no one wins arguement here as far as i know..... both of you has a good point...
anyway, lets just hope our application will be approve and hope for the best....

You're right...

But allow me to ask R151NGSUN, are you against CIC revoking citizenship from those folks caught in that ring of immigration fraud? Surely there are children involved, no?

FS

 

[R151NG5UN]

You're right...

But allow me to ask R151NGSUN, are you against CIC revoking citizenship from those folks caught in that ring of immigration fraud? Surely there are children involved, no?

FS

I as specified in every post I have mentioned regarding adults who come to Canada (or any country for that matter) to bend/ fleece/ screw/ work the system should be dealt with in the most severest of penalties. If Children are involved who are not born in Canada they should be deported or dealt with however a government see's fit to address the problem.

If on the other hand a child has been born in to Canada by the offenders whilst they are or have been abusing the immigration system, should be given Canadian citizenship. I say this because the system has allowed these people in the first place, the problem therein lies with the Canadian government and the people who commit these fraudulent acts, not the children themselves.

 

[Leon]

At http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jus_soli you can see a map of which parts of the world give citizenship by birth. Mostly they are North and South American countries but several other countries also have some modified variations. For example, a baby born in the UK does not gain citizenship unless at least one of the parents is a UK citizen or a PR.

That does not necessarily mean that babies born in the UK who do not gain citizenship by birth will be stateless. Depending on where the parents are from, they could end up with the mothers or fathers citizenship or possibly both if they are from different countries. However, the UK also has special provisions for the baby to acquire citizenship if it would otherwise be stateless. As far as I know, there are similar laws in many other countries that do not grant citizenship by birth.

 

[computergeek]

Wow, when I posted my response last night (in which I tried to remain factual and not submit an opinion) I never imagined I would wake this morning to find a firestorm of commentary.

The OP wanted to know about the state of affairs now. Clearly, if they came to Canada as refugees they must have come from a less fortunate set of circumstances than they find in Canada. Fortunately, Canadian Immigration does individualized assessments of cases - they generally do not use blanket opinions about how "those people" are trying to screw the system. Based upon what the OP said, they didn't come to Canada for the purposes of tourism birth, they came to Canada to flee oppression of some sort. Maybe it was economic oppression, in which case their refugee status will not be confirmed. Perhaps it was due to one of the ongoing wars around the world that have displaced many people (Syria being a good example here) and put some people in a position in which their lives are in jeopardy. I don't begrudge them the desire to move somewhere else so that they can raise their child without fear of being tortured, beaten, raped and enslaved.

The OP has further indicated in one follow-up post that he's already established a business here in Canada, so he is earning a living and trying to contribute to the general economy. While I know that some people hold the opinion that immigrants are lazy and abusive of the system, in general I have not seen that this pattern holds for MOST immigrants. But what seems to happen is that some (particularly in the media) like to take the extreme cases and hold them up for all to see, thus creating the illusion that this is "representative" of the group, rather than the abberations of the group.

This made me wonder - if CIC is stripping 2900 people of their citizenship, what percentage of the total is this? The data is publicly available (open data project).

In 2007 CIC awarded citizenship to 199,861 people
In 2008 CIC awarded citizenship to 176,554 people
In 2009 CIC awarded citizenship to 156,334 people
In 2010 CIC awarded citizenship to 143,585 people
In 2011 CIC awarded citizenship to 181,251 people
In Q1 2012 CIC awarded citizenship to 42,133 people

That is 899,718 people.

So if we assume the 3,000 people being stripped of citizenship were all awarded within this time frame (I don't know that this is true, but if the time frame is larger this would merely indicate the percentage is even lower) then 0.33% of this group are guilty of perfidious behaviour.

It seems unreasonable to me to condemn an entire group simply because some tiny fraction of the people did something illegal, although I understand others may hold the group up to higher standards than this. Better that 10 innocent suffer than one guilty go free, after all.

As for the OP, I am sorry you felt it was better to take the very risky step of subjecting yourself to the risks of fleeing to a foreign country than remain in your own country. I hope that regardless of the outcome of your case you find peace and quiet sufficient to support yourself, your family, your community and your society in such a way that you are successful.

 

[Fencesitter]

The percentage when looking at the total number of people awarded citizenship is very small, but if you consider that only 70 people have had their citizenship revoked since 1947, I think the 3,000 is a staggering figure.

I hope CIC continues their investigations. The last thing we need are more people leeching off our system or obtaining citizenship for a JIC (just in case) situation in their home country (e.g. political upheaval, war, etc...).

My political views are mostly to the left, but on certain issues, like immigration, I am most definitely a strong conservative. That being said, I am all for immigration as long as those applying are doing so legitimately and playing by the rules. It's the cheats and scammers that I can't stand. Look at the processing time out of HK. 17 months! I blame the longer processing times on the cheats and scammers. They ruin it for everyone and this is something I will never accept. Why should my wife have to wait so long when clearly her case is legitimate?

Anyways, apologies for being party to the firestorm...saying I sound like Hitler or that my opinions are draconian deserve a strong reaction...

FS

 

[YorkFactory]

A child being born in a country makes them a citizen whether you like or dislike the rule.

This is not true in most of the world. It is true in the U.S. and Canada, but not true in the UK, New Zealand, or Australia.

 

[computergeek]

My political views are mostly to the left, but on certain issues, like immigration, I am most definitely a strong conservative.

I have a very different perspective. My original application was rejected because they found (as part of the immigration medical physical) that I have a treatable medical condition. I demonstrated that I already contribute substantially to the tax base (over $50k per year just in income taxes), that I had two separate overlapping insurance policies that would cover 98% of the cost of the medication in question (up to $60k), an employer sponsored PHSP (a form of health savings account that pays for medical expenses and is not discretionary) that covered up to $20k per year and all I got back from CIC was a form letter rejection that said because BC has a program that can pay for the medication (which I don't even TAKE) my application for PR was rejected.

Within my field I'm a world-class expert; I bring my own customers with me wherever I live. I hire local staff, I rent local office space and I help support the local economy. But guess what? Because of the CONSERVATIVE view of immigration in Canada, the ONLY thing that counts is "how much could this cost us." It's cost/benefit analysis where the benefit is ignored and we do worst case assumptions for the costs.

Somewhere in the 31 months it took for them to reject me I met and married a Canadian citizen. We're ecstatically happy and I love my spouse with all my heart and soul. But because of my prior rejection the CIC website says I can not apply in the sponsored spousal class (I am "inadmissible). I've had plenty of people say "well, that's not the way the law reads" but the language on the CIC website is clear and unambiguous - so who do I believe?

Further, based upon the complete lack of transparency in the original decision I've grudgingly come to the conclusion that when it comes to medical inadmissibility at least the REAL reason is simply discrimination. The thin veneer of "due process" that CIC places over it is a farce. I recently spoke to someone who WON their case with CIC in Federal Court. But they never immigrated because when their case went back to CIC the CIC officer said they had to do something they couldn't do unless they were successfully immigrated to Canada. Such a Catch-22 situation makes a mockery of the concepts of "due process".

You have seen signs of this yourself, I've seen it as I've watched your posts evolve. There are clear discriminatory patterns within CIC. They claim this is due to fraud, but I seriously must question the reality of why it requires 24 months for an applicant for a work permit through Singapore to get resolution, when it require 1-2 months at most. Perhaps it's a staffing issue, but I wonder how much of those staffing decisions are based upon subtle bias. It's not blatant - it would be far too easy to prove - it is subtle.

Processes such as this do need to be subject to review and revision. Humans are amazingly adaptable at subverting fixed systems, so you have to shake things up from time to time. That's fine. But making a couple wait 2-3 YEARS before they can reunite isn't about preventing marriages of convenience, it's a bald attempt at preventing such relationships from surviving in the first place.

I didn't read that post as saying you were Hitler by the way. I read it in a much broader context. If the poster intended it to be an insult it didn't succeed with me.

I suspect you will see rules changes to prohibit child birth tourism in the future, because it does create complex situations. But punishing the child for the acts of the parents is something not worthy of a compassionate society such as Canada.

 

[Fencesitter]

They've already started to crack down on child birth tourism. Good, and about bloody time!

I mostly agree with you that there is discrimination, but like you said, it's subtle...too subtle to do anything about...you can't change human nature...people are biased...

I totally agree about the lack of transparency. This is the one thing that has really annoyed me throughout the process. E-cas, though something, is not very useful. There is too much guess work on the part of the 'client'...

Still, I believe that as long as you are in a legitimate marriage, CIC will not reject you (assuming you meet all requirements). I can't believe that a visa officer, given a case that meets all requirements, would still reject applicants based on his/her personal bias...does it happen? perhaps...but I wouldn't say it's widespread...at least based on what I know and people I've spoken to...

The Hitler comment was most certainly intended to be an insult...to even compare what I wrote to a monster of that calibre is in itself insulting...

FS

 

[Steph C]

I like Australia's policy myself:

Australia:[5] Australian nationality law was changed on 20 August 1986 so that a person born in Australia acquires Australian citizenship by birth only if at least one parent was an Australian citizen or permanent resident or upon the 10th birthday of the child born in Australia regardless of their parent's citizenship status (see Australian nationality law).

 

[bagelbagel81]

They've already started to crack down on child birth tourism. Good, and about bloody time!

I mostly agree with you that there is discrimination, but like you said, it's subtle...too subtle to do anything about...you can't change human nature...people are biased...

I totally agree about the lack of transparency. This is the one thing that has really annoyed me throughout the process. E-cas, though something, is not very useful. There is too much guess work on the part of the 'client'...

Still, I believe that as long as you are in a legitimate marriage, CIC will not reject you (assuming you meet all requirements). I can't believe that a visa officer, given a case that meets all requirements, would still reject applicants based on his/her personal bias...does it happen? perhaps...but I wouldn't say it's widespread...at least based on what I know and people I've spoken to...

The Hitler comment was most certainly intended to be an insult...to even compare what I wrote to a monster of that calibre is in itself insulting...

FS

I find your view point refreshing to be honest. The same situation occurs in Australia, but mainly with asylum seekers, who have paid off Indonesians, who would rather risk their lives and their children's lives to go on this journey by sea in a leaky boat, than wait for the immigration process in due course. When some politicians or citizens are brave enough to voice a similar opinion they are usually shot down as being rascist. (I don't think I have ever heard them been compared to Hitler though!) There are many applicants from the same countries as those fleeing (mainly Afghanistan) who have gone about it legally and have been waiting months, if not years to do it the right way - so I think it's unacceptable that those rich and privileged enough to pay of human trafficker, and put their families and kids lives at risk, should not be given more rights than that of those going about it the right way... anyway just my two cents...
This of course is off topic of children born in a country... It's great Canada can offer that privilege (to those who aren't holidaying) Australia doesn't unless one parent is a citizen or PR.

 

[Fencesitter]

I couldn't agree more. This makes perfect sense.

It's funny how people assume that 'most' countries have the same laws as we do. In fact, we are the exception and most countries do not automatically grant citizenship if a child is born in that country.

I read that they did this in Canada and the US because years and years ago, when people were immigrating, they had no intention of returning to their home countries. It was understood that they were staying, so of course, the government made it easy for them to gain citizenship for their children born in Canada.

FS

 

[Fencesitter]

I find your view point refreshing to be honest. The same situation occurs in Australia, but mainly with asylum seekers, who have paid off Indonesians, who would rather risk their lives and their children's lives to go on this journey by sea in a leaky boat, than wait for the immigration process in due course. When some politicians or citizens are brave enough to voice a similar opinion they are usually shot down as being rascist. (I don't think I have ever heard them been compared to Hitler though!) There are many applicants from the same countries as those fleeing (mainly Afghanistan) who have gone about it legally and have been waiting months, if not years to do it the right way - so I think it's unacceptable that those rich and privileged enough to pay of human trafficker, and put their families and kids lives at risk, should not be given more rights than that of those going about it the right way... anyway just my two cents...
This of course is off topic of children born in a country... It's great Canada can offer that privilege (to those who aren't holidaying) Australia doesn't unless one parent is a citizen or PR.

Thanks. At least their are some who understood what I am getting at...and it's got nothing to do with racism...that's just a cop out...and I agree with what you wrote...common sense...

FS

 

[Steph C]

This isn't really in reference to the OP, just my own thoughts.
This might be out of line, but I get the most upset when people wave their babies in front of CIC asking for special privileges. While some of us : may have have to waste their child bearing years waiting for their spouse and needing to work to support them both.

 

[Fencesitter]

Don't worry, Steph C, most Canadians who have an idea about the issues surrounding CIC (or who care about their country) feel exactly the same way.

What's worse is when upstanding citizens like yourself have to wait, wait, wait, and wait some more, for first stage approval...when PR holders (not even a citizen!!) get theirs processed faster...

FS

 

[doljan]

Don't worry, Steph C, most Canadians who have an idea about the issues surrounding CIC (or who care about their country) feel exactly the same way.

What's worse is when upstanding citizens like yourself have to wait, wait, wait, and wait some more, for first stage approval...when PR holders (not even a citizen!!) get theirs processed faster...

FS

it seems that i would agree with this, in my case, my wife is canadian born citizen yet its taking us time for the first stage approval.
we submitted our application 3rd week of july and haven't heard anything yet, although we are hopeful that we will be approved
within the processing time posted in cic website...