"Children Born Abroad to Canadians, May End Up Lost Canadians"

[links18]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/children-born-abroad-to-canadian-parents-may-end-up-as-lost-canadians/article30938653/

 

[march2016]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/children-born-abroad-to-canadian-parents-may-end-up-as-lost-canadians/article30938653/

So bad for that first generation limit hurts their kids kids future. To regain full citizenship transmission rights for further generation, may be second generation should have kids in canada there by its all set , which will be tough for many who work in UN

 

[screech339]

The only lost Canadians I can see are those who become stateless. Again not sure why it is canada's fault. Those who become stateless are due to personal choice of the parents working or moving abroad.

The parents in the article are trying to have their cake and eat it too. No one is forcing them to accept the jobs outside Canada or settle outside Canada permanently. So which is it? Citizenship or Job.

 

[Leon]

Besides, if the parents plan to return home to Canada at some point, they can sponsor the child for PR and apply for citizenship for the child when they return to Canada. The child will be naturalized then and can pass citizenship to their children no matter where they are born. It may be inconvenient for Canadians who happen to be born outside Canada and happen to marry foreigners and have children outside Canada too but it does protect the value of citizenship.

A 1st generation born outside who doesn't live in Canada and never lived in Canada could sponsor their child for PR too but the child would eventually lose it again due to not meeting the RO.

 

[links18]

A 1st generation born outside who doesn't live in Canada and never lived in Canada could sponsor their child for PR too but the child would eventually lose it again due to not meeting the RO.

Couldn't they apply for citizenship for the child right away after landing?

 

[links18]

The only lost Canadians I can see are those who become stateless. Again not sure why it is canada's fault. Those who become stateless are due to personal choice of the parents working or moving abroad.

The parents in the article are trying to have their cake and eat it too. No one is forcing them to accept the jobs outside Canada or settle outside Canada permanently. So which is it? Citizenship or Job.

I think the point is that the parents do not realize the citizenship implications when they accept these jobs. Just how much knowledge do you expect the average person to have about these things? They probably figure that since they are Canadian their kids will be Canadian too and leave it at that. In any event, it will be the child that is punished for the parents' ignorance.

 

[Leon]

Couldn't they apply for citizenship for the child right away after landing?

They could if they move to Canada but that is the idea of the law, to protect the value of citizenship by not letting people pass it on for generations who never lived in Canada and don't plan to. With the current law, the minimum requirement would be for every 2nd generation to sponsor their kids for PR and then stay in Canada at least for a bit to apply for their citizenship.

 

[screech339]

They could if they move to Canada but that is the idea of the law, to protect the value of citizenship by not letting people pass it on for generations who never lived in Canada and don't plan to. With the current law, the minimum requirement would be for every 2nd generation to sponsor their kids for PR and then stay in Canada at least for a bit to apply for their citizenship.

What is stopping them from claiming "I cannot move back to Canada until my kid has PR to land with me". Once they land, then under the new 3/5 rule, when implemented (intend to reside clause is removed) they don't have to stay in Canada. Apply for citizenship for child and then leave only to come back to pick up citizenship certificate.

 

[links18]

What is stopping them from claiming "I cannot move back to Canada until my kid has PR to land with me". Once they land, then under the new 3/5 rule, when implemented (intend to reside clause is removed) they don't have to stay in Canada. Apply for citizenship for child and then leave only to come back to pick up citizenship certificate.

Nothing really. But minors are not subject to "intent to reside clause" anyway are they? Regardless, it wouldn't apply to their Canadian citizen parent.

 

[links18]

They could if they move to Canada but that is the idea of the law, to protect the value of citizenship by not letting people pass it on for generations who never lived in Canada and don't plan to. With the current law, the minimum requirement would be for every 2nd generation to sponsor their kids for PR and then stay in Canada at least for a bit to apply for their citizenship.

Protecting the value of citizenship in one way, devaluing it in another by creating two classes of Canadian citizens--those who can pass on their citizenship to foreign born children and those who can't.

 

[screech339]

Nothing really. But minors are not subject to "intent to reside clause" anyway are they? Regardless, it wouldn't apply to their Canadian citizen parent.

Right now the "intend to reside clause" I believe do apply to children PR since they are PR themselves. The only exemption is the residency qualification and test. The rest are applied including "intend to reside".

 

[screech339]

Protecting the value of citizenship in one way, devaluing it in another by creating two classes of Canadian citizens--those who can pass on their citizenship to foreign born children and those who can't.

If you want to keep thinking that there are two classes of citizenship, that's your problem. I only see one type. Canadians.

Funny that nobody called those born under the retention rules 2nd class Canadians before the 2009 law.

 

[Leon]

Right now the "intend to reside clause" I believe do apply to children PR since they are PR themselves. The only exemption is the residency qualification and test. The rest are applied including "intend to reside".

They are going to do away with the intent to reside clause in the next law as far as I know but it's true that a Canadian citizen can apply for their child's PR while living outside Canada. They do however have to provide proof of moving to Canada when their child gets PR so for someone who got citizenship based on mom or dad and never lived in Canada and does not have many ties to Canada, it would take a little thought on how to do that. True they can apply for citizenship for their child and then leave again, however, they would have to keep a mailing address and be ready to go to Canada if the child is called for an interview or needs to do the oath. It's not like immigration is causing them loads of hassle and headaches to sponsor their kids and get them citizenship but it is a lot more hassle than simply having to apply for a citizenship certificate through the embassy and then wait for it. At least they ensure the the parent and child visit Canada at least one or two times.

 

[links18]

If you want to keep thinking that there are two classes of citizenship, that's your problem. I only see one type. Canadians.

Funny that nobody called those born under the retention rules 2nd class Canadians before the 2009 law.

Its not about me wanting to think anything: Its a fact: Some Canadians have more privileges than others under the law. That may be necessary, it may be reasonable, but its nevertheless true.

 

[screech339]

Its not about me wanting to think anything: Its a fact: Some Canadians have more privileges than others under the law. That may be necessary, it may be reasonable, but its nevertheless true.

That's funny. Because when I see my certificate and my children's certificates, they are identical. I don't see "2nd class Canadian" on my children's certificate.

How can a 2nd generation Canadian with dual citizenship (without the hassle of PR process and no proof required of moving back) with ability to work / live in two or more countries without visas be "2nd class" in comparison to a non-dual canadian who is stuck living/working but need visas to work/live outside Canada.