Two days ago, in another topic (one among multiple topics about petitioning the new government or the PM regarding the potential rollback of provisions adopted in Bill C-24 during the reign of Harper Conservatives), I offered some in-depth analysis of prospects for changes in significant part based on the positions proffered during the Bill C-24 second reading debate, focusing in particular on statements made by John McCallum, who is now the Minister of
Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship.
Highlights of that analysis:
dpenabill said:
As already noted, there is no need to repeal the entirety of Bill C-24. And the Liberals do not plan to repeal Bill C-24.
. . . the Liberal campaign platform did NOT promise to repeal Bill C-24, and indeed only promised to repeal a small portion of it related to the revocation of citizenship for criminal convictions (those provisions described as creating two-tier citizenship), and otherwise the Liberal platform said that the Liberals would:
-- restore credit for pre-PR time toward qualifying for citizenship
-- remove unfair hurdles to grant citizenship
. . . parts of Bill C-24 constituted clearly needed fixes for a range of problems in the previous version of the Citizenship Act, such as clarifying provisions regarding citizenship by descent. But to a significant extent this also included revisions to the grant citizenship requirements, including in particular the clarification that qualification for citizenship is based on physical presence not time resident in Canada.
. . . the 4/6 rule is actually more flexible if not lenient in some respects. In particular, it allows an immigrant to be abroad up to one-third of the time rather than just the one-quarter that the 3/4 rule prescribes.
. . . a huge problem with Bill C-24: this was largely a Bill drafted by a very small, inner circle of advisers close to Harper . . .
. . . [what McCallum opposed in Bill C-24] included the following:
-- expanding language and knowledge testing to younger and older applicants (now, for example, these apply to applicants up to the age of 64, whereas before only to age 55)
-- the elimination of credit for students and temporary workers (Liberal campaign platform explicitly promised to restore the credit)
-- the 4/6 rule
In that analysis I also noted that then MP McCallum did not, at that time (during second reading of Bill C-24 back in 2014), oppose the oft criticized
intent-to-reside clause.
The Mandate for Minister McCallum and Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship:
Some general observations about the Mandate letters:
First and foremost, I must say that it is refreshing, downright exhilerating, just to see the actual letters to the various Ministers (other Ministers received similar "mandate" letters relative to their particular portfolio, the ones getting the most media attention appear to be that to the new Finance Minister Bill Morneau, given
27 top priorities, and that given to the new Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould who was also given an extensive list of priorities, including legalization of marijuana). For the past nine years the various Ministers were extremely limited in what they could publicly say about their agenda, and there was not the slightest hint of publicly disseminating information like this. I do not expect Trudeau's government to not have internal
secrets, but the scope of transparency already being displayed by the new government is very, very encouraging.
Secondly, importantly, beyond reiterating the new government's commitment to transparency, the
mandate letters further instructed the respective ministers about including consultations in their governing. In particular, the
mandate letter to
the Minister for Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship, John McCallum, states (emphasis added):
"As Minister, you will be held accountable for our commitment to bring a different style of leadership to government. This will include: close collaboration with your colleagues; meaningful engagement with Opposition Members of Parliament, Parliamentary Committees and the public service; constructive dialogue with Canadians, civil society, and stakeholders, including business, organized labour, the broader public sector, and the not-for-profit and charitable sectors; and identifying ways to find solutions and avoid escalating conflicts unnecessarily. As well, members of the Parliamentary Press Gallery, indeed all journalists in Canada and abroad, are professionals who, by asking necessary questions, contribute in an important way to the democratic process. Your professionalism and engagement with them is essential."
The extent to which this is the polar opposite of the government Canada has had for the previous nine years cannot be overstated. Some fumbling is to be expected. The bar is set very, very high. Just some significant movement of actual governing toward this would be a major accomplishment. Canadians deserve a more open and progressive government. I have high hopes that, notwithstanding the inevitable setbacks and failings, the governing of Canada is headed in a much, much better direction.
Matters directly related to citizenship in the Mandate:
There are only
three of the itemized priorities which relate to citizenship, and one of these is the broad charge to improve processing timelines generally.
The two specific items of priority for citizenship are:
"-- Work with the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness to repeal provisions in the Citizenship Act that give the government the right to strip citizenship from dual nationals.
-- Eliminate regulations that remove the credit given to international students for half of the time that they spend in Canada and regulations that require new citizens to sign a declaration that they intend to reside in Canada."
There is no suggestion that there will be, any time soon, efforts to rollback the 4/6 rule or the 183 days X 4CY rule.
Restoring credit for pre-PR time:
It is somewhat a surprise to see that the priority item about restoring credit for time in Canada only refers to
students and not, at the least,
workers in Canada with temporary status. As noted in my previous analysis, the Liberal platform included a commitment to restore the credit for
both students and temporary workers.
My guess: the
mandate letter was drafted in some haste and this was an oversight. If and when the Liberal government actually moves to restore credit,
my guess is that it will include credit for temporary workers in addition to students.
Eliminating the intent-to-reside requirement:
This is somewhat of a surprise, given that during the debate about Bill C-24 the Liberals did not raise much of an objection to this provision and in particular John McCallum dismissed the significance of criticisms aimed at this requirement. I suspect that its inclusion in the agenda, the mandate, is based on two things: (1) it is a highly unpopular provision, and (2) its practical effect is so limited that the government feels it can be removed without compromising the grant citizenship process.
Eliminating the provisions for revoking citizenship from dual citizens:
This was the more high profile item during the campaign, the one stated with more emphasis, among some of the key refrains in the campaign being
"a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian," which was specifically aimed at these particular provisions added to the
Citizenship Act by Bill C-24. This is one of the things more likely to happen in 2016.
Timeline for changes:
With only a few exceptions, the timeline for changes is largely open, and this applies across the broad relative to the other mandate letters sent to all the Ministers. The total body of priority items is huge, absolutely huge. The letters themselves acknowledge that the
objective is to address these within the next
four years. And indeed, it is very likely that many of the items in the various mandate letters will not be dealt with until well beyond 2016, and
some will NOT get done. That is inevitable.
The best laid plans of mice and men . . . and all.
While only the restoring of credit for students and eliminating the
intent-to-reside provision is listed lower in the dozen priorities itemized for the Minister of
Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship, I would expect the repeal of the provisions to strip citizenship from dual citizens to be among those items addressed sooner rather than later. Other sources have cited Minister McCallum to indicate this is among items which will be addressed in 2016, by the
spring of 2016 if not sooner.
That leaves the timeline wide open as to when the government will restore credit for students and eliminate the
intent-to-reside clause. While the mandate letter does not mention other changes,
my guess is that when it comes time to make these particular changes (in 2017 perhaps? maybe a bit sooner), there will be others considered, such as rolling back the expanded age brackets for language and knowledge of Canada requirements, including restoring pre-PR credit to temporary workers, and
possibly some modifications or relaxation of the physical presence requirements in particular, such as the 183 X 4CY rule.
That said, there is little hint of an agenda to otherwise change the 4/6 rule. As I addressed in my other analysis, actually the 4/6 rule offers greater flexibility for PRs who, for example, have employment which involves extensive travel abroad. Its advantages in this regard may outweigh the perceived advantage of a shorter timeline to eligibility offered by a 3/4 rule.
