39th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION
EDITED HANSARD • NUMBER 078
CONTENTS
Friday, June 1, 2007
Citizenship Act
Mr. Ed Komarnicki (Parliamentary
Secretary to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak to Bill
C-14, a bill designed to address a provision in the Citizenship
Act. This bill reduces the distinction between natural born
children of Canadian citizens and foreign born children adopted
by Canadian citizens.
Every year Canadian parents welcome into their families children
born in another country. These adoptive parents are Canadian
citizens. The adopted children become part of a family, but
their parents must complete yet another step before their children
can officially be part of the Canadian family.
We are talking about the adoption of foreign born children,
often barely out of infancy. Our government believes that Canada
should welcome them as warmly as their adoptive family.
This government is taking action through Bill C-14 to grant
citizenship to foreign born adopted children without their first
having to become permanent residents. We promised to support
Canadian parents who adopt foreign born children. We promised
parents that we would grant citizenship to their adopted children
if the adoption met the requirements of the bill which will
protect the best interests of the child and Canada and which
recognizes the jurisdiction of the provinces and the territories.
This legislation, Bill C-14, delivers on these promises.
We need to make it easier for Canadian parents to obtain Canadian
citizenship for their foreign born adopted children whether
the parents reside in Canada or abroad. We need to give children
adopted overseas access to citizenship without first having
to apply for permanent residence. And we need to show Canadians
that we want new families to be able to come together as quickly
as possible.
The legislation before us today is the product of extensive
study and consultation. This issue has been examined by several
standing committees in previous sessions of Parliament.
Parliamentarians support the principle of this legislation,
but most important of all, Canadians support the principles
of this legislation. At the same, if we are to fulfill our duty
as parliamentarians, we must remove the amendment to Bill C-14
referred to in the motion which adds an appeal to the Immigration
Appeal Division for adopted persons only whose application is
refused under the provisions of Bill C-14.
There are jurisdictional issues that are of significance. It
is important to remember that in Canada the matter of adoption
falls within the jurisdiction of the provincial and territorial
governments.
In the case of adoptive parents living in Canada, the province
or territory where the parent resides is an integral part of
the adoption process. Bill C-14 as it was originally drafted
does not alter or interfere with that. However, the introduction
of the proposed amendment to create a separate appeal mechanism
has the potential to undermine the role of the provinces and
territories as the competent authority in a receiving country.
The Department of Citizenship and Immigration has consulted
with the provinces and territories on the implications of the
proposed amendment. In general, they are very concerned that
the inclusion of the Immigration Appeal Division as a separate
appeal mechanism will usurp their authority by permitting the
granting of citizenship on humanitarian grounds.
I would like to quote from a letter received from the Quebec
minister of immigration and cultural communities voicing the
province's strong objection to the adoption of this amendment.
The letter states that the authority of IRB members could interfere
with Quebec's constitutional jurisdiction with respect to civil
rights, as members could, in some cases, grant citizenship to
a child whose adoption may not comply with Quebec requirements
according to Quebec's international adoption authority. The
letter also states that in addition to the constitutional issues
raised here, such a decision would have a major impact on the
individuals involved. It goes on to say that if an adoption
is not recognized in Quebec, then a new parent-child relationship
cannot be established and a pre-existing parent-child relationship
cannot be terminated.
If the Immigration Appeal Division grants citizenship to the
adopted child without the province approving the adoption, there
is a real concern that a child could be in the province as a
citizen without a legal parent. We must remove the proposed
amendment to ensure that this bill respects the jurisdiction
of our provinces and our territories which are partners in this
issue.
The proposed amendment to Bill C-14 to add a mechanism for an
appeal to the Immigration Appeal Division for adopted children
only would, if passed, create a discrepancy within the Citizenship
Act. It would create a separate appeal mechanism only open to
a select few.
For programs to work well, they must be fair and apply consistently.
The current Citizenship Act has an appeal mechanism in place
for the Federal Court system. The introduction of an alternate
appeal mechanism in the case of adopted children would not enable
us to maintain fair and equitable citizenship programs.
This government recognizes that Canadian citizenship is valuable.
We have a responsibility to protect it and make sure it is granted
appropriately. I can assure hon. members that we have taken
note of the concerns that were identified through our consultations
and we are taking action that is necessary to address them.
This bill addresses the possibility that some individuals may
seek to adopt children merely to help them acquire citizenship,
so-called adoptions of convenience, adoptions that are taken
for no other reason than to acquire status in Canada. However,
if the proposed amendment is allowed, Bill C-14 would no longer
be able to guard against adoptions of convenience in the same
way.
We designed Bill C-14 to maintain a number of safeguards to
deal specifically with these concerns and to ensure that Canadian
citizenship is protected. The safeguards include the existence
of a genuine parent-child relationship, and that relationship
must be demonstrated. It must be clear that the best interests
of the child are met. A proper home assessment must be completed
where applicable. The birth parents must give their consent
to the adoption. No person will achieve unwarranted gain as
a result of the adoption, or it will not be allowed. The proposed
amendment does not contain these safeguards.
In conclusion, Canada is diligent in maintaining the integrity
of the citizenship process and in protecting children. We must
act in the best interests of the children and in the best interests
of Canadian families who have opened their hearts and their
homes to provide love and opportunity to the children.
Let us all support the efforts of Canadian families. I urge
all members of the opposition to do the right thing and support
the deletion of the immigration appeal division amendment, so
as to ensure that this bill respects the jurisdiction of our
provincial and territorial partners and can be passed without
further delay, so the process is open to those who wish to proceed
with adoption and have it confirmed by citizenship upon the
adoption being granted.