Are you a second class Canadian?
 

Well, buzzling through my Facebook feed, something caught my attention... Bill C-24 came into effect.

Basically if you are a dual-citizenship Canadian, (doesn't matter whether you ever set foot on the other nation) you are a second class citizen as your Canadian citizenship can be stripped at the discretion of not a Judge, but the government themselves.

I have already sign the petition and wrote to my local MP.

Seriously though, yes, I am a naturalized citizen and this affects me the most. But this is utter bullshit for any Canadian. This is a bill that does nothing but appealing the ego of elitist *Canadian* that never travel outside of Canada and lives in their little caves.

We are an immigrant country. As in, everyone except the First Nations were an immigrant from somewhere some time. And by undermining the core value of our citizenship and granting government a unprecedented level of power to control our citizenship is simply tyranny. It basically gives gov't the ability to strip any second class citizen of their citizenship just because they don't agree with the gov't.

The citizenship used to be a right for Canadians regardless whether they agree with their gov't agenda or not, so any right granted by the Canadian Charter would still protect such person. Now the gov't has the power to take away. :rukidding:

unless you're involved in some kind of illegal activity, why would this even matter to you?

Yes, I agree.

It is total BS.

It says, quote "It gives the government the discretion to strip the citizenship of any dual citizen convicted of terrorism, treason or spying abroad."

Here:
Bill C-24 is wrong: There is only one kind of Canadian citizen - The Globe and Mail

So, in effect, it gives the Government additional power and an additional punishment: to strip the guilty of Citizenship.

I believe that the guilty (of terrorism, spying, and treason) should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

However, to strip them of citizenship?

I am not for or against stripping them of citizenship.

That is not the issue at heart here for me.

However, the side effect of C-24 is that 99.999% of all of the "second-class" citizens will question and second-guess about their own Canadian citizenship status.

In effect, it is the perception of being a second class citizen that is in question here.

This bill makes "second-class" citizens feel like... second-class even though 99.9999% of all second-class citizens are not spies or terrorists.

No citizens should feel as if they are second class.

There should only be one-class of citizenship.

Because we should not set a precedent allowing gov't to continue down this path. What's next? Canadian gov't decides that you should NOT agree to the ideology of any group that it finds contradicting its agenda, or they threaten you to strip your citizenship based on treason. Remember, there is no need for a judge to rule whether what you do or think qualifies as treason. All it needs is that the gov't says so.

Canadian Charter or rights gives me certain freedom. And just because our gov't is against some of my ideas, they should be allowed to forced me into agreeing with them?

my 1st time hearing about this...and the law was passed a year ago

any further reading that isn't the full document on the act?

this graduate student's analysis says it also applies if you leave Canada for work/school?

Critical Review of the New Canadian Citizenship Law Bill C-24 - Centre for Education, Law and Society - Simon Fraser University

so you want to come to this country, be a terrorist, and remain a Canadian?

how nice.

The problem is the language of the bill itself. It's discriminatory and all without the much needed chance of fair trial in a court of law as long as the gov't think you are someone who goes against their view.

If it targets specifically to terrorists, I'm all in for it. Nevertheless, it goes much further and it makes no sense.

If you are a second class citizen (which includes every Canadian with or eligible to a second citizenship through parents and everyone who were born abroad; Canadian citizens through their parentage), you are basically stripped of rights to any of those guaranteed to you as stand in Canadian Charters. This is not how our democracy works. We state specifically that everyone is equal in front of those rights.

Second, it's discriminatory against newer immigrants; those who are within 2 generations of BEING Canadian. It does not stop anyone, whose parents were Canadian (and not any other citizenship) for becoming a terrorist. Our Canadian charter would still protect such a TERRORIST because hey, he is a first class Canadian.

But the question is, what makes this person, or any other Canadian citizen for the matter any more Canadian than I am?

And now the law covers only terrorism and treason (which by itself is a big problem... you have a different opinion than your gov't? You are a fucking traitor and we are going to strip your citizenship), but where does it end? We don't shut this down today, what's stopping the gov't to introduce new reason to it? It could add whatever the gov't sees fit.

"First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."

Don't let the gov't have their way on something that's clearly wrong. Or else, it might no be you, but your children or grandchildren who will pay the price.

Lastly, again on the topic of discrimination, the law was worded specifically so it would not have any resistance on the general population. If it were to be fair and square, so that ANY Canadian can be stripped of citizenship regardless their source of citizenship, I'm sure it would have had much more problem passing it.

I 've read the bill and I don't agree with you however goodluck with your fight it's your right as a Canadian.

For those who want to take the time to read it.

House Government Bill - Bill C-24 - First Reading (41-2)

here is the original act that the bill makes its amendments to

Citizenship Act

if you are not well versed in the original act you might be confused...

hey hehe, stop with this stupid intellectual masturbation please.

I didn't find that sexy enough to masturbate on.

How smart does a person have to be to feel like it? :suspicious:

I could really give a ratass about what they do with this bill, as I don't think any would apply to me.

But I do feel like the bill was poorly written and lack much needed research before going forward. That plus the fact that it is discriminatory. The Supreme court is going to hear this case. But I suggest anyone who don't agree with the bill to write to their MPs.

If you or any of your family has a secondary citizenship, congrats! The person just became a second class citizen accordingly the law. (Yes, even if you were born and raised in Canada) I have read the entire bill back and forth twice and it creates more problem than what it tries to address. They can easily solve this discriminatory problem: by forcing every Canadian, no matter how they obtained their citizenship, into the bill's coverage.

Does this have anything to do with skinny jeans?

Terrorism, treason, and spying, are ever broadening terms and nearly every other country does not hold the same standards and practices of law as we do. Going on the word of some shithole dictatorship government in order to revoke Canadian citizenship seems a bit of an unreasonable stretch - "Well if they said you did this, it must be true. You are no longer welcome here!"

I wouldn't worry too much. Someone will likely sue the Crown in the future, the Crown will lose, and the legislation will be re-written.

For future reference you are at least a year too late.

Bills with C prefixes are before Commons, after 3 readings it changes to S prefix for Senate.. You are supposed to submit opinions when it is still C, not when the amendment had become law!

Since the amendment had royal assent. It becomes expensive politically and money wise (the hours gov lawyers reviewed it) to repeal it, unless someone wants to spend the political capital on it. You want it changed, spend your own dime and challenge the constitutionality in court.. The government lawyer who takes up a few floors in Robson Court building don't just twiddle their thumbs during business hours you know, their job is to make sure the law is at least valid.

When the law is being debated in the commons, that is when you are supposed to tell your MPs to change it. What you are complaining now is analogous to you complaining about a neighbors' addition a few years after it had been built (and it had all the approval etc done).:rukidding:

Ignorance is no excuse either, it had been well publicized for quite a while at least in the speech from the throne... It takes at least a year to draft law and get feedback.

I thought they cover this in civics class in schools?

Because "illegal activity" is one hell of a slippery slope.

maybe they should do something with the immigration.... it's too fucking easy to get into Canada. I'm not saying that we should boot people out of the country because we are xenophobes.... but you need actual Canadians that care and give a fuck about this country. If actual Canadians are outnumbered by immigrants, we are fucked like how Singapore is destined to be overtaken by immigrants.

An immigrant with Canadian citizenship is still a Canadian.

What is your definition of 'actual Canadian'?

Or, what happened is that Crown lawyers recommended that it wouldn't stand up to a Charter challenge, but someone in the government decision-making chain said, "Thanks, but no thanks" and moved the bill along.

There are lots of celebrities or people with money that have dual citizenship. If people are concerned about this, they're better off tweeting them or getting them on-board with changes. Figure out how to get the media to pay attention - modern governments are in the business of trying to minimize negative press.

White Christians don't worry even if you are a criminal Harper will let you in.

Actual Canadians... so Aboriginals, right?

Just as a general comment, it seems reasonable to me that the same government which grants citizenship should have the right to revoke it.

Seems awfully 1+1= to me...

If you play nice and don't break any rules it shouldn't really matter... you can play the second class citizen angle if you like, the reality is that it's easy to punt a foreigner, if you tried to strip an "Actual Canadian" of their citizenship it's more complex because they don't have a home to which they can return...

The Canadian Gov. has had terrible immigration policies for a long time, these policies result from a rather thoughtless approach to increasing population growth. For generations we/the gov. have overspent, and the only way they believe the problem can be fixed is with more tax payers. (All while raping the land of its resources as quickly as possible...)

When capitalism goes wrong. *sigh*

the bill C51 just got passed on and this?

It's not just immigrants that they can revoke the citizenship from. They can take a Canada born citizen's citizenship as long as they have the possibility of citizenship from another country.

For example, you're a Canadian born in Canada. You get arrested and convicted in some other country on charges serious enough to warrant your citizenship taken away. Turns out Mom was a US Citizen at the time of your birth, and that makes you eligible for US citizenship. Whether or not you have US citizenship or not, the government can take your Canadian citizenship via bureaucratic process, not a judicial process.

Also, the government doesn't care if the charges are legit or not. If you're put up on trumped up charges by a third world dictatorship, too bad!