Immigrant groups fear dual-citizenship review

[Edward Campbell]

I raised this point here - http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/49914/post-456710.html#msg456710  on 2006-10-05; here it is again, as reported in a Globe and Mail article which is reproduced here under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20061025.ITAR25/TPStory/?query=U.S.+rules+limit+hiring 

U.S. rules limit hiring at Montreal firm
Dual citizens barred from certain positions at aerospace services provider CAE Inc.

DANIEL LEBLANC

OTTAWA -- Canadians who hold a second citizenship from a country considered a security risk by the United States cannot apply for some jobs at Montreal-based CAE Inc., a multinational company that produces flight simulators.

The company's job postings state that a number of positions are restricted to people who comply with the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, which prevent dual citizens from 17 countries, including China, Cuba, Syria and Lebanon, from working on U.S. military contracts.

Of the 20 Canadian jobs posted on CAE's website this month, eight require applicants to "comply with" or "be eligible to meet requirements of" ITAR.
Canadian military industry sources say a number of other companies are also complying with the regulations, either by refusing to hire certain people or transferring them to other projects.

"When we work with the Chinese, we need people who speak Chinese," said Nathalie Bourque, CAE's vice-president for global communications. "In the case of ITAR projects, we will have to work with people who meet ITAR criteria."

Ms. Bourque said the company has 5,000 employees and can shuffle them around. If the company is not "flexible" and refuses to meet the needs of U.S. military clients, contracts will go to other companies around the world that meet U.S. rules, she said.

"It's like if you want to buy a specific kind of television," she said. "Even if they try to sell you a black-and-white set, if you want a 42-inch colour screen, they will sell you a 42-inch colour screen."

The Canadian government is refusing to impose ITAR on its own employees, saying the restrictions violate the Charter of Rights and cannot be enforced in Canada.

"Under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, it is prohibited to discriminate against Canadian citizens, irrespective of where they were born or whether they retain citizenship in other countries," said Elizabeth Hodges, a spokeswoman for the Department of National Defence.

Canada says the United States is enforcing the regulations with increasing vigour. This is causing problems in Ottawa's plan to acquire billions of dollars of military equipment from the United States.

Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay and Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor raised the matter in talks last week with U.S. intelligence director John Negroponte.

"It's an issue we're concerned about," Mr. MacKay said this week. "It also has commercial implications for Canadian companies."

The Charter of Rights does not apply to all private companies, but provincial human-rights codes also prohibit employment discrimination based on ethic or national origin.

Errol Mendes, a human-rights expert at the University of Ottawa, said companies can discriminate only by invoking the notion of "bona fide qualifications." This means, for example, it is appropriate for an employer to insist on an employee being a qualified engineer.

But Prof. Mendes said he doubts ITAR can be defined as a legitimate restriction. "Is this a bona fide -- or good faith -- qualification requirement, or one which is basically buckling down to an order to discriminate on the part of a foreign government?" he said.

The Human Rights Commission of Ontario recently referred a number of cases to the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, alleging that General Motors Defense of London, Ont., "did not allow persons with dual citizenship [other than American], to work on defence equipment, nor did it apply for a security clearance for these persons."

An aerospace industry worker in Montreal, who spoke on condition his identity not be revealed, said he was recently told he would have to revoke his Lebanese citizenship in order to qualify for a position.

"I was finally told that being a dual citizen will not get me ITAR clearance and hence, I cannot get that job unless I revoke my Lebanese citizenship," the man said. "I feel it doesn't change anything; I'm still the same person."

He said he is mulling the decision.

Prof. Mendes said Ottawa should be concerned if a company is found to discriminate against Canadian citizens as part of the purchase of military equipment. In many cases, when the Department of National Defence buys hardware from a U.S. firm, a portion of the work is subcontracted to Canadian firms that are asked to comply with ITAR.

Ms. Bourque of CAE said that the company hopes to win further contracts from DND, and will gladly allow all of its employees to work on those projects.

"The contracts we will do for the Department of National Defence . . . these jobs will be offered to people as a whole. For contracts with the American military, it has to be ITAR, so it will be for people who meet the ITAR criteria," she said.

This is a very human dilemma for employers and employees alike.

Now, I, personally, am inclined to believe that when a new Canadian accepts Canadian citizenship (s)he should, formally, renounce the citizenship of his or her birth and surrender any other passport and should refrain from applying, ever again, for another passport.  But, I recognize that:

• Some nations do not care if you renounce citizenship – they still say: “You were born here, you’re one of us, regardless of that useless scrap of paper called a Canadian passport.  We’ve got you, we’ll do with you or to you as we please and there’s nothing Canada can do about it.”

• There might be good reasons for loyal, tax paying, contributing Canadians to want use another passport, now and again.

I also believe that companies should be able to use ITAR (and similar foreign programmes) to discriminate in hiring and employment; but I think firing should not be allowed on that basis, alone – if José cannot be employed on this contract because he was born in Cuba then, I believe, the company must find him a new job at equal or higher salary. 

 

[warrickdll]

...
This is a very human dilemma for employers and employees alike.

Now, I, personally, am inclined to believe that when a new Canadian accepts Canadian citizenship (s)he should, formally, renounce the citizenship of his or her birth and surrender any other passport and should refrain from applying, ever again, for another passport.  But, I recognize that:

• Some nations do not care if you renounce citizenship – they still say: “You were born here, you’re one of us, regardless of that useless scrap of paper called a Canadian passport.  We’ve got you, we’ll do with you or to you as we please and there’s nothing Canada can do about it.”
...

The formal renunciation should be part of the Canadian Citizenship program. If the former nation still insists that it will not recognize Canadian Citizenship then this should be strongly pursued by the Foreign Affairs department. If Canada does not have the clout to have its own Citizenship recognized as such then that person must be mindful of where they travel. As long as the renunciation is on record then this should not be a problem in gaining Canadian Citizenship.

Perhaps Canada chose the dual citizenship course to avoid the embarrassment of not having its own Citizenship fully recognized? 

...
• There might be good reasons for loyal, tax paying, contributing Canadians to want use another passport, now and again.
...

To want to be something other than Canadian I think is from one of two reasons: either they are not yet fully Canadian; or they fear that their ability to reside in Canada will be lost. For the former there isn't anything to be done, you either feel that you are more Canadian than anything else, or you don't - and so you should not be a Canadian Citizen. For the latter, I have proposed a way to allow someone the ability to frequent Canada without constant vetting.

...
What is needed is something more than Permanent Resident (Landed Immigrant) status, with its inherent restrictions on the time allowed outside of Canada, but still less than full citizenship. Maybe give "Honourary Citizenship" a real meaning.

 

[Kat Stevens]

The formal renunciation should be part of the Canadian Citizenship program. If the former nation still insists that it will not recognize Canadian Citizenship then this should be strongly pursued by the Foreign Affairs department. If Canada does not have the clout to have its own Citizenship recognized as such then that person must be mindful of where they travel. As long as the renunciation is on record then this should not be a problem in gaining Canadian Citizenship.

And you think getting those people out of Lebanon was expensive?  I can imagine the tab for this idea.

Perhaps Canada chose the dual citizenship course to avoid the embarrassment of not having its own Citizenship fully recognized? 


To want to be something other than Canadian I think is from one of two reasons: either they are not yet fully Canadian; or they fear that their ability to reside in Canada will be lost. For the former there isn't anything to be done, you either feel that you are more Canadian than anything else, or you don't - and so you should not be a Canadian Citizen. For the latter, I have proposed a way to allow someone the ability to frequent Canada without constant vetting.
 

Neither of the above, but thanks for playing.  My reasons for retaining British citizenship are my own, and, quite frankly, none of your frackin'  business.

 

[warrickdll]

...
The formal renunciation should be part of the Canadian Citizenship program. If the former nation still insists that it will not recognize Canadian Citizenship then this should be strongly pursued by the Foreign Affairs department.
...

...
And you think getting those people out of Lebanon was expensive?  I can imagine the tab for this idea.
...

It is what Canada must do as a sovereign nation.

...
To want to be something other than Canadian I think is from one of two reasons: either they are not yet fully Canadian; or they fear that their ability to reside in Canada will be lost. For the former there isn't anything to be done, you either feel that you are more Canadian than anything else, or you don't - and so you should not be a Canadian Citizen. For the latter, I have proposed a way to allow someone the ability to frequent Canada without constant vetting.

...
Neither of the above, but thanks for playing.  My reasons for retaining British citizenship are my own, and, quite frankly, none of your frackin'  business.

I believe in single citizenship, and I do not want to have Canadians who do not feel more Canadian than they do a foreign nationality - this is, I believe, the threshold that must be overcome.

There are alternatives to dual-citizenship; I have proposed one.

 

[Edward Campbell]

It is what Canada must do as a sovereign nation.

I don't agree.

Despite my preference for unitary citizenship, I think there is little we can do or even want to bother trying to do about e.g. Iran.  We should, as I believe DFAIT does, caution all Canadians with dual citizenship, including, especially the involuntary kind, about the risks they take when they return to the country of their birth.

It seems to me that satisfies all our concerns.  Our sovereignty does not depend on ensuring that another country obeys our laws.  That's extraterritoriality and we oppose it when others try to apply it to us and we should avoid doing the same to others.  Our sovereignty ends at our borders.  Those Canadian citizens who leave our borders have a legitimate claim on our assistance when they are overseas but neither they nor we have any legitimate right to tell any other country how to make and apply their own laws.  When I enter China, as a Canadian, I break Chinese laws at my peril.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>if José cannot be employed on this contract because he was born in Cuba then, I believe, the company must find him a new job at equal or higher salary.

If a company has no contracts/projects against which to bill Jose's time, then Jose should be laid off.  If the company's contracts/projects have ITAR conditions and effectively there is no contract/project against which to bill Jose's time, Jose should be laid off.  Jose isn't entitled to a job.

 

[warrickdll]

...
If the former nation still insists that it will not recognize Canadian Citizenship then this should be strongly pursued by the Foreign Affairs department.
...

It is what Canada must do as a sovereign nation.
...

I don't agree.

Despite my preference for unitary citizenship, I think there is little we can do or even want to bother trying to do about e.g. Iran.  We should, as I believe DFAIT does, caution all Canadians with dual citizenship, including, especially the involuntary kind, about the risks they take when they return to the country of their birth.

It seems to me that satisfies all our concerns.  Our sovereignty does not depend on ensuring that another country obeys our laws.  That's extraterritoriality and we oppose it when others try to apply it to us and we should avoid doing the same to others.  Our sovereignty ends at our borders.  Those Canadian citizens who leave our borders have a legitimate claim on our assistance when they are overseas but neither they nor we have any legitimate right to tell any other country how to make and apply their own laws.  When I enter China, as a Canadian, I break Chinese laws at my peril.

Having any issue "strongly pursued" by DFAIT isn't the kind of "extraterritoriality" I would think Canada opposes. If you don't pursue a diplomatic objective, how would it be obtained?

I do believe that it is an issue for any nation to have its citizens recognized as its citizens. After all, if you did break the law in China, how would Canada know unless China informed it (which China would/should do if it arrested a Canadian)?


What other nations do isn't the stumbling block in having Canada return to a single-citizenship system:

...
As long as the renunciation is on record then this should not be a problem in gaining Canadian Citizenship.
...

 

[Kirkhill]

Just curious - does anybody believe that removing dual-citizenship will end the problem of divided loyalties?

How about when Catholic-Canadians are advised to vote against the government on abortion and same-sex marriage?
How about Muslim-Canadians who see their home countries' governments, indeed the whole concept of a country, as an affront to the establishment of Dar-al-Islam?
How about those naturally born Canadians who are so adamantly opposed to the policies of the Government of the Day that they take Direct Action against it? Litton Industries? Oka? FLQ? General Strikes I have known?

As noted previously I swore allegiance to HM on British soil and Canadian soil.  The good news is I can't foresee the time when the governments of those two countries will get to the point where I have to go and invade Ayr or my cousins come visiting Aldergrove with guns.   The bad news is that if I had had to make a choice - I don't know what the outcome might have been.  It would have been a different contract I was being asked to sign.

As it stands now - I would end up defending Canada because my kids are Canadians as are my in-laws.  Those aren't the same reasons I had when I signed up with the Canadian Militia over 20 years ago (after having been turned down by the regular Canadian Navy for eyesight).   

As to carrying a Brit passport - I enjoy being able to flash it and bypass the line-ups at Heathrow.  It also gives me speedy passage at Copenhagen and Amsterdam.  Beyond that, like most immigrants, as soon as I open my mouth people know I am not from here.  By contrast the folks in Ayr don't need me to show a passport to be able to place me within five miles of the hospital I was born in.  Until I get within that five mile circle I am a furriner.

Cheers. 

 

[warrickdll]

Just curious - does anybody believe that removing dual-citizenship will end the problem of divided loyalties?
...

I do not believe so. Nor do I believe it would fix everything concerning the other topic on Lebanon. Divided loyalties are natural. I see this more as a commitment, a choice that must be made.

The Lebanon situation brought out the fact that, when the going gets tough, hard decision will need to be made. Canada has a singular responsibility to its citizens, and in turn they have the reciprocal singular responsibility to Canada. That responsibility to Canada cannot be equally shared across multiple nations.

...
As noted previously I swore allegiance to HM on British soil and Canadian soil.  The good news is I can't foresee the time when the governments of those two countries will get to the point where I have to go and invade Ayr or my cousins come visiting Aldergrove with guns. 
...

You would be swearing allegiance to the Queen of GB and N. Ireland for the British forces and then the Queen of Canada for Canadian forces, so it isn't technically the same HM (this grieves me to no end - but that is a different topic).

The similarities between UK and US cultures to Canada do not require a special circumstance for dual-citizenship. There are other ways to allow someone the ability to reside and benefit from Canada without full Citizenship, what is required is a status above Permanent Resident (which restricts your time allowed outside of Canada), and this should be developed prior to switching back to the single-citizenship system.

...
As to carrying a Brit passport - I enjoy being able to flash it and bypass the line-ups at Heathrow.  It also gives me speedy passage at Copenhagen and Amsterdam. ...

There are, as others have mentioned, very practical reasons why someone, who feels very Canadian, would not want a single-citizenship system for Canada (travel/family/pensions/etc.).  And, if I had multiple citizenships, I would hold onto them for as long as possible; but in the end a choice should have to be made.

 

[Redeye]

All, but Iterator in particular:

Trying to outlaw dual citizenship is a pointless exercise for a fairly simple reason.  I am a loyal, ferociously patriotic Canadian citizen by birth.  I hold citizenship of the United Kingdom by ancestry.  There is no way I would ever renounce that citizenship, nor surrender my UK passport.  No Canadian law could force me to do so and if any law attempted, I'd go to court and win.  Canada has no legal right or means to have any impact on my other citizenship.  Since a lot of the dual citizens you want to deal with are similar in circumstances to me (ie Canadian born). 

Further, the idea that DFAIT (it would be Citizenship and Immigration Canada, but that's a moot point)  pursue the renunciation of foreign citizenships by naturalized Canadians would also be a pointless waste of time, since most countries would tell them to pound salt.  Never mind the idea introducing another class of residency in Canada (Permanent residence and citizenship is more than enough).  The fact is that the situation of the evacuation of all those individuals from Lebanon, which is what touched this all off, is a rare occasion.  Dual citizens retain connections to their other country for any of a number of reasons, the vast majority of which should be of no concern to us.  The whole debate remains utterly pointless.

 

[Brad Sallows]

There are two distinct parts to the debate:

1) Status.

2) Privileges.

Canada has full control over the latter.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Frankly Canada should be offering citizenship to Gurkha's willing to serve in the Canadian Army for 5 years and be able to bring over immediate family, they would make a good contribution to our society.

 

[warspite]

Well dual citizenship back in the news.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/11/07/dual-citizenship.html

Ottawa reviewing rules of dual citizenship: Solberg
Last Updated: Tuesday, November 7, 2006 | 1:56 PM ET
CBC News
Ottawa is reviewing the rules governing dual citizenship and whether Canadians living abroad should qualify for social programs when they return, Citizenship and Immigration Minister Monte Solberg confirmed Tuesday.

The review comes in the aftermath of the mass evacuation of 15,000 Canadians from Lebanon last summer during the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict, at an approximate cost of $63 million. Many of those Canadians hold dual citizenship and some have returned to Lebanon.

Speaking to a House committee on immigration, Solberg said it raised questions about the rights of citizens who hold dual citizenship and don't live in the country.

"If we're in a situation where somebody's absent, isn't paying taxes but is going to be using our social programs down the road, I think Canadians would feel that that is unfair," Solberg said.

Benefits and obligations
He said the response from Canadians after the Lebanon evacuation is that citizenship conveys both benefits and obligations.

"Canadians want to know that citizenship means something, that we are not just a port in the storm," he said.

Continue Article

Liberal MP Jim Karygiannis accused Solberg of pandering to anti-immigrant sentiment.

"Let's not use dual citizenship as a scapegoat in order to satisfy the Reform agenda," said Karygiannis.

Liberal Andrew Telegdi said that if the issue was freeloading, the government should seek to amend the Tax Act.

An estimated 90 countries now permit dual citizenship, including the United States and most of Europe.

Canada changed its laws 30 years ago to allow Canadians to hold passports from another country.

Since then, two parliamentary committees have recommended the practice be reviewed.

"Canadians are concerned about the issue of dual citizenship which is why the government has a responsibility to review the current system," Solberg said.

According to the latest figures from Statistics Canada, about 557,000 Canadians — 1.8 per cent of the population — are dual citizens.

 

[Redeye]

This isn't a dual citizenship issue, then.  It's an access to services based on residency issue, and that's alright.  Health care already works like this: if you are an expatriate and return to Canada, even if you are a citizen you face a 90 day waiting period before you're eligible to access public health insurance benefits.  That system is designed so that people can't just run for the border to get health care they haven't been paying into.  Makes sense to me to restrict access in that way - although a broad stroke isn't necessarily a good idea.  I would suggest a mechanism that gives a more diligent review to applications for social program access by returning Canadians to see if the need for them is legitimate or a result of poor planning or attempted exploitation - ie did they plan for their return properly or have they hit a spell of hard luck.  I don't know how such a system could be effectively managed though, that's the trick.

 

[TCBF]

"divided loyalties? How about when Catholic-Canadians are advised to vote against the government on abortion and same-sex marriage?"

- Since when is voting against a government considered disloyal?

"Canada has no legal right or means to have any impact on my other citizenship."

- Well, not quite.  Canada could pass a law stating that a Canadian citizen may not hold citizenship of any other nation.  It would have a grandfathering clause, of course. After that, you can be a landed immigrant, but unless your country of birth lets you relinquish, you cannot become a Canadian.  As well, from that point, acquiring another citizenship would immediately nullify your Canadian one.

Too easy.

But the issue here is "services".  I think dual citizens should have a primary nation based on geography:  when I go back to my fatherland of Elbownia, I am able to access Elbownian services, ergo, Canada does not have to provide for me in the way of consular support, legal issues, evacuation and so on.  This would eliminate those gangsters who become Canadians so their home country will not execute them.

I say phoeey.  If I spend half of each year in Elbownia, Elbownia can execute me, and Canada should not have to shed a single tear or penny.

Tom

 

[Kirkhill]

I say phoeey.  If I spend half of each year in Elbownia, Elbownia can execute me, and Canada should not have to shed a single tear or penny.

As a dual citizen I say "Hear! Hear!"

 

[The Bread Guy]

A bit more of the latest on this one....

Solberg reviews dual citizenship but larger issues loom, say experts
Bruce Cheadle, Canadian Press, 12 Nov 06
Article Link

The Canadian government has no idea how many Canadian citizens live abroad - and isn't trying to find out - but independent researchers say the number is close to three million and growing. That's a figure that could swamp Canada's relatively generous social programs if this pool of non-tax-paying citizens were to spill back into the country in retirement. Yet the government response to date has been limited to vague musing about a review of dual citizenship - an approach that experts say totally misses the mark ....

(R)estricting or ending dual citizenship might make it more difficult for Canada to attract or retain skilled immigrant workers from the 90 or so countries that permit it. That means a government review of dual citizenship misses the mark, according to senior researcher Kenny Zhang of the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada. "From my point of view, that's the wrong medicine for the issue," Zhang said in an interview. If the Canadian government has a problem with citizens living abroad for the balance of their working lives, and then returning in retirement for medical care and other social services, the solution has little to do with dual citizenship ....

Don DeVoretz, an economist at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, is another researcher specializing in migration and citizenship issues.  He agrees with Zhang that dual citizenship in the current debate is a red herring. But he's much less sanguine about the impact of Canada's huge population abroad.  "People talk about the benefits of the Canadian diaspora. I don't see them," DeVoretz said in an interview.  "The policy question is, can we rig it better so that the benefits accrue to Canadians? That's the nub of the matter.  "And if we have any policy, it has to be (directed) to everybody living abroad, not just for the Chinese. And I don't think any government has the nerve." ....


Economist wants Canada to show 'more self interest' in treatment of nationals abroad
Canadian Press, 12 Nov 06
Article Link

For the record, Don DeVoretz doesn't criticize immigrants who come to Canada, stay long enough to become citizens, then leave to sow greener pastures in the world's economic hothouses.  "Nobody's breaking any law here," the economist and immigration researcher said in an interview from Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, where he's co-director of Research for Immigration and Integration in the Metropolis, or RIIM.  "If we set up the policy to encourage people to come here, get citizenship and leave without paying taxes, I would do it. You would. It's not evil."  But DeVoretz does take issue with some of Canada's current immigration and citizenship policy.  In an increasingly mobile world, Canada's generous social programs, platinum passport and low threshold for naturalization make this country an attractive way-station.  Whether that is a good or bad thing for the country depends on who you talk to ....

 

[rregtc-etf]

If people are so concerned about divided loyalties, why do we accept landed immigrants (non citizens) into the CF, police forces and political parties.  In theory the landed immigrants in a political party can elect the party leader that you the Canadian citizen vote to be PM.  In today's shrinking world dual citizenship makes a lot of sense and can also have a stabilizing effect of Canadian ex-pats pushing for services in other countries to at least Canadian standards. I think the President of Latvia or Lithuania is a Canadian. There are more benefits overall to dual citizenship in the long run.  Incidentally, i have only ever held Canadian citizenship

 

[The Bread Guy]

Not JUST immigrant groups - shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the Copyright Act.

Harper suggests Governor General set precedent on dual citizenship
Canadian Press, 8 Dec 06
Article Link

Stephen Harper took a thinly disguised jab at Stephane Dion, subtly suggesting Friday the new Liberal leader might want to surrender his French citizenship.

The prime minister noted Gov. Gen. Michaelle Jean gave up her French citizenship shortly after being named to the vice-regal post.

"As you know the Governor General was faced with a similar decision and I certainly supported her decision when she gave up her (French) citizenship," Harper said when asked about the matter.

"Obviously, I think everyone has a right to select options under the law, they have to use their own political judgment."

Dion, who holds French and Canadian citizenship, has responded testily to suggestions he renounce the former, saying he has proved his loyalty to Canada.

Former Liberal prime minister John Turner also holds dual citizenship, having been born in Britain.

An estimated 700,000 dual citizens live in Canada, though many more - the numbers are unclear - live abroad.

Dion says he has maintained his French citizenship out of respect for his mother.

"It's part of me. It's my mother who gave that to me. And like all sons, I love my mother and I love what she gave to me. And so to remove that from me, I'd be sad," Dion said in a TV interview this week.

"This being said, if I see that it's a liability for our winnability, I will do it."

Earlier in the week Dion said his loyalty to Canada can't be questioned - not after he was vilified by many people in his own province while standing up for national unity.

"I'm proud of who I am, and I am fully loyal to my country, and nobody will question that," he said.

"I'm 100 per cent loyal to Canada, and I believe I've more than demonstrated that in my life."

 

[Old Sweat]

This subject is fubared amazingly. Turner was born in the UK, so he could apply for a British passport. This probably leads to the assumption that he is a dual citizen. This also applies to the other public figures who were born abroad. However, if they do not opt for the foreign citizenship, then they are exclusively Canadian.

Other countries do  not accept this. I had a soldier in my troop in Gagetown who had a warning in his personnel file that, as he had been born in Belgium and had received a call up notice from the Belgian army, he should not set foot in that country, as he would be suject to arrest for 'draft dodging.'

Now, to toss a red herring into the debate, I was not originally a Canadian citizen, although I was first saw the light of day in Fort Erie, Ontario. I was born a British subject, and it was not until 1947 that I became a Canadian citizen, thanks to a long overdue act of the Canadian parliament.