Lost Canadians

1940s document key to citizenship for Lost Canadian Jackie Scott: “Absurd injustice” denies citizenship to War Bride children

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Thu, 10 May 2012 15:00:00 +0000

For Immediate Release

Jackie Scott was born in England
to a Canadian War Bride and
came to Canada in 1948.

(May 10, 2012) - A Surrey, B.C. woman who arrived in Canada in 1948 with her War Bride mother is now fighting for her citizenship in the Federal Court. A document from the 1940s recently discovered in the Library and Archives in Ottawa could hold the key to citizenship for Jackie Scott and others, known as Lost Canadians, who are excluded from citizenship because they were born out of wedlock outside Canada before 1947.

A transcript of the document, with its archival reference, can be found on the Lost Canadian website at http://tinyurl.com/chsd2o6

Jackie Scott and her parents
at Niagara Falls in 1948, soon
after she and her mother
arrived in Canada.

Jackie Scott was born in England in 1945 to a Canadian father and a British mother. She was born out of wedlock because her father, a Canadian soldier of the Second World War, could not get the required permission to marry. Such cases were common and inevitable under wartime conditions. After the war, Ms Scott’s father was repatriated to Canada, but because of poor health she was unable to travel to Canada with her mother until 1948. Shortly after her arrival, her parents were married in Toronto. By her parents’ marriage Ms Scott was legitimated retroactively from birth under Ontario law, but is still excluded from citizenship by the continuing application of an obscure provision of the 1946 Canadian Citizenship Act. She is now suing the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration in the Federal Court.

A document found last week on a microfilm in the Library and Archives could determine the outcome of Ms Scott’s case. Its subject line reads: ‘Canadian Citizenship Act – Ruling status of illegitimate child whose father is Canadian citizen’. Written by a senior immigration officer and dated Sept 3, 1948, the document describes a case substantially the same as Ms Scott’s. A child was born in the United States, out of wedlock, to a Canadian father and an American mother. No date of birth is given for the unnamed child, but a reference to section 4 of the 1946 Canadian Citizenship Act – the same section that applies to Ms Scott’s case – confirms that it was before the Act came into force on January 1, 1947. Three weeks after the birth, the parents married. The father returned to Canada and his wife and child later applied for entry to join him.

An immigration officer, applying the same law by which Ms Scott is excluded from citizenship, admitted the child to Canada as an immigrant. The case was subsequently referred to the Registrar of Canadian Citizenship, who gave the following ruling:

‘I think it would be right and proper to recognize the child as a Canadian citizen. I note that the marriage of the parents took only three weeks after the date of birth of the child. We are of the opinion that a marriage under these conditions, wherein the father recognizes, by the fact of marriage, that the child is his own, and that in all probability the laws of the community in which the child is born would recognize it as legitimate, we should take the view that the child is the legitimate offspring of the father and in consequence should be regarded as a natural born Canadian.’

Ms. Scott says the document confirms what she has always believed, that she is a Canadian citizen from birth “by operation of law.”

“That the present government disregards the decision made in September 1948 regarding pre-1947 out-of-wedlock children who were subsequently legitimated by their parents' marriage, as well as other Supreme Court rulings, is unconscionable,” says Ms. Scott. “It's time for the Canadian government to recognize the citizenship of individuals in my position and immediately do the right thing and honour the directive handed down in 1948.”

A friend of Ms Scott commented: ‘The Minister has a political decision to make: take the high road and correct this absurd injustice now, whether by administrative or legislative action, or fight the Lost Canadians in court. If he chooses the latter, he must explain what the government is defending, what policy objective is served, by continuing to exclude people from citizenship solely because they were born out of wedlock over 65 years ago.’ No date has been set for a hearing of Ms Scott’s case in the Federal Court.

A transcript of the document, with its archival reference, can be found on the Lost Canadian website at http://tinyurl.com/chsd2o6

Status of Illegitimate Child 1948

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Thu, 10 May 2012 14:30:00 +0000

DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND RESOURCES

Immigration Branch

Ottawa, September 3, 1948

Circular #78(B)

To Immigration Officers,

Atlantic District

Subject: Canadian Citizenship Act – Ruling Status of illegitimate child whose father is Canadian citizen

A ruling has been received from the Citizenship Branch concerning the status of an illegitimate child whose father is a Canadian citizen. The case upon which the ruling is based is as follows:-

“A Canadian born citizen was living in the United States out of wedlock with an American born woman. They had an illegitimate child born in the United States. Subsequent to the birth of the child (three weeks thereafter) the parents were married. The father returned to Canada and his wife and child later applied for entry to join him. Our examining officer at the port of entry took the view that the child, having been born out of wedlock, came under Part 1, Section 4, (b) of the Canadian Citizenship Act, deriving citizenship from his mother. Therefore, the child was regarded as an immigrant, of American citizenship, and admitted as such. However, when the facts were submitted to the Citizenship Branch for review the Registrar furnished the following ruling:-

I think it would be right and proper to recognize the child as a Canadian citizen. I note that the Marriage of the parents took place approximately three weeks after the date of birth of the child. We are of the opinion that a marriage under these conditions, wherein the father recognizes, by the fact of marriage, that the child is his own, and that in all probability the laws of the Community in which the child is born would recognize it as legitimate, we should take the view that the child is the legitimate offspring of the father and in consequence should be recognized as a natural born Canadian”.

The above is furnished for your information in the event that you have to deal with a case of this type.

(Signature illegible)
District Superintendent

Source:Libraries and Archives Canada

Canadian Citizenship Act and Regulations 1945-1952 (RG76, Volume 519,

File 801544, part 9, 1947-49)

Microfilm reel C-10615

Transcribed 2012-05-02

Order in Council P.C. 1945-858 and the Lost Canadians

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Thu, 10 May 2012 14:00:00 +0000

A gateway to Canadian citizenship

R. H. Addington May 8, 2012

Order in Council P.C. 1945-858 and the Lost Canadians

Page 1 of
Order in Council 858
Click for larger view

On February 9th, 1945, the Cabinet made an Order in Council that is now all but forgotten but is of continuing importance to one group of remaining Lost Canadians: War Bride children who arrived in Canada before January 1st, 1947. Some of them, after a lifetime in Canada, are still excluded from citizenship because they were born out of wedlock, even if their parents later married. The purpose of this note is to show that this continuing denial of citizenship is both historically and legally indefensible.

Historically, Order in Council P.C. 1945-858 was just one of thousands of wartime Orders in Council made under the special powers of the War Measures Act. Its existence has always been known, but only recently has it been studied because it is not readily accessible to the general public. It was never published in the Canada Gazette and has not yet been digitized by the Library and Archives but is accessible there both in print and on microfilm (LAC References: Canadian War Orders and Regulations 1945, Volume 1, No 7 (printed booklet), AMICUS No 101204; Microfilm Reel No T-5174).

The purpose of P.C. 1945-858 was to facilitate the entry to Canada of the arriving military dependents; i.e., the women who had married Canadian soldiers overseas during the Second World War, and of their children. It did so in two ways. First, it allowed the military dependents to enter Canada without meeting the usual requirements of the Immigration Act, except for a medical examination. (Section 2 of the Order in Council allowed delayed entry of those who could not pass the medical examination). Second, it gave the military dependents immediate Canadian domicile, and Canadian citizenship as then defined under the Immigration Act.

Section 3 of the Order in Council reads as follows:

Every dependent who is permitted to enter Canada pursuant to section two of this Order shall for the purpose of Canadian immigration law be deemed to be a Canadian citizen if the member of the forces upon whom he is dependent is a Canadian citizen and shall be deemed to have Canadian domicile if the said member has Canadian domicile.

Page 2 of
Order in Council 858
Click for larger view

But what did the term ‘Canadian citizen’ mean in 1945? The answer is found in the Immigration Act , R.S.C. 1927, c. 93, at par.

2(b): ‘Canadian citizen’ means

(i) a person born in Canada who has not become an alien;

(ii) a British subject who has Canadian domicile; or

(iii) a person naturalized under the laws of Canada who has not subsequently become an alien or lost Canadian domicile.

The Order in Council did not make new law; it simply recognized the status of the arriving military dependents under existing law, treating them more as returning Canadians than as immigrants. The government of the day clearly regarded them as members of the Canadian family, as indeed they already were by blood or marriage.

From January 1st, 1947, citizenship status was determined solely by the Canadian Citizenship Act 1946. Two sections of the Act apply to persons born before 1947: section 4 and section 9. Section 4 deals with ‘natural-born Canadian citizens; section 9 with ‘Canadian citizens other than natural-born’. War Bride children born out of wedlock are excluded from citizenship under section 4, unless the mother was Canadian. Section 9, however, contains no restrictions based on the sex or marital status of the parents. It gives citizenship to all British subjects, other than natural-born citizens, who had Canadian domicile on January 1st, 1947. That would logically include War Bride children born out of wedlock. On statutory interpretation, they are indisputably ‘Canadian citizens other than natural-born’, by operation of law.

In Minister of Citizenship and Immigration v. Taylor (2007 FCA 349), the Federal Court of Appeal, reversing the earlier judgement of Martineau J. of the Federal Court (2006 FC 1053), held that P.C. 1945-858 could not, ‘in and of itself confer the status of “Canadian citizenship” (par. [52]). The Court did not, however, rule that rights acquired before January 1st, 1947 were somehow extinguished by the Canadian Citizenship Act 1946. On the contrary, those pre-existing rights were expressly saved by sub-section 46.(1) of the Act. Anyone who on December 31st, 1946 was a British subject who had Canadian domicile was still a British subject with Canadian domicile on January 1st, 1947 and a citizen under the new Act. And the Court of Appeal noted (par. [53]) that the Minister had conceded before Martineau J. that Mr Taylor had indeed acquired Canadian domicile and the same status as his father on arrival in Canada, and would have become a citizen under the 1946 Act had he not left Canada with his mother before January 1st, 1947. The Court did not, however, accept the Minister’s argument that Mr Taylor had lost Canadian domicile when he left Canada.

The Minister had also conceded that:

[54] While P.C. 858 itself limited its reach "for the purpose of Canadian immigration law", the amendments to the [1910] Immigration Act, also coming into force on January 1, 1947 changed the definition of citizen to incorporate the definition found in the new [1947] Canadian Citizenship Act. Additionally, the combination of being granted domicile and being a British subject would have themselves met the requirements of the 1947 Canadian Citizenship Act [emphasis in original].

(Since Mr Taylor had claimed citizenship only under section 4 of the Canadian Citizenship Act 1946, the Court of Appeal did not rule on whether, in the alternative, he had acquired citizenship under section 9 which, as noted above, has no out-of-wedlock exclusion. In the end, the Court ruled that even if Mr Taylor became a citizen in 1947 he had lost Canadian citizenship by failing to meet the pre-1977 retention conditions at age 24.)

The transition from the old definition of citizenship under the Immigration Act to the new definition under the Canadian Citizenship Act 1946 was seamless. That is exactly what Parliament intended. The contrary interpretation, that Canadian citizenship was somehow created ex nihilo on January 1st, 1947, with no legal continuity with what went before, is both historically and legally untenable. This argument applies to any case involving an out-of-wedlock War Bride child.

Vancouver Observer: Lifelong Canadians face discrimination by their own government...still

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Fri, 16 Mar 2012 15:59:00 +0000

Advocates for Lost Canadians – those excluded from citizenship because of obscure legal loopholes – are asking questions after citizenship and immigration minister Jason Kenney seemingly admitted to discrimination recently at a press conference.

Click here to read original article in the Vancouver Observer

When the Vancouver Observer asked the minister whether the Canadian government denies citizenship based on gender, age, or marital status, he said no.

"No, citizenship isn't and shouldn't be," he said. "The Citizenship Act lays out who can become citizens and it is available to anyone ... regardless of marital status or age."

This statement seemed to be a huge paradox for many Lost Canadians, who are currently being denied citizenship, as well as old age benefits, based on the fact that they are seniors (born before 1947) and born out of wedlock, often to war veterans and war brides. What, if not discrimination, was preventing Canadians who had lived their entire lives in the country from obtaining citizenship?

Lifelong Canadians facing discrimination

There are famous cases of lifelong Canadians who have been struggling for recognition of their Canadian status. Jackie Scott, 66, was blocked from citizenship in 2005 because her parents – including her Canadian war veteran father – were unwed when she was born, based on an obscure clause covering people born in Canada prior to the 1947 Citizenship Act. Prior to that act, a so-called “illegitimate” child was the sole property of the mother, and her mother was British. Scott, with Chapman, filed a lawsuit last month for her citizenship in a federal court.

Then there are people like Ian Munroe, a former serviceman who served the Canadian military for 18 years before being told that he wasn't a Canadian citizen. Despite Kenney's claim that Citizenship isn't based on marital status, government authorities asked Munroe whether his parents were married at the time that he was born -- the question is technically illegal, classified as discriminatory under the Canadian Human Rights Act. Even though Munroe ended up receiving his citizenship in his sixties, he spent the majority of his life stateless.

Leonard Johnson is currently being denied benefits because -- despite having lived in Canada since 1947 with his war bride mother and having worked paid taxes in the country, he was denied his old age security pension last month. Johnson, however, was able to obtain British citizenship in order to travel. He is currently 65, however, and now only has 20 per cent vision out of one eye and is blind in the other, which makes it difficult for him to complete paperwork in order to become a Canadian citizen.

Even though there are several situations in which people can become Lost Canadians, war bride children who were born in 1946 and 1947 are in the spotlight because they are now applying for Old Age pensions, and are becoming 'red-flagged' when they report to the government that they were born in England or Scotland. Since many of them never realized they weren't Canadian to begin with, they find themselves at loss when the government refuses to grant them any pension or benefits.

Refusal to speak about citizenship issues

Last month, Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) suddenly over-ruled a Vancouver Observer scheduled interview with the head of Canada's Citizenship and Multiculturalism Branch, Nicole Girard, in Ottawa.

“The interview request was refused at a higher level,” CIC spokesperson Remi Lariviere explained, apologetically.

Lost Canadians advocate Don Chapman expressed dismay at both Kenney's remarks and the government's refusal to meet in person with the Vancouver Observer – saying it demonstrates their unwillingness to address the concerns of rightful Canadians.

Chapman, once a Lost Canadian himself, has long campaigned for several years on the matter, and added that there could be up to 40,000 people still excluded from citizenship unfairly.

“What public good is being served by keeping these people out?” he asked. “Excuse me, but if you had a business in Canada, and you refused to hire someone because of their age, gender, or family status, you'd be before the courts. It's illegal.

“But here's the government of Canada saying, 'We're okay with that.' In other words, we're not going to abide by the Charter or our own laws.”

Finish the job
The New Democratic Party (NDP)'s immigration critic, Don Davies, called upon the government to fix the Citizenship Act to include what he suggested could amount to tens of thousands of people who, for all intents and purposes, are Canadians without citizenship. He said that a 2009 revision to the act – Bill C-37 – enfranchised 95 per cent of Lost Canadians – but the government should “finish the job.”

“It should be the goal and desire of the federal government to fix the citizenship problems for everybody, not just for 50 per cent or 75 per cent or 90 per cent,” Davies told the Vancouver Observer. “Everybody who should have Canadian citizenship intact should be dealt with.

“If Jason Kenney puts his money where his mouth is and really believes that Canadian citizenship is something that should be exalted, then he should be getting on this right away.”

In an emailed response to the Vancouver Observer's questions – sent in lieu of the cancelled interview – another Citizenship and Immigration Canada media spokesperson said remaining Lost Canadians can apply for special consideration.

“Canada’s citizenship laws are generous and cover the situations of most people,” Jack Branswell, manager of media relations for the department, commented. “Those not covered can apply for a discretionary grant of citizenship. The acceptance rates for discretionary grants of citizenship are high (92 per cent).

Branswell said that the 2009 changes restored or gave citizenship to the vast majority of those who lost or never had it because of outdated provisions in previous legislation.

The Lost Canadians left behind
Both Davies and Chapman agreed that Bill C-37 restored citizenship to many rightful claimants, but asked why legislation cannot be extended to address problems of marital status and birth year, two of the remaining criteria for exclusion.

“Huge numbers benefited,” Chapman said. “But what about those who didn't?

“Here's what the government answer is: do it on a case-by-case basis. Do you believe a politician should be judge of whether or not you're Canadian? That's what the courts have said they don't want to happen.”

John Weston, Conservative Member of Parliament for West Vancouver, said that he supports expanding citizenship coverage for such cases as Jackie Scott.

“Jackie Scott should have citizenship, I've told cabinet members that,” said Weston, who sits on Parliament's citizenship and immigration committee. “I am vying for further Citizenship Act (amendments) that would ultimately enfranchise her as a citizen.”

Weston said that Citizenship and Immigration had declined a “very rarely provided minister's order” to grant Scott exceptional consideration, but that the number of people actually falling through the cracks of the 2009 amendments are “150 or less, in that range,” contradicting Chapman and Davies' claim there are up to 40,000 Lost Canadians. Chapman added later added that 150 or less was grossly inaccurate, since CIC admitted in July 2010 that there were at least 750,000 cases of Lost Canadians, and 5 per cent of that number is closer to 40,000.

Is 95 per cent good enough?
Within the Conservative Party, Weston said, he is proposing a change to grant citizenship to those, like Scott, who are excluded based on outdated social norms of “legitimacy” -- i.e., being born in wedlock, or having a Canadian father rather than a Canadian mother.

“It would affect a class of citizens – people born out of wedlock before 1947 – who are not allowed citizenship,” Weston said. “That's a bias no one I know considers fair or just – I don't know any Canadian who would say that's fair.

For advocates like Chapman, individual appeals and internal government discussions are not enough to address what he views as an injustice towards people who, for all intents and purposes, live as Canadians and may not even realize they do not qualify for citizenship.

“Australia had the same wacky laws on their books as Canada – because all these laws were British,” Chapman said. “But everybody else corrected these.

“Canada is one last hold-out that doesn't want to really correct it totally. They're saying, 'We did it for 95 per cent, and that's good enough.' Is that really a way a country should treat its people?”

Vancouver Observer: Discriminatory laws against unwed mothers leave Lost Canadian Ken Smith out in the cold

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 15:41:00 +0000

Liz Johnston and her husband, Lost Canadian Ken Smith, at their home in White Rock. Photo by Alexis Stoymenoff

Click here to read original article in the Vancouver Observer

As the world celebrate progress on International Women's Day, Lost Canadians born out of wedlock still face gender discrimination due to outdated citizenship laws.
Ken Smith and his wife Liz Johnston love to travel. But recently, planning a vacation has become a nearly impossible task.

“Lately, we’ve had some problems at the border because of my weird situation, where I can’t say I’m Canadian but I’ve lived here the majority of my life,” said Smith.

The 68-year-old White Rock resident is one of a number of Lost Canadians, excluded from citizenship due to the country’s archaic laws. Despite having lived in Canada since 1945, he’s been rejected twice by Citizenship and Immigration Canada. And ever since border security ramped up after 9/11 he says he’s had terrible experiences with customs officials.

“They don’t understand why I’m not Canadian, so immediately that raises some flags. About a year ago, the flags were all raised and we ended up not being able to go on our vacation down in the Caribbean because the plane landed in the United States,” Smith recalled.

“So we’ve got a little process that we’ve got to go through, and we’ve been advised that it won’t be a problem...if you get your citizenship first. And that shouldn’t be a problem, right? Well, guess what? It is.”

Discrimination against women

Smith was born in England in 1943, to a British mother and Canadian father in the Royal Regiment. His parents were married 10 months after his birth, and they moved to Canada in 1945. Tragically, Smith’s mother died just 12 days after they arrived in Toronto, and when his father soon remarried, he was raised to believe that his stepmother was really his birth mother. It was not until his thirties that he finally found out he was not born in Canada.

Because Smith was born out of wedlock before 1947, the law says he’s not a citizen—even though his father was Canadian. Outdated regulations affecting war brides like his mother are the reason for many of the current Lost Canadian cases.

While it may seem shocking that such a discriminatory law is still in effect, despite aggressive appeals from citizenship advocates, the government has yet to fully resolve the issue.

“They still apply the laws of the time, which were, of course, very discriminatory,” said Johnston, who has passionately taken up the cause on her husband’s behalf.

“I mean, they’re not legal today but they apply these laws. It’s bizarre. And it’s because Ken was born out of wedlock. He was ‘owned’ by his mother, who was not a Canadian, which means he wasn’t Canadian.”

This week, as politicians commend progress on gender equality in honour of International Women’s Day, it’s particularly important to consider how such rules are still in effect. The laws at the time discriminated against women who had children out of wedlock, and the government continues to hold up this discrimination in existing legislation.

“There’s no question. If you’re a person who has a Canadian parent, you should be Canadian. Period,” said Johnston.

“It’s disheartening. It really is. Because you’re here, but you’re not one of them,” added Smith.

“There are times when you feel like you don’t even want to do it. You don’t even want to become Canadian, because why should you fight to become what you legally are supposed to be?”

Bill C-37, a problematic solution

Like many Lost Canadians, Smith was initially encouraged by news of a bill that passed in 2009—Bill C-37—which helped restore citizenship to people affected by loopholes in the Citizenship Act. Unfortunately, there were still many whose circumstances did not apply to the new legislation.

Smith was one of those excluded.

“We celebrated Bill C-37. I was pleased, and then it seemed to slide back to where we were before,” said Smith.

“Understanding that there’s about five per cent of the Lost Canadians who haven’t been dealt with, they’re saying that they’ll deal with them on a case-by-case basis. But the question is, how are they making judgment on a case-by-case basis? What rules are applying? They need to make it clear,” said Johnston.

While there have been some successes, other Lost Canadians who have applied on this “case-by-case” basis have still been denied. There has, however, been some recent progress in more aggressive appeals to the federal government.

Smith says he's paying close attention to a landmark court case taken up by Lost Canadian advocate Don Chapman, regarding the citizenship of Jackie Scott. Like Smith, Scott was also born out of wedlock and now faces a similar challenge in trying to prove her nationality. Just last month, Chapman applied for a federal review of Scott’s case, on the basis of age and gender discrimination.

“I think that the outcome of that case will affect Ken’s situation,” said Johnston.

Next steps

As they await the results of Scott's case, Johnston says she and her husband will continue to push for his own citizenship. But they don't want it to be adversarial.

“I like to advocate in a positive way,” said Johnston.

“And the way of doing that is that we need to find a person who is in a position to make change,” she said, pulling up a list of MPs on her computer.

Johnston says their next step will be reaching out to these politicians, particularly those on the Standing Committee for Citizenship and Immigration. The Vice Chair of this committee, Vancouver Kingsway MP Don Davies, is one of the top names on their to-do list.

Davies has previously commented on Lost Canadians, noting the difficulties in approaching an issue that bureaucrats are “a little reluctant to talk about”.

"I think it's just a combination of bureaucratic rigidity and weird historical elements and policy perspectives that you grapple with,” he said in July 2011.

Having dealt with this “bureaucratic rigidity” for most of his life, Smith says it’s tough sometimes not to simply give up.

“It has the very distinct effect of knocking the wind out of your sails, as they say,” said Smith.

“I’ll push it and push it, and then I get to the point that I’m so fed up with it because it’s so one-sided and it’s so discriminatory. It’s so un-Canadian.”

But despite past disappointments, Johnston is determined to take all necessary steps to secure her husband’s rightful citizenship. She looks forward to the day when they’ll be able to cross the border with ease, when Smith will finally get the acknowledgement he deserves.

“I want Ken to be a Canadian citizen, he wants to be a Canadian citizen—and he is a Canadian citizen. It’s a question of proving it. And that’s what is so frustrating,” said Johnston.

Huffington Post : Harper Could Make This a Happier Women's Day

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Thu, 08 Mar 2012 17:54:00 +0000

Two weeks ago, years of Harper government inaction forced Mrs. Jackie Scott, now 66, to file an action in the Federal Court in Vancouver gain her citizenship. It was denied to her because she was born out-of-wedlock.

by Dan Veniez for the Huffington Post

Follow Daniel D. Veniez on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@danveniez

Today is International Women's Day, so expect a lot of feel-good words in the House of Commons.

As the father of a 13-year-old daughter, I want her to know that she stands on the shoulders of giants. The opportunities she has today were made possible by the courageous pioneering women that came before her. And while there is much to celebrate in the significant achievement of Canadian women, there is also a great deal of unfinished business.

Click here to read original article in Huffington Post on line

Two weeks ago, years of Harper government inaction forced Mrs. Jackie Scott, now 66, to file an action in the Federal Court in Vancouver gain her citizenship. It was denied to her because she was born out-of-wedlock.

Yes, you read that correctly.

Jackie's mother was an English War bride who came to Canada with her young baby in 1948 to be with her husband, a WWII veteran, James Ellis, who was born in Canada and was wounded in Europe fighting for our country. Sent back to Canada to be treated and recover from his battle injuries, Jack was unable to marry his bride until after infant Jackie was born.

The Ellises -- Jackie's parents -- married shortly after arriving in Canada. They stayed married for 51 years, until Jack died. Their daughter Jackie grew up in Canada, went to school here, voted, paid taxes, married, had a family, had a Social Insurance Number, paid into Canada Pension Plan, and has been married to her Canadian husband for 42 years. She grew up 100-per-cent Canadian and believed that with every fibre in her being. Both Jackie's parents were Canadian, and so was her sister.

But astonishingly, the Government and Parliament of Canada do not deem Jackie to be a Canadian citizen. Why? An arcane and arbitrary clause in the Citizen Act says she can't because her parents didn't quite make it to the church on time before she came into this world.

This is an incredible -- even unbelievable -- story. It is fair to ask what is missing from this picture. Surely, there's more than meets the eye; Jackie has to be a bad person, a criminal, or maybe a tax cheat? No, no, and no. She's been an upstanding citizen all her life.

Many other Canadians were born out-of wedlock prior to 1947. Jackie is far from being alone. To make this even worse, you could also be denied because you were born in wedlock!

Prior to 1947 Canadian married women were considered chattel of their husbands, and children were chattel of their father if born in wedlock, and chattel of their mothers if born out-of- wedlock.

What the Government and Parliament of Canada are effectively saying is that because she was born out-of-wedlock, Jackie was property of her British war bride mother, and not her Canadian soldier father.

Now let's take this further into the Twilight Zone. Arch Ford was born in wedlock prior to 1947, so the Government of Canada is also telling him he's not a Canadian. Why? Because Arch was born in wedlock to a Canadian mother and U.S. father prior to 1947. Ottawa's logic is that he was property of his father and his mother had no standing. Where are the rights of Arch's mother? What the law says is that she doesn't have any, and therefore, Arch is not a Canadian.

What does that say about the fundamental human and civil rights of Canadian women, especially on the day we celebrate their great strides?

It defies common sense and decency that potentially thousands of Canadians could find themselves at risk of being stripped of their citizenship, simply because our government has decided to judge people born prior to 1947 under the archaic laws that were on the books more than half a century ago.

Don Chapman, a tireless advocate for people like Jackie, has been fighting for a decade to correct this historical injustice. The organization he founded, The Lost Canadians, was instrumental in driving important amendments to the Citizenship Act in 2009 to capture people born from 1947 forward. However, inexplicably, the Harper government made the deliberate decision to ignore Canadians born prior to 1947. For reasons that remain a mystery, taking the "acceptance" date back further was not acceptable to the Harper Conservatives.

Therefore, flagrant discrimination in citizenship law -- denying people citizenship only because of age, gender, and family status -- remains the law of the land.

I cannot think of a situation that is more obviously at variance with the basic spirit and tenets of what we stand for as a country. This need not be a political or partisan issue. But this is a profoundly Canadian issue that should and must be rectified.

The lives of real people have been profoundly affected. They have suffered quietly in pain for decades. Their grace and dignity has hidden their real anguish and hurt that their parliament and government have told them they don't belong.

Jackie's father fought for Canada and almost died to protect the freedoms and values we so take for granted. There are far too many Jackie Scott's out there, and that is why she has felt compelled to take the Government of Canada to court to seek justice. Not only for her, but also for all Canadian women, wherever they may be. And for the legacy of our parents and grandparents who sacrificed so much for the country they left us.

A day more of inaction on this matter is contemptible of our parliament and unworthy of Canada. The time has come to correct these historic injustices. On this day -- especially on this day -- actions speak louder than words.

Follow Daniel D. Veniez on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@danveniez

Lost Canadians Say Citizenship a Battle for Women’s Rights

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Wed, 07 Mar 2012 20:36:00 +0000

Jackie Scott is the daughter of a Canadian War Bride and a World War Two veteran who has been told she is not a Canadian citizen because her parents were not married when she was born in 1945. She is now suing the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration in the Federal Court.

For Immediate Release

(Gibsons, British Columbia – March 7, 2012) - As Canada prepares to observe International Women’s Day on Thursday, some Canadians are still excluded from citizenship solely because they were born to unwed mothers over 65 years ago. They are part of a group known as Lost Canadians: people who are excluded from citizenship or are having difficulty claiming it because of the date or circumstances of their birth.

Among them are some of the 22,000 children who were born overseas to Canadian servicemen and arrived in Canada with their war bride mothers during or immediately after the Second World War. Some were born out of wedlock because their fathers could not get the required permission to marry. Such cases were common and inevitable under wartime conditions. After a lifetime in Canada, these war bride children are still excluded from citizenship by an obscure provision of the 1946 Citizenship Act.

Jackie Scott was born in England in 1945, out of wedlock, to a Canadian soldier and a British mother. Because of poor health, she was unable to travel to Canada with her mother until 1948. Shortly after her arrival, her parents were married in Toronto. By her parents’ marriage she was legitimated retroactively from birth under Ontario law, but is still being denied citizenship. She is now suing the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration in the Federal Court.

Marion Vermeersch, a retired social worker living in Simcoe, Ont., was born in England in 1944 to a Canadian soldier and a British mother. Her father, born in Scotland, had arrived in Canada in 1926 as a British Home Child. Marion was born out of wedlock, but after her father was wounded in action her parents were able to marry in England before he was repatriated to Canada. She arrived in Canada with her mother in May 1946 and has lived here ever since. When she applied for her first passport in 2003, she was informed to her shock and disbelief that she was not a Canadian citizen. She was told instead to apply for a Permanent Resident Card, and now travels on a British passport.

Tom Kent (1922-2011) served briefly in the 1960s as deputy minister of Citizenship and Immigration. In 2009, asked to comment on one of these cases, he replied: ‘Exclusion from citizenship, in cases such as you describe, is entirely contrary to the philosophy of Canadian citizenship as I have always understood it. The people you know have not been treated fairly. The dismissive attitude of officials, as reported, should be unacceptable to the Minister.’

Jason Kenney - The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration has recently stated that the government will take steps to end the automatic acquisition of citizenship by so-called passport babies whose mothers enter Canada solely for the purpose of giving birth to a Canadian child. He
should give equal attention to the plight of those Canadians who by an accident of birth are still excluded from citizenship of the only country they know.

Vancouver Observer: Lost Canadians sue government over discriminatory citizenship

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Thu, 23 Feb 2012 20:38:00 +0000

While speaking at a press conference in Surrey, Citizenship and Immigration Minister Jason Kenney stated that the government does not deny citizenship based on age, gender or marital status. Yet these factors are at the heart of problem for "Lost Canadians", who are taking the federal government to court over its refusal to grant citizenship to victims of Canada's discriminatory laws of the past.

The “Lost Canadians ” citizenship case has now officially gone to court. Don Chapman, who has championed the case of thousands of legitimate Canadians who have been denied or stripped of citizenship due to arcane laws – filed for the federal judicial review yesterday for Jackie Scott, a Lost Canadian.

Click here to read original article on the Vancouver Observer website

Daughter of Canadian war veteran, Jackie Scott, denied citizenship

Chapman suggests the Canadian government could forfeit “tens of billions of dollars” over this case, which was eight years in the making.

His main argument centres on gender and age discrimination, both of which are outlawed by Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

"In a sense, our shared identity is on trial, as is the Charter of Rights and Freedoms," Chapman argued, noting that the legal battle could have been avoided if the government stopped clinging to outdated laws that denied people based on age, gender and marital status.

Why should this trial matter for Canadian identity? It matters for two reasons. First, the government is basing its exclusion of Lost Canadians on old laws esteeming women's rights beneath those of men. Secondly, it now claims that no one who died in Canada before 1947 was ever a Canadian citizen -- including war veterans.
A sexist and ageist law

The case of Jackie Scott, the daughter of a Canadian war veteran, embodies many problems faced by people involved in this legal battle.

Scott moved to Canada with her mother and father from England when she was several months old and lived for over 60 years as a Canadian: working, raising children, voting and paying taxes.

In 2005, Scott was denied citizenship based on the fact that her parents were unwed on the date of her birth. According to laws of the time, a “legitimate” child was considered property of the father, while an out-of-wedlock child – a “bastard”, so to speak – the sole responsibility of the mother.

Even though her parents married shortly after arriving in Canada, the government dismissed her request for citizenship, using the now-defunct rule for out-of-wedlock children to justify its decision.

Scott soon found that thousands of other Canadians were similarly affected by unjust citizenship laws -- one man, for example, was refused Canadian citizenship because he was born in wedlock to a Canadian mother and American father. Had his mother given birth outside of wedlock, like Scott's mother, he would be a Canadian today.

After extensive lobbying by Chapman, himself a former Lost Canadian, the group forced Bill C-37 into place in 2009, retroactively granting citizenship to those who lost their status. Mysteriously, however, the government only granted citizenship to Lost Canadians born after Jan. 1, 1947 -- excluding elderly applicants like Scott.

If Scott had been just two years younger, she would have been a Canadian citizen. Advocates for the Lost Canadians question how that could not be regarded as discrimination.
Revising history on Canadian citizenship

Undeterred by the 2009 exclusion, Scott applied again for her citizenship, and waited an agonizing two years for a reply from the government. In January 2012, Citizenship and Immigration Canada sent her a rejection letter. Shaking with disbelief, Scott read once again that her case was invalid because she was born out of wedlock, but a new passage caught her attention. It claimed that her father -- an Ontario-born war veteran -- was in fact never a Canadian citizen to begin with.

The rejection letter from the CIC states:

“...at the time you were born in 1945, neither of your parents was a Canadian citizen. Before 1947 persons born in Canada such as your father were considered British Subjects...”

“The government is revising history by denying Jackie her citizenship,” Chapman said.

"In order to get into the League of Nations or the International Court of Justice, you had to be an independent country. For the government to say now that Canadian citizenship never existed before 1947 -- that means that Canada was fraudulently in the League of Nations before that."
Canadian citizenship: not discriminatory?

Curiously, Citizenship and Immigration Ministry have been largely silent on the issue. On Wednesday, the Vancouver Observer asked Citizenship and Immigration Minister Jason Kenney whether citizenship can be denied based on gender, age or marital status. Without missing a beat, Kenney shook his head and replied:

"No, citizenship isn't and shouldn't be. The Citizenship Act lays out who can become citizens and it is available to anyone ... regardless of marital status or age."

And yet, Scott remains excluded from the same citizenship that millions of foreign-born newcomers to Canada enjoy today, precisely because of her mother's marital status and her own advanced age.

Chapman pointed out that more lawsuits are coming to correct what he considers an historic wrong.

"The government is making this claim for the sole purpose of keeping people out of citizenship," he said. "They either do not know their own laws -- I have a feeling Kenney is so ignorant he doesn't know what he is defending -- or, if they do know the laws, they are purposefully ignoring Supreme Court decisions."

Vancouver Observer: Daughter of Canadian war veteran, Jackie Scott, denied citizenship by Canada. Again.

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 20:50:00 +0000

Click here to read original article on Vancouver Observer website.

Jackie Scott was trembling as she waited for the FedEx envelope from Citizenship and Immigration Canada. When she started reading out the letter that accompanied the citizenship applications that she had sent two years ago, tears sprang to her eyes. She had been denied citizenship. Again.

“It's a horrible feeling to be rejected by the country you believe in, which you believe is your close connection and your identity,” said Scott, speaking over the phone from Arizona, where she now lives due to her non-Canadian status.

Her file, she said, was received by the Citizenship and Immigration office on January 18, 2010 – more than two years ago. She said that the CIC acknowledges that politicians such as West Vancouver MP John Weston have voiced their support for her and amendments to the law are being considered. But considering how long it has taken to get any response, Scott is skeptical that the laws will change anytime soon.

“I'll be dead by that time,” she said with a frustrated sigh.

“That's what they're looking for – natural attrition. They just want us to just go away.”

Even though her case has made little progress in eight years, she said she plans to continue her fight for Canadian citizenship.

"They're discrediting me, they're discrediting my father," she said.

"They're denying me citizenship because my parents weren't married when I was born. That's contrary to all kinds of laws.

"This has to be corrected so that they honour the laws in place."
Excluded from Canadian citizenship

Scott, 66, is one of hundreds of remaining “Lost Canadians,” a term to describe Canadians who are denied citizenship by a series of antiquated and sexist nationality laws which the government amended in 2009, but not completely.

“I'm the only one in my family that doesn't have Canadian citizenship,” she said, her voice shaking.

Scott's citizenship woes began the day she was born -- out of wedlock in England during World War II, the child of a Canadian soldier and a young British woman.

According to the laws of the time, her parents' unwed status made her a 'bastard', the legal product of her British mother with no right to her father's Canadian identity.

Scott's parents did everything so that their daughter could become a registered Canadian after the war. They moved to Canada when she was just two months old, and got married. Her father 'legitimated' her in writing according to the 1921 Ontario Legitimacy Act (a law established to deal with war brides of World War I) and never gave it a second thought.

Scott grew up in Ontario, worked and paid taxes, voted in Canada's federal elections. She even has children and grandchildren who are Canadian. In 2004, after going through her whole life believing she was a Canuck, she learned to her horror, after a rejected passport application, that she was, in fact, completely stateless – and was forced to take a U.S. citizenship through her husband.

Despite fighting an eight-year public battle to have her situation addressed, Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) has repeatedly denied her requests for citizenship.
A Canadian-born soldier, but not a citizen

It's not news to her that she has been turned down due to her “bastard” status: this, she has heard before. But today, Scott is angry over the statement accompanying her papers, which suggests that her late father was not in fact Canadian after all.

“My father was born in Toronto in 1911,” Scott bristled. “They're saying the Canada Citizenship Act didn't come in until 1947. So when I was born, he wasn't a Canadian. He fought for Canada. How can they say that?”

She added that he had never set foot outside of Canadian soil except during the war years in Europe, where he met his future British wife.

“They (government officials) don't even know their own laws,” said Don Chapman, an advocate of the Lost Canadians whose lobbying helped push through Bill C-37, giving thousands of Canadians in similar situations citizenship in 2009. For the last two years, he has been advocating on behalf of an estimated five per cent of Lost Canadians – including Scott – who were left behind because Bill C-37 mysteriously excluded people born before 1947.

To illustrate his point, Chapman brings up the case of Joe Taylor, whose high profile dispute with the government led to the creation of Bill C-37.

The resulting document, “Reclaiming citizenship for Canadians – a report on the loss of Canadian citizenship,” noted the problem of stateless “war babies” and recommended that in addition to Taylor, 250 people similarly affected be given a special grant of citizenship.

“Jackie Scott is one of the 250 people,” said Chapman. “Why is the government ignoring its own recommendations?”

Rick Dykstra, Parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, did not respond before the date of publishing, but had said in a previous interview that such applications are being dealt with on a “case-by-case” basis.

According to Chapman, the government has rejected each case of remaining Lost Canadians.

Scott said she plans to fight for a judicial review – she has 30 days to file her case -- but is troubled by the time it has taken for a response to her application.

CBC: Interviews with Curt Petrovich, Joe Taylor and War Bride Eswyn Lyster about Lost Canadians

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 14:46:00 +0000

Three interviews about Lost Canadians with CBC journalist Curt Petrovich of CBC Television.

Click here to listen the interviews on line.

Interview One

Interview Two - Canada Day 2006

Interview Three With Joe Taylor and War Bride Eswyn Lyster- July 6, 2006, The World At Six

Readers Digest:: How Unjust Legal Quirks Rob Canadians of their Citizenship

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 19:11:00 +0000

Readers Digest Magazine, features an article about the Lost Canadians in its December 2011 issue.

The world's most read magazine has finally featured the story of the Lost Canadians on its front cover this December, 2011!

Click here to read more about the article on the Readers Digest website.

Written by Drew Nelles, the six page article Lost Canadians: How Unjust Legal Quirks Rob Canadians of their Citizenship, features an interview with Don Chapman, leader of the Lost Canadians and tells the the true life story of several victims, including Guy Vallieres, a Second World War veteran who died in 2009, disenfranchised from his own country.

"I cry every day and think about dying," Vallieres was quoted as saying in a 2007 presentation to the Parliamentary Committee on Citizenship and Immigration before he passed away.

The article also includes an interview with "Jack" who prefers to remain anonymous for fear it may jeopardize his status. His mother is 93 and he cares for her at home in Atlantic Canada. Another interview with Montreal Rabbi Shneur Rabbin shows the unfairness meted out to Canadians because of legal quirks based on gender or family status that prevent them from claiming citizenship.

A side bar contains a list of famous Lost Canadians, including Dan Akroyd, Michael J. Fox, Shannon Tweed, etc.

Do you have your own Lost Canadian story? Share it on line and it could appear on the Readers Digest website. Click here to submit your story to Readers Digest Magazine.

Toronto Star: Suit seeks citizenship for ‘Lost Canadians’

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 23:02:00 +0000

Howe Lee is backing a federal court case to grant citizenship to retired chief petty officer Peter Brammah who has lived in Canada for 65 years but did not realize he was not a Canadian citizen.

Published On Wed Nov 9 2011

VANCOUVER—Peter Brammah had always considered himself as Canadian as it gets, enlisting in the Royal Canadian Navy and serving as a police officer in Calgary.

But Brammah, now 75 and in poor health, didn’t realize until 2002 that he was not considered a Canadian citizen, even though he has lived in Canada since he was six years old. His parents were both British subjects, but Brammah’s mother came to Canada with him as a child after divorcing his father and then marrying a Canadian citizen

Click here to read original article in the Toronto Star

An advocacy group called Lost Canadians filed an application in federal court Tuesday on Brammah’s behalf, demanding the federal government provide the Navy veteran with his Canadian citizenship.

The group is comprised of people who believe they are Canadians but never actually received their citizenship because of quirks in citizenship legislation, including many born during World War II. In 2009, Bill C-37 was passed, which granted or restored citizenship to thousands affected by such quirks. But others, including Brammah, remain outside of that amended bill because he was born before 1947, the year Canada’s first citizenship act became law.

A statement from the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration department said the minister is aware of the claim and wants to resolve the issue.

“The department is interested in working with Mr. Brammah to find a positive solution to his dilemma. On Monday, the Department offered Mr. Brammah the opportunity to obtain citizenship. He declined,” said spokeswoman Nancy Caron in a statement to the Toronto Star.

Don Chapman of Lost Canadians said they don’t want citizenship to be granted individually to people who file claims. Rather, the group wants instead the government to grant citizenship to all residents who lived in Canada before 1947. Those who lived in Canada or were born in Canada before that year were technically considered British subjects.

Howe Lee, who was born in Canada and served in the Canadian army for 35 years, is helping support the claim because of his concerns that many war veterans may not be considered Canadians.

They include some of the 800 Chinese Canadians who served in the war and died overseas before being officially recognized in 1947. Lee said one soldier, Quan Louie, was in the Royal Canadian Air Force and died in Berlin in active duty.

“He died in a Canadian uniform and served in the Canadian army, but because he died before 1947, there’s the possibility that the Canadian government won’t recognize Quan Louie as a Canadian,” said Lee Tuesday.

Another supporter, Jackie Scott, who was born in England in 1945 and came to Canada , said she had no idea she wasn’t considered a Canadian citizen until she applied for her citizenship card in 2004.

“I think the government is trying to wait us out, all of us who were born pre-1947,” said Scott. “They’re looking at natural attrition, waiting for us to die, so they don’t have to worry about what to do with us.”

Yahoo News: Lawsuit aims to return citizenship to elderly "lost" Canadians

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Mon, 07 Nov 2011 19:31:00 +0000

..VANCOUVER - Peter Brammah sailed with the Canadian navy and later worked for Calgary's police force.

Despite serving this country as both a naval and police officer, he can't actually call Canada his own.

When he applied for a passport in 2002 — more than fifty years after moving here at age 10 — he was swiftly denied. Pointing to an archaic set of laws, the government informed him he's never been a citizen.

Click here to read original article on Yahoo News

So the 75-year-old will file a lawsuit Monday, aiming to set a precedent to force the return of Canadian identities to thousands of other elderly people who similarly believe they've been unjustly excluded.

The suit in B.C. Supreme Court in Vancouver comes days ahead of Remembrance Day.

Brammah is part of the so-called "lost Canadians," people whose nationality was stripped or never granted in the first place owing to kinks in citizenship legislation.

He was left out even after the 2009 passage of Bill C-37, an amendment that rectified several long-standing inequities and retroactively brought what's believed to be hundreds of thousands of people back into the fold.

That's because Brammah was born before 1947, the year Canada's first citizenship act came into force.

Brammah was born in England to British parents, but the marriage broke up when Brammah was a small child. His mother became involved with a Canadian soldier and the couple later had a daughter.

Marion Vermeersch, Peter's half sister, said in an interview that military rules prevented her parents from marrying until after the war — a year after she was born.

Once married, the family moved back to Ontario and from the age of six, Peter's Canadian father was the only one he ever knew.

"It was such the shock of our lives in 2003 when Peter was told he was not a Canadian," Vermeersch said in an interview.

Her brother had applied for a passport for the first time after spending years travelling the world on naval papers.

"When he joined the Canadian navy in 1952 and they went through all his documents, there was no question he was a Canadian," said Vermeersch.

Don Chapman, who has long advocated for improved and more equitable citizenship laws, said Peter's case highlights the absurdity of the government's position.

"Should Peter go to his grave after serving and being honourably discharged from the military and be told 'You're not Canadian?'" asked Chapman.

"As we honour all the Canadian soldiers — but particularly those that died for Canada in World War One and World War Two — they're all going to be deemed not Canadians ... if the government wins this suit."

Chapman, once a lost Canadian himself, says he's buried four war veterans lacking status since Jason Kenney took over as Citizenship and Immigration Minister in the Conservative government.

Though a driving force behind Bill C-37, Chapman was frustrated that about five per cent of all people affected by the convoluted laws remained disenfranchised.

Going to court is the only avenue Chapman feels they've got.

"This has got a lot of tentacles and it's going to affect a lot of people and potentially cost a lot of money," he said, adding the suit is only the first in a series of planned legal manoeuvres.

Asked whether the government has considered bringing the remaining thousands of people into the fold, Remi Lariviere, a spokesman for Citizenship and Immigration Canada, said the amended legislation resolved the vast majority of cases including people born before 1947.

He said the information available suggests those still left out is small.

"Anyone who has been living in Canada most of their life and has the mistaken belief that they are a Canadian citizen, may be eligible for a discretionary grant of citizenship," he said in an email. "Such grants are made on a case-by-case basis by the Governor in Council to relieve special and unusual hardship or to reward exceptional service to Canada."

The courts have tested issues similar to Brammah's before, the highest-profile case being that of Joe Taylor. The son of a British Columbian D-Day vet and British war bride mother was also denied citizenship by the courts.

The law excluded him because he was born before his parents married and because he left Canada as an infant with his mother before the 1947 citizenship act was passed.

Taylor initially won back his birthright in a Federal Court ruling, only to have it overturned by the appeal's court. He was looking towards taking it to the Supreme Court of Canada when his certificate was bestowed under the special grant by cabinet described by Lariviere.

According to a 2008 news release from then-Immigration Minister Diane Finley, "the government felt it had to pursue the court case because the issue had legal implications which went beyond Mr. Taylor."

That was just before Bill C-37 came into effect. Brammah's case will be the first major action since.

"I think it will affect all of us," said 66-year-old Jackie Scott, herself a lost Canadian who's been fighting for her citizenship since 2004.

She plans to attend the filing of Brammah's suit in support and is hoping it will help bring resolution to her own feeling of lost identity.

"You're being told you're being thrown away, this isn't your home, go away," she said. "You love your country, you're proud of your country, I'm proud of where I grew up and of my parents.

"They're saying I don't have the right to do that."

Chapman said he knows the laws inside and out and feels confident in the power of the new case, but he still sees Ottawa as his biggest obstacle. More than anything, he said he feels his cause is simply being ignored.

He said after the first wave of people were handed back their citizenships, some people came back home to receive benefits. But most of those who were given their Canadian status already live here and are afforded the same rights as others. Extending citizenship to people like Brammah won't cost much extra, he said.

"Dr. Willard Boyle came back. He won the Nobel Prize. Canada is now claiming him as one of their own," Chapman said.

"So the ramifications, really, if there's anything, it's only a positive for Canada."

Click here to read original article on Yahoo News

CTV: Lawsuit seeks citizenship for elderly 'lost' Canadians

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Sun, 06 Nov 2011 22:07:00 +0000

VANCOUVER — Peter Brammah sailed with the Canadian navy and later worked for Calgary's police force.

Despite serving this country as both a naval and police officer, he can't actually call Canada his own.

When he applied for a passport in 2002 -- more than fifty years after moving here at age 10 -- he was swiftly denied. Pointing to an archaic set of laws, the government informed him he's never been a citizen.

So the 75-year-old will file a lawsuit Monday, aiming to set a precedent to force the return of Canadian identities to thousands of other elderly people who similarly believe they've been unjustly excluded.

The suit in B.C. Supreme Court in Vancouver comes days ahead of Remembrance Day.

Brammah is part of the so-called "lost Canadians," people whose nationality was stripped or never granted in the first place owing to kinks in citizenship legislation.

He was left out even after the 2009 passage of Bill C-37, an amendment that rectified several long-standing inequities and retroactively brought what's believed to be hundreds of thousands of people back into the fold.

That's because Brammah was born before 1947, the year Canada's first citizenship act came into force. And he was born abroad to British parents who later moved their family to Canada.

"Should Peter go to his grave after serving and being honourably discharged from the military and be told 'You're not Canadian?"' said Don Chapman, who has long advocated for improved and more equitable citizenship laws.

"As we honour all the Canadian soldiers -- but particularly those that died for Canada in World War One and World War Two -- they're all going to be deemed not Canadians ... if the government wins this suit."

Chapman, once a lost Canadian himself, says he's buried four war veterans lacking status since Jason Kenney took over as Citizenship and Immigration Minister in the Conservative government.

Though a driving force behind Bill C-37, Chapman was frustrated that about five per cent of all people affected by the convoluted laws remained disenfranchised.

Going to court is the only avenue Chapman feels they've got.

"This has got a lot of tentacles and it's going to affect a lot of people and potentially cost a lot of money," he said, adding the suit is only the first in a series of planned legal manoeuvres.

Asked whether the government has considered bringing the remaining thousands of people into the fold, Remi Lariviere, a spokesman for Citizenship and Immigration Canada, said the amended legislation resolved the vast majority of cases including people born before 1947.

He said the information available suggests those still left out is small.

"Anyone who has been living in Canada most of their life and has the mistaken belief that they are a Canadian citizen, may be eligible for a discretionary grant of citizenship," he said in an email. "Such grants are made on a case-by-case basis by the Governor in Council to relieve special and unusual hardship or to reward exceptional service to Canada."

The courts have tested issues similar to Brammah's before, the highest-profile case being that of Joe Taylor. The son of a British Columbian D-Day vet and British war bride mother was also denied citizenship by the courts.

The law excluded him because he was born before his parents married and because he left Canada as an infant with his mother before the 1947 citizenship act was passed.

Taylor initially won back his birthright in a Federal Court ruling, only to have it overturned by the appeal's court. He was looking towards taking it to the Supreme Court of Canada when his certificate was bestowed under the special grant by cabinet described by Lariviere.

According to a 2008 news release from then-Immigration Minister Diane Finley, "the government felt it had to pursue the court case because the issue had legal implications which went beyond Mr. Taylor."

That was just before Bill C-37 came into effect. Brammah's case will be the first major action since.

"I think it will affect all of us," said 66-year-old Jackie Scott, herself a lost Canadian who's been fighting for her citizenship since 2004.

She plans to attend the filing of Brammah's suit in support and is hoping it will help bring resolution to her own feeling of lost identity.

"You're being told you're being thrown away, this isn't your home, go away," she said. "You love your country, you're proud of your country, I'm proud of where I grew up and of my parents.

"They're saying I don't have the right to do that."

Chapman said he knows the laws inside and out and feels confident in the power of the new case, but he still sees Ottawa as his biggest obstacle. More than anything, he said he feels his cause is simply being ignored.

He said after the first wave of people were handed back their citizenships, some people came back home to receive benefits. But most of those who were given their Canadian status already live here and are afforded the same rights as others. Extending citizenship to people like Brammah won't cost much extra, he said.

"Dr. Willard Boyle came back. He won the Nobel Prize. Canada is now claiming him as one of their own," Chapman said.

"So the ramifications, really, if there's anything, it's only a positive for Canada."

Read more: http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20111106/peter-brammah-lost-canadians-lawsuit-setup-111106/#ixzz1cxvN5Wqx

Coast Reporter: Back to court for Lost Canadians

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 21:20:00 +0000

October 28, 2011

Ben Ingram / Staff Writer

The leader of the Lost Canadians, Don Chapman of Gibsons, said he once again intends to take the government of Canada to court over citizenship discrimination.

Having taken up the cause of 10 people he said were undeservingly stripped of their citizenship, Chapman described the group’s position as being indisputable.

“What they're doing is they're actually now going to challenge us. And if they challenge us, we're really ready for the fight,” Chapman said. “We've just got them left, right and centre on this.”

Lost Canadians is known for its previous efforts leading up to the passage of Bill C-37 in April 2008. The legislation retroactively granted citizenship to thousands who had previously struggled to qualify, including Chapman.

But for him, the bill does not go far enough. According to Chapman, holes still remain in the legislation, allowing for true Canadians to fall through the cracks.

Armed with what he describes as an open-and-shut case, Chapman claims he has been ignored by a government failing to come to terms with unquestionable evidence.

“The government has not wanted to meet with me. They refused for three years since our bill passed,” he said, describing the remaining gaps in the legislation. “I'm trying hard to get the government to listen to me so we don't have to go to court.”

One of Chapman’s current concerns is 66-year-old Jacqueline Scott.

The daughter of a Canadian Second World War veteran, Scott’s mother was an English war bride. The year after her birth, Scott’s parents were married.

Scott grew up in Canada, and in 2005 found out that because she was born out of wedlock, she would no longer be considered a Canadian citizen.

“Essentially they were saying ‘you're a bastard’,” she said. “All my family is Canadian but me. My children were born in Toronto.”

Back in 2006, Scott heard of the case of Joe Taylor, one of the central disputes leading up to Bill C-37. She attended a hearing and met Chapman.

Soon after, she decided her only recourse was legal action. Like Chapman, Scott echoed frustrations at the government’s unwillingness to listen.

John Weston, the member of Parliament for West Vancouver - Sunshine Coast - Sea to Sky Country, said Chapman is well known to him and his staff.

Weston said Chapman has had consistent access to him over the years. He added his willingness to take up cases like Scott’s, but alleges Chapman has routinely failed to deliver the proper paperwork.

“We met him as recently as Aug. 4 and asked him at the time, as I have continually done, to provide names and privacy waivers for people he claims to represent,” Weston said. “Typically he fails to follow through.”

When asked about the Scott case in particular, Weston described her circumstances as unfair.

“[It] should be dealt with. I would want to take that up. Again, I would need a name and a privacy waiver and the background information,” he said.

Chapman and Scott, who lives in Vancouver, were meeting with their lawyers this week.

Vancouver Observer: Lost Canadians to take Canadian government to court, advocate tells war vets

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 20:25:00 +0000

As Lost Canadian advocate Don Chapman announced that his group expects to take the Canadian government to court over ongoing discrimination, a wave of approval went through the room of Chinese-Canadian war veterans. Chapman looked out at the group of Chinese-Canadian war veterans of Pacific Unit 280 and members of Chinese Canadian Military Museum Society assembled at Foo's Ho Ho Restaurant. "We're 100 per cent behind you on this, Don," Alfred Woo, a member of the Chinese Canadian Military Museum Society, said.

"You people were the only ones who supported the Lost Canadians as a group early on -- I thank you so much for that," Chapman answered.

Click here to read original article in the Vancouver Observer

Lost Canadians are a group of Canadian citizens stripped of their citizenship by the 1947 Canadian Citizenship Act and subsequent amendments to the law.

Addressing the cases of famous Lost Canadians, such as Jackie Scott, who was the child of a war bride, and World War II veteran Guy Valliere, Chapman spoke about the sexist and racist policies that have led to legitimate Canadians being denied citizenship. The Chinese-Canadian war veterans, some of them wearing their medals, nodded as they listened. Themselves denied the right to vote in Canada until 1947 -- two years after serving the country during the war -- many older Chinese-Canadians understood what it was like to be denied equal rights.

Gim Wong, an 88-year-old former air force member and war veteran, stood up to share his story of how he was turned down from signing up for the army based on his race. A talented air gunner, he wasn't allowed to vote at the time that he signed up for the army in 1943, and fought with the government on citizenship issues such as immigration and the Chinese head tax throughout his life.

The group discussed posthumous citizenship for Chinese-Canadians who fought in the war and died during combat.

"These people fought for Canada and paid the ultimate price," Chapman said. "They are Canadians of the highest order."

Although an amendment to the 1947 Citizenship Act granted citizenship to the majority of Lost Canadians in 2009, Chapman said the legislation created a new class of stateless individuals and continues to leave out five per cent of Lost Canadians who were born prior to 1947. He said that he would continue to pressure the government until all legitimate Lost Canaidans are granted citizenship.

Read more about the Lost Canadians in other Vancouver Observer stories.

Huffington Post Canada: On Canada Day, Lost Canadians Sit on the Sidelines

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Fri, 01 Jul 2011 17:31:00 +0000

Today is Canada Day, and on televised ceremonies across Canada our government will be rolling out the welcome mat to thousands of newcomers. Now consider what that feels like to a Canadian-born, Canadian WWII veteran being told they're not wanted in Canada. That's what it's like to be a Lost Canadian.

Click here to read original article on Huffington Post website.

Almost 50 years ago the civil rights movement was gaining tremendous strength in the United States. It was about an egregious issue -- an abomination if you will -- called discrimination. The pressing question was, should all people be afforded equal rights?

We as Canadians readily admit that everyone should be equal, but when Canadians learn about our country's ongoing discrimination in citizenship law, they seem content sitting on the sidelines in silence.

In 1963 U.S. President John F. Kennedy gave his famous Civil Rights Address. In 2011 -- on this Canada Day -- regrettably a lot of his words are just so apropos.

In what I'm about to say, I'll change a few of President Kennedy's words to make it Canadian specific- but sadly, his message is as true today in Canada as it was half a century ago in the deep south:

More legislation is needed,

but laws alone cannot make men see right.

Today, Canada is confronted with a moral issue.

The heart of the matter is, should all Canadians be treated with equality, so that each and everyone of us is afforded the same opportunities.

Should we treat all Canadians in a manner that we ourselves wish to be treated?

Some of the remaining Lost Canadians cannot send their children to a public school.

They cannot collect the pension they've paid into for most of their lives.

They can be denied medical coverage.

Or they cannot travel outside of Canada because they can't get a passport.

Consider: They can't even vote against the very politicians allowing these injustices to continue.

In short, who amongst us would willingly trade places with one of the five per cent of Lost Canadians who still remain disenfranchised from their own country? If it was you or your child being denied citizenship, would you be satisfied with the continued bureaucratic and political delays to correct the discriminatory legislation which has been enforced in Canada since 1868, or just one year after Confederation 144 years ago?

Or do you believe that Canada, and Canadians, can do better? Shouldn't the example we bestow to the world, is a Canada that at the very least nurtures and protects its own people -- regardless of age, or gender, or race, or whether a person was born in or out-of wedlock.

Proudly, it was a Canadian who wrote the first draft of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, yet today our own government refuses to abide by its provisions.

When confronted with the facts about citizenship and belonging, Canadians often turn a blind eye. To the Lost Canadian it's a deafening silence. Dr. Martin Luther King once said, "The greatest tragedy in this period of social transition was not the strident clamour of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good."

Canadian human rights activist June Callwood said, "Once you know about the abuse you become a part of it." In that sense all of you now share some responsibility for the outcome of your fellow Canadians.

One question remains: How many of you will come forward to help Lost Canadians? They too are part of our Canadian family -- except that our government continues to discriminate based on gender, age, and family status, while steadfastly refusing to recognize their citizenship. As I said, its an abomination.

Please, step forward and help me. Together there's much we can do. Individuals, especially with community support, can make a huge difference. A shining example of this was Denmark during WWII, where the Danish people so protected their fellow Jewish citizens. That lesson, of 'doing what is right,' should not be lost here in Canada.

On this Canada Day, let me end with two more quotes from President Kennedy:

"Those who do nothing are inviting shame. Those who act boldly are recognizing right, as well as reality."

And, "Ask not what your country can do for you -- ask what you can do for your country."

Reaching out to help a Lost Canadian in need is a really great place to start.

Click here to read original article on Huffington Post website.

Vancouver Observor: More Equality Needed for All in Canada

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Fri, 01 Jul 2011 17:28:00 +0000

Today is Canada Day, and on televised ceremonies across Canada our government will be rolling out the welcome mat to thousands of newcomers. Now consider what that feels like to a Canadian-born, Canadian WWII veteran being told they're not wanted in Canada.
That's what it's like to be a Lost Canadian.

Almost 50 years ago the civil rights movement was gaining tremendous strength in the United States. It was about an egregious issue -- an abomination if you will -- called discrimination. The pressing question was, should all people be afforded equal rights?

We as Canadians readily admit that everyone should be equal, but when Canadians learn about our country's ongoing discrimination in citizenship law, they seem content sitting on the sidelines in silence.

In 1963 President John F. Kennedy gave his famous Civil Rights address. In 2011 -- on this Canada Day -- regrettably, a lot of his words are just so apropos.

In what I'm about to say, I'll change a few of President Kennedy's words to make it Canadian specific -- but sadly, his message is as true today in Canada as it was half a century ago in the deep south:

More legislation is needed,

but laws alone cannot make men see right.

Today, Canada is confronted with a moral issue.

The heart of the matter is, should all Canadians be treated with equality, so that each and everyone of us is afforded the same opportunities.

Should we treat all Canadians in a manner that we ourselves wish to be treated?

Some of the remaining Lost Canadians cannot send their children to a public school.

They cannot collect the pension they’ve paid into for most of their lives.

They can be denied medical coverage.

Or they cannot travel outside of Canada because they can’t get a passport.

Consider: They can’t even vote against the very politicians allowing these injustices to continue.

In short, who amongst us would willingly trade places with one of the 5 per cent of Lost Canadians who still remain disenfranchised from their own country? If it was you or your child being denied citizenship, would you be satisfied with the continued bureaucratic and political delays to correct the discriminatory legislation which has been enforced in Canada since 1868, or just one year after Confederation 144 years ago?

Or do you believe that Canada, and Canadians, can do better? Shouldn’t the example we bestow to the world, is a Canada that at the very least nurtures and protects its own people- regardless of age, or gender, or race, or whether a person was born in or out-of-wedlock.

Proudly, it was a Canadian who wrote the first draft of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, yet today our own government refuses to abide by its provisions.

When confronted with the facts about citizenship and belonging, Canadians often turn a blind eye. To the Lost Canadian it’s a deafening silence. Dr. Martin Luther King once said, “The greatest tragedy in this period of social transition was not the strident clamour of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good.”

Canadian human rights activist June Callwood said, “Once you know about the abuse you become a part of it.” In that sense all of you now share some responsibility for the outcome of your fellow Canadians.

One question remains: How many of you will come forward to help Lost Canadians? They too are part of our Canadian family- except that our government continues to discriminate based on gender, age, and family status, while steadfastly refusing to recognize their citizenship. As I said, its an abomination.

Please, step forward and help me. Together there's much we can do. Individuals, especially with community support, can make a huge difference. A shining example of this was Denmark during WWII, where the Danish people so protected their fellow Jewish citizens. That lesson, of 'doing what is right,' should not be lost here in Canada.

On this Canada Day, let me end with two more quotes from President Kennedy:

"Those who do nothing are inviting shame. Those who act boldly are recognizing right, as well as reality."

And, "Ask not what your country can do for you- ask what you can do for your country."

Reaching out to help a Lost Canadian in need is a really great place to start.

Downhome Magazine Features Lost Canadian Isabel Harris of Newfoundland

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Mon, 27 Jun 2011 17:20:00 +0000

In the July 2011 issue of Downhome, Lin Crosbie-Marshall delves into the murky issue of Canadian citizenship. She found that some life-long residents of this country have been unpleasantly surprised to find out they are not recognized as citizens. If it happened to them, could it happen to you?

Take the online test to find out by clicking here.

Below you'll find a list of circumstances under which, at one time or another, Canadians could have unknowingly lost their citizenship.

12 Ways to Lose Your Citizenship
Researched and compiled by Don Chapman

1. As a minor child, one’s father took out citizenship in another country.

2. You were a foreign-born Canadian, and on your 24th birthday you weren’t domiciled in Canada.

3. You were a war bride who never became naturalized.

4. You were a war-bride child who never was naturalized.

5. In certain circumstances, you were a second-generation, born-abroad Canadian and you didn’t reaffirm your citizenship by your 28th birthday.

6. You were a border-baby, meaning you were born in the U.S. (mainly because the nearest hospital was in the States rather than Canada), and you were never properly registered. People from Quebec were particularly affected.

7. In certain circumstances, your connection to Canada came through a woman rather than a man. This mainly affected foreign-born, born in-wedlock children to Canadian mothers and foreign fathers. In 1997, the Canadian Supreme Court ruled CIC was guilty of gender discrimination, thus granting citizenship to this group on application. However, in 2004, CIC decided to ignore the Supreme Court’s ruling, thus Canada went back to blatantly discriminating against women.

8. You were born out of wedlock.

9. You were born to a Canadian serviceman outside of Canada, commonly referred to as “military brat.”

10. You are a woman who married a non-Canadian prior to 1947.

11. You are a child of a woman who married a non-Canadian prior to 1947. (It doesn't matter that you’ve spent your whole life in Canada or were born in Canada!)

12. You took out citizenship in another country prior to 1977.

Huffington Post Canada: The Lost Canadians

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Thu, 02 Jun 2011 14:53:00 +0000

May 26, 2011

Walter Cronkite once said, "In seeking truth you have to get both sides of the story."

To all at the Huffington Post: Welcome to Canada. While I suspect many in the Canadian media will be less than overjoyed with your arrival, I'm thrilled. You'll give your editors, journalists, and bloggers the freedom to do in-depth reporting and encourage them to follow stories of importance to their end. This is not often the case in Canada. For instance, much of the Canadian press establishment has either completely ignored or only touched the surface of the 'Lost Canadian' story before dropping it.

Click here to read the original article on the HuffPost Canada website.

How can I say that? Well, have you heard of the 'Lost Canadians'? If not, why not? How could somewhere between 750,000 and one million Canadians -- average people just like you and me -- have been stripped of their citizenship, with the public barely aware of it?

In contrast, we Canadians know all about Lindsay Lohan and Charlie Sheen. Real news often gets overshadowed by fluff. Maybe it's because the bottom line really has become the bottom line: true journalism -- that of Murrow, Woodward and Bernstein, and Cronkite -- is both time-consuming and expensive.

In coming weeks, I'll explain the 12 distinct ways Canadians have lost -- and some could still lose -- their citizenship. You'll find that not all Canadians enjoy equal rights, and that the Harper government still actively discriminates by letting archaic gender and age-based provisions of our citizenship law continue.

It matters not that a person was born in Canada, or grew-up, married, had a family, voted, paid taxes, held a passport, and lived their whole life as a Canadian; according to the Harper government, such a person might still not really be Canadian.

Did you know that if you were born prior to 1947 you can be stripped of your rightful citizenship just for being born in wedlock, or conversely, out-of wedlock? (Yes, it really is as stupid as it sounds.) Could you be the next person to have your citizenship or OAP denied? Or could it happen to a relative, a friend, your neighbor?

The ongoing story of the 'Lost Canadians' is not just bizarre, it's true... and regrettably, it's so, so... Canadian!

So, welcome, HuffPost. How very refreshing it is that you've arrived in Canada.

Click here to read the original article on the HuffPost Canada website.

Toronto Zoomer Radio 740 AM:Dale Goldhawk Live

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Thu, 28 Apr 2011 23:18:00 +0000

Don Chapman LIVE on Dale Goldhawk Talk Show today, April 29, 2011 on Zoomer Radio 740 AM in Toronto.

Click here to go to Zoomer Radio 740 AM

Fighting for the rights of Canadian consumers, multiple awards winner Dale Goldhawk has earned Canadas trust by his four decades of work exposing fraud and greed in the marketplace.

A journalist, author, and broadcaster, Dale has had shows on CBC Television, CBC Radio, Global Television, and the CTV Television Network. Dale wrote for the Toronto Telegram and other newspapers, the author of Getting What You Deserve, detailing many of his adventures in pursuit of conmen and now on the International Board of Directors for Alzheimer’s Society, representing Canada

Among his many accolades, Dale is the winner of the 2006 Canadian Cable Television Association Galaxy Award for on air performance and the 2005 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners of Canada Lifetime Achievement Award.

GOLDHAWK FIGHTS BACK for Zoomers on The New AM 740 as he provides useful information to avoid the dirty tricks directed often at older people.

Vancouver Observer: So you think you're Canadian, eh?

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Sat, 23 Apr 2011 18:30:00 +0000

April 11, 2008, Ottawa. Robert Addington, second from left, helps celebrate the passage of Bill C-37. From Left to Right: Andrew Telegdi (MP Kitchener-Waterloo), Robert Addington (Supporter, Lost Canadians), Bill Janzen (Mennonite Central Committee), Don Chapman (Lost Canadians), Melynda Jarratt (War Brides Historian) and Meili Faille (MP Vaudreuil-Soulanges).

It's the dirty little secret of our approach to citizenship: Some of us are more Canadian than others.

by Robert Addington

The Conservative attack ads directed at the leader of the Liberal Party during this election campaign have exposed one of Canada’s ugly little secrets: our exclusionary models of citizenship.

Click here to read original article in the Vancouver Observer

Some Canadians embrace a two-tiered model of citizenship, which includes one tier for the "real" Canadians -- those they happen to like -- and another for the rest, who are dismissed as "Canadians of convenience".

I have identified two of these "exclusionary" models of citizenship, each with its own characteristics and political constituency. The first model, which I call the nativist model, includes only people who were born in Canada, have European names and have never lived outside Canada.

It excludes all naturalized Canadians and those born abroad to Canadian parents.

It also excludes some prominent Canadians, among them two former governors-general (both non-Caucasian immigrants but resident in Canada since childhood), renowned humanitarian Jean Vanier (born in Switzerland to Canadian parents and resident in France since 1964), Minister of Public Safety Vic Toews (born in Paraguay to Canadian Mennonite parents) and, of course, Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff, a former expatriate with two children born abroad (and who never took U.K. or U.S. citizenship during his years abroad).

It certainly excludes Maher Arar (a Canadian citizen born in Syria and exonerated after gruelling incarceration as a terror suspect), Omar Khadr (born in Canada and serving time in Guantanamo for crimes he was accused of committing as a child soldier) and Abousfian Abdelrazik (a Canadian-born in Sudan and refused help by the Canadian government when imprisoned there).

Wayne Gretzky, hockey's Great One, now both a resident and citizen of the U.S -- recently promoted from Officer to Companion of the Order of Canada -- gets a free pass.

This model of citizenship is supported by a network of crude, vicious, gutter-dwelling bloggers (including some on the CBC news website). Hiding behind such pseudonyms as "TrueCanadian" or "ChucktheCanuck", they spew their venom against anyone who doesn't fit their model of a 'real' Canadian.

The second model, which I call the post-colonialist model, is a mirror-image of the first, but more subtle. It includes only aboriginal peoples and those who have arrived in Canada since 1970, and their descendants. The rest of us, who are mainly of European descent, are excluded because we belong to the "old" Canada.

Acknowledging these two exclusionary models of citizenship can help us to understand the citizenship policies -- and politics -- of our political parties, and the unexamined and inconsistent attitudes of some Canadians towards their fellow citizens, including expatriate Canadians and those stranded, detained or in danger abroad.

But there is more.

Some Canadians, because of the date or circumstances of their birth, are actually excluded from citizenship – and from voting –
by the continued application of obscure, unfair rules that were repealed 34 years ago and that no politician today would defend.

They are psychologically stateless even if not legally so. Among these "Lost Canadians", as they have become known, are some of the children of war brides, born out of wedlock during the Second World War, some Mennonites born abroad who are excluded because their parents’ (or in some cases their grandparents’) religious marriage outside Canada was not recognized by the local civil law, and some people born abroad before 1947 whose claim to citizenship is through the female line.

Bill C-37, in force since April 17, 2009, limits citizenship by descent (with some exceptions) to only the first generation born abroad -- that is, those with at least one parent born, naturalized or adopted in Canada.

At first glance this may seem reasonable, but already it has had unintended consequences. As the government was warned when the bill was before Parliament, we now have a small but growing number of stateless children born abroad to Canadian parents who were also born outside Canada. These stateless children, and those yet unborn, are innocent hostages to the government’s apparent obsession with "Canadians of convenience".

Jason Kenney, the minister of citizenship and immigration, and his officials are well aware of this absurd injustice. He still has time before the election (between visits to carefully targeted "ethnic" constituencies) to rectify it or explain what he is defending and what policy objective is served by continuing to exclude Jackie Scott and others from the Canadian family solely because they were born out of wedlock over 65 years ago.

Or has the government made a political calculation that because now that some of the Lost Canadians are now in their sixties or older, they can safely be ignored and left in citizenship limbo for the rest of their lives?

This post-modern dominion (as journalist Robert Fulford once called it) badly needs an informed debate on the meaning and value of Canadian citizenship. Sadly, we are unlikely to get it during this election. Whatever the outcome, the Lost Canadians will keep knocking on the minister’s door until it opens.

Click here to read original article in the Vancouver Observer

Vancouver Observer: Candidates Trudeau and Dosanjh rattle Tories' cage on family reunification and citizenship

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Wed, 20 Apr 2011 18:19:00 +0000

Liberal MPs delight party faithful, woo ethnic vote with attack on Conservative policy

Ujjal Dosanjh and Justin Trudeau visited Vancouver Quadra to push Liberal party immigration policy.

by Darren Fleet, Vancouver Observer

In Liberal MP Joyce Murray’s packed Vancouver–Quadra riding office, supporters stood shoulder to shoulder to hear Liberal MP’s Justin Trudeau and Ujjal Dosanjh criticize an array of Conservative citizenship policies Wednesday.

Click here to read original article in the Vancouver Observer

As the author of another proposed “Lost Canadians” amendment, Vancouver–South MP Ujjal Dosanjh, took a moment to talk to The Vancouver Observer.

“I had a private members bill that the government wanted to adapt but obviously that didn’t complete this issue,” Dosanjh said of Bill C-467, stalled by the election call.

“When we get back into parliament we are going to have to re-consider that, and I may reintroduce my private members bill perhaps in an expanded capacity to deal with the issues that weren’t taken into account,” he said.

Dosanjh’s 2010 proposal was an attempt to amend a specific clause of 2009’s “Lost Canadian” legislation, Bill C-37. While Bill C-37 created a path to citizenship for potentially hundreds of thousands of Canadians stripped of their Canadian nationality because of prejudice and outdated citizenship regulations, it didn’t extend citizenship to all Lost Canadian claimants, nor did it close the door for future Lost Canadian cases. No sooner than Bill C-37 ascended the first of a new generation of stateless Canadian’s was born – including Rachel Chandler, the daughter of two Canadians who were also born abroad.

As the law reads today, if a Canadian has a child overseas, that child is Canadian, but the children of that offspring wouldn’t be Canadian if they too were born overseas. Bill C-467, had it gone through, would have dealt specifically with these second generation, born-abroad Canadians.

Dosanjh argued that Conservative Citizenship and Immigration Minister Jason Kenney is aware of other shortcomings of Bill C-37, but that the continued complexities surrounding the Lost Canadian issue, specifically the need to curtail an endless ability to pass on citizenship, made changing the law difficult. He also noted that while Conservatives are willing to engage the issue, they’re not holding their arms too widely open.

“Mr. Kenney is not open to dealing with all the Lost Canadians. He was open to dealing with the narrow scope of my bill, but I hope he is more open to the issues,” Dosanjh said.

Jason Kenney declined to comment to The Vancouver Observer.

Micheal Vonn, policy director of The BC Civil Liberties Association, expressed shock at some of the more infamous Lost Canadian cases, specifically the woes of children of Canadian soldiers born overseas, like Jackie Scott, who are still without Canadian citizenship.

“It defies common sense that the children of World War II veterans should be subjected to years of administrative wrangling based on the marital status of their parents. The basic presumption should be that people should have timely recognition of their Canadian citizenship if blatantly discriminatory laws prevented them from acquiring citizenship from their parents,” she said.

Scott, 65, migrated to Canada as a child with her Canadian soldier father and British mother, only to be told upon applying for a passport in 2005 that she was not Canadian. Scott was born out of wedlock during the Second World War. According to current citizenship law that applies to people born before 1947, her nationality is that of her British mother, not her Canadian father. Had her parents been married at the time of her birth, she would be Canadian.

Scott has been denied recognition of citizenship twice and has two more application in the system.

“The government must move quickly and decisively to provide the 'Lost Canadians' with their citizenship," said Vonn.

"This is a matter of vital importance. The denial of citizenship status, where it unfairly makes a person stateless, is a breach of international human rights law.”

Click here to read original article in the Vancouver Observer

North Shore News: Fighting for the Lost Canadians

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Wed, 30 Mar 2011 21:02:00 +0000

By Sean Kolenko - North Shore Outlook
Published: March 30, 2011 12:00 PM
Updated: March 30, 2011 12:48 PM

Weeks before the writ was dropped, both the federal Liberal and Conservative parties began drawing lines in the soon-to-come campaign sand.

Fighter jets, crime bills, coalition governments and, lying just beneath each election issue, trust have become topics of heated debate between the Grits and the Tories.

The Liberals have also been outspoken on immigration, in particular pledging help to the remaining “Lost Canadians.”

The “Lost Canadians” are an advocacy group headed by West Vancouver-born Don Chapman. Its goal is to re-instate citizenship for those who became stateless because of loopholes in the Citizenship Acts of 1947 and 1977.

Chapman is a former “Lost Canadian”. His father, suffering from arthritis in his hands, had moved the family to the U.S. in search of a warmer climate when Chapman was still a child. Chapman didn’t realize he had lost his citizenship — the United States did not grant dual citizenships at the time — until he tried to return to Canada at the age of 18. After discovering he didn’t qualify for his planned return north of the border, Chapman built a life in Phoenix, Ariz. but didn’t give up on his quest to become a Canadian, again. He began researching the intricate rules that governed how citizenship was attained.

He compiled a list of 12 ways one could lose their citizenship — those born out of wedlock, a woman who married a non-Canadian prior to 1947, or foreign-born Canadians who weren’t in Canada on their 24th birthday, for example — and began to advocate on their behalf.

On April 19, 2009, after years of pounding on the doors of both Liberal and Conservative governments, Chapman succeeded in helping a large majority of Lost Canadians when the Conservative government passed into law Bill C-37, which retroactively grated citizenship to those who lost their status after Jan. 1, 1947. For those who had issues from a time before that date, the file remains unresolved.

“It’s ridiculous that this is an issue we have to take a stance on. We are a country that values all the Charter, citizenship and the people who have paid taxes,” Justin Trudeau, Liberal immigration critic, told The Outlook.

“What remains about this issue doesn’t touch a whole lot of people, but this Conservative government won’t touch something unless there’s a swath of votes in it for them. That type of short-term strategy is not what Canada and the Liberal government stands for.”

The remaining five per cent of Lost Canadians generally fall into three groups: second-generation Canadians born abroad who were not in Canada on the day of their 28th birthday, those born before 1947 in wedlock to a Canadian mother and a non-Canadian father — children in these cases are considered the property of the father — and children born to Canadian citizen out of wedlock, who grew up outside of Canada.

Since the passing of Bill C-37, Chapman has lobbied to have all remaining cases in this file resolved but to no avail, he said. Chapman said he has repeatedly reached out to John Weston, MP for the West Vancouver-Sea-to-Sky riding, for help in this issue but has been ignored.

Weston said he has met with Chapman on a number of occasions. When Stockwell Day visited the riding, Weston said he arranged for the two to meet. He’s spoken to Chapman both in his office and in Ottawa, and has helped a family on Bowen Island, the Segals, with their children’s immigration issues.

“The changes that are being called for would abolish the second-generation limit, changes that would allow people to claim citizenship even if they haven’t paid taxes,” said Weston. “It’s not something most Canadians would support, but people in this riding will be served. Citizenship is something I take very seriously.”

Chapman, however, isn’t convinced. He cites the case of Guy Valliere, a former WWII soldier, who lived in Canada his entire life but died stateless in February. Valliere was born in Montreal in 1926 to a Canadian mother and American father, in wedlock — and considered the property of the father. The government retroactively awarded his father citizenship, but Valleire was not included. He discovered in hospital he wasn’t a Canadian and died without citizenship.

“What public good is there in denying the last remaining five per cent their citizenship?” wondered Chapman, in an interview with The Outlook.

“Why doesn’t my MP [Chapman own a house in Gibsons, B.C] return my phone calls for help?”

Prior to the fall of the last Parliament, remaining citizenship inquiries in this area were handled on a case-by-case basis by immigration minister Jason Kenney.

CTV: Ian Munroe, War Bride Child Complaint to Human Rights Commission Leads to Citizenship

noreply@blogger.com (Lost Canadian) — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 01:08:00 +0000