Modernizing Citizenship

Close Icon

Bill not proceeded with

S-262
May 9, 2023 (2 years ago)
Canadian Federal
Ratna Omidvar
Senate
Third reading
0 Votes
Full Title: An Act to amend the Citizenship Act (Oath of Citizenship)
Social Issues
Immigration
Public Lands

Summary

The amended Citizenship Act introduces two options for the citizenship oath, moving away from a direct allegiance to the British monarchy and focusing instead on allegiance to Canada and its laws. This change recognizes the current monarch, King Charles III, and emphasizes the importance of Aboriginal and treaty rights, aiming to reflect modern Canadian values.

What it means for you

New citizens and immigrants may feel more included in the citizenship process, particularly those who do not identify with the British monarchy. Groups such as Indigenous peoples can find recognition of their rights within the new framework. However, those who value Canada's historical ties to the monarchy might feel that this change overlooks important cultural traditions.

Expenses

Implementing these changes will likely incur costs related to updating official documents and training staff involved in the naturalization process. Additionally, public communication efforts to inform potential citizens about the new options will require funding. Critics might consider these expenses unnecessary, arguing that they divert resources from more pressing issues.

Proponents view

Supporters argue that this revision modernizes the Citizenship Act, aligning it with contemporary Canadian values and fostering a sense of national identity that resonates with a diverse population. They believe it encourages greater participation in Canadian society by providing options that reflect the beliefs of the current citizenry.

Opponents view

Critics contend that the shift represents a decline in the significance of the monarchy within Canadian identity and heritage. They express concerns that a nationalistic allegiance may dilute historical connections to the Crown, and they argue that the financial costs of implementing these changes could be better spent elsewhere, suggesting the bill could lead to unnecessary bureaucracy and waste.

Original Bill