Citizenship restored for some born abroad

Summary#

This bill changes the Citizenship Act to restore or confirm Canadian citizenship for a narrow group of people born outside Canada who lost it — or would have lost it — because of an old “age 28 retention” rule that existed before April 17, 2009. It also clarifies that people who were already citizens on June 11, 2015 keep that status, and updates a regulation-making reference. The bill does not change the general “first-generation born abroad” limit introduced in 2009.

• Restores citizenship to people whose retention applications were refused under the pre‑2009 rule (Citizenship Act s.3(1)(f)(iii), as amended).
• Recognizes as citizens people born outside Canada after February 14, 1977 who would be citizens if they had applied to retain under the pre‑2009 rule (s.3(1)(g.1), new).
• Confirms that the “second‑generation born abroad” limit does not strip citizenship from anyone who was a citizen on June 11, 2015 (s.3(4), replaced).
• Aligns regulation‑making authority to cover the new category (s.27(1)(j.1)(i), amended).

What it means for you#

• Households

  • If you or a family member were born outside Canada after February 14, 1977 and lost citizenship at age 28 for not meeting the old retention rule, you would be recognized as a citizen in law once this bill takes effect (s.3(1)(f)(iii), as amended; s.3(1)(g.1), new).
  • If you applied to retain citizenship under the old rule and your application was refused, you would be recognized as a citizen in law (s.3(1)(f)(iii), as amended).
  • To use rights (passport, vote), you would still need to get proof of citizenship and then apply for a passport through normal processes. The bill does not set procedures or fees (Data unavailable in bill text).

• Workers

  • If you regain citizenship under this bill, you can work in Canada without a work permit and access rights reserved for citizens (recognition under s.3(1), as amended).

• Businesses

  • No direct compliance changes. Some employers may see new hires who can work as citizens. No new reporting or fees (bill text).

• Local and provincial governments

  • No new mandates in the bill text. Service agencies may see more proof‑of‑citizenship and ID updates (Data unavailable).

• Service users

  • People recognized under this bill would be eligible for federal and provincial services that require citizenship, subject to other program rules (recognition under s.3(1), as amended).

• Timing

  • The bill does not state a specific coming‑into‑force date. It takes effect on the date it comes into force (bill text).

Expenses#

Estimated net cost: Data unavailable.

• No appropriations, taxes, or fees are created in the bill text.
• Likely costs are administrative (processing proof‑of‑citizenship and passports), but no official fiscal note was identified (Data unavailable).
• Regulation updates may be needed to reflect the new category (s.27(1)(j.1)(i), amended).

Proponents' View#

• Fixes a narrow historical gap from the pre‑2009 “age 28 retention” rule by restoring status to people refused under that rule (s.3(1)(f)(iii), as amended).
• Gives citizenship to people who would have kept it if they had applied under the old rule, addressing a procedural trap rather than changing today’s general rules (s.3(1)(g.1), new).
• Protects continuity for existing citizens by making clear the “second‑generation born abroad” limit does not remove citizenship from anyone who had it on June 11, 2015 (s.3(4), replaced).
• Limited scope reduces cost and implementation risk because it targets a defined cohort born after February 14, 1977 and tied to the pre‑2009 rule (s.3(1)(g.1), new).
• Aligns regulation‑making powers so the department can verify and document status for the affected group (s.27(1)(j.1)(i), amended).

Opponents' View#

• Creates retroactive recognition that may be complex to administer; departments must verify old facts about births and parent citizenship decades later (s.3(1)(f)(iii) and s.3(1)(g.1)).
• May increase workloads for proof‑of‑citizenship and passport processing without added resources, risking longer wait times (Data unavailable).
• Could cause confusion about who qualifies, since the bill refers to a repealed rule and specific past dates, requiring clear guidance and updated regulations (s.3(1)(g.1); s.27(1)(j.1)(i)).
• Does not address other “lost Canadian” situations or the broader “first‑generation born abroad” limit, which may leave similar cases unresolved (s.3(3) unchanged; s.3(4) only preserves 2015 citizens).