Category Archives: Lost Canadians

Was My Parent A Canadian? From “Lost Canadians” to Bill C-3: The 80-Year Evolution of Canadian Citizenship

John Richardson, J.D. – August 27, 2026

Were You Born To A Canadian Citizen Parent

You are reading this post because you were born outside of Canada and you would like to apply for a Certificate of Canadian Citizenship. If you were born before December 15, 2025 you are entitled to that Certificate if you can prove that you were born to a Canadian parent who was a Canadian citizen at the time that you were born.

In some cases this will be relatively easy. In some cases it will be hard. In some cases you it will require tracing your ancestry back to a time preceding Canada’s 1947 Citizenship Act. (In these cases you may have been born to a British Subject.) There are enormous ranges in far you may have to go back into your family history.

The first question is to determine how far you have to go back.

The second question is to determine what evidence (documents or otherwise) you will have to obtain to prove that you were indeed born to a Canadian citizen parent.

From “Lost Canadians” to Bill C-3: The 80-Year Evolution of Canadian Citizenship

Introduction and purpose

This is the fourth of a series of posts about Canada’s Bill C-3 which redefines (among other things) Canada’s, “citizenship by descent rules”. The first three posts are described in the Appendix to this post.

Most people understand that Canada’s Bill C-3 states that those who are born outside of Canada to a Canadian citizen parent may (depending on the date of birth) be a Canadian citizen. This is a very simple principle to understand. In some cases it’s very easy to know whether your parent was a Canadian citizen. In other cases, it’s not that easy.

The lawyer as a “practical historian”

In a previous post I referred to J.J. Robinette’s conviction that a lawyer is a “practical historian”. This is particularly true in citizenship law. The reality is that Canadian citizenship has changed very significantly over the years. A person who may not have been a citizen under the law of 1976 might be a citizen under the law of 2026.

When does Canadian citizenship law begin? When does Canadian citizenship begin?

Most of the discussion of Canadian citizenship law assumes that Canadian citizenship law begins with the Canada Citizenship Act of 1946 (taking effect in 1947). Although this is a reasonable assumption, it may be an incorrect assumption.

I begin with a “shout out” to Don Chapman. Don Chapman is a retired United Airlines pilot. For years he has been the public face of the “Lost Canadians” movement. He argues (I believe persuasively) that Canadian citizenship existed long before the 1947 Canada Citizenship Act.

Put another way: the 1947 Citizenship Act did NOT create Canadian citizenship. Rather it was a legislative expression of Canadian citizenship.

Because this post is a description of the evolution of the Canada Citizenship Act, I will NOT address the issue of the temporal origins of Canadian citizenship. This post should be considered to be a discussion of the evolution of Canada’s statutory citizenship act. Interestingly the evolution of Canada’s citizenship law is like the game of “whack a mole”. Each statutory iteration of law is intended to “fix” a problem created by the previous legislation.

Therefore, I will begin with the 1947 Canada Citizenship Act.

The 1947 Canada Citizenship Act did NOT keep up with changes in Canadian society

The problems addressed by the Canada Citizenship Act today are largely an attempt to change the effects of problems that began with the 1947 Canada Citizenship Act. Specifically, remedying the following two features of the 1947 Act have been the focus of the 1977 Act, the 2009 Act, the 2014 Act (to a lesser extent) and the 2026 Act.

Those two features of the 1947 Act were:

1. Losing Canadian citizenship because of the prohibition on dual citizenship – S. 16 – A Canadian who naturalized as a citizen of another country automatically lost his Canadian citizenship.

2. Never having received Canadian citizenship because of the problem of gender discrimination – S. 5 – If a child was born outside of Canada to a married couple, Canadian citizenship by descent was possible ONLY when the father was a Canadian citizen.

These problems were compounded because the legislative fix proposed in 1977 operated prospectively and NOT retrospectively.

From 1947 to 2026 – A Legislative Journey

What follows is a brief summary (partly AI generated) that describes the four phases of Canadian citizenship law. This is intended only to be a 30,000 foot view. Those who prefer graphs and charts might find the following “Canadian Citizenship By Descent Lineage Blueprint” to be a helpful summary:

The_Lineage_Blueprint

But first, a reminder of what Bill C-3 was intended to accomplish

Bill C-3 was an attempt (I think largely successful) to fix some of the injustices of the past. As discussed in previous posts (See the Appendix), what Bill C-3 did was:

1. Legislate that a person born outside of Canada prior to December 15, 2025, IS a Canadian citizen, if that person was born to a parent who was a Canadian citizen at the time of that person’s birth; and

2. Legislate that a child born outside of Canada after December 14, 2025, to a Canadian citizen parent, is a Canadian citizen, if the Canadian citizen parent had a “substantial connection” to Canada prior to the child’s birth. “Substantial connection” is CURRENTLY defined as 1095 days of physical presence in Canada. Note that the meaning of “substantial connection” is subject to legislative change!

To understand why Bill C-3 was necessary and some of the problems it was intended to fix, it’s important to understand the “Evolution Of Canadian Citizenship By Birth”. Specifically, it’s important to understand, in a general way, how each major legislative revision was designed to fix a problem caused by previous legislation.

Continue reading

Canadian Citizenship By Descent – A Search For Proof (To Prove The Truth) – 4 Perspectives

John Richardson, J.D. – August 13, 2026

Introduction

This is the second post in a series of posts designed to explore Canadian citizenship generally and Canada’s citizenship by descent rules specifically. The first post (which I suggest you read first) explained how Canada’s citizenship by descent rules work. If you haven’t read it, I suggest that you read it now.

Understanding The Citizenship By Descent Provisions Of Bill C-3 – The Canada Citizenship Act

For those who prefer a visual blueprint to determine whether you ARE a Canadian citizen see:

Bill_C3_Citizenship_Blueprint

This post is organized in the following parts:

Part A – The difference between knowing what to do and doing what you know!

Part B – Proving your parent was a Canadian citizen

Part C – Proving 1095 days of physical presence

Let’s begin.

Continue reading

Expanding eligibility for Canadian citizenship: Bill C-71 opens up a possible never-ending chain of citizenship

Bill C-71 opens up a possible never-ending chain of citizenship

Bill C-71 sets out to allow Canadians to pass on their citizenship to any of their children born abroad past the first generation and expands “Lost Canadians” to cover a much larger number than before.

It is fraught with potential unintended consequences.

The bill is in response to a ruling by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in 2023, which declared previous limitations for citizenship transmission unconstitutional. Essentially, the court objected to a limitation inherent in previous citizenship laws that prevented Canadian citizens born outside Canada from passing on citizenship to a child also born abroad, or for an adopted child born outside Canada.

To remedy the issue, Bill C-71 uses residency as the “substantial connection test.”

However, the new standard in Bill C-71, which requires a foreign-born Canadian parent to have spent a total of 1,095 days in Canada prior to the birth or adoption, differs significantly from what is required of new Canadians.

Specifically, while in both cases the parent must have spent 1,095 days (the equivalent of three years) in Canada, new Canadians must have done so within a five-year time limit.

Bill C-71 places no such time limit to accumulate 1,095 days of residency in Canada for foreign-born Canadian citizens in the same circumstance.

This lack of a timeframe for meeting the critical requirement for passing on citizenship to descendants suggests the government has failed to fully consider the implications of such an open-ended condition.

The number of people potentially affected is significant.

There are an estimated four million Canadians living outside Canada. About half of them were born abroad.

As of 2017, two-thirds of them lived in the U.S., with another 15 per cent in the U.K., Australia, France and Italy – the total living in all other countries has unsurprisingly risen from 14 per cent in 1990 to 20 per cent in 2017.

This trend is significant in the context of Bill C-71: for second- and subsequent-generation expatriates in the U.S., EU and other politically stable places, seeking Canadian citizenship may not be a priority. It is likely a higher priority for those in other countries with less secure conditions.

Fueling the issue triggered by Bill C-71, expatriates as a whole are older than Canadians living in Canada – 45.3 years old compared to 41.7. Citizens by descent are much younger, at an average age of 31.7.

Without an established timeframe, it will be challenging or impossible for the federal government to accurately predict citizenship acquisition year over year.

Same rights, divergent pathways

Consider these scenarios:

My grandson was born in Europe. He cannot pass down Canadian citizenship to any future child. Under C-71, he would have that right, but only after first spending 1,095 cumulative days in Canada. One strategy would be to attend a Canadian university and accumulate most or all of the 1,095 days while getting a degree.

Consider a Canadian born abroad who maintains a cottage in Canada and spends summers there. Spending eight weeks a year in Canada, it would take nearly 20 years to acquire the right to give their descendants Canadian citizenship.

For second-generation Canadians who spend most of their life abroad, the road is even longer. Perhaps they make occasional trips to Canada, accumulating days to meet the 1,095-day requirement. But they would not likely meet the threshold unless they choose to return permanently in retirement.

Many descendants who are temporary residents either through a job transfer or as spouses of skilled workers or students would likely meet the physical-presence requirement. Temporary foreign workers on seasonal or short-terms contracts, on the other hand, would likely not meet the requirement.

The first two scenarios are manageable given that the physical-presence requirement for most would be met within a defined time period. In the latter situations, it is impossible to forecast if or when descendant citizenship rights would eventually be required.

Questions persist as Ottawa prepares Citizenship Act amendments

Birth tourism is rising again post-pandemic

Immigration Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) needs to determine and share estimates for the approximate number of new citizens expected under the change, along with the incremental workload and resources that are required before the bill goes before committee.

Media in India are characterizing Bill C-71 as legislation that “will open up the chain of citizenship without end as long as the parents have spent at least 1,095 cumulative days.”

Arguably, this change moves Canada closer to a hybrid jus sanguinis/jus soli regime, as it will make it possible for families to maintain intergenerational Canadian citizenship through different scenarios, which currently is not possible.

It may also provide opportunities for longer-term sophisticated foreign-interference efforts by countries like China and India by exploiting descendants who can acquire Canadian citizenship in their recruitment strategies.

Another question that remains unanswered is how many “Lost Canadians” want to be found. As seen in previous efforts to respond to public pressures, the actual number of those who request citizenship proofs is relatively small, at an average of just 1,500 per year between 2009 and 2022. (Similarly, the low number of expatriates who register and vote is another indicator that interest may be limited.)

However, the potential impact of Bil C-71 could be potentially large. So, before the government enshrines a new pathway to citizenship for some, all of the facts need to be properly considered.

Canadian citizenship is a precious gift. At the committee stage, members of Parliament must be able to fulsomely examine the implications of an open-ended residency requirement and consider establishing a specific time frame of five or 10 years.

This article authored by Andrew Griffith first appeared on Policy Options and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.