Lena Metlege Diab
Halifax West, Nova Scotia · Liberal · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, I do want to wish the colleague a very happy July and August, wherever she is with her family. Perhaps in the fall she will come back with a bit of a better spirit. We have continuously said that no one can commit a crime with impunity. Serious crimes deserve serious consequences.”
“Mr. Speaker, we all know that anyone who commits a crime in this country, regardless of their immigration status, be it Canadian or not, is treated according to the law, to the fullest extent of the law. Judges make decisions. There is absolutely nothing in the immigration law that allows for sentences to be discounted.”
“Mr. Speaker, that colleague has asked that question a number of times, and it has been answered. Let me tell him what Canadians do want to know. Canadians know that the government is focused on building a stronger economy to responsibly manage migration.”
“Mr. Speaker, I have good news. Here is what Canadians need to know. Our plan for responsible, sustainable immigration is working. The non-permanent resident population has declined. We are focused on attracting skilled talent, like health care workers, construction workers, researchers and engineers. The numbers do not lie.”
“Mr. Speaker, I have been clear. Just because someone has a Canadian ancestor, this does not mean they are automatically eligible for citizenship. They must definitively prove their link to Canada at each and every generation. Genealogy websites are not enough.”
“Mr. Speaker, let us get the facts straight. I answered four hours of questions in committee of the whole for all Canadians to hear. I was very clear in my response that IRGC officials are inadmissible to Canada and have no place in our country. Some hon. members: Oh, oh! Hon.”
The complete record
Every one of 364 lines we hold for Lena Metlege Diab, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 of 8.
“Mr. Speaker, Canadian law is clear: Since the end of the Second World War, anyone born in Canada is a Canadian citizen. Our government will continue to support a fair, constitutional and robust citizenship framework.”
“Mr. Speaker, as I said, each case is assessed individually. Anyone wishing to enter Canada must meet the requirements of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. A person whose application for an electronic travel authorization has been refused may reapply after explaining the reasons. We cannot comment on individual cases.”
“Mr. Speaker, persons seeking to come to Canada must meet eligibility and admissibility requirements of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Each case is assessed individually. Entry into Canada may be refused for a number of reasons. An individual whose electronic travel application has been declined can reapply by doing an eTA and addressing the reasons it has been refused. IRCC cannot comment on individual cases.”
“Mr. Speaker, Canadians' trust in their immigration system is paramount. That is why we are constantly working to improve immigration security screening processes, particularly in response to new challenges and pressures. We have the border bill, Bill C-2 . I invite my colleagues to help us pass that bill, which will further strengthen our immigration system.”
“Mr. Speaker, anybody who commits a crime in Canada, regardless of their status, will face consequences. [ Translation ] Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada is working with the Canada Border Services Agency and all our partners to ensure the following. [ English ] If we need to deport somebody, we will. That is CBSA's job. Again, we work with other government departments to ensure that Canadians are protected and that fraud is limited.”
“Mr. Speaker, Canadians gave us a mandate to bring international student programs back to a viable level, and we are doing just that. Nearly 100,000 fewer new students arrived in 2025. The House is also considering Bill C‑2 , which would reduce the number of applications and prevent sudden spikes in applications. We are here to strengthen our borders and make them more resilient as well. I invite all parliamentarians to support us.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am not going to thank the member for that question, but I will answer the question. I have spent my summer, a whole 10 or 11 weeks, working seven days a week without taking one day for vacation. Having said that, this government is intent on ensuring that our immigration system becomes sustainable, as well as intent on protecting our borders. That is why we have Bill C-2 in front of us in Parliament, which would be an aid for us here. I urge all parliamentarians to get on board and support it.”
“Mr. Speaker, again, I want to thank the Prime Minister . In fact, I want to thank the people in Halifax West for electing me to this Parliament. I am here to do the best job I possibly can do with my experience, with my expertise and with my love for Canada and love for Canadians. We will continue to do that. With respect to my record as minister of immigration provincially from 2013 to 2021, the record is clear. I would invite parliamentarians to look at it.”
“Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the Prime Minister for choosing me to be the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship. I am very proud of my record from when I served as Nova Scotia's minister of immigration. Protecting prospective newcomers from those who try to take advantage of them is critically important. That is why we have established the College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants to regulate consultants and protect the public. This is something that we are very serious about, and we will ensure that it gets done.”
“Mr. Speaker, we just campaigned on strengthening our borders. Fraud is getting increasingly sophisticated, so we need effective tools to maintain a migration management approach. The House is currently considering Bill C-2 , which seeks to ensure equity in our immigration system and to improve visa and asylum application processing. We want to protect the integrity of our system, and I invite all parliamentarians to support us.”
“Mr. Speaker, Canadians have given us a mandate to restore our international student program to sustainable levels, and that is what we are doing. Nearly 100,000 fewer students arrived in 2025, and the latest figures show that the number of student visa holders dropped by 144,000. We want to attract the best talent while protecting international students.”
“Mr. Speaker, Canadians gave our government a mandate just a few months ago: to return the international student program to sustainable levels, and we are doing exactly that. Almost 90,000 fewer students arrived between January and June 2025, compared to the same period in 2024, and the latest numbers show 100,000 fewer study permit holders in Canada compared to the end of 2024. We want to attract the best and the brightest talent to Canada. We will do that, but we will also protect the students who are here.”
“Mr. Speaker, let me repeat it in English so she and other members of her party understand: Our measures are working. In the first quarter of 2025, Canada recorded the smallest non-pandemic population gain since the government started to keep records in 1946. We are following through on our immigration plan, and that is reducing our temporary resident number and our permanent resident number by 20%. Our plan is clear: Bring sustainability to our system and attract best talent. Our student and temporary worker admissions are down by 50%. Asylum claims are down by a third, and—”
“Mr. Speaker, our measures are working. Yes, they are working. In the first quarter of 2025, Canada experienced the lowest non-pandemic demographic growth since the Second World War. We are continuing to implement our plan on immigration levels, a plan that reduces our temporary resident population by hundreds of thousands and reduces our permanent resident target by over 20%. Our objective is clear: to make our system viable and attract the best talent.”
“Mr. Speaker, one of the goals of the campaign we ran a few months ago was to restore the vitality of our immigration system in order to alleviate the housing and services crisis. Our measures are working. Admissions of new students and temporary workers have decreased by more than 60%. Asylum applications have fallen by a third. The number of new residents will be reduced by 20%. With Bill C‑2 , we will continue that work. I invite all parliamentarians to join us.”
“Mr. Speaker, we just ran a campaign on restoring sustainability to our immigration system to ease pressure on housing and social services, something the Conservatives also voted for. Our immigration levels plan reduced targets for permanent residents. That plan is working. New student and temporary worker admissions are down more than 60%, asylum claims are down one-third and new permanent residents will be down 20% at the end of the year. With Bill C-2 we can do even more. I urge parliamentarians to support it.”
“Mr. Speaker, I know that Canadians are concerned. Our government has been working tirelessly. We understand that we need to see a return to sustainable immigration levels that fit our capacity and serve our growth, which is exactly why we are focused on our levels plan with reducing both temporary and permanent residents in this country, and we are seeing results. We are bringing population to sustainable levels and decreasing the pressures on housing and services. We are focused on solutions on this side of the House. There is legislation in front of this Parliament, and we hope that the Conservatives will support it.”
“Mr. Speaker, while the opposition is concentrating on making assumptions and speaking about things that are not there, let me tell members that, with the asylum system, our numbers are down 40%. We have also introduced Bill C-2 , which will strengthen our border, and this legislation is in front of the House. We campaigned on it, and Canadians gave us a mandate. So did Conservatives, and we hope that the Conservatives will help us pass it.”
“Mr. Speaker, I look forward to working with my colleague. We worked together on the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. I am here to work on immigration issues with him and all the members of his team.”
“Mr. Speaker, again, I am going to reiterate that the reason we are here today is a decision made by a court that rendered these provisions unconstitutional. If we do absolutely nothing, it will put Canadians at risk, and it would really be a tragedy for those who have been waiting for years to have their citizenship recognized. I very much look forward to members discussing and debating this and receiving any amendments or constructive advice.”
“Mr. Speaker, again, I am looking forward to constructive dialogue from all parties, whether it is today or in committee. We are taking the responsible step of approaching the court decision by creating a framework to citizenship by descent, including creating the need to demonstrate a strong connection to Canada. I am very much looking forward to July 1, because on July 1, traditionally, for the last many years and decades, I go to citizenship ceremonies. This year, it will be very special because I will again be at Pier 21, which is where over a million immigrants entered Canada between 1928 and 1971. This legislation would directly affect—”
“If we do not do anything, then we risk losing that, and anybody could potentially apply. This is a good legislation, and I very much look forward to all colleagues working with us to advance this.”
“Mr. Speaker, those are valid points. As I stated already, I do look forward to the co-operation of all parties in the House. It is important to remind members, as well as viewers, who have really been waiting for this for years, that the reason we are here today is that sections of this were declared unconstitutional by the Ontario Supreme Court on December 19, 2023, and Parliament has had x amount of time to remedy this. We were not able to move it forward in the last session, unfortunately, because of various things, including the election, so I am here again to present the bill in order to move it forward. What we have done in this bill is to strike a balance by protecting the value of citizenship going forward and limiting it to those whose parent has a substantial connection to Canada.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am here today to speak to this bill to amend the Citizenship Act. I am here to say that it is very important to work on getting this bill through committee and the House. I look forward to the co‑operation of all parliamentarians who are working in the House to move this bill forward.”
“Mr. Speaker, allow me, first of all, as we start to debate on the bill, to take a moment to thank again the stakeholders across the country, including Don Chapman, who is the head of the lost Canadian website and who has been a tireless advocate for this. Let me also clarify the record. I look forward to the committee study on this, but the majority of lost Canadian cases were remedied by the legislative amendments that were implemented in 2009 and 2015, with approximately 20,000 people at the time acquiring citizenship. We know from history that not everyone is going to apply through this. We are here again to right a wrong. There is a constitutional issue in front of us, leaving us with no choice but to enact legislation.”
“I invite all members of the House to move the legislation forward, and I welcome constructive dialogue on any refinements that are needed, both here in the House and as we advance to the committee stage. I very much look forward to working across party lines to see the bill enacted as speedily as possible. As I said, many people have been waiting. Together we can ensure that the Citizenship Act reflects the spirit of Canadian identity.”
“That is why the bill would also provide access to the same simplified renunciation process as the one established in 2009. (1035) [ Translation ] If this bill is adopted, we are committed to fully implementing the proposed amendments without delay. This legislative update is not only necessary, it is urgent. It is urgent because families have waited far too long to be recognized as Canadians under the law. They waited while the courts deliberated. They waited while governments debated. Today, let us end their wait. [ English ] As we respond to the ruling that the provision is unconstitutional and to decades of heartfelt calls for justice, we have an opportunity to reaffirm that Canadian citizenship is not only a legal status but a living expression of our shared values.”
“If the adoptive parent was physically present in Canada for three years in total prior to the adoption, their child can access the adoption grant of citizenship. Of course, they would have to apply as well. We recognize that citizenship cannot and should not be imposed on people who do not wish to hold it, so these choices must remain accessible, humane and free of bureaucratic burden, especially for those navigating complex international legal systems. In many countries, dual citizenship is not permitted in certain jobs, including government, military and national security positions. In some countries, having citizenship in another country can present legal, professional or other barriers, including restricting access to benefits.”
“It would allow anyone adopted abroad by a Canadian parent, beyond the first generation, before this new law comes into force, to access the direct granting of citizenship for adopted persons. Going forward, the bill would permit access to citizenship beyond the first generation, as long as the Canadian parent demonstrates a substantial connection to Canada. That substantial connection will be measured by physical presence in Canada. In order to pass down their Canadian citizenship, the Canadian parent must have spent three years in total in this country, or 1,095 days cumulatively, but not necessarily consecutively, before the birth of their child. Bill C-3 would also allow Canadian adoptive parents born outside Canada to access a grant of citizenship for their children adopted abroad if they meet the same substantial connection criteria.”
“Bill S-245 was then amended by the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration to provide access to citizenship by descent beyond the first generation for those who can demonstrate a substantial connection to Canada. This is where our new bill, Bill C-3 , picks up. It retains many elements of the committee's suggested improvements and reflects the input of experts and community voices. (1030) [ Translation ] I want to thank the many advocates who testified and gave their time and attention to help us update our citizenship law. [ English ] Bill C-3 proposes to restore Canadian citizenship to those who have lost it because of the now repealed age 28 rule. It would give Canadian citizenship to those born outside Canada to a Canadian parent in the second or subsequent generation before the new law comes into force.”
“There remains a very small, specific group of Canadians still affected by the old 28-year age requirement: those born outside Canada in the second or subsequent generation between 1977 and 1981 who had reached the age of 28 and lost their citizenship before the 2009 amendment came into force. Challenges faced by lost Canadians have been thoughtfully raised in this House and other places. For example, back in 2022, Senator Yonah Martin introduced a Senate public bill, Bill S-245 , to address the age 28 issue. Her work was supported by those personally affected by the bill, by legal scholars and by policy-makers across the political spectrum.”
“In December 2023, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice ruled that key provisions of the first-generation rule were unconstitutional. Its decision reminds us that all Canadian families must be treated fairly, no matter where their children are born, and that Canadians with a genuine connection to Canada should have the freedom to move abroad, start a family and then return without losing their right to pass on their Canadian identity and citizenship. The decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice reflects what many advocates have been saying for a long time: that some people are unacceptably excluded from citizenship by outdated or overly restrictive definitions. We need to approach this issue in a thoughtful and inclusive way.”
“Some people were unaware of this requirement. Some made their lives in Canada without realizing that they risked becoming a new group of lost Canadians. My department previously received about 35 to 40 applications each year to remedy the status of people affected by this former rule. These numbers have been decreasing in recent years. However, the 2009 legislative update that addressed most of the lost Canadian cases also introduced a new rule. Citizenship by descent was restricted to only the first generation of children born outside Canada, meaning that children born to Canadian citizens who were themselves born abroad would no longer automatically be citizens. This first-generation limit has since been challenged in court, which is why I am here today.”
“The individuals affected by these provisions have come to be known as “lost Canadians”. Amendments made to the Citizenship Act in 2009 and 2015 resolved the majority of these older cases. Since 2009, approximately 20,000 people have contacted our department and received a certificate of Canadian citizenship thanks to those amendments. Over the decades, changes to citizenship laws have meant that Canadians could pass citizenship on to their children and grandchildren born abroad, but only if certain conditions were met. After the new Citizenship Act came into force in 1977, children born outside Canada to a Canadian parent who was also born abroad had to make a formal application before the age of 28 to retain their citizenship. If they did not apply or if their application was refused, they lost it.”
“Canada's history has been shaped by generations of people who chose to pursue their dreams and raise their families here, including many who, like my own family in Nova Scotia and many who arrived through Pier 21 in Halifax, arrived from abroad seeking opportunity and built a new life through hard work and perseverance. [ Translation ] To understand the challenge we face, it is important to take a moment to review the history of Canadian citizenship law. [ English ] The first Canadian Citizenship Act was enacted in 1947. At that time, certain provisions existed that could prevent individuals from obtaining citizenship or cause them to lose it even if they had strong ties to Canada. These outdated provisions have gradually been amended or repealed over time, most notably with the introduction of a new Citizenship Act in 1977.”
“As my colleagues may already be aware, there are three ways to become a Canadian citizen: by being born in Canada, by going through the naturalization process after immigrating from another country or by passing it on to one's children. Each of these ways of becoming Canadian has its own story. [ English ] Regardless of a person's path to citizenship, we all share a common bond: our commitment to the rights, responsibilities and shared values that define life in Canada. We live in a country that supports human rights, equality and respect for all people. The integrity of our values depends on how we extend them, especially in areas like citizenship by descent, where issues persist for some families due to decisions made decades ago.”
“Mr. Speaker, now that we have clearly identified that the audio is working in both languages, I appreciate this historic opportunity to stand today and really make right what is a wrong. I will continue by saying that this bill was already introduced in the last Parliament but did not go through all the stages. The previous government put in place interim measures to allow lost Canadians affected by the first-generation rule limit to be offered a discretionary grant of citizenship until corrective legislation was passed. [ Translation ] The bill I am introducing today is substantively the same as Bill C-71 to ensure continuity. I look forward to hearing from my colleagues in the House and in committee as we resume our work.”
“The term “lost Canadians” can also be used to describe people who are not Canadian citizens today because they are excluded by the first-generation rule. Although this bill was introduced as Bill C-71 in the previous session, Parliament did not complete its review before the end of the session. As a result, this is the reintroduction of a bill that had been introduced and on which debate had started. The previous government put in place—”
“moved that Bill C-3, An Act to amend the Citizenship Act (2025) , be read the second time and referred to a committee. Bill C-3. Second reading She said: Mr. Speaker, let me begin by acknowledging that we are gathering on the traditional unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people. It is a privilege to stand here this morning, as Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, to present Bill C-3 , an act to amend the Citizenship Act, 2025. This bill is an important opportunity to address issues in Canada's citizenship legislation with the intention of restoring and providing access to citizenship for those who have been impacted. We often refer to this group as “lost Canadians”, those people who lost or were denied citizenship status because of provisions in previous legislation that we would now consider outdated.”
“Mr. Chair, I know the member works very hard for her constituents, and I appreciate that. She spoke about the borders act, which is Bill C-2 . What I will say, and this is what I have said, is that the integrity of the immigration system is critical to supporting border security and assuring Canadians that the system is well managed, including protections against fraud and misuse. The border bill would provide Canada with—”
“Mr. Chair, I will tell you one thing that I agree with the member on: Immigrants did build this country. I congratulate her for getting that one right. Our temporary targets were developed to achieve the objective of reducing the proportion of non-permanent residents to 5% of the total population by the end of 2026. Supporting the Canadian economy continues to be our priority. We will work on bringing the talent that we need here, including those who are doctors and construction workers to build homes. Canada welcomed over 483,000 new permanent residents in 2024, and over 58% of those were from economic programs. That is something we are very proud of. More than 30,500, about 7.2%, were French-speaking immigrants. I know they do not care about the answers, but— Some hon. members: Oh, oh!”
“Mr. Chair, that question gives me the opportunity to talk about our immigration levels plan, which does set permanent resident numbers. For the first time, this past year, temporary numbers have been set. I am proud of the work that was done prior to my becoming a minister. It is working.”
“Mr. Chair, I have answered that question a number of times. I will try one more time. People leaving because of an expired visa or deportation, or anything of that matter, is the purview of the Canada Border Services Agency, which is not—”
“Mr. Chair, again, my role here tonight is not to talk about people leaving and the people who are here with an expired visa and so on, in terms of how many have left. That is completely a CBSA function, and public safety takes care—”
“Mr. Chair, we need to contextualize the numbers when we present them in the House. There are facts. The public safety minister was here, on Thursday I believe, and he is in charge of answering those questions.”
“Mr. Chair, I am proud of the work that I and the government at that time did in Nova Scotia. In 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017, we were living in different times. Right now we have an economic crisis in the country overall. We need to manage our immigration numbers.”
“Mr. Chair, I have only been here for three and a half weeks, and I want to continue working with all the provinces, including Quebec, but also with my officials. We are going to come back to this. There have been many changes to many programs.”
“Mr. Chair, that is an important question. The two levels of government jointly administer the temporary foreign worker program. Quebec controls more than 50% of the immigration for this type of worker, but we are here to work with Quebec, regardless.”
“Mr. Chair, the federal government has paid the Government of Quebec $750 million in consideration of the challenges associated with temporary accommodation and asylum caused by irregular border crossings. We always work with the Province of Quebec—”
“Mr. Chair, we understand and recognize the role that Quebec plays in welcoming asylum seekers. We have always supported Quebec. The number of asylum seekers in Ontario and Quebec is very high. That is why we are working with the provinces to—”