Toward a new oath of citizenship (National Post, July 07)



Canada Day and U.S. Independence Day elicited several columns comparing our respective ideas of patriotism. Most agreed that Americans don't brood over patriotism's meaning, they just exude it, while ours consists in being self-consciously Not American. Hardly an inspiring message for new Canadians.

During the election campaign, nobody mentioned our need for fresh approaches to Canadianizing immigrants in the age of terrorism. The Liberals suffered a drubbing for Adscam, but they took no flak for having also created the Khadr family, Pakistani immigrants for whom Canada is a refuelling centre between jihads. Even many grateful immigrants consider Canada more a hotel than a home.

That's because the Liberal doctrine of multiculturalism encourages immigrants to bring along excessive country-of-origin baggage. We fail to deliver the message that Canada is not only a rich, peaceful country, but also a nation whose common values we expect newcomers to adopt, whether they like them or not.

Citizenship applicants receive a test-preparation pamphlet of dry facts, rights and legal responsibilities, but it should also include historical narratives on the sacrifices Canada made in 20th-century wars. Applicants should be advised that financial or moral support of democracy's new totalitarian enemies is grounds for deportation. We need a "Khadr clause" -- loss of citizenship should follow incitement by any adult of a minor to become a child soldier in any political cause.

Moreover, our oath of citizenship is uninspiring: "I swear ... I will ... bear true allegiance to Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth the Second ... and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and fulfill my duties as a Canadian citizen."

In November, 2002, a new citizenship bill, C-18, was tabled by then-Citizenship and Immigration minister Denis Coderre with a revised version:

"I pledge my loyalty and allegiance to Canada and Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second ... I promise to respect our country's rights and freedoms, to uphold our democratic values, to faithfully observe our laws and fulfill my duties and obligations as a Canadian citizen."

The stirring "rights and freedoms," "democratic values" and "obligations" are an improvement. But neither text is a patch on the American version:

"I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law ... and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."

This oath reflects a nation that knows its own worth, that grants the immigrant a favour in accepting him, not the other way around. It says once you're a citizen of the United States, there won't be a nano-doubt about whose interests prevail, so don't think for a minute that your previous home has any further claim on your loyalty.

This oath says becoming American is such a fantastic privilege that there may be a huge price to pay for it when the chips are down. Anyone who swears this oath in good faith is on the path to real patriotism.

Coderre's updated oath of citizenship doesn't share the American's grave tone or emphasize the potential sacrifices citizenship might entail; still, it expresses the pricelessness of citizenship in a positive, values-centric way.

Alas, the revised oath never made it past a second reading. So new citizens continue to swear simply to "observe the laws" and "fulfill my duties as a Canadian citizen" -- as the Khadrs no doubt feel they've done -- and still become citizens.

In swearing their oath, new Canadians are neither challenged to drop old allegiances nor motivated to change and integrate.

But if it's patriotism we want, surely that's the whole point?

© National Post 2004