Here’s a term I hadn’t heard or thought about until recently: birth tourism. It refers to travel to another country for the purpose of giving birth in that country. The main reason for birth tourism is to obtain citizenship for the child in a country with birthright citizenship, such as Canada for example, where the child then has access to public schooling, health care, and even sponsorship of the parents in future. Birth tourism is not illegal. Since 1947, Canada’s Citizenship Law has generally conferred Canadian citizenship at birth to anyone born in Canada regardless of the immigration or citizenship status of the parents. The federal government has considered limiting this type of citizenship and has debated the issue since 2012 but hasn’t changed the law. Should it be changed? It’s not black & white simple. It doesn’t seem fair that someone can come to this country as a visitor just to have their baby born here who automatically receives citizenship and a Canadian passport plus the aforementioned benefits, and then leaves with the baby for their home country. On the other hand we do need immigration to increase the tax base and supply of working citizens down the road when the grown-up baby could choose Canada in which to live. I’m sure the politicians will continue to bounce this ball around as it suits them and my money says nothing will change.
That’s Coffeetalk. I’m Vic Dubois.