Understand. Many of us are considering our dual citizenship options while they are available.

I can appreciate your concern.

Good luck. That should be fairly straightforward as you are only second generation descent.

No.

The 1095 day presence is a requirement should you wish to pass Canadian citizenship to a child born or adopted after December 15, 2025z

Long form birth certificates that name parents and marriage certificates to show name changes would cover it.

Baptismal certificates can be used when there’s no civil registration of births. Civil registration began very late in several provinces of Canada. There’s more likely to be an Anglican or Roman Catholic baptismal record regardless of being Indigenous.

You may be able to find ship manifests and landing records in Family Search or Ancestry. Those list nationality — you would be looking for her to be a British subject domiciled in Canada at the time she landed in Australia.

Your great grandmother’s death certificate may have information that could be useful, as they usually state the place of birth. Newspaper death notices and obituaries can also be helpful as supporting information.

Lastly Canadian and US census records can be used as supporting information.

There is no generational limit. However, a direct line of descent has to be documented back to an ancestor born or naturalized within the borders of what is now Canada.

Acadians in Louisiana have been successful in making claims back to the Le Grand Derangement / Expulsion by the British. They had meticulous records however.

Regrettably region-locked.

It’s a concern the way the CPC MPs confabulated citizenship by descent with immigration during the committee hearings on the Bill.

The Government responded to the 2023 Bjorkquist court decision that found the first generation limit unconstitutional as a violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

C-3 establishes a requirement going forward: to pass down citizenship to persons born after December 15, 2015 a parent born outside Canada must have had a cumulative 1095 day presence in Canada before the child’s birth.

The C-3 changes were in response to the 2023 Bjorkquist court decision that struck down the first-generation limit on citizenship by descent. The Government had to bring in legislative amendments or the Court would have just struck the limit down as a Charter violation.

It was Conservative Party of Canada Harper Government that enacted the limit in reaction to air lifts of Canadians in Lebanon, calling them ‘Canadians of convenience.’

The CPC tried to amend the Bill C-3 to require a 1095 day presence in a 5 year period in order to past citizenship down to future generations, basically making it like the requirement for naturalization. Instead the law has a lifetime 1095 day presence to pass down citizenship to children born after December 15, 2025.

Having your grandmother’s birth is a great start.

You need to prove a direct line of descent by birth* back to your grandmother — assuming she’s the last generation born or naturalized in Canada.

So, her birth certificate would establish that she was Canadian if it’s from a Canadian province or territory. However, you will also need to demonstrate :

• that one of your parents was her child with their long form birth certificate with her name listed as their mother — if your grandmother’s family name changed in marriage, you’ll need a marriage certificate or other proof to show she was the same person;

• likewise, you’ll need to demonstrate that parent your parent’s child through your long form birth record and possibly your parents’ marriage certificate if claiming through your mother.

*Adoption unfotunately continues to not have quite the same process:

If you were adopted, and you are claiming citizenship through your adoptive grandmother, this is possible but it’s a two step process where your adoptive parent would need a Confirmation of citizenship first and then you could apply for a grant of citizenship.

If the parent you are claiming citizenship through was adopted by your grandmother, as the Act is now, they would not be able to pass down citizenship to you. They could get a grant of citizenship for themselves but it would only come into effect the day the grant is made and couldn’t only pass it down to their children born after the date of granting.

I can see Moopsy taking other creatures with bones, but not sure if it can gobble up and consume chitin exoskeletons.

If it can drink exoskeletons though, it would be threat even to much larger monsters.

But it’s sooooo cute!

My Whovian knowledge is clearly lacking.

Rounded features, big eyes and mouths full of sharp nastiness definitely seems a theme.

Why doesn’t Lemmy have a polling functionality?!!

This tracks with the usual definition in international relations.

e.g., International grant funding — whether to UN organizations like WHO and UNDP or directly to other countries and programs through US AID and its counterparts — is generally considered as important ‘soft power’ mechanisms. In principle, the recipients of the grants and loans are in control of their governance but as these are long term relationships, the donor countries have significant strategic influence.

This is why foreign affairs specialists have commented that, beyond the moral and ethical considerations in the elimination of US AID funding — and lesser contractions in international grants by other NATO donor countries shifting budgets to prioritize defence build ups — mean that the US and NATO donor countries are giving up soft power.

Meanwhile, China and the Saudis are reportedly gaining influence through direct and indirect investment, foreign aid grants and loans etc.

It’s more that Star Trek’s science advisor Dr. Erin MacDonald is a physicist who did her PhD thesis with the team in Scotland that got the Nobel prize shortly after she graduated.

As she puts it, her friends got her into watching Voyager when she was working on her PhD and she thought “oh cool, just what I am studying.”

There’s definitely a feedback loop going on, since Dr. MacDonald is whom they bounce their ideas off of.

She appears as herself - although as a Starfleet officer in the 24th century — in animated form in Prodigy, and explains ‘Temporal Mechanics 101’ in a learning module.

Jonathan Frakes mentions several things in the TrekMovie interview that may impact costs.

Alex Kurztman set the direction style with more close up, tight camera work. More, he specifically ordered special long camera lenses to enable that. This means that despite the enormous sets and UHD cinematography, with long lenses they are able to block the scenes without as much extraneous detail.

Saving the wide angles for when they need them but closing up on the characters, and doing more in set internal volumes must surely reduce a lot of crew time and accelerate production.

Good point. There are repetitive signals that her expectation is that he hasn’t materially changed.

Beyond the ‘you grew up’ startlement at his physical growth and development, she expects his temperament, preferences ambitions and values are exactly the ones she saw in him at six years old.

She’s not just missed the past year as a cadet in Starfleet, they both have missed his entire adolescent experience of youth separating themselves from their parents.

Interestingly, the challenge of needing to catch up with who someone has changed into is foreshadowed by Caleb and the others’ difficulties in understanding who SAM is now - and her own struggles to reconcile who she was with who she is.

When asked in the TrekMovie interview about the similarities to Matalas Prime in Picard, Jonathan Frakes said that most of it was the virtual set volume but they reused set pieces within it.

Well, that’s a lot. I’m not sure why I didn’t expect a cliffhanger, and I hope there won’t be one at the end of the season.

As we saw the wall of omega-47 mines, it occurred to me that Brakka had told Ake what he wanted in episode 6 — a return to the isolation of planets that gave him and the Venari Rahl their power — but neither she nor Vance appreciated the scale of his ambitions to return to the anarchy of past century.

And the Federation should have anticipated this kind of challenge to come from some quarter, even if they’d come to detente with the Emerald Chain. Those who benefited from the systems that were built up over the century of the Burn would have nostalgia for it and distrust against the Federation would not vanish quickly.

I appreciate the narrative structure of the season, Anisha and Caleb Mir represent those who struggled to get by around the powers and forces of the Burn. There is a personal story and a societal story about making choices to take the risk to move towards something better — as found family and as a society.

As it goes on, this show reminds me increasingly of The Magicians, on which SFA showrunner Noga Landau was a head writer at one point. There’s the quotidian developmental, coming of age challenges of students in their undergraduate years juxtaposed with massive and truly menacing events.

Bella Shepherd, who plays Genesis, said in an interview that Frakes was originally booked for direct her character’s feature episode in season two, but then he couldn’t be available because of conflicts but was expected to direct a later episode. It sounds as though they couldn’t make the schedules mesh.