Reflection concerning validity period of the Canadian permanent resident card. Why not more than 5 years? Some concrete examples from other countries.

[piotrqc]

Hello everyone,

I would like to share with you a reflection that I had.

Potentially if it taken seriously and if IRCC hears about it, it could be of benefit to all permanent residents here in Canada. Experience has shown that the media have real power in this country: Don't forget: We are in a real democracy !

Context and starting point of the reflection:

With all that is happening, and the delays due to covid (especially in the subject of the citizenship application because of the undated stop of the resumption of tests, that is to say technically an interruption of citizenship), I had the reflex to look at the expiration date of my pr card ... I still have some headroom, but I also checked the estimated processing time for the renewal of the pr card on the official IRCC website : The site today indicates an estimated time of 165 days. That is to say more than 5 months. About 6 months to round off.

Precautionary principle: You have to do things in advance and not to wait until the last moment = In my mind that means around 9 months, even if the IRCC site says that you can send a request for renewal when there are 6 months left before expiration. (The time to assemble the requested documents, prepare the envelope, make the copies, and the shipping time for Canada Post).

By chance discussing the subject with an acquaintance who lives in Europe, he showed me his residence card. Duration of validity = 10 years!


Concrete examples from other countries:

France, for example (apart from temporary “residence permits” of 1 or 2 years) issues a 10-year residence permit. See here, the official website:

https://www.service-public.fr/particuliers/vosdroits/F2208

Most European countries have validity periods ranging from 7 to 10 years.

The USA, our neighbor to the south, issues 10-year green card pr cards for people in the divrsity lottery. The only exception is for spousals: Conditional residence for 2 years, before obtaining the regular 10-year card. (Like Canada was doing before the Liberals canceled it recently).

All of this information can be verified.


Argument in favor of extending the validity period to 5 years:

- The duration of validity of the pre card does not mean the end of the status of permanent resident of Canada, as it as its name suggests is permanent in any case. Without limits. There is no objective argument to maintain such a short duration, only 5 years. Source:

https://www.cic.gc.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?qnum=065&top=10

- We have to tell the truth: Most residents want to become Canadian citizens (which means more renewal of the loan after their acquired citizenship). A longer initial validity period of the pr card means fewer renewals in the future.

- Less work for the agents who deal with renewals.

- More flexibility to travel for people.

- Less stress and waste of time and money in renewing the card for people.

- 5 years is too short, and the alternation of power (We are in a democracy) means that the conservatives can return to power mainly = change and hardening of conditions for citizenship, especially extending the period of 3 years to be able to apply for citizenship (All the more reason for residents to take advantage of the time that the liberels are still in power to ask that ... Just saying).

- Some owners of rental housing, or employers require a valid Canadian ID ... Of course, they are wrong, but a card with a longer validity will avoid the headaches to explain to them that the status is permanent anyway.

- Certainly other arguments and advantages that I forgot (Can you name some?)

Why not in Canada?

I agree. Unfortunately, observing and being silent will not change anything, and passivity does not bring anything positive in general. We must move, and at least talk to our local federal parliamentarians, or alert the press. As I said, past experience has shown the effectiveness of making noise and alerting the press, often with a '' happy ending '' (As with spousal sponsorship, and other recent examples).

There is a journalist in CBC who has already written on several immigration-related topics, I think it would be very good to send her emails on this subject ...


What do you think ?

, Piotr.

 

[primaprime]

Given that the RO is already extremely generous, I feel like five years is a decent amount of time.

 

[piotrqc]

Given that the RO is already extremely generous, I feel like five years is a decent amount of time.

What sigle '' RO '' means ? Thank you.

Again, with all respects, i fail to understand the relevance of your argument.

The duration of validity of a pr card is absolutely not linked to the status of permanent resident.

How does an extended validity of 7, or 10 years cause a problem?

Passports generally have a validity period of 10 years. These are ids. Why not a card pr? (Which is also an identity document)?

 

[scylla]

Hello everyone,

I would like to share with you a reflection that I had.

Potentially if it taken seriously and if IRCC hears about it, it could be of benefit to all permanent residents here in Canada. Experience has shown that the media have real power in this country: Don't forget: We are in a real democracy !

Context and starting point of the reflection:

With all that is happening, and the delays due to covid (especially in the subject of the citizenship application because of the undated stop of the resumption of tests, that is to say technically an interruption of citizenship), I had the reflex to look at the expiration date of my pr card ... I still have some headroom, but I also checked the estimated processing time for the renewal of the pr card on the official IRCC website : The site today indicates an estimated time of 165 days. That is to say more than 5 months. About 6 months to round off.

Precautionary principle: You have to do things in advance and not to wait until the last moment = In my mind that means around 9 months, even if the IRCC site says that you can send a request for renewal when there are 6 months left before expiration. (The time to assemble the requested documents, prepare the envelope, make the copies, and the shipping time for Canada Post).

By chance discussing the subject with an acquaintance who lives in Europe, he showed me his residence card. Duration of validity = 10 years!


Concrete examples from other countries:

France, for example (apart from temporary “residence permits” of 1 or 2 years) issues a 10-year residence permit. See here, the official website:

https://www.service-public.fr/particuliers/vosdroits/F2208

Most European countries have validity periods ranging from 7 to 10 years.

The USA, our neighbor to the south, issues 10-year green card pr cards for people in the divrsity lottery. The only exception is for spousals: Conditional residence for 2 years, before obtaining the regular 10-year card. (Like Canada was doing before the Liberals canceled it recently).

All of this information can be verified.


Argument in favor of extending the validity period to 5 years:

- The duration of validity of the pre card does not mean the end of the status of permanent resident of Canada, as it as its name suggests is permanent in any case. Without limits. There is no objective argument to maintain such a short duration, only 5 years. Source:

https://www.cic.gc.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?qnum=065&top=10

- We have to tell the truth: Most residents want to become Canadian citizens (which means more renewal of the loan after their acquired citizenship). A longer initial validity period of the pr card means fewer renewals in the future.

- Less work for the agents who deal with renewals.

- More flexibility to travel for people.

- Less stress and waste of time and money in renewing the card for people.

- 5 years is too short, and the alternation of power (We are in a democracy) means that the conservatives can return to power mainly = change and hardening of conditions for citizenship, especially extending the period of 3 years to be able to apply for citizenship (All the more reason for residents to take advantage of the time that the liberels are still in power to ask that ... Just saying).

- Some owners of rental housing, or employers require a valid Canadian ID ... Of course, they are wrong, but a card with a longer validity will avoid the headaches to explain to them that the status is permanent anyway.

- Certainly other arguments and advantages that I forgot (Can you name some?)

Why not in Canada?

I agree. Unfortunately, observing and being silent will not change anything, and passivity does not bring anything positive in general. We must move, and at least talk to our local federal parliamentarians, or alert the press. As I said, past experience has shown the effectiveness of making noise and alerting the press, often with a '' happy ending '' (As with spousal sponsorship, and other recent examples).

There is a journalist in CBC who has already written on several immigration-related topics, I think it would be very good to send her emails on this subject ...


What do you think ?

, Piotr.

U.S is a bad example. I would drop that one in your compre. Their residency requirements are far more restrictive than Canada's. So while the green card may be issued for a 10 year period, the flexibility provided with regards to being outside of the country and retaining status is more limited than Canada's. If you wander over to any U.S. immigration forum right now, you're going to find a ton of people who are panicking because they are running close to being outside of the U.S. for a year which (without a returning residence permit) results in the automatic loss of the green card. Canada allows you to be outside of Canada for three years straight. So shorter card validity but more flexibility on residency.

And as others have said, the PR card validity has nothing to do with the validity of your PR status. Apples and oranges.

 

[canuck78]

Hello everyone,

I would like to share with you a reflection that I had.

Potentially if it taken seriously and if IRCC hears about it, it could be of benefit to all permanent residents here in Canada. Experience has shown that the media have real power in this country: Don't forget: We are in a real democracy !

Context and starting point of the reflection:

With all that is happening, and the delays due to covid (especially in the subject of the citizenship application because of the undated stop of the resumption of tests, that is to say technically an interruption of citizenship), I had the reflex to look at the expiration date of my pr card ... I still have some headroom, but I also checked the estimated processing time for the renewal of the pr card on the official IRCC website : The site today indicates an estimated time of 165 days. That is to say more than 5 months. About 6 months to round off.

Precautionary principle: You have to do things in advance and not to wait until the last moment = In my mind that means around 9 months, even if the IRCC site says that you can send a request for renewal when there are 6 months left before expiration. (The time to assemble the requested documents, prepare the envelope, make the copies, and the shipping time for Canada Post).

By chance discussing the subject with an acquaintance who lives in Europe, he showed me his residence card. Duration of validity = 10 years!


Concrete examples from other countries:

France, for example (apart from temporary “residence permits” of 1 or 2 years) issues a 10-year residence permit. See here, the official website:

https://www.service-public.fr/particuliers/vosdroits/F2208

Most European countries have validity periods ranging from 7 to 10 years.

The USA, our neighbor to the south, issues 10-year green card pr cards for people in the divrsity lottery. The only exception is for spousals: Conditional residence for 2 years, before obtaining the regular 10-year card. (Like Canada was doing before the Liberals canceled it recently).

All of this information can be verified.


Argument in favor of extending the validity period to 5 years:

- The duration of validity of the pre card does not mean the end of the status of permanent resident of Canada, as it as its name suggests is permanent in any case. Without limits. There is no objective argument to maintain such a short duration, only 5 years. Source:

https://www.cic.gc.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?qnum=065&top=10

- We have to tell the truth: Most residents want to become Canadian citizens (which means more renewal of the loan after their acquired citizenship). A longer initial validity period of the pr card means fewer renewals in the future.

- Less work for the agents who deal with renewals.

- More flexibility to travel for people.

- Less stress and waste of time and money in renewing the card for people.

- 5 years is too short, and the alternation of power (We are in a democracy) means that the conservatives can return to power mainly = change and hardening of conditions for citizenship, especially extending the period of 3 years to be able to apply for citizenship (All the more reason for residents to take advantage of the time that the liberels are still in power to ask that ... Just saying).

- Some owners of rental housing, or employers require a valid Canadian ID ... Of course, they are wrong, but a card with a longer validity will avoid the headaches to explain to them that the status is permanent anyway.

- Certainly other arguments and advantages that I forgot (Can you name some?)

Why not in Canada?

I agree. Unfortunately, observing and being silent will not change anything, and passivity does not bring anything positive in general. We must move, and at least talk to our local federal parliamentarians, or alert the press. As I said, past experience has shown the effectiveness of making noise and alerting the press, often with a '' happy ending '' (As with spousal sponsorship, and other recent examples).

There is a journalist in CBC who has already written on several immigration-related topics, I think it would be very good to send her emails on this subject ...


What do you think ?

, Piotr.

The 5 years is to be make sure that a person remains compliant with their RO especially for the first 5 years. More frequent checks allows Canada to assess more easily if a person remains compliant with their RO. As it is people enter right before their PR cards expire. If PR cards were 10 years then people coule board a flight to Canada having spent almost no time in Canada over 10 yesrs..

 

[Copingwithlife]

Hello everyone,

I would like to share with you a reflection that I had.

Potentially if it taken seriously and if IRCC hears about it, it could be of benefit to all permanent residents here in Canada. Experience has shown that the media have real power in this country: Don't forget: We are in a real democracy !

Context and starting point of the reflection:

With all that is happening, and the delays due to covid (especially in the subject of the citizenship application because of the undated stop of the resumption of tests, that is to say technically an interruption of citizenship), I had the reflex to look at the expiration date of my pr card ... I still have some headroom, but I also checked the estimated processing time for the renewal of the pr card on the official IRCC website : The site today indicates an estimated time of 165 days. That is to say more than 5 months. About 6 months to round off.

Precautionary principle: You have to do things in advance and not to wait until the last moment = In my mind that means around 9 months, even if the IRCC site says that you can send a request for renewal when there are 6 months left before expiration. (The time to assemble the requested documents, prepare the envelope, make the copies, and the shipping time for Canada Post).

By chance discussing the subject with an acquaintance who lives in Europe, he showed me his residence card. Duration of validity = 10 years!


Concrete examples from other countries:

France, for example (apart from temporary “residence permits” of 1 or 2 years) issues a 10-year residence permit. See here, the official website:

https://www.service-public.fr/particuliers/vosdroits/F2208

Most European countries have validity periods ranging from 7 to 10 years.

The USA, our neighbor to the south, issues 10-year green card pr cards for people in the divrsity lottery. The only exception is for spousals: Conditional residence for 2 years, before obtaining the regular 10-year card. (Like Canada was doing before the Liberals canceled it recently).

All of this information can be verified.


Argument in favor of extending the validity period to 5 years:

- The duration of validity of the pre card does not mean the end of the status of permanent resident of Canada, as it as its name suggests is permanent in any case. Without limits. There is no objective argument to maintain such a short duration, only 5 years. Source:

https://www.cic.gc.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?qnum=065&top=10

- We have to tell the truth: Most residents want to become Canadian citizens (which means more renewal of the loan after their acquired citizenship). A longer initial validity period of the pr card means fewer renewals in the future.

- Less work for the agents who deal with renewals.

- More flexibility to travel for people.

- Less stress and waste of time and money in renewing the card for people.

- 5 years is too short, and the alternation of power (We are in a democracy) means that the conservatives can return to power mainly = change and hardening of conditions for citizenship, especially extending the period of 3 years to be able to apply for citizenship (All the more reason for residents to take advantage of the time that the liberels are still in power to ask that ... Just saying).

- Some owners of rental housing, or employers require a valid Canadian ID ... Of course, they are wrong, but a card with a longer validity will avoid the headaches to explain to them that the status is permanent anyway.

- Certainly other arguments and advantages that I forgot (Can you name some?)

Why not in Canada?

I agree. Unfortunately, observing and being silent will not change anything, and passivity does not bring anything positive in general. We must move, and at least talk to our local federal parliamentarians, or alert the press. As I said, past experience has shown the effectiveness of making noise and alerting the press, often with a '' happy ending '' (As with spousal sponsorship, and other recent examples).

There is a journalist in CBC who has already written on several immigration-related topics, I think it would be very good to send her emails on this subject ...


What do you think ?

, Piotr.

I’m just totally envious you have so much time on your hands to think of this
This PR card project & the citizenship one.
I’m constantly having to remember to put on a mask when I go out to avoid catching something that could plant me six feet under
Once again , totally envious

 

[primaprime]

What sigle '' RO '' means ? Thank you.

Again, with all respects, i fail to understand the relevance of your argument.

The duration of validity of a pr card is absolutely not linked to the status of permanent resident.

How does an extended validity of 7, or 10 years cause a problem?

Passports generally have a validity period of 10 years. These are ids. Why not a card pr? (Which is also an identity document)?

RO = residency obligation. With an RO of only two in five years, a five-year PR card makes sense. It's a very generous setup, so it's worth the government's while to make sure people aren't abusing it.

 

[IndianBos]

PR card expiry dates and RO are 2 completely different topics. While RO can stay it is, I agree the PR card expiry date of 5 years should be extended to 10. Just removes the unnecessary paperwork. RO can stay as is, CBSA and IRCC check it anyways whenever there is an interaction with them.

 

[piotrqc]

I have to concede one thing: The answers and arguments given here give me one impression:

That permanent residents in Canada are a huge herd of cattle that must be "controlled" on a regular basis, and to which mechanisms must be put in place to "help" them to meet the minimum residency requirement ... that those who give these arguments are concerned about the happiness and interest of permanent residents (lol I doubt that personally).

I know one thing: People who have this status are adults, and know what they are doing, and also, to my knowledge, during the establishment ceremony where people receive confirmation of permanent residence (I was doing mine in an indoor office in Canada, but I imagine it must be the same for people who receive it in a port of entry, in an airport? Is not it?), during the ceremony in the office domestic, or at the point of entry, the officer CLEARLY explains the implications of the minimum period and the risks of losing status if you stay outside Canada for a certain period of time. There is a verbal explanation from the officer + We are made to read the relevant articles of law + We have to sign that we are okay and aware ... The burden of responsibility is accepted and approved by aware people and adults ... Why are you concerned about this if they know the risks involved, and assume the possible consequences?

A parenthesis, for those who will argue the risk of fraud, I agree, I am for the primacy of laws and regulations ... This concern can be fixed very simply, if people are controlled on their exit from Canada by The Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), and even put a stamp on the passports on exit, as most countries do, why not? ... I recently read an article going in this direction, indicating that from now on, The Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) was going to request information on the exits of people directly from the airlines ... They did this to avoid fraud related to unemployment benefits and child benefits. It's good. But why not put a stamp on the passport at the exit and check that ... Also with a view to extending the validity period of the pr cards? ... Just saying.

Another thing, concerning those who are said that generally people are quick to return before the expiry date of their pre card, and that therefore it is an excellent way to '' control '' them, and avoid them exceeding their duration obligation of residence ... I find that this argument is deceptive and dishonest ...
1) The periods can overlap, and the person will want to travel a few months or days before the end of the card's expiration date: The two elements are therefore not linked, it will be pure luck if the timing is that the expiration date gives the impression of "regulating" the permanent resident's exits.
2) Following the same logic, the possibility of requesting a Permanent Resident Travel Documents (PRTDs) should not exist ... So why do they exist? ... You follow me ? ... Completely false argument, with my respect.


Ah yes, last thing: Regarding those who say that the standards or requirements of residences are more difficult in the USA than in Canada, my answer to this question will be another question: Why not aspire to more, to better? ... Before coming here, I lived in Europe, and I must admit that in general, I have the impression that the North American mentality is less `` militant '' or that it demands less rights than the mentality in Western Europe, in general .... I have the impression that people here are fearful, are satisfied with what is offered to them, and never aspire for better. Never dispute or little. It must be cultural.

 

[piotrqc]

We will not hide the truth: The phenomenon of renewed interest that will experience this sub-category of the forum called `` Permanent Residency Obligations '', during the months or even, unfortunately, the years to come will be attributable to a single explanation: People who sent an application for citizenship, and who are unfortunately in a situation of blocking because of the technical stop in the facts of the citizenship procedures (Because of the stopping of the tests). Over time, all these people will be forced to renew their pr card.

The already long deadline for renewing a pr card will certainly get even longer over time if the situation continues.

The real problem is the blocking of citizenship applications. It's connected. The worry will increase over time, with deadlines and people's stress.

I think that concerning the short duration of validity of the pr card, it would be interesting to send remarks on this subject on the section dedicated to the remarks and feedbacks of the web forms of the site. Here is the link to do it:

https://secure.cic.gc.ca/feedback-retroaction/feedback-retroaction-eng.aspx

I also found the contact details of the CBC journalist specializing in immigration topics, she has already written a lot of topics concerning spousal sponsors (Her articles helped unblock the situation for them), the citizenship application fees, and the situation of blocking citizenship tests:

Kathleen Harris from CBC

kathleen.harris@cbc.ca

 

[Almost_Canadian]

The issue of long time required for renewal of PR card is not something which has just come about due to Covid. If you look back in this forum, there have been numerous years when the time taken would go up to even 7 to 8 months. When I was a PR and renewing my card around 2010, the wait time was around 180 days officially ( even longer if your application went for further review).
It is not an issue of trust that everyone is an adult and so they are responsible and should be trusted. It is a matter of policy that when certain privileges are given, they should be adhered to and the government has the full right and authority to check for compliance.
As another post has mentioned, giving a PR card validity for 10 years means more chances of people not fulfilling their residence obligations and then trying to come into Canada just before their card expires.
It is an inconvenience when travel plans can be disrupted due to wait times for PR card renewal but then it is part of the process to becoming a citizen.
As for the examples of European residence card, you have to check if their compliance allows to stay out of the country for years at a time ( as in 3 years out of 5 for Canada).

 

[primaprime]

Furthermore, as the presence requirement to apply for citizenship is only three years, in theory a new PR who is fully invested in building a life in Canada—as intended by the law establishing PR status—will not have to apply to renew their PR card even once. By the time five years have passed, they will have already traded it in at their oath ceremony.

So if you have to renew your PR card at all, it already strongly suggests that you have been abroad more than 40% of the time, or at the very least, you are not yet interested in finalizing your commitment to Canada. In a few cases, that may be legitimate, such as if someone's home country doesn't allow dual citizenship, and they don't want to give up their ability to freely return there. Or, they had genuine obligations that kept them abroad for a while, without diminishing the strength of their attachment to Canada. And now, with the current delays to citizenship applications, some people may wish to renew their cards despite being on the verge of no longer needing them. But these are exceptions, not the rule.

The mild inconvenience of having to wait for a new PR card is a reminder that the right to live and work in Canada comes with the responsibility to do so.

 

[dpenabill]

It is an inconvenience when travel plans can be disrupted due to wait times for PR card renewal but then it is part of the process to becoming a citizen.

Furthermore, as the presence requirement to apply for citizenship is only three years, in theory a new PR who is fully invested in building a life in Canada—as intended by the law establishing PR status—will not have to apply to renew their PR card even once. By the time five years have passed, they will have already traded it in at their oath ceremony.

Yes. Very much so.

Comments about the role of citizenship in Canadian immigration policy as it relates to the grant of Permanent Resident status, and provisions governing PRs, are very much on point. While proceeding to qualify for and become a Canadian citizen is not mandated (PRs can remain a PR for life without becoming a citizen; indeed I have had friends and acquaintances who elected to remain PRs for many decades, even though they have lived in Canada full time for decades, having and raising a family here), it is nonetheless a major part of the policies underlying Canada's approach in these matters.

It can be difficult to determine the policy underlying particular statutory provisions, given that what matters is completing the formal procedure for adopting and implementing those provisions, and once the provisions are in effect the policy behind them is largely NOT relevant, so there is rarely any formal let alone official statement of policy (in isolated instances involving difficult issues of statutory interpretation, the courts can look at the legislative record for insight into what the statute means based on discussions about policy, but this is never a dispositive approach to statutory construction and does not result in any official or binding statement of policy). Nonetheless, both Liberal and Conservative governments have extensively discussed the role the path to citizenship has in Canada's immigration policies generally, more than sufficient to recognize that the administrative structure governing PRs is in significant part oriented around the path to citizenship.

There is, sometimes, a tendency to focus on what is allowed as defining the standard for what is expected. This tends to be a mistake. At best a misunderstanding of the Canadian approach, which often employs broad flexible provisions defining what is, in effect, tolerated. The PR Residency Obligation is perhaps the most obvious example. The fact that a PR is allowed to keep status notwithstanding spending more time abroad than in Canada should in no way be understood to diminish the purpose for granting PR status, which is so the individual can settle and live in Canada PERMANENTLY. And, as you have noted, in significant part this about a policy facilitating the path to citizenship.

In any event, in terms of what legislation has been tabled in the last decade and a half, including individual member or private Bills, and in terms of proposed regulations and rules published in the Gazette, and in terms of policy discussions by Canadian politicians generally, there has been little or no indication that changing the validity period for PR cards is an issue of interest or an issue likely to generate much interest. For what that is worth.

The only significant change at all relevant to this we have seen in the last decade has been some reports about IRCC issuing multi-entry PR Travel Documents to some PRs living abroad, which started popping up in the forum about five years ago. And it is not clear that IRCC is still doing this much.

It is possible IRCC could decide to issue PR cards for longer time periods. Yes, it might happen. Sometime down the road perhaps. Not likely anytime soon since there are so many far more pressing priorities the government needs to address in the current situation.

IN THE MEANTIME . . . the demeaning insults aimed at Canadians by the OP, referring to PRs as a "huge herd of cattle" for example, are reprehensible and unacceptable. Period. End of story.

 

[piotrqc]

It is not an issue of trust that everyone is an adult and so they are responsible and should be trusted. It is a matter of policy that when certain privileges are given, they should be adhered to and the government has the full right and authority to check for compliance.

Who spoke of trust or having confidence? ... I'm pretty well aware that not everyone works like this. The world of Telletubies with happy endings does not exist unfortunately, I know ... I rather alluded to their sense of responsibility, and to the fact that people with status sign a paper clearly mentioning that they have read correctly the passage of the law talking about RO + the agent who explains to them several times orally ... And that they will assume the consequences (that is to say a cancellation of their PR status, if they do not comply).

I completely agree that the law must be respected, and the violators must bear the consequences ... We can defend a certain political vision of immigration ... But not in this way. You have to have the audacity and the courage to set out the ideas clearly, not by considering people as incapable of facing their responsibilities alone ... The argument of the short duration of the card to '' regulate '' or 'controlling' people is misleading, in my opinion ... and within the limits of underestimating people pr status (Otherwise, as I said, why the existence of Permanent Resident Travel Documents ( PRTDs)? ... In other words: A person with pm status may be in full compliance with his OR conditions, but ending up with an expired pr card while outside of Canada is a question coincidence of timing ... The logic of explaining the limited validity period of 5 years, by the desire to want to control them and give them a `` call to order '' is completely fallacious, dishonest ... And I almost want to say humiliating.

A concrete example to illustrate my remarks: Suppose a person X, father of a family, who has never left Canada since his arrival with his wife, has 2 children both born in Canada, well integrated, good jobs, etc. .. His mother is very ill in her country (God save you from that,friends ... It is a bit of a cartoonish example to illustrate my point). Note that the person's country of origin is not fortunate enough to have a respectable passport that allows entry to Canada without a visa ...

This good (future) citizen, and also a good loving son, takes the first plane to his country of origin, and doesn't even bother to look at the expiration date of his pr card, he is so horrified and sad. .

After the funeral, he realizes he's stuck in his home country. Pr card expired ... It is a totally fictitious scenario, but possible and truly tragic.

Why should we punish this tax-paying tax payer with such a restricted loan life, only 5 years? ... Wouldn't it be wonderful to have a longer pr-card validity period? ... I remind you that the status of PR is PERMANENT ... And that a more extensive card will certainly cover the time before any person taking status becomes a Canadian citizen ...

As another post has mentioned, giving a PR card validity for 10 years means more chances of people not fulfilling their residence obligations and then trying to come into Canada just before their card expires.

It is precisely this interpretation that I find `` infantilizing '', that is to say that we consider the PR status as people who are not mature or having the age of legal majority, and that they are unable themselves to assess the risks, or to assume the consequences of their actions if they do not respect the rules of the game ...

In truth, when I spoke about herds, I was ironic criticizing the deceptive or even humiliating arguments, as I explained above ... I also clearly used the word `` impression '' before making this criticism with an image, figure of speech. I wanted to give a picture of my feeling and my perception of these arguments.

Here is your answer, my dear @dpenabill

... I am really flabbergasted that you try all the time to twist what I am saying. Really sad.

Did you just bother to read my words? ... I spoke clearly of an impression. That is to say a feeling, a feeling.

I have to concede one thing: The answers and arguments given here give me one impression:

That permanent residents in Canada are a huge herd of cattle that must be "controlled" on a regular basis, and to which mechanisms must be put in place to "help" them to meet the minimum residency requirement ... that those who give these arguments are concerned about the happiness and interest of permanent residents (lol I doubt that personally).

2 possible explanations:


- Intellectual dishonesty. Your misinterpretation is intentional. (Although I clearly specified '' impression '').

- Google translator is really bad, and not sophisticated enough to translate "Figures de style" (Figure of style, in English? This concept exist in english ?), And just translates word by word.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. It is a misunderstanding. I never intended to insult anyone ... I myself an pr statut ... And very compassionate, as well as a former lawyer (Although you have already accused me of having '' bought my diploma in another topic, which is very hurtful and humiliating).


To tell the truth, the very first time that I had taken the plane out of Canada, I was amazed and stunned that there is no control at the exit (In almost all the other countries of the world, one stamps a exit stamp when leaving the country) ... It is this lack of exit control, I suppose, which rekindles fears of fraud or non-compliance with the OR. This is understandable.

The equation would therefore be a tighter control of movements (pass in front of a border agent + exit stamp with the date on the passport), but with the advantage of a longer validity period of the card. More flexibility.

We therefore ask for more flexibility on the length of validity of the pr card. No change to the minimum RO potics or durations, or even in the spirit of the law (integrated people, and ultimately good tax-paying Canadian citizens). I think it's legitimate as requests, it's worth trying to contact the press + send feedback to IRCC CIC through the form. A smart way to do this would be to expose to them our personal bad experiences with the short term of 5 years ... Just saying.

I also found the contact details of the CBC journalist specializing in immigration topics, she has already written a lot of topics concerning spousal sponsors (Her articles helped unblock the situation for them), the citizenship application fees, and the situation of blocking citizenship tests:

Kathleen Harris from CBC

kathleen.harris@cbc.ca

 

[canuck78]

Who spoke of trust or having confidence? ... I'm pretty well aware that not everyone works like this. The world of Telletubies with happy endings does not exist unfortunately, I know ... I rather alluded to their sense of responsibility, and to the fact that people with status sign a paper clearly mentioning that they have read correctly the passage of the law talking about RO + the agent who explains to them several times orally ... And that they will assume the consequences (that is to say a cancellation of their PR status, if they do not comply).

I completely agree that the law must be respected, and the violators must bear the consequences ... We can defend a certain political vision of immigration ... But not in this way. You have to have the audacity and the courage to set out the ideas clearly, not by considering people as incapable of facing their responsibilities alone ... The argument of the short duration of the card to '' regulate '' or 'controlling' people is misleading, in my opinion ... and within the limits of underestimating people pr status (Otherwise, as I said, why the existence of Permanent Resident Travel Documents ( PRTDs)? ... In other words: A person with pm status may be in full compliance with his OR conditions, but ending up with an expired pr card while outside of Canada is a question coincidence of timing ... The logic of explaining the limited validity period of 5 years, by the desire to want to control them and give them a `` call to order '' is completely fallacious, dishonest ... And I almost want to say humiliating.

A concrete example to illustrate my remarks: Suppose a person X, father of a family, who has never left Canada since his arrival with his wife, has 2 children both born in Canada, well integrated, good jobs, etc. .. His mother is very ill in her country (God save you from that,friends ... It is a bit of a cartoonish example to illustrate my point). Note that the person's country of origin is not fortunate enough to have a respectable passport that allows entry to Canada without a visa ...

This good (future) citizen, and also a good loving son, takes the first plane to his country of origin, and doesn't even bother to look at the expiration date of his pr card, he is so horrified and sad. .

After the funeral, he realizes he's stuck in his home country. Pr card expired ... It is a totally fictitious scenario, but possible and truly tragic.

Why should we punish this tax-paying tax payer with such a restricted loan life, only 5 years? ... Wouldn't it be wonderful to have a longer pr-card validity period? ... I remind you that the status of PR is PERMANENT ... And that a more extensive card will certainly cover the time before any person taking status becomes a Canadian citizen ...





It is precisely this interpretation that I find `` infantilizing '', that is to say that we consider the PR status as people who are not mature or having the age of legal majority, and that they are unable themselves to assess the risks, or to assume the consequences of their actions if they do not respect the rules of the game ...

In truth, when I spoke about herds, I was ironic criticizing the deceptive or even humiliating arguments, as I explained above ... I also clearly used the word `` impression '' before making this criticism with an image, figure of speech. I wanted to give a picture of my feeling and my perception of these arguments.

Here is your answer, my dear @dpenabill

... I am really flabbergasted that you try all the time to twist what I am saying. Really sad.

Did you just bother to read my words? ... I spoke clearly of an impression. That is to say a feeling, a feeling.





2 possible explanations:


- Intellectual dishonesty. Your misinterpretation is intentional. (Although I clearly specified '' impression '').

- Google translator is really bad, and not sophisticated enough to translate "Figures de style" (Figure of style, in English? This concept exist in english ?), And just translates word by word.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. It is a misunderstanding. I never intended to insult anyone ... I myself an pr statut ... And very compassionate, as well as a former lawyer (Although you have already accused me of having '' bought my diploma in another topic, which is very hurtful and humiliating).


To tell the truth, the very first time that I had taken the plane out of Canada, I was amazed and stunned that there is no control at the exit (In almost all the other countries of the world, one stamps a exit stamp when leaving the country) ... It is this lack of exit control, I suppose, which rekindles fears of fraud or non-compliance with the OR. This is understandable.

The equation would therefore be a tighter control of movements (pass in front of a border agent + exit stamp with the date on the passport), but with the advantage of a longer validity period of the card. More flexibility.

We therefore ask for more flexibility on the length of validity of the pr card. No change to the minimum RO potics or durations, or even in the spirit of the law (integrated people, and ultimately good tax-paying Canadian citizens). I think it's legitimate as requests, it's worth trying to contact the press + send feedback to IRCC CIC through the form. A smart way to do this would be to expose to them our personal bad experiences with the short term of 5 years ... Just saying.

For the rare situations where a person has left Canada in an emergency not having renewed their PR card they can file for a PRTD. Given just this forum and the amount of people who enter not meeting their RO it seems unlikely that Canada will give PRs a travel document so they can easily fly into Canada for 10 years and file an appeal if necessary to try and keep their status.