Bill C-24 Second Reading on February 27th:

[MasterGeek]

bump!

 

[OHKIDDA]

And, in all due respect, I think you don't really know what you're talking about. I'm not 'minorizing' the value of new citizens (if such a word does indeed exist). I'm putting it in its proper context. Once you are a citizen, it does not matter how you became one. New citizens will vote no different than other citizens. They will vote with their economic interests of lower income taxes in their head. To do otherwise, would be indeed foolishly irrational. And yes, I have to concede, there are always citizens who will act foolishly but I'll bet they are in the extreme fringes and hence a very tiny minority at best.

More generally, I was addressing the pervasive impression people have in this forum that they are somehow entitled to demand alterations of the portions of bill C-24 that don't suit them just because they are PR's and can engage in protest. There's also the widespread attitude among these people that a huge part of the voting electorate supports them. And for icing on the cake, many believe that MPs are going to pay attention to them since they're going to be citizens tomorrow.

All of these notions are just delusional, self-serving fantasy that stokes the egos of those who hold them. You go ahead and believe MP's will bow to you if it makes you feel important, but that doesn't make it true. In fact, by believing it, you just show a blatant ignorance of the political establishment since on major policy issues MPs largely take their marching orders from their party headquarters. Letters from current citizens have almost no effect on them, let alone pleas from non-voting immigrants.

I'm glad you weren't around during the civil rights movement. You are, as a human, unnecessary. The majority of PRs are not protesting to the Bill because they are entitled to a better treatment. They are protesting because they feel they will be treated unfairly and unethically.
I am a PR and am fully aware that just because I don't like part of a bill, doesn't mean it should be removed. There may be countless justifications that support Bill C24. Further, the current political institutions and establishments may be completely indifferent to my concerns.

However, I can express my dissent, as can other PRs. Believing that my voice may have an impact somewhere is not a delusion in a democratic society, you intellectual zero. Last time I checked, I was in Canada, not China. Now, go back to being an obedient dog.

 

[vic48912]

I'm glad you weren't around during the civil rights movement. You are, as a human, unnecessary. The majority of PRs are not protesting to the Bill because they are entitled to a better treatment. They are protesting because they feel they will be treated unfairly and unethically.
I am a PR and am fully aware that just because I don't like part of a bill, doesn't mean it should be removed. There may be countless justifications that support Bill C24. Further, the current political institutions and establishments may be completely indifferent to my concerns.

However, I can express my dissent, as can other PRs. Believing that my voice may have an impact somewhere is not a delusion in a democratic society, you intellectual zero. Last time I checked, I was in Canada, not China. Now, go back to being an obedient dog.

Well said, I am sure Torontosm another poster with zero brain power will come to his rescue.

 

[on-hold]

This post was responding to mine -- I, and I don't think this guy, were not disparaging the rights of PRs to protest, we were pointing out that their idea of peeling off 30 CPC MPs and getting all of the opposition to vote with them, was a bizarre fantasy. Which it is, this bill has substantial bipartisan support.

Also, I disagree, I don't think most PRs are afraid they will be treated unethically, I think they're angry that they are going to have to live in Canada longer before they apply for citizenship. That's fine to feel that way, but it's not anger about an unethical principal, it's anger at an inconvenience. If I'm wrong, tell me what unethical treatment you fear?

As for the value of protest to the issue, there are many, many issues where public protest hurts the people protesting -- Canadians who oppose abortion, for example, form a large part of the current government's support. The government has told them to shut their traps because the Canadian population as a whole has decided that they don't want to hear a bunch of Prairie conservatives trying to make abortion illegal. In the same manner, I suspect that the news that large numbers of Canadian immigrants are protesting having to live in Canada for four years, and being asked to settle here permanently, will not bring wide delight or support.

But of course you can protest, no one at all is denying that right. And if your rights were endangered, I'd join you.

 

[fasnoon]

Things, on the surface, seem to be moving along! Not sure if its with the help of the $40 Million they have put in/or plan to put in. Guys, its all about resources! They clearly know how to fix the RQ and ALL other issues... but they are not pressed to do so. If they want to, they can hire 100 FT staff members and another 50 part time and you will surely see the backlog on RQ's etc. vanish in no time! They DON'T want to spend, its not a priority for them!!!

 

[on-hold]

Things, on the surface, seem to be moving along! Not sure if its with the help of the $40 Million they have put in/or plan to put in. Guys, its all about resources! They clearly know how to fix the RQ and ALL other issues... but they are not pressed to do so. If they want to, they can hire 100 FT staff members and another 50 part time and you will surely see the backlog on RQ's etc. vanish in no time! They DON'T want to spend, its not a priority for them!!!

This I agree completely with -- and I suspect that part of the impetus behind the current bill is that it will give them a grace period of about a year to fix the giant mess the botched RQ process created.

 

[sthaeem]

Things, on the surface, seem to be moving along! Not sure if its with the help of the $40 Million they have put in/or plan to put in. Guys, its all about resources! They clearly know how to fix the RQ and ALL other issues... but they are not pressed to do so. If they want to, they can hire 100 FT staff members and another 50 part time and you will surely see the backlog on RQ's etc. vanish in no time! They DON'T want to spend, its not a priority for them!!!

Looking at this:
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/statistics/data-release/2012-Q4/index.asp
(scroll down to Canadian citizenship)

Basically, the number of applications processed in:
2011 was 181,288,
2010 was 181,288
and in 2012 was 113,111
and may be even less in 2013.

So, it looks like CIC may be going back to their 2010 and 2011 year processing.

And it is possible that they may have half processed applications in 2013 being very slow and now to show progress together with going back to normal processing speed. In the committee meeting on March 5th the minister did say that CIC may not be able to keep this pace (as in January and Feb 2014) for the rest of the year.

One very good question Liberal MP asked about EAP. Why was half of the promised total $44 million not spend in 2013/2014 and it was $0. And the full $44 million was kept for 2014/2015 year. And this is against the promise (I am just writing what he said, you can listen to his talk during the question/answer section on March 5th). So, this bring us to another question (he said - the only Liberal MP from Markham in committee - I forgot his name) that government may not even spend this amount and the members would know only after the election next year. I didn't see any answer to this question.

and
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/statistics/data-release/2013-Q2/index.asp

It shows slowing down processing started sometimes in later half of 2012 and it may be just picking up to show that CIC is doing something. I wish CIC had kept the same pace as they had in 2010 and 2011 and now the processing times would be very different. Not sure if it was because of some reason or intentional to create this problem and then come up with a solution to eliminate backlog. I think they are still not addressing the real problem for backlog (i.e. resources and everyone going thru so many unnecessary checks and document requirements just because of very tiny applicants - fraud etc.)

I am just thinking out loud. I may be wrong. Just thoughts based on CIC and MPs recorded discussion from parliament site.

 

[on-hold]

Here's a good article:

http://www.thestar.com/news/immigration/2014/03/03/canadian_newcomers_dread_changes_to_citizenship_rules.html

 

[OHKIDDA]

This post was responding to mine -- I, and I don't think this guy, were not disparaging the rights of PRs to protest, we were pointing out that their idea of peeling off 30 CPC MPs and getting all of the opposition to vote with them, was a bizarre fantasy. Which it is, this bill has substantial bipartisan support.

Also, I disagree, I don't think most PRs are afraid they will be treated unethically, I think they're angry that they are going to have to live in Canada longer before they apply for citizenship. That's fine to feel that way, but it's not anger about an unethical principal, it's anger at an inconvenience. If I'm wrong, tell me what unethical treatment you fear?

As for the value of protest to the issue, there are many, many issues where public protest hurts the people protesting -- Canadians who oppose abortion, for example, form a large part of the current government's support. The government has told them to shut their traps because the Canadian population as a whole has decided that they don't want to hear a bunch of Prairie conservatives trying to make abortion illegal. In the same manner, I suspect that the news that large numbers of Canadian immigrants are protesting having to live in Canada for four years, and being asked to settle here permanently, will not bring wide delight or support.

But of course you can protest, no one at all is denying that right. And if your rights were endangered, I'd join you.

I definitely hate PRs who are only protesting because it's inconvenient for them and they'll have to stay in Canada for longer. I loathe PRs who get their status and then only fulfill minimums. I wish they would just have their status revoked.

My concern is that if the government removes the inclusion of time spent prior to becoming PR (perhaps as as student or worker), it devalues those people. Essentially, the government is saying "Come to Canada. Pay three times the fees of other students. And, of course, when you graduate and get a job, we'll make it as hard as possible for you to stay here. But, we love you guys, though, and we need you."

So my primary concern is not requirng that more time is spent in Canada, but that the time spent prior to becoming a PR is not counted. I don't get that. What's the difference between staying in Canada as a legitimate student or worker, and a PR? You still pay all the taxes, fees, etc. It just seems like a nonsensical thing to do, turning foreign students and workers into second-class people, when in fact, the existence of these people provides jobs and security for hundreds/thousands of Canadians.

 

[rayman_m]

I definitely hate PRs who are only protesting because it's inconvenient for them and they'll have to stay in Canada for longer. I loathe PRs who get their status and then only fulfill minimums. I wish they would just have their status revoked.

I object your above quote. Why you would think like this? Have you not been a PR and then path to the citizenship? Don't forget we all are immigrant in this land..

New law will effect PRs who came in this country knowing that will have to spend 3 years to qualify for citizenship. Citizenship is a privilege for one who came as PR in Canada. My view is that, if the effective date of the new law is set on deferred date then those PR came here knowing the current rule may be eligible to apply. Future PR not yet landed in Canada, surely will be glad to accept the 4 years residency as they will set their life and mindset accordingly..

 

[marcus66502]

So my primary concern is not requirng that more time is spent in Canada, but that the time spent prior to becoming a PR is not counted. I don't get that. What's the difference between staying in Canada as a legitimate student or worker, and a PR? You still pay all the taxes, fees, etc. It just seems like a nonsensical thing to do, turning foreign students and workers into second-class people, when in fact, the existence of these people provides jobs and security for hundreds/thousands of Canadians.

Your primary concern is your own self-interest. I agree with on-hold here and nothing has ever rang truer than what he said in his last post. You and any others who are protesting the removal of pre-PR time are simply protesting against the inconvenience of being made to wait longer before you apply. The Canadian public sees your protests for what they are: cries of inconvenience. Hence this public has no sympathy for you. None whatsoever.

And just to nail the gist of your "argument", why exactly should pre-PR time count toward residence? As a non-PR you're technically a foreign national with the intention, at least officially, to leave Canada when your status expires. One could argue that in this situation you don't intend to establish significant ties to Canada, which has been the explicitly stated purpose of the residence requirement for PRs. The income taxes you pay as a foreign worker are not for the future right to have your cries of inconvenience heard in Ottawa. They're for the services you get while living here in civilized society (you know ... the roads you drive on and such). And the university tuition fees you pay as a foreign student are for your own edification. Why should they have anything to do with any residence requirement for future citizenship?

Whatever your profession is, you should stick to it and not venture into academia with your analogies of the Civil Rights Movements. You don't seem to be very good at this and you're only embarrassing yourself. Like on-hold said, nobody here is arguing against your right to protest. But in some cases protests are useless and this is one of them. The fact remains that as mere PRs you are a non-voting block and hence, again, you have no standing to demand anything from this government.

The Government of Canada is elected by Canadian citizens and, come election time, only has to answer to citizens. Moving MPs with protests from non-voters sounds about as bizarre (in terms of effectiveness) as trying to shoot mosquitoes with a cannon.

 

[rayman_m]

I agree with marcus66502. We should not be looking only for our self interest. We should think about the PRs who are in agony and equally concerned as millions of Canadian who think this Govt. is changing the law for their own political interest. I am quite sure if this law would have gone through public opinion polls, it would have failed. Harper govt. is no longer enjoying majority of public support as per recent polls..

 

[on-hold]

I definitely hate PRs who are only protesting because it's inconvenient for them and they'll have to stay in Canada for longer. I loathe PRs who get their status and then only fulfill minimums. I wish they would just have their status revoked.

My concern is that if the government removes the inclusion of time spent prior to becoming PR (perhaps as as student or worker), it devalues those people. Essentially, the government is saying "Come to Canada. Pay three times the fees of other students. And, of course, when you graduate and get a job, we'll make it as hard as possible for you to stay here. But, we love you guys, though, and we need you."

So my primary concern is not requirng that more time is spent in Canada, but that the time spent prior to becoming a PR is not counted. I don't get that. What's the difference between staying in Canada as a legitimate student or worker, and a PR? You still pay all the taxes, fees, etc. It just seems like a nonsensical thing to do, turning foreign students and workers into second-class people, when in fact, the existence of these people provides jobs and security for hundreds/thousands of Canadians.

I agree with this -- I don't think it is unethical for the government to change the pre-PR grant, but it is stupid. In my opinion, studying here or working as a temporary worker gives people much more interaction with Canadian society than many PRs. What about, for example, the wife of a skilled worker who comes here as a PR, doesn't study, and makes friends in her own ethnic group? She has far less interaction with 'Canada' than a live-in caregiver or a university student. When I came to Canada (tragically long ago) as a university student, I lived and studied with Canadians every day and I felt that 'Canada' was my normal life. I just don't think that it's unethical for the government to change this, just dumb. And if they were nice people, they'd do what Australia did, and set it two years in the future so that current people wouldn't find their plans suddenly impossible.

I don't care that much one way or the other about PRs who stay the minimum and then leave. Canadians do that too . . . check out the university applications to southern Cal . . .

 

[surgi]

This post was responding to mine -- I, and I don't think this guy, were not disparaging the rights of PRs to protest, we were pointing out that their idea of peeling off 30 CPC MPs and getting all of the opposition to vote with them, was a bizarre fantasy. Which it is, this bill has substantial bipartisan support.

Also, I disagree, I don't think most PRs are afraid they will be treated unethically, I think they're angry that they are going to have to live in Canada longer before they apply for citizenship. That's fine to feel that way, but it's not anger about an unethical principal, it's anger at an inconvenience. If I'm wrong, tell me what unethical treatment you fear?

As for the value of protest to the issue, there are many, many issues where public protest hurts the people protesting -- Canadians who oppose abortion, for example, form a large part of the current government's support. The government has told them to shut their traps because the Canadian population as a whole has decided that they don't want to hear a bunch of Prairie conservatives trying to make abortion illegal. In the same manner, I suspect that the news that large numbers of Canadian immigrants are protesting having to live in Canada for four years, and being asked to settle here permanently, will not bring wide delight or support.

But of course you can protest, no one at all is denying that right. And if your rights were endangered, I'd join you.

In reality I do not know how you define ethics?? If you are applying for immigration and they make you sign for papers about your rights and obligations of the process of citizenship even before you are accepted for immigration. Also.at your arrival at the airport,they take one hour to explain to you ,that you have to stay 1095 days and if you go to USA it will be counted or not and what does it mean physical presence in Canada and so on and they get a paper signed declaring that you understood everything concerning this. If you have a family and fighting to work and can not find a job and they refuse to give you a license ,even they were very enthusiastic when were convincing you to come to live and work in Canada. Then all of a sudden, all of this (gone with the wind). Everything changed on you midstream. What is ethical here??!!! If you think this is ethical and if you feel that you are hurted but you should not talk, in whihc country we live?? Peronally I think in a democratic fair country no law is allowed to hurt a single citizen, either you should find for this citizen a cape for this law which may be beneficial for others or no need for it at all. This is the era of Stalline who was sacrificing thousands of people for the whole society. Everybody knows well he was a big liar. I am really sad.

 

[on-hold]

In reality I do not know how you define ethics?? If you are applying for immigration and they make you sign for papers about your rights and obligations of the process of citizenship even before you are accepted for immigration. Also.at your arrival at the airport,they take one hour to explain to you ,that you have to stay 1095 days and if you go to USA it will be counted or not and what does it mean physical presence in Canada and so on and they get a paper signed declaring that you understood everything concerning this. If you have a family and fighting to work and can not find a job and they refuse to give you a license ,even they were very enthusiastic when were convincing you to come to live and work in Canada. Then all of a sudden, all of this (gone with the wind). Everything changed on you midstream. What is ethical here??!!! If you think this is ethical and if you feel that you are hurted but you should not talk, in whihc country we live?? Peronally I think in a democratic fair country no law is allowed to hurt a single citizen, either you should find for this citizen a cape for this law which may be beneficial for others or no need for it at all. This is the era of Stalline who was sacrificing thousands of people for the whole society. Everybody knows well he was a big liar. I am really sad.

Look, I'm not one of the guys who goes around saying "That's the process, if you don't like it, go home." I hate authoritarian people like that, I feel that the process should work for PRs and for Canada both. However:

- Canada does get to define the terms on which people become citizens. If they want to take out the pre-PR grant, that's stupid, but they can do it. They should grandfather it in, maybe protesting that would help.

- I know exactly how you feel with a family and no job. The same thing happened to me and it is a nightmare. I can completely see how waiting another year, or two years, could destroy your plans. I'm sorry about that.

- But everything didn't change. 3/4 years changes to 4/6 years. It's a change in degree, not a change in kind.

- Laws hurt everyone, all the time, that has nothing to do with democracy. My car's airbags blew out in a fender-bender, instead of cutting them off and driving, I have to pay thousands of dollars to fix them. C'est la vie.

- Saying that being forced to wait an extra year to apply for Canadian citizenship, which is still the easiest to obtain in the world, is the same as Stalinism, is just stupid. I know that it puts terrible stress on a family to immigrate and try to settle in, but if things are that tough, you should come to Alberta. There are good jobs here for people who want to work, and the rent is cheaper than the GTA and Vancouver.

And one thing that I do hate is when people argue that they've been recruited or tricked into coming to Canada. The process for qualifying for a professional license is not secret, every person can look on the Internet or write emails and see what they will have to do. Did you do that?