Bill C-6: Senate stage

[SufferInCan]

Any attempt to impose ANY KIND OF AMENDMENTS at this stage is another NASTY TACTIC TO DELAY BILL C-6. Amendments are important and critical, yes we all agree. BUT due to the sensitivity of these amendments which touch a serious matter like citizenship revocation, AMENDMENTS SHOULD BE INTRODUCED IN A SEPARATE BILL. They should take time discussing, arguing and playing ping pong LATER ON, not at this timing when everyone is fed up waiting for C-6 to be implemented.

 

[jsm0085]

Any attempt to impose ANY KIND OF AMENDMENTS at this stage is another NASTY TACTIC TO DELAY BILL C-6. Amendments are important and critical, yes we all agree. BUT due to the sensitivity of these amendments which touch a serious matter like citizenship revocation, AMENDMENTS SHOULD BE INTRODUCED IN A SEPARATE BILL. They should take time discussing, arguing and playing ping pong LATER ON, not at this timing when everyone is fed up waiting for C-6 to be implemented.

No, they should be covered in bill C-6. The purpose of bill C-6 is to replace C-24, which removed the citizens right to due process. The only purpose of doing it in a separate bill is to suit inpatient people like you. It makes no legal or logical sense to do it as a separate bill.

 

[itsmyid]

Any attempt to impose ANY KIND OF AMENDMENTS at this stage is another NASTY TACTIC TO DELAY BILL C-6. Amendments are important and critical, yes we all agree. BUT due to the sensitivity of these amendments which touch a serious matter like citizenship revocation, AMENDMENTS SHOULD BE INTRODUCED IN A SEPARATE BILL. They should take time discussing, arguing and playing ping pong LATER ON, not at this timing when everyone is fed up waiting for C-6 to be implemented.

Agree
At this point , the biggest winner will likely be the cons - they have more time to tell the public that 'liberal wants to keep the citizenship of terrorists' and convince more Canadians that it is a bad idea (based on comments under many related news stories about this bill, a lot of people are agreeing with them), they won't have to worry about losing additional votes from new citizens (because if it gets implemented later than this year , it would just be too late for many people to get citizenship in time to vote). All they need to do is just throw in some more delay in the discussion like they did for the first and second reading

 

[itsmyid]

No, they should be covered in bill C-6. The purpose of bill C-6 is to replace C-24, which removed the citizens right to due process. The only purpose of doing it in a separate bill is to suit inpatient people like you. It makes no legal or logical sense to do it as a separate bill.

You are right and it should be... but the reality is, the purpose to include it now is just to cover Monsef's a*s, otherwise why didn't they think of it the first time when they put C6 together?

Before you accuse me of being impatient about this bill passing - I have said it before , at this point I am pretty indifferent about when it will pass, since I will be qualified in less than 10 months under 4/6, whether this bill pass this summer or next year really doesn't make a difference to me. And the longer it takes the better it is for my potential application, since I may not have to suffer from the backlog resulted from the passing of C6, if it takes longer to pass and implement

 

[jsm0085]

This was one of the first questions raised to the immigration minister, at the one and his response was, he would welcome it. It's introduction has been introduced at a time that is unlikely to slow down the process. Had it been introduced during the second reading or the committee - the process would have taken longer. The third reading was going to take a while anyway, especially considering senate sitting days being limited. This will pass the senate - the only concern we should have is whether or not the House of Commons will reject the amendment.

 

[egghead]

"but the reality is, the purpose to include it now is just to cover Monsef's a*s,"

True, that. The principal reason for the delay has been the amateur manner by which this has been handled by the Trudeau government. Can anyone find anywhere that Justin Trudeau, himself, has worked to push this thing through? He has kept himself at a distance for a political reasons. Monsef, Senate reform, new amendment, etc., etc. - we are allowed a little impatience, especially when imcompetence is the reason for the delay.

 

[egghead]

Geezus!

Many of you are complaining about that bill that its being mishandled by "incompetent politician/s".

Count your blessings, be thankful someone in his right mind introduced and fought for that bill.
Otherwise you'd be stuck paranoid if some crazy nut will accuse you and revoke your citizenship no questions asked.

Has it been handled well? What grade would you give to the current government for their handling of the bill? Isn't there a link between the amendment and Monsef? Has Mr. Trudeau been active in pushing the bill? Hasn't incomptence played a role in the delay(s)? If the amendment is so important, why wasn't it introduced in the orignial bill, i.e. pre-Monsef gaffe?

Any thoughts on the questions I raised, or should I just shut up and count my blessings?

 

[747-captain]

Geezus!

Many of you are complaining about that bill that its being mishandled by "incompetent politician/s".

Count your blessings, be thankful someone in his right mind introduced and fought for that bill.
Otherwise you'd be stuck paranoid if some crazy nut will accuse you and revoke your citizenship no questions asked.

Once again well stated ipfreely!! ...I totally get your frustration. It makes me laugh at the total lack of common sense of some :

.....for those arguing against this amendment, I have a question. Who is going to determine who the "bad people" are, as you say?? The Minister?? His uncle?? And who is going to be JUDGE, JURY AND EXECUTIONER of something SO DAMN VALUABLE AS YOUR CITIZENSHIP?? Once again the Minister?? .......Sorry, but if it doesn't make sense at this point, then there is nothing more I can say to make it any clearer!! :

And here's one more thing to possibly get some sense into some people's heads: We have Donald Trump here in the US and we all know how it went over for immigrants here. In spite of the law being incredibly BULLETPROOF here in the US, for naturalized citizens, he has STILL tried to go well above and beyond the law to screw over immigrants.

Initially, he blocked both visa holders and GREEN CARD HOLDERS (from certain countries) from returning to the US, regardless if the person was a "bad person" or not. Then he even considered not letting back naturalized DUAL citizens from these countries!!, which luckily in the US would be highly unconstitutional!! And as expected the courts eventually slapped him down!!

If the revocation process here was so stupid, crazy and easy as it is in Canada today, DT would have unilaterally stripped the citizenship of all people from these countries by now!! :

 

[itsmyid]

Once again well stated ipfreely!! ...I totally get your frustration. It makes me laugh at the total lack of common sense of some :

.....for those arguing against this amendment, I have a question. Who is going to determine who the "bad people" are, as you say?? The Minister?? His uncle?? And who is going to be JUDGE, JURY AND EXECUTIONER of something SO DAMN VALUABLE AS YOUR CITIZENSHIP?? Once again the Minister?? .......Sorry, but if it doesn't make sense at this point, then there is nothing more I can say to make it any clearer!! :

And here's one more thing to possibly get some sense into some people's heads: We have Donald Trump here in the US and we all know how it went over for immigrants here. In spite of the law being incredibly BULLETPROOF here in the US, for naturalized citizens, he has STILL tried to go well above and beyond the law to screw over immigrants.

Initially, he blocked both visa holders and GREEN CARD HOLDERS (from certain countries) from returning to the US, regardless if the person was a "bad person" or not. Then he even considered not letting back naturalized DUAL citizens from these countries!!, which luckily in the US would be highly unconstitutional!! And as expected the courts eventually slapped him down!!

If the revocation process here was so stupid, crazy and easy as it is in Canada today, DT would have unilaterally stripped the citizenship of all people from these countries by now!! :

Worrying about all who's going to take away your Canadian citizenship while you don't even have one to start with .... and I am still struggling with how I should spend the lottery money that I haven't won yet

 

[spyfy]

"but the reality is, the purpose to include it now is just to cover Monsef's a*s,"

True, that. The principal reason for the delay has been the amateur manner by which this has been handled by the Trudeau government. Can anyone find anywhere that Justin Trudeau, himself, has worked to push this thing through? He has kept himself at a distance for a political reasons. Monsef, Senate reform, new amendment, etc., etc. - we are allowed a little impatience, especially when imcompetence is the reason for the delay.

When people write these things I sometimes wonder if they have any idea about how the legislative process in Canada works. Make yourself acquainted with the history and procedure of the Senate and you will realize that the Prime Minister has minimal possibilities to influence the legislative process in the Senate. The part that the PM really can influence is the passing in the HoC, which happened neither very slowly nor very fast, but simply in a usual amount of time for a bill like this.

Also it is kind of short-sighted to only look at your own situation, the one thing that affects you right now and not the bigger picture. This bill has many other implications apart from 3/5 for both people who want to become and who already are citizens. Some of them might affect you later personally, some of them might not. To think that the legislative process in Canada in general or the Senate in particular has to revolve exclusively around the interests of some impatient people in a Canada Immigration Forum (e.g. that some amendment has to be thrown under the bus just so that you can apply some weeks earlier if even) as if we are the centre of the universe is actually kind of narcissistic.

Why should the drop the amendment now (which has been in the talks for months) just because the Conservatives delayed the second reading so much? This amendment will - in the worst case - delay the process by some weeks. If the amendment were a separate bill it would in fact take up much more time in parliament with all the readings and committee sessions that have to be held for it. So in the bigger picture, parliament is actually saving time by making this an amendment.

Also, many experts in committee called for an amendment like this. Don't you want your parliamentarians to listen to experts on this matter? Would you prefer to ignore the experts' advice for the sake of faster lawmaking? What kind of laws would that produce.

I think taking a step back and thinking beyond your own particular situation for a moment is a good idea.

 

[egghead]

When people write these things I sometimes wonder if they have any idea about how the legislative process in Canada works. Make yourself acquainted with the history and procedure of the Senate and you will realize that the Prime Minister has minimal possibilities to influence the legislative process in the Senate. The part that the PM really can influence is the passing in the HoC, which happened neither very slowly nor very fast, but simply in a usual amount of time for a bill like this.

Also it is kind of short-sighted to only look at your own situation, the one thing that affects you right now and not the bigger picture. This bill has many other implications apart from 3/5 for both people who want to become and who already are citizens. Some of them might affect you later personally, some of them might not. To think that the legislative process in Canada in general or the Senate in particular has to revolve exclusively around the interests of some impatient people in a Canada Immigration Forum (e.g. that some amendment has to be thrown under the bus just so that you can apply some weeks earlier if even) as if we are the centre of the universe is actually kind of narcissistic.

I have been living full time in Canada since July of 1999. I have a pretty fair understanding of the how the political system functions. I raised some valid points in my questions, and am labelled "lacking in common sense," "ignorant concerning the political system," "narcissitic," etc. I am fortunate to have come from the U.S, so I don't really have some of the potential horror situations some have faced or may face, but you don't know my story and if you did you might have a lot less patience with this whole thing than I have had. Just saying.....................

 

[itsmyid]

I have been living full time in Canada since July of 1999. I have a pretty fair understanding of the how the political system functions. I raised some valid points in my questions, and am labelled "lacking in common sense," "ignorant concerning the political system," "narcissitic," etc. I am fortunate to have come from the U.S, so I don't really have some of the potential horror situations some have faced or may face, but you don't know my story and if you did you might have a lot less patience with this whole thing than I have had. Just saying.....................

To some people , 'ignorance' just means 'you don't agree with them'

 

[spyfy]

I have been living full time in Canada since July of 1999. I have a pretty fair understanding of the how the political system functions. I raised some valid points in my questions, and am labelled "lacking in common sense," "ignorant concerning the political system," "narcissitic," etc. I am fortunate to have come from the U.S, so I don't really have some of the potential horror situations some have faced or may face, but you don't know my story and if you did you might have a lot less patience with this whole thing than I have had. Just saying.....................

I can understand that some in here have waited for many years if not decades and this is just another rock thrown in their way now. I am not judging your situation which I don't know obviously. I also don't mean that everyone here is "narcissistic". I'm saying that some on here show these kind of tendencies. I can also understand that some of us are very impatient. I myself am impatient. But this impatience shouldn't make people call everyone involved in this process "incompetent", claim that they are "lazy", that they are just "showing off" or that they are "intentionally delaying the bill".

By all means, I know impatience, it is all too human. I have many moments of impatience myself. But - and this is just my impression in this thread - some people are letting their impatience cloud their judgement quite a bit.

 

[asifmehmood]

My only concern is, amendments are so huge, they wont send it back to committee, as this is possible as per Senate procedures, which will delay the bill significantly at this point.

 

[spyfy]

To some people , 'ignorance' just means 'you don't agree with them'

I haven't called anyone ignorant. I haven't even used that word in my post.