Bill C-6: Senate stage

[MTweet12]

@Whocares, your name says it all. It's amazing how selfish some people can be. You reached the conclusion that international students are not in Canada to be Canadians but only to get their degrees.. do you think in the same manner that PRs should be prevented from pursuing education because they're here to be Canadians and not on study permits?
Students are more likely to experience the Canadian culture and society than someone who comes as a PR and immediately joins the workforce. People on work permits are are at least giving to society as much as those on PRs since PRs can be unemployed, but most on work permits cannot.
And then you can justify those students waiting for 5-6 years before getting their PR and then getting no credit for pre-PR. wow!

 

[quasar81]

only good thing C24 brought was the short delay in getting the citizenship.

Do simple math.

4/6 temporarily reduces # of qualified applications. After 1-2 years, number of applications IRCC gets for citizenship will be same as 3/5 rule as # of immigrants coming in is same.


Guys, do simple math before thinking this. Processing time for 4/6 and 3/5 will be same after a year or so.

If processing times went down when 4/6 came it, it will be temporarily. Simple math.

 

[sia_kb8]

It is so dumb and makes no sense to count pre pr. unfair for all other immigrants who are waiting. For example, Some1 came as a student for 4 years to get a phd, why counting 2 years towards his res. ? He got his degree because that was his intention. However, I slightly agree with temp workers to get pre pr.

1) Get your facts straight. Pre-PR time only counts up to 1 year towards residency requirement.

2) The student/foreign worker has paid taxes, contributed to the economy, and is better integrated into the Canadian society compared to the immigrant who arrives in Canada and holds PR status from day one. If anything, it's unfair if pre-PR time is not counted at all. A whole bunch of countries in the EU and UK are giving 100% credit. I can go on andLet's at least agree that 50% credit is not "unfair" to the other PRs...

3) Pre-PR was a campaign promise, everyone here were shocked when the 3/5 rule was included in the original draft of C-6 in the HoC.

4) I doubt HoC will approve any amendments to residency requirements. They will end up paying for it at the ballot box.

 

[richard1234]

1) Get your facts straight. Pre-PR time only counts up to 1 year towards residency requirement.

2) The student/foreign worker has paid taxes, contributed to the economy, and is better integrated into the Canadian society compared to the immigrant who arrives in Canada and holds PR status from day one. If anything, it's unfair if pre-PR time is not counted at all. A whole bunch of countries in the EU and UK are giving 100% credit. I can go on andLet's at least agree that 50% credit is not "unfair" to the other PRs...

3) Pre-PR was a campaign promise, everyone here were shocked when the 3/5 rule was included in the original draft of C-6 in the HoC.

4) I doubt HoC will approve any amendments to residency requirements. They will end up paying for it at the ballot box.

This is what I was saying earlier. There are some people, who present their argument with no facts or alternative facts .

 

[vasyok]

Unless the intention was to get citizenship, not studying for education. In other words, the applicant falsified his/her intentions to leave Canada after obtaining his education. That was the point of getting a study visa is it not? The applicant agreed to leave Canada with no intention to immigrate to Canada by accepting the study visa. After all he/she was suppose to convince the VO officer that he/she will leave Canada after the visa expired.

Well, there is a thing called 'dual intent'. It's recognised by both Canada and US, and I think by other countries as well. It's perfectly legal to want to visit/study/work AND immigrate at the same time.

Sorry, but your statement re "the applicant agreed to leave Canada" is completely out of touch with the reality. Have you ever applied for a student/work visa?

 

[screech339]

Well, there is a thing called 'dual intent'. It's recognised by both Canada and US, and I think by other countries as well. It's perfectly legal to want to visit/study/work AND immigrate at the same time.

Sorry, but your statement re "the applicant agreed to leave Canada" is completely out of touch with the reality. Have you ever applied for a student/work visa?

Have any applicant ever tell the VO officer that he/she intends to stay to qualify for PR and citizenship in their study visa application? If yes, and still gotten study visa, then my argument is moot.

If no applicant wouldnt dare state this intention in their study visa application, then my argument stands.

 

[sia_kb8]

Unless the intention was to get citizenship, not studying for education. In other words, the applicant falsified his/her intentions to leave Canada after obtaining his education. That was the point of getting a study visa is it not? The applicant agreed to leave Canada with no intention to immigrate to Canada by accepting the study visa. After all he/she was suppose to convince the VO officer that he/she will leave Canada after the visa expired.

I am sure you are not familiar with the CIC's very own PhD stream. But it's always good to read your informed opinions.

http://fgs.news.yorku.ca/2012/06/18/phd-stream-for-permanent-residence-as-federal-skilled-workers-volet-dadmissibilite-concernant-les-etudiants-au-doctorat-pour-le-residence-permanente-a-titre-de-travailleurs-qualifies/

 

[richard1234]

Have any applicant ever tell the VO officer that he/she intends to stay to qualify for citizenship in their study visa application? If yes, and still gotten study visa, then my argument is moot.

You can think this in different way. Convincing visa officer to return back is support not committing overstay. You are allowed to change your status while you are here. Temporary to Permanent to Citizenship. As I mentioned earlier, even government wants foreign students and temporary workers stay.

 

[vasyok]

Have any applicant ever tell the VO officer that he/she intends to stay to qualify for PR and citizenship in their study visa application? If yes, and still gotten study visa, then my argument is moot.

Visitors/students/workers do not usually interview with the Canadian VO during the application process. They submit the required documents and that's all; none of the documents asks them to "promise" not to immigrate to Canada, nor it asks whether they have applied for PR in the past. (For the US, one needs to disclose a previous green card application, but it does not ban the person from getting a visa).

 

[screech339]

Visitors/students/workers do not usually interview with the Canadian VO during the application process. They submit the required documents and that's all; none of the documents asks them to "promise" not to immigrate to Canada, nor it asks whether they have applied for PR in the past. (For the US, one needs to disclose a previous green card application, but it does not ban the person from getting a visa).

You do realize that if an VO officer is not convinced that the applicant will not leave Canada at end of visa, the visa will be denied, whether it is a study , visitor, temporary work visa. When an visa is issued, it means that the VO officer is convinced that you will LEAVE at end of visa.

 

[Inlandoct2014]

Guys, is there any meetings scheduled for today? If not, so when they want to go through these new amendments?

 

[richard1234]

Visitors/students/workers do not usually interview with the Canadian VO during the application process. They submit the required documents and that's all; none of the documents asks them to "promise" not to immigrate to Canada, nor it asks whether they have applied for PR in the past. (For the US, one needs to disclose a previous green card application, but it does not ban the person from getting a visa).

Just to make your clear, it does ask whether you have applied or not. "Have you previously applied to enter or remain in Canada?" ref. Application for a Study Permit Made Outside of Canada [IMM 1294] form BACKGROUND INFORMATION #2 (c)

 

[MarceauBletard]

Guys, is there any meetings scheduled for today? If not, so when they want to go through these new amendments?

REMINDER:

Follow-up of the Bill C-6: http://www.parl.gc.ca/LegisInfo/BillDetails.aspx?Mode=1&billId=8117654&Language=E
Watch the Senate sittings: http://senparlvu.parl.gc.ca/XRender/
Senate of Canada Order of the day: https://sencanada.ca/en/in-the-chamber/order-papers-notice-papers
Senate of Canada calendar: https://sencanada.ca/en/annual-calendars/

Senate of Canada's twitter: https://twitter.com/SenateCA/
Twitter du Sénat du Canada: https://twitter.com/SenatCA/

Other Twitter accounts:
Liberal Senator Mobina Jaffer: @SenJaffer https://twitter.com/senjaffer/with_replies
Non-affiliated Senator Ratna Omidvar: @ratnaomi https://twitter.com/ratnaomi/with_replies

List of Senators:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_Senators_of_Canada
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_Senators_of_Canada

As you can see here: http://senparlvu.parl.gc.ca/XRender/ : 2PM session today

 

[sia_kb8]

You do realize that if an VO officer is not convinced that the applicant will not leave Canada at end of visa, the visa will be denied, whether it is a study , visitor, temporary work visa. When an visa is issued, it means that the VO officer is convinced that you will LEAVE at end of visa.

At the time of the initial application, the job of the initial VO is to weed out applicants who are looking to abuse a study permit as a front to immigrate to Canada. Breaking news for you: people's intentions change after living in Canada for a few years. Some hate it here or find better opportunities elsewhere. Some like it and look for legal ways to stay. You may find it shocking but not only the government welcomes this, they even provides avenues (PhD stream, CEC program, additional points in express entry) for people on temporary permit to become PRs.

 

[vasyok]

You do realize that if an VO officer is not convinced that the applicant will not leave Canada at end of visa, the visa will be denied, whether it is a study , visitor, temporary work visa. When an visa is issued, it means that the VO officer is convinced that you will LEAVE at end of visa.

Yes, you are completely right. The officer must be convinced that the applicant will not overstay. It has nothing to do with applicant's right to legally live in Canada. In many cases, one can even adjust his/her status while being in Canada. Unrelated example, many spouses of Canadians come to the country on visitor visa and stay in country while the the sponsorship process is in progress. Yet to get such a visitor visa, the VO must have been convinced that a spouse in question will not overstay in Canada.