Bill C-6: Senate stage

[sukhi7]

With bill passed in 3rd reading and heading to HOC , I believe with these amendments still conditions of presence of 183 days in each calendar year for 3 years will still apply.

Any expert comments please.

 

[Joshua1]

Do you honestly think your calls make any difference? You think the Minister can easily change his priorities and schedules because someone is calling to ask about one of the tons of bills out there? Come on man, give them a break. At this stage, all we can all do is sit and wait while Bill C-6 makes its last sprint to the finish line. For the record, do you think whoever talked to you on the phone will really go to the Minister and say some random PR called and said we need to speed up C6?

People can be delusional when they desperately want something.

 

[_MK_]

People can be delusional when they desperately want something.

Thats how democracy works. If you keep quiet, your opinions are never heard!
Just look at what is happening south of the border. If you do not participate or do not think your voice matters, you end up with results like Trump and Brexit!

It never hurts to try. Takes 2 minutes out of your day. I had emailed multiple senators in the last few months about Bill C6 and the amendments and lot of them actually replied back as well.
This system of government does not work well if you do not participate!

 

[quasar81]

People can be delusional when they desperately want something.

If you desperately want some govt to go away, don't go and vote(sit on sofa and complain online on some forum) because your want may be a delusion only.

 

[rizmayo]

Do you honestly think your calls make any difference? You think the Minister can easily change his priorities and schedules because someone is calling to ask about one of the tons of bills out there? Come on man, give them a break. At this stage, all we can all do is sit and wait while Bill C-6 makes its last sprint to the finish line. For the record, do you think whoever talked to you on the phone will really go to the Minister and say some random PR called and said we need to speed up C6?

I guess you have never spent time inside a minister or MP's office. If the MP/Minister was personally answering calls or reading emails, I too would have advised people on this forum to stop bothering them.

Unlike some countries where the members of this forum originate from, Ministers and MPs in Canada get funding for staff whose primary job function is to interact with the community.

You will meet a lot of people who carry around letters they received from their MPs or boast about the personal call they got, however what they don't know is that the staff writes the letters/emails and MPs only sign before sending and the phone calls that seem so personal and full of details about your problem and your last face-to-face meeting that make you feel the MP remembers you, are actually scripted bullet points the staff hand them, 2 minutes before they call you.

Too give you an idea of what happens (from previous personal experience hanging out with friends in an MP's office), I will use bill C6 as an example:
1. All letters, emails, phone calls and personal visits, regarding a concern (Bill C6 in this example) will be logged (Names, one line summary of concern, etc.)
2. If this is a community concern (which bill C6 is), they will start a tally on the number of people For and Against the issue.
3. If certain things about the concern are repeated (e.g. Bill C6 is already delayed a year) by several people, that is also logged in the summary.
4. The MP is then given this summary periodically, along with stats (how many raised the concern, how many for, how many against). The concern that was repeated the most is also highlighted.
5. If it is a global issue, the MP would either personally (depends on the case, less likely for C6) raise this with the concerned Minister, or instruct their staff to coordinate with the minister's staff (more likely for a bill) to either express their support or opposition for a bill.
6. The staff in the minister's office prepares a similar summary, that the minister uses to prioritize their whole year.


The point is: If the politicians did not react to people reaching out them, they would not hire staff specifically for this purpose.

 

[marcher]

I guess you have never spent time inside a minister or MP's office. If the MP/Minister was personally answering calls or reading emails, I too would have advised people on this forum to stop bothering them.

Unlike some countries where the members of this forum originate from, Ministers and MPs in Canada get funding for staff whose primary job function is to interact with the community.

You will meet a lot of people who carry around letters they received from their MPs or boast about the personal call they got, however what they don't know is that the staff writes the letters/emails and MPs only sign before sending and the phone calls that seem so personal and full of details about your problem and your last face-to-face meeting that make you feel the MP remembers you, are actually scripted bullet points the staff hand them, 2 minutes before they call you.

Too give you an idea of what happens (from previous personal experience hanging out with friends in an MP's office), I will use bill C6 as an example:
1. All letters, emails, phone calls and personal visits, regarding a concern (Bill C6 in this example) will be logged (Names, one line summary of concern, etc.)
2. If this is a community concern (which bill C6 is), they will start a tally on the number of people For and Against the issue.
3. If certain things about the concern are repeated (e.g. Bill C6 is already delayed a year) by several people, that is also logged in the summary.
4. The MP is then given this summary periodically, along with stats (how many raised the concern, how many for, how many against). The concern that was repeated the most is also highlighted.
5. If it is a global issue, the MP would either personally (depends on the case, less likely for C6) raise this with the concerned Minister, or instruct their staff to coordinate with the minister's staff (more likely for a bill) to either express their support or opposition for a bill.
6. The staff in the minister's office prepares a similar summary, that the minister uses to prioritize their whole year.


The point is: If the politicians did not react to people reaching out them, they would not hire staff specifically for this purpose.

I am aware of everything you said above, hence I said it is NOT worth contacting the Minister at this stage since it will NOT make any difference. I think you need to address this message to the genius who thinks flooding the Minister's phone line and emails will make C6 a law overnight!

There is a right timing and subject that requires contacting politicians. C6 in its final step is already too late. What do you expect the Minister to do at this stage that he wouldn't do if not contacted by the public now? I never said contacting politicians is useless, I said contacting the Minister at this stage is useless.

 

[quasar81]

Thanks rizmayo, for explaining the facts.....
Delusionals are aware of everything but still say it won't make any difference

 

[Whocares]

Guys tweet or email ur MPs, you will be thier future voters.

 

[Varangian]

I am aware of everything you said above, hence I said it is NOT worth contacting the Minister at this stage since it will NOT make any difference. I think you need to address this message to the genius who thinks flooding the Minister's phone line and emails will make C6 a law overnight!

There is a right timing and subject that requires contacting politicians. C6 in its final step is already too late. What do you expect the Minister to do at this stage that he wouldn't do if not contacted by the public now? I never said contacting politicians is useless, I said contacting the Minister at this stage is useless.

I agree!

 

[747-captain]

People can be delusional when they desperately want something.

Totally agree with you! What some of these people don't realize is that as a PR one has no "right" to demand they be given citizenship immediately.

These arguments about "participating in a democracy" and demanding your rights etc. are BEYOND INSANE. The only people who have a right to demand anything are CURRENT CANADIAN CITIZENS (and even then, there has got to be some sense of reasonable-ness (if that's even a word) to one's demands).

While I am all for advocating for one's positions, it must be done with a tone of politeness and most importantly, the REQUEST has to be reasonable. You can't DEMAND : that the bill be passed tomorrow! : ....and then state what you're doing, is simply exercising your democratic rights! :

....And please don't compare what's happening here in the US, the Trump charade and all, with the C6 bill. Trump is stepping all over people's basic constitutional rights by dragging them out of their houses in the middle of the night and deporting them. It is just not even on the same level as not getting your citizenship tomorrow just because you want it so badly :

Instead of constantly losing sleep over how quickly the bill will pass, what you folks should be deathly scared of, is the fact that there are virtually ZERO protections for a naturalized citizen currently in Canada. Spend your energy and efforts, instead, to make absolutely sure that a future Leitch or Bernier administration will not be able to revoke citizenship right and left and try to do things that Trump has unsuccessfully attempted here in the US, thanks to the EXTREMELY STRONG protections that exist in the United States! Use your energy to advocate for the amendment sponsored by Sen. Omidvar!

 

[quasar81]

Guys tweet or email ur MPs, you will be thier future voters.

100% Agree...

 

[Varangian]

Totally agree with you! What some of these people don't realize is that as a PR one has no "right" to demand they be given citizenship immediately.

These arguments about "participating in a democracy" and demanding your rights etc. are BEYOND INSANE. The only people who have a right to demand anything are CURRENT CANADIAN CITIZENS (and even then, there has got to be some sense of reasonable-ness (if that's even a word) to one's demands).

While I am all for advocating for one's positions, it must be done with a tone of politeness and most importantly, the REQUEST has to be reasonable. You can't DEMAND : that the bill be passed tomorrow! : ....and then state what you're doing, is simply exercising your democratic rights! :

....And please don't compare what's happening here in the US, the Trump charade and all, with the C6 bill. Trump is stepping all over people's basic constitutional rights by dragging them out of their houses in the middle of the night and deporting them. It is just not even on the same level as not getting your citizenship tomorrow just because you want it so badly :

I agree. Looks like some people misunderstand the term Democracy.

 

[spyfy]

These arguments about "participating in a democracy" and demanding your rights etc. are BEYOND INSANE. The only people who have a right to demand anything are CURRENT CANADIAN CITIZENS (and even then, there has got to be some sense of reasonable-ness (if that's even a word) to one's demands).

I agree with some of the other points you make. However, this statement about only having rights to demand anything if you are a Citizen is not just morally but also legally not correct.

There are several Charter rights that PRs enjoy just like Canadians. Also, every person living in Canada has the right to make their voice heard. Do not equate the right to vote with the right to democratic participation. Permanent Residents can join partys, donate to these parties, vote for party leaders and so on. So non-Citizens have democratic rights, too. At universities, even international students who aren't Permanent Residents have the right to vote in University Elections for the Senate and other bodies that directly decide on how tax money is spent.

Again, you are right in some parts regarding that no right should be overused. But the assumption that non-citizens don't have the right to be heard and/or demand something is not correct. We could argue about the ethical correctness forever, but legally that is just not the case.

Example, this is from the Charter of Rights and Freedoms:

"2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association."

Which means everyone (literally everyone, it is not a Citizen's right but a universal right) has the right to form a party, a union, call and lobby MPs and whatever, write opinion pieces in whatever newspaper and so on to demand and/or ask for action.

This does, again, don't mean this right should be overused. But we still have it.

 

[paulvoyer]

Hello spyfy
what is the name of the thing that we request at the court to follow up with an application within the federal parties ??? something begin with mag...... ,,,, I don't remember ,,, something like ATIP ,, help please

 

[Joshua1]

Instead of constantly losing sleep over how quickly the bill will pass, what you folks should be deathly scared of, is the fact that there are virtually ZERO protections for a naturalized citizen currently in Canada. Spend your energy and efforts, instead, to make absolutely sure that a future Leitch or Bernier administration will not be able to revoke citizenship right and left and try to do things that Trump has unsuccessfully attempted here in the US, thanks to the EXTREMELY STRONG protections that exist in the United States! Use your energy to advocate for the amendment sponsored by Sen. Omidvar!
[/quote]

To me, this is the most part of bill c-6. C-24 turned most immigrants into 2nd class citizens by using the "terrorism" cover-up and left people at the mercy of a minister (without appeal) to revoke citizenship. What is constituted as terrorism today may (most likely) mean something else tomorrow as times are changing. Once there is a precedent, anything is possible in case law.