+1(514) 937-9445 or Toll-free (Canada & US) +1 (888) 947-9445

Bill C-6: Senate stage

admontreal

Hero Member
Feb 15, 2011
326
9
Montreal, QC
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
marcher said:
Totally agree. I would also suggest moving all the minor clauses like the 3/5 rule and address them in a different bill. But I may be selfish there since that is the only clause that concerns me at this stage. I would also suggest keeping the language requirements as they are set now.
That's a good idea (and not selfish at all), it seems to me like some of the clauses address WHAT citizenship is while other items address HOW citizenship is granted. It"s like having very symbolic and strategic items and very nitty gritty operational details on the same document. It looks messy.
 

marcher

Hero Member
Mar 30, 2016
534
61
admontreal said:
That's a good idea (and not selfish at all), it seems to me like some of the clauses address WHAT citizenship is while other items address HOW citizenship is granted. It"s like having very symbolic and strategic items and very nitty gritty operational details on the same document. It looks messy.
True, I still cannot understand Harper's reason for increasing the residency period to 4/6.
 

screech339

VIP Member
Apr 2, 2013
7,887
552
Category........
Visa Office......
Vegreville
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
App. Filed.......
14-08-2012
AOR Received.
20-11-2012
Med's Done....
18-07-2012
Interview........
17-06-2013
LANDED..........
17-06-2013
admontreal said:
If I may ask, what would you redraft ?
In my case I just think that it lacks three things :

- Proper appeal procedures for misrepresentation cases
- Adjustments to the Second generation limit rule
- Last round of adjustments to address ALL the remaining Lost Canadians cases.


That would address most of the pending Citizenship problems in Canada for the next generation.
I am curious as to what kind of adjustment do you have in mind to the 2nd generation limit that will still prevent unlimited generational passing of citizenship.
 

admontreal

Hero Member
Feb 15, 2011
326
9
Montreal, QC
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
screech339 said:
I am curious as to what kind of adjustment do you have in mind to the 2nd generation limit that will still prevent unlimited generational passing of citizenship.
Like other countries of the G7 and Commonwealth peers (including the UK, Australia, USA, Singapore,...), we could add an exception for citizens by descent who lived here for 3 years (or 4 depending on what is the naturalization cap) to pass their citizenship to their children.
In New Zealand, a citizen by descent can apply after 5 years of residence in the country to become a citizen by Grant and then be able to pass his citizenship to his eventual kids. I think it's more fair than limiting it radically and blindly (I tried to find a western country with such a radical rule that doesn't allow exceptions other than for diplomats and military but I was unsuccessful).

PS: I said earlier that copying other countries shouldn't be automatic. But this seems like the most logical thing to do.
If we want to be fair between citizens by descent and citizens by grant. Otherwise, a second generation citizen would have no right to transmit her citizenship to her kids should they be born abroad, even if she spent almost her whole life in Toronto or Halifax.
 

subha_1962

Hero Member
Dec 20, 2013
265
24
Can someone kindly explain the following, does it mean only amendments or does it also include a new bill. Thank you in advance

"The Senate has almost the same powers as the House of Commons. Bills are read three times in the Commons as well as in the Senate. The Senate can only delay constitutional amendments for 180 days. But no bill can become law without its consent, and it can veto any bill as often as it likes"
 

Shmak2017

Champion Member
Sep 3, 2016
1,106
111
Category........
Visa Office......
ND
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
App. Filed.......
30-08-2016
AOR Received.
2016/09/26
File Transfer...
SA 2016/09/30 & AOR2 on 2016/10/11
Med's Done....
12-08-2016
Interview........
BG IN PROGRESS 30-March-2017 DM :31-March 2017
Passport Req..
10 April 2017
McCallum expresses hope to amend law that allows citizenship to be revoked with no hearing

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2016/10/04/mccallum-says-he-hopes-senate-will-help-canadians-stripped-of-citizenship-with-no-hearing.html
 

marcher

Hero Member
Mar 30, 2016
534
61
Shmak2017 said:
McCallum expresses hope to amend law that allows citizenship to be revoked with no hearing

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2016/10/04/mccallum-says-he-hopes-senate-will-help-canadians-stripped-of-citizenship-with-no-hearing.html
That article is from October 4th.
 

spiritsoul

Hero Member
Jan 9, 2013
448
35
Mississauga
Category........
FSW
Visa Office......
London
NOC Code......
2511
App. Filed.......
28-03-2011
AOR Received.
02-05-2011
File Transfer...
02-05-2011
Med's Request
25-11-2012
Med's Done....
17-01-2013
Interview........
Nil
Passport Req..
18-02-2013
VISA ISSUED...
11-03-2013
LANDED..........
16-06-2013
marcher said:
They haven't reached Second Readings yet.
Well, in fact they passed it I guess as they're discussing S-229 now!!!
 

marcher

Hero Member
Mar 30, 2016
534
61
subha_1962 said:
Can someone kindly explain the following, does it mean only amendments or does it also include a new bill. Thank you in advance

"The Senate has almost the same powers as the House of Commons. Bills are read three times in the Commons as well as in the Senate. The Senate can only delay constitutional amendments for 180 days. But no bill can become law without its consent, and it can veto any bill as often as it likes"
According to this the max delay permitted is only for constitutional amendments. It does not address bills, at least not in this quotation.
 

marcher

Hero Member
Mar 30, 2016
534
61
spiritsoul said:
Well, in fact they passed it I guess as they're discussing S-229 now!!!
you are right, they went pretty fast from questions to that. Another day with no news.
 

screech339

VIP Member
Apr 2, 2013
7,887
552
Category........
Visa Office......
Vegreville
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
App. Filed.......
14-08-2012
AOR Received.
20-11-2012
Med's Done....
18-07-2012
Interview........
17-06-2013
LANDED..........
17-06-2013
admontreal said:
Like other countries of the G7 and Commonwealth peers (including the UK, Australia, USA, Singapore,...), we could add an exception for citizens by descent who lived here for 3 years (or 4 depending on what is the naturalization cap) to pass their citizenship to their children.
In New Zealand, a citizen by descent can apply after 5 years of residence in the country to become a citizen by Grant and then be able to pass his citizenship to his eventual kids. I think it's more fair than limiting it radically and blindly (I tried to find a western country with such a radical rule that doesn't allow exceptions other than for diplomats and military but I was unsuccessful).

PS: I said earlier that copying other countries shouldn't be automatic. But this seems like the most logical thing to do.
If we want to be fair between citizens by descent and citizens by grant. Otherwise, a second generation citizen would have no right to transmit her citizenship to her kids should they be born abroad, even if she spent almost her whole life in Toronto or Halifax.
So in other words, send their children by descent to Canada for schooling at taxpayer's expense and then leave Canada to pass on citizenship to their children. Repeat it over and over. This is no difference from the old retention rule. It doesn't stop citizenship from being passed on for generations.