Bill C-6: Senate stage

[tyl92]

Going through the other gov. bills in the Senate, I noticed that bill C-6 is the weakest. That's because Sen. Omidvar is not strong enough and is not supported by other senators. The bills that are adopted by Harder, Bellemare or other senior Senators have a much stronger stand and pass faster. The very least thing the adopter of a bill can do is to Nay any adjournment motion to any discussion so to push the bill through the committee; that never happened by Omidvar.

Omidvar was the wrong person to be given the opportunity to adopt the bill besides her seemingly little knowledge of the procedural system of the senate and grouping. Therefore, good luck C-6 in the far future.

BTW, this is another mistake of the Minister choosing the wrong person.

couldn't agree more to that

 

[itsmyid]

He still has 3 years. Let's please call it a joke when it's effectively abandonned. People are judging JT for not being Harper, and it's not fair. It takes time to listen (really listen) to all the stakeholders and have a fair process. Otherwise it would be easy to give a Liberal Party card to all the Independant Senators and force them to adopt whichever bill with no debate whatsoever.

did he check with any stakeholders in Canada when loads of Syrian refugees were brought in in just a few months, regardless whether there were enough resources and facilities for screening and to accommodate them ? It's been a year and half of them are still unemployed and living on welfare, how's that different from conservatives' way of doing things?

 

[marcher]

just a question on the side , WHY DO YOU WANT TO RENOUNCE USA CITIZENSHIP . I always regret i missed a past change that would have let me get usa citizenship ! this is the first time i hear somone who wants to renounce it !!!!!!!

A lot of individuals having dual or more citizenships of which two are US and Canadian; end up renouncing one or the other mostly for tax reasons. The two nations share every detail of taxes of their dual citizens, so unless one is planning on moving back to live in the other country at some point, they are better off renouncing one citizenship. If they will just go back to visit, then either citizenship is good as there is no visa requirement between the two nations. There has been many stories of individuals not aware of the tax issues, until they go back to the second country and find out that they owe CRA or IRS tons of $$$

 

[marcher]

Are you sure every individual is smart enough to do that ?

In fact I think they are. If anyone goes through the effort of going to the voting poll and votes for a specific candidate then they are smart enough to do that. Whether their reasons for selecting the party are right or wrong is a subjective matter, and they are free to make their own choices. I think the ones who are not smart are those that do not bother voting at all yet complain about the status. One could go vote and not choose any party; or write The Beetles as a choice

 

[marcher]

Going through the other gov. bills in the Senate, I noticed that bill C-6 is the weakest. That's because Sen. Omidvar is not strong enough and is not supported by other senators. The bills that are adopted by Harder, Bellemare or other senior Senators have a much stronger stand and pass faster. The very least thing the adopter of a bill can do is to Nay any adjournment motion to any discussion so to push the bill through the committee; that never happened by Omidvar.

Omidvar was the wrong person to be given the opportunity to adopt the bill besides her seemingly little knowledge of the procedural system of the senate and grouping. Therefore, good luck C-6 in the far future.

BTW, this is another mistake of the Minister choosing the wrong person.

The sad fact is that Omdivar was the only Senator who cared about this Bill. The others do not want anything to do with it.

 

[marcher]

did he check with any stakeholders in Canada when loads of Syrian refugees were brought in in just a few months, regardless whether there were enough resources and facilities for screening and to accommodate them ? It's been a year and half of them are still unemployed and living on welfare, how's that different from conservatives' way of doing things?

Like someone said above this is off topic. But just out of curiosity, who do you think was a better candidate for PM? No matter who is in office, there will always be continuous critiques because no leader can keep everyone happy. The priority of Canadians in the last elections was to get Harper out of office because he was overstepping the lines and passing unconstitutional laws; several of which had to be overruled by the Supreme Court. The only two realistic other options were JT and Mulcair. Many NDP supporters voted strategically for Liberals to ensure Harper is out. I think the next elections will show who Canadians really want for PM.

 

[marcher]

There has been a CBC investigation conducted about immigration scams (Link http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/identity-theft-fraud-foreign-workers-1.3894128).
It is basically scammers using real Canadian company names to offer fake jobs to applicants abroad for a fee. Just for the sake of humour, imagine Harper was still in power and decided to add a clause to C-24 to deal with this issue. What do you think the clause would state?

My guess: He would change 4/6 Rule to 9/10 Rule; and add a requirements of speaking English, French and one indigenous language

 

[itsmyid]

Like someone said above this is off topic. But just out of curiosity, who do you think was a better candidate for PM? No matter who is in office, there will always be continuous critiques because no leader can keep everyone happy. The priority of Canadians in the last elections was to get Harper out of office because he was overstepping the lines and passing unconstitutional laws; several of which had to be overruled by the Supreme Court. The only two realistic other options were JT and Mulcair. Many NDP supporters voted strategically for Liberals to ensure Harper is out. I think the next elections will show who Canadians really want for PM.

Like I already said, they won - including trump - because there is no better alternative, not because they are any good

 

[itsmyid]

There has been a CBC investigation conducted about immigration scams (Link http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/identity-theft-fraud-foreign-workers-1.3894128).
It is basically scammers using real Canadian company names to offer fake jobs to applicants abroad for a fee. Just for the sake of humour, imagine Harper was still in power and decided to add a clause to C-24 to deal with this issue. What do you think the clause would state?

My guess: He would change 4/6 Rule to 9/10 Rule; and add a requirements of speaking English, French and one indigenous language

How is that relevant? A fraud is a fraud is a fraud, it needs to be punished accordingly , just like Monsef's case. Tolerating fraud is a slap on the faces of honest applicants

 

[marcher]

Like I already said, they won - including trump - because there is no better alternative, not because they are any good

In all honesty, was there ever a good political candidate? Good people cannot survive in the political field.

 

[marcher]

How is that relevant? A fraud is a fraud is a fraud, it needs to be punished accordingly , just like Monsef's case

You missed the part where i said 'for the sake of humour' . But it is not far from his logic of having an intent of residence during the application to solve the Canadians of Convenience issue; as it clearly does not.

 

[2_of_5]

See:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2016/02/06/record-numbers-renounce-their-u-s-citizenship/

http://money.cnn.com/2016/02/08/news/americans-citizenship-renunciation/

http://www.vice.com/read/why-americans-renounce-their-citizenship

Check out what we have to go through:
http://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/-t184395.0.html

Thanks Keesio, couldn't have said it better myself. My wife is non-US and the fact that I'm supposed to divulge intimate details of our joint banking arrangement is just one insult of many. Plus I honestly believe the US is trying to shut the gate eventually on people expatriating, and can easily see the renunciation/relinquishment fee going up yet again to discourage it (or simply put it out of reach for most.)

 

[keesio]

If they will just go back to visit, then either citizenship is good as there is no visa requirement between the two nations.

It is reported that some CBP officers give former US citizens (who voluntarily renounced) are hard time when trying to vist the US. For example I know a former US citizen who gave it up and tried to enter as a Canadian. He got a lot of questions and then the officer finally let him in on a 2 week visa - even though as a Canadian, he should be able to enter for 6(?) months. Renouncing your US citizenship seems to add some red flag to CBP.

 

[keesio]

Thanks Keesio, couldn't have said it better myself. My wife is non-US and the fact that I'm supposed to divulge intimate details of our joint banking arrangement is just one insult of many. Plus I honestly believe the US is trying to shut the gate eventually on people expatriating, and can easily see the renunciation/relinquishment fee going up yet again to discourage it (or simply put it out of reach for most.)

Yup, there is at least a one year wait list and a high fee. Not only that, but there is a chance (though admittedly very small one) that the State Dept might not even approve your renunciation application. It's alwats funny when I hear people who are scared of accidentally losing their US citizenship when it is actually not that easy.

 

[marcher]

It is reported that some CBP officers give former US citizens (who voluntarily renounced) are hard time when trying to vist the US. For example I know a former US citizen who gave it up and tried to enter as a Canadian. He got a lot of questions and then the officer finally let him in on a 2 week visa - even though as a Canadian, he should be able to enter for 6(?) months. Renouncing your US citizenship seems to add some red flag to CBP.

Some CBP officers make their decisions based on personal opinions. I assume in your friend's case the CBP might have considered renouncing US citizenship an insult to Americans or something.