Bill C-6: Senate stage

[marcher]

So that means bill c6 should pass the committee stage in a few sitting in feb and third reading in March or April.Because there is no question of it going to Hoc for amendments now.So it can became a law as soon as July 2017 or as late as April 2018.

The chances are higher now, but let's keep in mind they are not 100%, probably 80% chances now compared to 40% before. If the Committee vote in favour without any amendments, then it does not need to go back to HoC. I am hoping third reading is just a formal stamping process, otherwise I dread another delay at that stage since it goes back to the hands of the same Senators as before.
I think even if it is amended, it will become law before July, probably April 2017; unless they delay it on purpose to coincide with Canada Day celebrations. Now I am referring to C-6 becoming a law, not necessarily to the implementation of its clauses. Some can immediately be implemented such as the revocation of citizenship. But others need time. For example, they cannot implement 3/5 Rule immediately. That requires a few months to a year depending on how fast it takes to make the systematic changes to implement it. There is also the issue of a potential excessive backlog, so they might want to prevent that by gradual implementation. Having said that, someone pointed out before that Liberals seem to be facilitating online applications (such as sponsorship) which reduce the processing time since everything is automatically screened; less human work needed. If they have some plan in mind for citizenship application that can cut down the waiting time further, then probably they might implement 3/5 earlier than anticipated. In this day and age, you would think that at least 90% of the evaluation of a citizenship application could be done automatically with software connected to all kinds of databases. However, the human element is always necessary at some stage to confirm the accuracy of the software.

 

[HSD]

The chances are higher now, but let's keep in mind they are not 100%, probably 80% chances now compared to 40% before. If the Committee vote in favour without any amendments, then it does not need to go back to HoC. I am hoping third reading is just a formal stamping process, otherwise I dread another delay at that stage since it goes back to the hands of the same Senators as before.
I think even if it is amended, it will become law before July, probably April 2017; unless they delay it on purpose to coincide with Canada Day celebrations. Now I am referring to C-6 becoming a law, not necessarily to the implementation of its clauses. Some can immediately be implemented such as the revocation of citizenship. But others need time. For example, they cannot implement 3/5 Rule immediately. That requires a few months to a year depending on how fast it takes to make the systematic changes to implement it. There is also the issue of a potential excessive backlog, so they might want to prevent that by gradual implementation. Having said that, someone pointed out before that Liberals seem to be facilitating online applications (such as sponsorship) which reduce the processing time since everything is automatically screened; less human work needed. If they have some plan in mind for citizenship application that can cut down the waiting time further, then probably they might implement 3/5 earlier than anticipated. In this day and age, you would think that at least 90% of the evaluation of a citizenship application could be done automatically with software connected to all kinds of databases. However, the human element is always necessary at some stage to confirm the accuracy of the software.

I agree with most of the things you said.One thing is for sure now ,any delay for this bill in the future will be liberals fault as the Cons are out of the scene now completely.

 

[marcher]

I agree with most of the things you said.One thing is for sure now ,any delay for this bill in the future will be liberals fault as the Cons are out of the scene now completely.

Not exactly, our dear Cons will reappear at Third Reading . After that they are out of the scene, until the next elections if they win, then expect a new C-24 to be introduced again.

You know as much as C-6 is a good bill, I wish the controversial unconstitutional clauses of C-24 were annulled by a Supreme Court order, to ensure they never surface in the future. Unfortunately, Harper's government passed so many controversial bills, that the Supreme Court was too busy to get to C-24.

 

[admontreal]

After that they are out of the scene, until the next elections if they win, then expect a new C-24 to be introduced again.

After all that ? I don't expect them to try again for a while. Most of them will try to distance themselves from Harper's ideas in 2013-2015. Even Tony Clement (now ex-candidate) said that reinstating revocation of citizenship for dual citizens should be done in a 'constitutional way', and that it would be difficult.

 

[marcher]

This is the wrong thread but I will put this here because I think it is useful:

Ladies and gentlemen, I know most you have been waiting for a while to fulfill the time requirements for applying for citizenship. Please do not let that excitement push you to rush and apply as soon as you qualify. I read several threads of individuals who did that and ended up in a mess because CIC determined that they were short on the required days (even one day can be a valid reason to deny your application). What happens then is you have to wait for your application and re-apply ..etc. In other words, you end up wasting way more time. All I recommend is to simply keep a safety buffer just to avoid any miscalculations. I would say about a week to two weeks after you complete the necessary days. I do not think two weeks would make any significant difference if you have been waiting for years, but rushing could delay your application by months. Happy Holidays ;D

 

[marcher]

After all that ? I don't expect them to try again for a while. Most of them will try to distance themselves from Harper's ideas in 2013-2015. Even Tony Clement (now ex-candidate) said that reinstating revocation of citizenship for dual citizens should be done in a 'constitutional way', and that it would be difficult.

My dear forum friend , we must not forget that Harper's way is not necessarily a bad route to win the elections. The Libs had about 1.3m more votes than Cons because a big portion of the population voted strategically. Harper tried to use the niqab card and it backfired; NDP tried to oppose it completely and it backfired too; Libs kind of stayed in the middle and won. Depending on who leads the Cons (hopefully not Kellie Leitch), Cons have a big chance of winning the next election with their usual promise (which they fulfill) of cutting down the taxes. Those benefiting from JT's handouts don't usually bother voting; but those paying more taxes do. Coming back to your point, if anything, C-24 has a wide support among Canadians as they narrow it down to revoking citizenship of terrorists. Keep in mind no one really followed C-24 or C-6 in the Senate from the general public since it does not really concern them, and to be fair Canadian politics can be a bit boring , no Trump entertainment. I do not see why a future Conservative leader might not pull some edited form of C-24 from the hat to attract public support. I can say at the moment that Kellie Leitch won't be the next Cons leader, but we are living at times everything is possible. Imagine she is leading Cons in the next elections, won't the revocation of citizenship be one of many tools she will use to gain further support?
This is why I prefer a Supreme Court ruling to put an end to this subject.

 

[cooldoc80]

My dear forum friend , we must not forget that Harper's way is not necessarily a bad route to win the elections. The Libs had about 1.3m more votes than Cons because a big portion of the population voted strategically. Harper tried to use the niqab card and it backfired; NDP tried to oppose it completely and it backfired too; Libs kind of stayed in the middle and won. Depending on who leads the Cons (hopefully not Kellie Leitch), Cons have a big chance of winning the next election with their usual promise (which they fulfill) of cutting down the taxes. Those benefiting from JT's handouts don't usually bother voting; but those paying more taxes do. Coming back to your point, if anything, C-24 has a wide support among Canadians as they narrow it down to revoking citizenship of terrorists. Keep in mind no one really followed C-24 or C-6 in the Senate from the general public since it does not really concern them, and to be fair Canadian politics can be a bit boring , no Trump entertainment. I do not see why a future Conservative leader might not pull some edited form of C-24 from the hat to attract public support. I can say at the moment that Kellie Leitch won't be the next Cons leader, but we are living at times everything is possible. Imagine she is leading Cons in the next elections, won't the revocation of citizenship be one of many tools she will use to gain further support?
This is why I prefer a Supreme Court ruling to put an end to this subject.

Good analysis marcher but i dont think the 3/5 years would be re introduced by conservatives again! If they do it will be a childish act as all parties in canada voted against it !!!

 

[tyl92]

The chances are higher now, but let's keep in mind they are not 100%, probably 80% chances now compared to 40% before. If the Committee vote in favour without any amendments, then it does not need to go back to HoC. I am hoping third reading is just a formal stamping process, otherwise I dread another delay at that stage since it goes back to the hands of the same Senators as before.
I think even if it is amended, it will become law before July, probably April 2017; unless they delay it on purpose to coincide with Canada Day celebrations. Now I am referring to C-6 becoming a law, not necessarily to the implementation of its clauses. Some can immediately be implemented such as the revocation of citizenship. But others need time. For example, they cannot implement 3/5 Rule immediately. That requires a few months to a year depending on how fast it takes to make the systematic changes to implement it. There is also the issue of a potential excessive backlog, so they might want to prevent that by gradual implementation. Having said that, someone pointed out before that Liberals seem to be facilitating online applications (such as sponsorship) which reduce the processing time since everything is automatically screened; less human work needed. If they have some plan in mind for citizenship application that can cut down the waiting time further, then probably they might implement 3/5 earlier than anticipated. In this day and age, you would think that at least 90% of the evaluation of a citizenship application could be done automatically with software connected to all kinds of databases. However, the human element is always necessary at some stage to confirm the accuracy of the software.

indeed , they talked about ways to reduce processing times ..if it concerns sponsorships we won't benefit from that since citizenship applications are not being processed at the same cic office .it will benefit sponsorships only . FYI , in Australia , they are already doing it , online applications for citizenship .
As per c6 , that is 100% sure and true that all the clauses won't be implemented right after royal ascent and not at the same time . My guess is that the pre-pr credit will come into force way before the 3/5 . Now regarding the backlog , it may happen like it may not happen , since the whole process was cut down to 1 step ( without including the fact it has to go through Sydney before being transferred to a local cic office ) . In a realistic point of view , any time between fall 2017-Summer 2018 would be reasonable for the 3/5 rule to kick in .
having the 3/5 in force in 2017 , will bring extra applications from candidates who never left the country not a single day and had their pr in 2014 or student/temp workers who can count on pre pr credit and got their pr as well in 2014 or 2015 , that flow of these specific applications is guaranteed and not including all those who really qualified under c24 in 2017 , and all those that could have qualified way before but their pre pr was not included. That'd be a big flow of applications but will it really cause delay ? when we had the 3/4 rule , applications took in average a year and a half to be completed which is huge compared to what is being done today ( longer process as well) . If you are to ask me , it would say yes , there'd be a surge , but as always it's not every single one that will apply ( citizenship fees , many travels etc..) . it may slow down a little bit but not drastically , local offices will be flooded though .

 

[marcher]

Good analysis marcher but i dont think the 3/5 years would be re introduced by conservatives again! If they do it will be a childish act as all parties in canada voted against it !!!

Sorry I was referring to citizenship revocation not the 3/5 rule. Honestly Cons had no reason at all for 4/6; it was just introduced for the sake of changing things, nothing more. Although one could argue it was a temporary technique to cut down the backlog and get credit for it.

There was barely any mention of 3/5 in the debates of C-6. Making people wait an extra year does not make them better Canadians; it just adds frustration to an already frustrating process.

 

[monalisa]

Great news, C-6 looks more like a reality now more than ever before. February can't come faster!

you see what I posted few days back, that they would change the composition of committee as happened before in other committees ;D

 

[monalisa]

ilay ? when we had the 3/4 rule , applications took in average a year and a half to be completed which is huge compared to what is being done today ( longer process as well) . If you are to ask me , it would say yes , there'd be a surge , but as always it's not every single one that will apply ( citizenship fees , many travels etc..) . it may slow down a little bit but not drastically , local offices will be flooded though .

You have to understand that it was political issue delaying processing time.
Also you have to admit that immigration became too hard, since 2013. number of applications is much much less.

dont worry, libs want new citizens as much as they can.

This bill will be applied immediately or on 1 july canada day. I am sure of it

 

[marcher]

You have to understand that it was political issue delaying processing time.
Also you have to admit that immigration became too hard, since 2013. number of applications is much much less.

dont worry, libs want new citizens as much as they can.

This bill will be applied immediately or on 1 july canada day. I am sure of it

monalisa first I have to admit you were right about your prediction regarding the change of committee members.
Second, I thought we need to be fair to Conservatives. We cannot just accuse them of being anti-immigrant or trying to cut down the number of immigrants. Harper has been PM from 2006 to 2015 during which immigrant numbers increased. Conservatives like every party are aware of the economic value immigrants bring to the Canadian system. I think Harper's adoption of the niqab ban tainted the Cons party and gave it a different image than it always had. There is no guarantee who the new citizens will vote for, because it will all depend on election day. Many citizens moved as immigrants and became citizens during Harper era, yet voted against him in the last elections because of his agenda. Similarly some of us will become citizens during JT era, but might vote against him in the future if that means we will pay less taxes or gain better benefits under a different party. No one will care about 3/5 or 4/6 rule after they become citizens.

 

[AnilGurung]

if they give the PR credit, I'll be happy already lol.
Supposed to be applying in March but now it's Dec.. i can wait 4 more months NP

 

[Richard11]

any meeting for bill c-6

 

[itsmyid]

Bill C-6 was spotted in the mall downtown buying gifts and preparing for the holidays. On a serious note, do you ever read previous comments? I will paste a comment I posted earlier (with some modifications because of new info), I hope it answers your questions:

Quote from: marcher on December 19, 2016, 09:31:20 am
I see a lot of comments on here might make it difficult for a visitor to find out the latest regarding Bill C-6, so I will just include a summary of where the bill stands now:
• On December 15th, 2016 the Bill passed Second Reading and was referred to committee by Senator Omidvar
• The committee it was referred to is: Social Affairs, Science and Technology
• The committee is composed of the following Senators: 6 Conservatives, 3 Liberals, and 6 non-affiliated
• The following non-affiliated Senator was appointed during Harper’s term: Don Meredith
• There are 15 votes, therefore a minimum of 8 votes are required to pass Bill C-6 through the Committee
• If all Cons vote No, and Libs vote Yes, then at least 5 out of 6 non-affiliated have to vote Yes
• One of the possible scenarios is that the Committee will introduce amendments to the bill and send it back to House of Commons for approval. The bill can then go straight to Third Reading and Royal Assent.

Regarding the time frame; anything provided here by me or any other contributor is pure speculation, please do not take it as facts and start planning accordingly.
• The next Senate sitting is on Tuesday 31st, January.
• There is a big chance the Committee will meet the same week.
• It may take a couple of committee meetings to complete the amendments
• If no amendments are included, and there is a majority vote, then the Bill could go to Third Reading after one Committee meeting
• The big question is when will the bill become law? My personal guess is it will get amended and go through the necessary route. It will not be delayed the same way it was before because the amendments will try to reach some level of compromise to keep the Cons happy. So I would say probably beginning of March would be a reasonable date for Third Reading.

doesn't matter what you post, everyday there will be someone asking the same question here