Bill C-6: Senate stage

[Free-Spirit]

Guys!

Use #C6 as much as you can on tweeter so we can find the topic about the bill easily!

Thanks to all of you!

 

[jsm0085]

Maybe I'm totally lost here. I'm with most of you, my citizenship was delayed by C-24 and I'm anxiously awaiting C-6 being implemented.

But...

Do you realise there are senators right now, fighting for our (immigrants) fundamental rights? Do you appreciate the severity of what's at stake? Your citizenship. It's fine assuming bad things only happen to "bad people" - but the case has been made, it happens to good people also - people it shouldn't happen to. Right now we have people fighting our back, ensuring that the law provides us with due process - that it's in line with the Charter.

And here - we are all too focused on having this bill implemented quickly so we can apply sooner - even though it means that our "Citizenship" is basically PR with voting rights. That if someone decides, for whatever reason, we have done something wrong, they can take it away from us without due process.

Let's aim to get this bill passed as quickly as possible - but not at the expense of our right to be an actual citizen. If the bill passes as is, we basically have Citizenship2 - which means someone can take it away from us - without a fight - without appeal - without due process - without the backing of the charter. If you have kids currently, think of them. Without this amendment, it's possible in years to come, that your kids may be forced to leave Canada - through no wrong doing. And if this doesn't apply to you, think of your friends. Think of the bigger picture.

I WANT this to pass as quickly as possible but more importantly, I want to know when I'm a Citizen, I'm a Citizen. No different to someone born in Canada.

Come on guys - let's back those who are protecting us the most. Let's not get pissed that this is taking a long time - it's not taking a long time because of the amendment - it's taking a long time because of those who are against the bill in General. EVERYONE from expert witnesses to immigration ministers have backed this amendment in one way or another.

Let's not loose sigh of what makes Canada "great".

 

[VFX_man]

Yes, indeed. Every political party looks for political gain (votes) in order to achieve the rest of its agenda. It's not really breaking news.
A general way to look at their agenda is this:
The Liberals it's: More taxes, more spending, bigger government, more financial control/less financial freedom, more public services, more freedom for LGBT and drug addicts, more immigration (for more votes).
The Tories: Less taxes, less spending, smaller government, less financial control/more financial freedom, less public services, status quo for LGBT and drug addicts, less immigration (for more votes).
And, personally, I'm split between the 2. I'm pro-choice, pro-LGBT, pro-public healthcare, pro-legal immigration. But I'm also for less taxes, less spending (except for healthcare and elderly-care) and less government control. So I think a country is healthy when it has a good balance and the government change side a lot. Like Canada does

This "problem" is what got the USA in it's current situation.

The middle ground has been crushed. I voted for the best candidate [in the USA] and not along part lines over the years - had a lot of people tell me that voting a split ticket was "wrong". Personally, I still disagree with that thinking. By voting for the candidate you align with . . . you can bring the middle [moderate] politicians back . . . if that is where you stand. I had 21 years in the Midwest and 25 in San Francisco . . . so I understand BOTH sides. The far fringes of the parties have too much power on both ends in the USA.

Cheers!


People ask me, Why do you want Canadian citizenship? . . . After 4.5 years, I love it up here and like the way Canadians think.

 

[razerblade]

Maybe I'm totally lost here. I'm with most of you, my citizenship was delayed by C-24 and I'm anxiously awaiting C-6 being implemented.

But...

Do you realise there are senators right now, fighting for our (immigrants) fundamental rights? Do you appreciate the severity of what's at stake? Your citizenship. It's fine assuming bad things only happen to "bad people" - but the case has been made, it happens to good people also - people it shouldn't happen to. Right now we have people fighting our back, ensuring that the law provides us with due process - that it's in line with the Charter.

And here - we are all too focused on having this bill implemented quickly so we can apply sooner - even though it means that our "Citizenship" is basically PR with voting rights. That if someone decides, for whatever reason, we have done something wrong, they can take it away from us without due process.

Let's aim to get this bill passed as quickly as possible - but not at the expense of our right to be an actual citizen. If the bill passes as is, we basically have Citizenship2 - which means someone can take it away from us - without a fight - without appeal - without due process - without the backing of the charter. If you have kids currently, think of them. Without this amendment, it's possible in years to come, that your kids may be forced to leave Canada - through no wrong doing. And if this doesn't apply to you, think of your friends. Think of the bigger picture.

I WANT this to pass as quickly as possible but more importantly, I want to know when I'm a Citizen, I'm a Citizen. No different to someone born in Canada.

Come on guys - let's back those who are protecting us the most. Let's not get pissed that this is taking a long time - it's not taking a long time because of the amendment - it's taking a long time because of those who are against the bill in General. EVERYONE from expert witnesses to immigration ministers have backed this amendment in one way or another.

Let's not loose sigh of what makes Canada "great".

Do majority of the countries support dual citizenship ? If this citizenship revocation is such a big issue why not renounce country of birth citizenship after one becomes a Canadian citizen?

Not trolling, genuinely curious ...

 

[sia_kb8]

Do majority of the countries support dual citizenship ? If this citizenship revocation is such a big issue why not renounce country of birth citizenship after one becomes a Canadian citizen?

Not trolling, genuinely curious ...

1) A number of countries do not allow you to renounce their citizenship. In some cases individuals become a citizen automatically via marriage or if one of the parents is a citizen. Those same countries often allow individuals to hold dual citizenship but do not recognize the foreign citizenship. Have a look here. It's just the tip of the iceberg:
https://www.quora.com/Which-countries-disallow-citizenship-renunciation

Example: A Canadian woman marries an Iranian/Canadian man. The Canadian woman is automatically granted Iranian citizenship. Any children from this marriage are also Iranian citizens automatically. None of these individuals can enter or leave Iran with their Canadian passports and are Iranian citizens in the eyes of the law. The best part? They cannot even renounce it. Iran is just one of many.

2) Laws have to as perfect as they can be. We are in this mess because C-24 was a sloppy bill that was passed without proper review. Citizenship revocation is no joke.

 

[hangincanada]

strategically, right! tactically, not smart! the fundamental rights can be fought for in many other ways (for instance enacting a separate bill) and at different timings (second reading, committee hearing) rather than delaying the passage of bill c-6 at its final stage.

Maybe I'm totally lost here. I'm with most of you, my citizenship was delayed by C-24 and I'm anxiously awaiting C-6 being implemented.

But...

Do you realise there are senators right now, fighting for our (immigrants) fundamental rights? Do you appreciate the severity of what's at stake? Your citizenship. It's fine assuming bad things only happen to "bad people" - but the case has been made, it happens to good people also - people it shouldn't happen to. Right now we have people fighting our back, ensuring that the law provides us with due process - that it's in line with the Charter.

And here - we are all too focused on having this bill implemented quickly so we can apply sooner - even though it means that our "Citizenship" is basically PR with voting rights. That if someone decides, for whatever reason, we have done something wrong, they can take it away from us without due process.

Let's aim to get this bill passed as quickly as possible - but not at the expense of our right to be an actual citizen. If the bill passes as is, we basically have Citizenship2 - which means someone can take it away from us - without a fight - without appeal - without due process - without the backing of the charter. If you have kids currently, think of them. Without this amendment, it's possible in years to come, that your kids may be forced to leave Canada - through no wrong doing. And if this doesn't apply to you, think of your friends. Think of the bigger picture.

I WANT this to pass as quickly as possible but more importantly, I want to know when I'm a Citizen, I'm a Citizen. No different to someone born in Canada.

Come on guys - let's back those who are protecting us the most. Let's not get pissed that this is taking a long time - it's not taking a long time because of the amendment - it's taking a long time because of those who are against the bill in General. EVERYONE from expert witnesses to immigration ministers have backed this amendment in one way or another.

Let's not loose sigh of what makes Canada "great".

 

[MarceauBletard]

Senate proposes major amendment to Liberal citizenship legislation: ‘It goes a long way’
http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/senate-proposes-major-amendment-to-liberal-citizenship-legislation-it-goes-a-long-way

 

[razerblade]

1) A number of countries do not allow you to renounce their citizenship. In some cases individuals become a citizen automatically via marriage or if one of the parents is a citizen. Those same countries often allow individuals to hold dual citizenship but do not recognize the foreign citizenship. Have a look here. It's just the tip of the iceberg:
https://www.quora.com/Which-countries-disallow-citizenship-renunciation

Example: A Canadian woman marries an Iranian/Canadian man. The Canadian woman is automatically granted Iranian citizenship. Any children from this marriage are also Iranian citizens automatically. None of these individuals can enter or leave Iran with their Canadian passports and are Iranian citizens in the eyes of the law. The best part? They cannot even renounce it. Iran is just one of many.

2) Laws have to as perfect as they can be. We are in this mess because C-24 was a sloppy bill that was passed without proper review. Citizenship revocation is no joke.

Thanks for explaining. While I do agree this amendment is necessary, I do not agree with its timing. This should've either been part of the original bill C-6 OR should've been introduced much earlier on. Not at the finish line! I was listening in to the 3rd reading sessions and conservatives just got free ammo to send this bill into an endless free fall. Not saying the bill will get delayed because of this amendment for sure, but it sure looks that way. Best would be to create a separate bill and then deal with it, given it's too late in the process. Just my opinion.

 

[jsm0085]

strategically, right! tactically, not smart! the fundamental rights can be fought for in many other ways (for instance enacting a separate bill) and at different timings (second reading, committee hearing) rather than delaying the passage of bill c-6 at its final stage.

It's actually very smart. It's what needs to happen. It's their job. It's not great for you - because you want it to pass yesterday. But the job isn't to please you - it's to ensure the legislation is appropriate. Right now, it isn't.

 

[747-captain]

Senate proposes major amendment to Liberal citizenship legislation: ‘It goes a long way’
http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/senate-proposes-major-amendment-to-liberal-citizenship-legislation-it-goes-a-long-way

This is OUTSTANDING news!! To say that I'm ecstatic would be a "YUUUGE" understatement!! Thank You for bringing this wonderful news to us!

I will personally send a long thank you letter to Sen. Ratna Omidvar for her diligent work on this, and for standing up for all naturalized citizens to ensure they are not "second class" citizens whose citizenship hangs by a thread at the whims and fancies of ONE SINGLE INDIVIDUAL: THE IMMIGRATION MINISTER!! Unfortunately, I will be sending it from the US, where I currently reside (hope that's OK). I will also send a thank you note to the other senators who helped make this happen!

This goes a long way (as perfectly stated by Ms. McCoy) to bring Canada in line with virtually all other 1st world countries in ensuring their naturalized citizens are just as VALUABLE as Canadian born ones!!

Actually this is SO MUCH MORE IMPORTANT than addressing the revocation of citizenship for those accused of terrorism. At least THAT process had the independent judiciary involved in it. If they really wanted to revoke citizenship from an alleged terrorist, why would they even go that route, when it is so easy for the minister to simply SAY that the person committed fraud in the application and then next day revoke their citizenship?? .......Make sense now??

Yes, virtually all modern democracies allow for revocation of citizenship on certain VERY SERIOUS grounds, as well as fraud committed to obtain it. THAT is not the issue. The fact is that virtually all of these countries (including the United States) require INDISPUTABLE AND INCONTROVERTIBLE EVIDENCE as well as an IMPARTIAL AND INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY to revoke someone's citizenship. And especially in the US it is an extremely difficult process.

 

[747-captain]

It's actually very smart. It's what needs to happen. It's their job. It's not great for you - because you want it to pass yesterday. But the job isn't to please you - it's to ensure the legislation is appropriate. Right now, it isn't.

Extremely well stated my friend!! You are definitely not short sighted like some! At least to me, citizenship is the ultimate identity a person holds and it should be sacrosanct!! It is frankly unfathomable to me how this was even possible in a developed country like Canada!!

Third world dictatorships are where you face harsh consequences (like maybe losing your citizenship?) for, say, speaking your mind! The fact that the validity of a naturalized individual's citizenship rests in the hands of ONE SINGLE INDIVIDUAL should be extremely scary to any sane person!!!

 

[missmini]

My following post refers to Senator Lang's intervention yesterday: How someone so ignorant and daft can be a senator is just beyond me! I think this is the second time this guy "shames" dual citizens for even having dual citizenship. First of all, if someone WANTS to have a second citizenship, they should not be shamed for it. That is what multiculturalism is about. Secondly and even more importantly, why is this guy so ignorant about the fact that many many non-western countries simply do NOT allow renunciation of citizenship. In fact, a mere blood connection to one of these countries (i.e. having a father or mother from that country) would AUTOMATICALLY grant you that second citizenship even if you are born in Canada and never even asked for it. Senator Omidvar explained this to Senator Lang, but apparently he is too limited intellectually to understand this simple, very checkable FACT. Instead, he goes on to contend that dual citizenship is a CHOICE, a "fact" he pulled from the alternative reality he lives in.

He even has the nerve so say that dual citizenship gives you "benefits". Keep in mind that most (if not all) of the countries that do not allow renunciation of citizenship (such as Iran, Cuba, and my own country) are god-awful countries that persecute or have persecuted their citizens for years. Believe me, not only is there no benefits in holding citizenship from these countries, but there are actually disadvantages! God knows, if I could, I would renounce my original citizenship the minute I become a Canadian citizen. Nothing would make me happier or feel more free. But unfortunately, I am not allowed to do so. As senator Omidvar pointed out, the minute I set foot in my birth country (to visit my family for example), I would no longer be considered a Canadian citizen, I would automatically be considered a citizen of my country of origin. And if I discard my original passport, I would not be allowed to get out of that country with a Canadian passport. Yes, these are FACTS. Unfortunately, I am not allowed to renounce my original citizenship. The fact that this idiot senator has the nerve to rub salt into the wound is simply disgusting and appalling. It is a testimony to how completely ignorant and lazy individuals get to decide on the fate of a country and its people.

very true, my children will have their father's citinzenship by default, even if they will never ever live in that place (maybe not even visit); if they don't my husband and remaining family there can be in serious trouble these countries are crazy

 

[missmini]

Do majority of the countries support dual citizenship ? If this citizenship revocation is such a big issue why not renounce country of birth citizenship after one becomes a Canadian citizen?

Not trolling, genuinely curious ...

because they cannot; see Alice's post and my answer to hers

 

[missmini]

1) A number of countries do not allow you to renounce their citizenship. In some cases individuals become a citizen automatically via marriage or if one of the parents is a citizen. Those same countries often allow individuals to hold dual citizenship but do not recognize the foreign citizenship. Have a look here. It's just the tip of the iceberg:
https://www.quora.com/Which-countries-disallow-citizenship-renunciation

Example: A Canadian woman marries an Iranian/Canadian man. The Canadian woman is automatically granted Iranian citizenship. Any children from this marriage are also Iranian citizens automatically. None of these individuals can enter or leave Iran with their Canadian passports and are Iranian citizens in the eyes of the law. The best part? They cannot even renounce it. Iran is just one of many.

2) Laws have to as perfect as they can be. We are in this mess because C-24 was a sloppy bill that was passed without proper review. Citizenship revocation is no joke.

thank you for detailed explanation with clear examples and links

 

[spyfy]

Maybe I'm totally lost here. I'm with most of you, my citizenship was delayed by C-24 and I'm anxiously awaiting C-6 being implemented.

But...

Do you realise there are senators right now, fighting for our (immigrants) fundamental rights? Do you appreciate the severity of what's at stake? Your citizenship. It's fine assuming bad things only happen to "bad people" - but the case has been made, it happens to good people also - people it shouldn't happen to. Right now we have people fighting our back, ensuring that the law provides us with due process - that it's in line with the Charter.

And here - we are all too focused on having this bill implemented quickly so we can apply sooner - even though it means that our "Citizenship" is basically PR with voting rights. That if someone decides, for whatever reason, we have done something wrong, they can take it away from us without due process.

Let's aim to get this bill passed as quickly as possible - but not at the expense of our right to be an actual citizen. If the bill passes as is, we basically have Citizenship2 - which means someone can take it away from us - without a fight - without appeal - without due process - without the backing of the charter. If you have kids currently, think of them. Without this amendment, it's possible in years to come, that your kids may be forced to leave Canada - through no wrong doing. And if this doesn't apply to you, think of your friends. Think of the bigger picture.

I WANT this to pass as quickly as possible but more importantly, I want to know when I'm a Citizen, I'm a Citizen. No different to someone born in Canada.

Come on guys - let's back those who are protecting us the most. Let's not get pissed that this is taking a long time - it's not taking a long time because of the amendment - it's taking a long time because of those who are against the bill in General. EVERYONE from expert witnesses to immigration ministers have backed this amendment in one way or another.

Let's not loose sigh of what makes Canada "great".

This is OUTSTANDING news!! To say that I'm ecstatic would be a "YUUUGE" understatement!! Thank You for bringing this wonderful news to us!

I will personally send a long thank you letter to Sen. Ratna Omidvar for her diligent work on this, and for standing up for all naturalized citizens to ensure they are not "second class" citizens whose citizenship hangs by a thread at the whims and fancies of ONE SINGLE INDIVIDUAL: THE IMMIGRATION MINISTER!! Unfortunately, I will be sending it from the US, where I currently reside (hope that's OK). I will also send a thank you note to the other senators who helped make this happen!

This goes a long way (as perfectly stated by Ms. McCoy) to bring Canada in line with virtually all other 1st world countries in ensuring their naturalized citizens are just as VALUABLE as Canadian born ones!!

Actually this is SO MUCH MORE IMPORTANT than addressing the revocation of citizenship for those accused of terrorism. At least THAT process had the independent judiciary involved in it. If they really wanted to revoke citizenship from an alleged terrorist, why would they even go that route, when it is so easy for the minister to simply SAY that the person committed fraud in the application and then next day revoke their citizenship?? .......Make sense now??

Yes, virtually all modern democracies allow for revocation of citizenship on certain VERY SERIOUS grounds, as well as fraud committed to obtain it. THAT is not the issue. The fact is that virtually all of these countries (including the United States) require INDISPUTABLE AND INCONTROVERTIBLE EVIDENCE as well as an IMPARTIAL AND INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY to revoke someone's citizenship. And especially in the US it is an extremely difficult process.

Let me just say that I couldn't agree more with both of you. Sure, 3/5 will be nice. But without this amendment the citizenship that I'm seeking is indeed nothing more than a Permanent Residence 2.0. This amendment is what actually makes naturalized citizens real citizens (again, finally). The speeches that both McCoy and Omidvar gave on Thursday were simply spot on. I wanted to clap but no one would've heard it, unfortunately