Bill C-6: Senate stage

[lilen]

can someone explain to me why some of u guys is saying that we need to wait one year to apply and if it is confirmed, thanks in advance

 

[Viva2014]

Guys, please calm down!

Just go back and check again those sections which will be applied one year later. As another member mentioned, these sections are all about the new amendments and don't have any relationship with the PRE PR and 3/5 Residency Requirements which were initially introduced by the bill.

 

[lilen]

oh GOD, thx viva, guys please we don't need surprises lool

 

[razerblade]

IIRC still bundling all the changes and rolling out at once after a year is still a possibility, no ?

 

[MarceauBletard]

I am also totally frustrated and hoping that the latter part of the statement might be considered and it would become effective earlier

or on any earlier day or days that may be fixed by order of the Governor in Council.”.

I've thought about it but "or any earlier days" probably means that it could be a couple days before 1 year. I wouldn't think it'd means weeks or months.

Count me in. I complete 4 years under C-24 april next year.

The processing time currently is between 3-6 months. I'm expecting it to atleast double after C-6 becomes effective.

So there's at least me, Whocares, Richard11, subha_1962 and razerblade to be really really upset about this.

 

[dpenabill]

And means that bill C - 6 will take affect 1 year after royal

Whoa! Whoa! Whoa!

No, that is not what the referenced provision means:

Regarding proposed amendments to Bill C-6 and the addition of the following in subsection of Section 27 in Bill C-6 in particular:

“(3.1) Subsections 3(2) to (4), subsections 4(1) and (3) and section 5.1 come into force one year after the day on which this Act receives royal assent or on any earlier day or days that may be fixed by order of the Governor in Council.”

In contrast, the observations by tyl92 and Viva2014 were correct; for example:

what you are referring to is the new changes that they just brought on the amendment , giving a 1 year buffer seems logic since CIC will need time to prepare for this . It has nothing to do with the residency requirements and other stuff that were originally included in C6.

But given the alarmism of some other posts (such as "This is THE worst news I've read."), a more thorough explanation is warranted.

Aside from this merely being a part of a pending motion to amend (meaning, as _MK_ observed that the Senate "will be debating the amendment on March 28"), not adopted as such yet so far as I can discern, there is a misunderstanding about what the added coming-into-force provision is about.

This has NOTHING to do with when the amendments to the physical presence requirements will come into force.

Subsection 27(3.1) (if the motion is carried and these amendments to Bill C-6 are added) refers to the coming-into-force of the proposed additions to Bill C-6 which will specify procedures governing the revocation of citizenship, which changes are about including important due (fair) process protections, in effect fixing one of the worst elements adopted by the Harper government in its Bill C-24. I agree that at this stage, if these proposed amendments cause a lengthy delay in the adoption of Bill C-6, it would have been better to propose a separate Bill. That said, these changes should have been a part of the original Bill C-6 (along with provisions reinstating the right of appeal when citizenship is denied), and if the resultant delay is not long, then it is better to get these important changes made now. Unfortunately, there is little sign the government will be reinstating a right of appeal when applicants are denied citizenship.

In any event, this provision will not delay the coming-into-force of the provisions which will implement a new 3/5 presence rule and allow credit for pre-PR time in Canada. (Except to the extent that the legislative process itself is delayed, that is, the extent to which final adoption is accomplished and Bill C-6 is given Royal Assent takes longer while the amendments are considered.)

Moreover, even if there was a similar provision added regarding the coming-into-force of the revised 3/5 presence requirement, what this provision does is mandate that the provisions come into force within one year and no later . . . the Governor in Council can still order the provisions to come into force sooner than that, but the Governor in Council cannot postpone when they come into force beyond a year from the date of Royal Assent.

That is, this would be a good thing for any of those paranoid about the Liberals stalling making the transition to the 3/5 rule because it would mandate the changes take effect no later than a year from the date of Royal Assent. There is no such limitation on how long it can be before the Governor in Council orders the 3/5 rule to take effect (but it is highly unlikely it would be as long as a year let alone longer).




Some Particulars:

What is this:

“3 (1)Subsection 10(2) of the Act is repealed.

This removes/repeals provisions in the current Citizenship Act which allow the Minister to revoke the citizenship of some individuals (can be either a naturalized citizen or a citizen by birth, including those born in Canada) if they are convicted of certain specified crimes. Section 10(2), and related provisions in the current Citizenship Act, have been widely criticized as creating two classes of citizenship, since not all citizens who are convicted of such acts would be subject to potential revocation of citizenship, in addition to criticisms about opening the door to revoking citizenship based on criminal acts.

This repeal is part of the original Bill C-6 which has been approved by the HoC.

 

[itsmyid]

I've thought about it but "or any earlier days" probably means that it could be a couple days before 1 year. I wouldn't think it'd means weeks or months.
So there's at least me, Whocares, Richard11, subha_1962 and razerblade to be really really upset about this.

I gave up on it already after the never-ending delay of 2nd reading. I will be eligible in 10 months under C-24 and probably by then the bill will still be under debate...

 

[MarceauBletard]

Thanks, dpenabill, I understand now.
So it mainly means, it can't wait more than a year to come into force.
I see.
Thank you VERY MUCH for helping us understand this!
Fingers crossed then.
Let's wait for the bill to get Royal Assent then we'll see.

 

[subha_1962]

This is so frustrating. One survival factor was the discussion threads that supported each other through the trillion senate holidays since last year....

 

[_MK_]

ّi have mentioned before that such amendment is just for showing off by Sen OM, no need for such amendments for people who did live here and comply 100% with CIC rules to get the citizenship.
Ex. If I did what required, why CIC officer will reject my application

NO NEED FOR SUCH REDICULAS AMENDMENTS, I hope it will not pass

It looks like you dont even know what the proposed amendments are! Please go to the senate website and read the bill!

 

[SufferInCan]

It looks like you dont even know what the proposed amendments are! Please go to the senate website and read the bill!

What so ever GREAT amendments are, it is not the right time to introduce them. Need a SEPARATE bill

 

[SufferInCan]

So there's at least me, Whocares, Richard11, subha_1962 and razerblade to be really really upset about this.

Please add me to the list and a couple of tens of thousands of immigrants. Libs will lose a lot by delaying this bill more

 

[torontosm]

Well I care about my situation. It's not like you guys are going to hold your application to let me apply first because of all the time me and others in my situation have waited. So don't lecture me. You have the right to care about your situation like I have the right to care about mine.

Caring about, or even prioritizing, your own situation is one thing. Wishing ill upon others (by saying you wish it never passes) becuase something doesn't help you is completely different. There is a huge distinction.

 

[monalisa]

Please add me to the list and a couple of tens of thousands of immigrants. Libs will lose a lot by delaying this bill more

Lol you made me laugh ;D

As if you had voted for libs last year and next time youll not vote for them

If your already a citizen will you care about c6?

 

[ottawahd]

Lol you made me laugh ;D

As if you had voted for libs last year and next time youll not vote for them

If your already a citizen will you care about c6?

I am a canadian citizen for more than 9 years now and I deeply care about c6. Believe me, you would care about it as long as you are alive because you don't want to be a second class citizen.