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

Bill C-6: Senate stage

sincara said:
Can someone please post a complete list of the amendments drafted by the Cons? Is it most likely that the 4/6 will be retained?
Click to expand...

You can find the amendment in the journal.
https://sencanada.ca/en/content/sen/chamber/421/journals/112jr_2017-04-12-e

Scroll down to "That Bill C-6, as amended, be not now read a third time, but that it be further amended:"

No one can say for sure what happens. People on here are just guessing.
Gotta see tomorrow.
 
I am new here and I read some of your comments, hoping this bill will end soon and become law but all we need is to wait,,,,
 
I studied the amendments and found the basic change is to add 183 for each of 4 of 6 back. The 1095 days of five years clause is not deleted. The tricky part is whether 182.5 can be rounded to 183 or not. Correct me if I am wrong.
ww.parl.gc.ca/content/hoc/Bills/421/Government/C-6/C-6_3/C-6_3.PDF
 
Thanks for the link! Oh well, there goes my hopes of applying for citizenship this year. I'm going to have to wait another year. Bill C-6 is useless to me then. Promises, promise . Sigh.
 
Any one with a Canadian Law degree can speak on the inadmissability of the residency ammendment? I found the very same rules that were put forward today to be ground for inadmissability. No Personal opinions pleasem only legal

Admissibility rules
To be admissible, amendments should conform to the rules and practices of the House in order to preserve the integrity of the bill. The committee Chair rules on the admissibility of amendments and is advised by the legislative clerk.

The following are the most common rules of admissibility:
1. Principle of the bill: The principle of the bill is the object or purpose which the bill seeks to achieve. The principle of the bill is fixed when the bill is adopted at second reading. Any amendment contrary to the principle of the bill is inadmissible.

2. Scope of the bill: The scope of the bill means the schemes or ways by which the principles of the bill are achieved; the scope of the bill is fixed when the bill is adopted at second reading. Any amendment that goes beyond the scope of the bill is inadmissible. When a bill is referred to a committee before second reading, amendments may alter the principle and scope of the bill.

3. Relevance: Any amendment must be relevant or pertinent to the subject matter of the bill or to the clause under consideration. This applies to bills both before and after second reading
 
Even if speaker reject, which he won't, CONs can still ask for vote and push through.

It's doomed. CONs have enough votes to get it through. They know their game.
 
Does anybody know the exact vote on C-4 today? if any, to see an indication of how many independents sides with the cons on this bill? It is not related as each bill is different, but it is worth examining.
 
knightofOrthodoxy said:
Does anybody know the exact vote on C-4 today? if any, to see an indication of how many independents sides with the cons on this bill? It is not related as each bill is different, but it is worth examining.
Click to expand...

http://www.parl.gc.ca/LegisInfo/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&billId=8073132
 
It says it passed, I know. I want to see the YaYs and Nays division
 
knightofOrthodoxy said:
It says it passed, I know. I want to see the YaYs and Nays division
Click to expand...

Here
http://senparlvu.parl.gc.ca/XRender/en/PowerBrowser/PowerBrowserV2/20170412/-1/6704?useragent=Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; Trident/7.0; SLCC2; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30729; Media Center PC 6.0; MAAR; InfoPath.3; .NET4.0C; .NET4.0E; rv:11.0) like Gecko
 
tyl92 said:
george furey
Click to expand...

I certainly do feel for Speaker Furey this evening, him having now been thrust so unexpectedly and somewhat unceremoniously into the midst of what's becoming an increasingly vicious 'cat-fight'; Senators Eaton & Frum are honourable indeed for their almost Manson-esque discipleship of their appointer, P.M. Harper, hehe.
 
Conservative Party of Canada 39
Non-affiliated (Independent Senators Group) 35
Liberal Party of Canada 18
Non-affiliated 7
Vacant seats 6 Manitoba (1), New Brunswick (1), Nova Scotia (2), Ontario (1), Saskatchewan (1)


CONs need only few votes.
This amendment will pass.

Liberals(Sen Mobina Jaffer) are a small minority only. Poor Liberals are less than HALF of Conservatives. Huge gap.



Call independent Senators and try if we can. Most of them have been supporting CONs lately.
 
Does anyone remember how the days of residence before C-24 are calculated? Does it round up or down? Say you have 1,094.5 days, will the online calculator round up to 1,095 days? Thanks.
 
naturalca said:
Does anyone remember how the days of residence before C-24 are calculated? Does it round up or down? Say you have 1,094.5 days, will the online calculator round up to 1,095 days? Thanks.
Click to expand...

Hi naturalca, not too sure how you came up with 0.5 days. You may refer to the link below:
https://eservices.cic.gc.ca/rescalc/redir.do?redir=faq#Q1

More specifically, "When calculating an absence, neither the day you leave Canada nor the day you return is considered an absence. Both are counted as days of physical presence. For example, an absence between July 1, 2013 and July 15, 2013 equals 13 days of absence. As another example, if you leave Canada on July 1, 2013 and return on July 2, 2013, this equals 0 days of absence. You must still declare this as an absence."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.