Bill C-6: Senate stage

[richard1234]

C4 is back on HoC today. C6 is not far.

Ref. http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=42&Ses=1&DocId=8916784

 

[Confused in Montreal]

Sorry I don't know what you mean someone else would have to answer this

AITP. Go to website and one can order GCMS notes and CBSA entry exit reads. Takes 4 weeks not a day more as per transparency commissioner. Hope that's what you were asking for.

 

[MarceauBletard]

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/liberal-government-to-debate-senate-amendments-to-long-delayed-citizenship-bill
Government House leader Bardish Chagger’s office said Wednesday amendments will be brought to the floor for debate “in due course.”

As you all know, "in due course" is a PC way of not saying anything at all.

 

[kirtivsingh]

What is the difference between the arrival date and when you became a permanent resident?

Isn't the arrival date same as when I became a permanent resident (written on the back of the PR)?

Some people arrive in Canada as student or worker like me I arrived in Canada in 2012 but became PR in 2016

 

[AliChraim]

Guys, don't trust that globe and mail calculator. That is not a reliable source. Just do the calculation yourself:

- Take todays date
- Go five years back
- Count the days you were in Canada not being a PR, call them X
- Count the days you were in Canada being a PR, call them Y
- Divide X by 2 and call it Z.
- If Z is more than 365, replace it by 365
- Z+Y, that is your day count. I must be more than 1095

Thank you.

 

[bethanasame]

C4 debated live in HoC, first thing for one hour. Watch live here http://www.cpac.ca/en/

 

[Joshua1]

As a sign of how little interest there is in this bill now, it's not even on the Order Paper to be discussed, and the agenda is set until May 12th. I bet it doesn't even show it's head until the fall. /quote]





You expressly said that the bill was "DOA" (because you had "solid" intelligence). Now you're betting that it will not be on the HoC agenda till fall.

Do you want the bill to fail? Why?

 

[Coffee1981]

You heard it here first. Minister Hussain's announced to IRCC staff this morning that he will reject the Revos amendment. He will reject the age increase amendment, and he will allow Senator Oh's amendment, but will propose amendments to that amendment.

 

[Redfield]

Wait so the government voted for McCoy's amendment through Harder but they will reject her amendment ?

 

[quasar81]

You heard it here first. Minister Hussain's announced to IRCC staff this morning that he will reject the Revos amendment. He will reject the age increase amendment, and he will allow Senator Oh's amendment, but will propose amendments to that amendment.

This bill is scrwd in that scenario..

 

[Coffee1981]

Wait so the government voted for McCoy's amendment through Harder but they will reject her amendment ?

Guess so. As I said before, they want an appeals mechanism at the Immigration and Refugee Board, and not to jam up the courts any more than they already are.

 

[Redfield]

Guess so. As I said before, they want an appeals mechanism at the Immigration and Refugee Board, and not to jam up the courts any more than they already are.

I don't know how the Senate will react to that.

 

[Coffee1981]

This bill is scrwd in that scenario..

I don't know about screwed, but it'll be bouncing back and forth.

 

[Varangian]

You heard it here first. Minister Hussain's announced to IRCC staff this morning that he will reject the Revos amendment. He will reject the age increase amendment, and he will allow Senator Oh's amendment, but will propose amendments to that amendment.

Well.... it's not up to him only to decide. There will be a vote.
And second, where did you get this info from?

 

[fwhitaker]

You heard it here first. Minister Hussain's announced to IRCC staff this morning that he will reject the Revos amendment. He will reject the age increase amendment, and he will allow Senator Oh's amendment, but will propose amendments to that amendment.

If true, this is just crazy. All amendments are good.

The revocation one will give fairness to those who are getting screwed by other's mistake. Eg: a child come with their parents at age of 2. All get the citizenship because of the parents misrepresentation. However, the child is now an adult who has only known Canada as home. Should the child pay for the parents mistake? What is necessary is to streamline the court process in those cases.

Second amendment is still a reduction compared to the actual law. Even if he does not agree, it is a good thing for those who are at that age.

Can't believe he will reject the amendments.