C-6 not great for some of us

[Marooned2]

I also have the same situation but honestly this is not hardship. To calm yourself just think about those who came here on ships and build a country out of nothing 400 years ago. Imagine the hardship they went through

 

[prudhvi]

While many greatly benefit from C-6's Royal Assent, some of us have been royally screwed, twice. First, because people like me, who landed before C-24 but didn't qualify for citizenship by the time it was implemented, were forced to wait an additional year to be able to apply for citizenship. That was the first strike. Then, a few weeks or months before completing the additional year, C-6 repeals the 1460-day requirement, to lower it back to 1095 days. The second strike ensues in the form of having to apply during a time when those who did not qualify with 4 years now qualify with only 3, making the application volume nearly doubled. So, by the time I get to apply under C-6, a whole 30 days, or so, before I qualified under C-24, I will face an uphill battle with overworked immigration agents, performing at half the speed and making my wait, then again (just like for my PR), one of the longest in the bunch. So, this post's for us, those who barely benefited, if at all or if not actually being hurt by C-6's reduction of physical presence. The only advantage for us is that we will qualify with a lot more days of physical presence and doubts about its calculation may be less of an issue.

OK

 

[Hashad]

I am in the same boat as you, but if you only focus on the physical presence factor then you are missing out on the significance and objective of Bill C-6. Our convenience as immigrants or permanent residents or even citizens is of zero value when it comes to the constitution. It is NOT the government's job to accommodate the convenience of anyone. You can argue this with some of Trudeau's policies, but that is a subject for another discussion. However, C-6 brings up bigger aspects that give way more value to the citizenship we will eventually acquire. Waiting a couple of extra months is not an issue at all knowing that when you become citizen, you will have the same EXACT rights that "old stock Canadians" have. You will not be obliged to sign an intent to reside so you can move anywhere you wish; and if God forbid you end up committing a crime, you will be judged like every other Canadian; no extra punishment. I know some might wonder why one would get involved in a crime, but keep in mind there are many innocent people in jail, so imagine an innocent person being twice punished.

I completely understand your frustration because it sucks to wait, but then again waiting a bit longer is worth it because of what you are waiting for. You could have received the citizenship faster under C-24 in your case, but the citizenship you would have received would have been of less value, more like a temporary one until the government finds a way to strip it off you. Now you will receive a more valuable citizenship that will not only make you equal to everyone else, but also guarantees the same for your children and grandchildren.

Just could not resist to comment "...under C-24 in your case, but the citizenship you would have received would have been of less value,", everyone who has got citizenship under C-24 (AKA "intent to reside") is subject to same rule as under C-6, no one is a lesser value Canadian!

 

[screech339]

Just could not resist to comment "...under C-24 in your case, but the citizenship you would have received would have been of less value,", everyone who has got citizenship under C-24 (AKA "intent to reside") is subject to same rule as under C-6.

Citizenship under C-24 would be no different from 3/4 rule or 3/5 rule. The "intend to reside" only applies to PRs. No citizenship will be taken away once acquired over "intend to reside" under C-24 since it does not or did it ever apply to Canadians.

 

[cempjwi]

What is the point of the thread? Complaining? Does people not care of Intent to reside? About citizenship revocation? 2nd class citizenship? Only thing that matters is processing time?

Have you not seen the posts on this forum? Many, many of them are about timeline. But sure, I think it was very important to resolve the issues regarding citizenship beyond processing time. I personally think that Canada has a too-short of a physical presence requirement and the 183 out of the year was just fair (same as the US), as I believe it definitely strengthened the ties to Canada. However, reality is that many are tourist PR's, and regardless of the reason, that is not good for the economy, not to mention Canadian citizenship hunters that are only waiting for it to fly to the US or other places for which they could not secure a visa. My post was exclusively to address that some of us were caught in a bad time frame situation, twice. Oh, and by the way, those other issues to which you are referring could have been resolved without the double change on the physical presence requirement (not that I thought C-24's was entirely a bad thing, but C-6's reversal of it made the whole thing quite sour, at least for many of us).

 

[cempjwi]

Citizenship under C-24 would be no different from 3/4 rule or 3/5 rule. The "intend to reside" only applies to PRs. No citizenship will be taken away once acquired over "intend to reside" under C-24 since it does not or did it ever apply to Canadians.

I believe the correct terms would be naturalized Canadians and born-Canadians. C-24's intend to reside would have applied only to naturalized Canadians, hence the need to remove it as it was one of a few other caveats that create a second class of Canadian citizenship.

 

[foodie69]

What is the point of the thread? Complaining? Does people not care of Intent to reside? About citizenship revocation? 2nd class citizenship? Only thing that matters is processing time?

People complain because they can. Canada allows to complain unlike other countries. I don't care if I have to wait 3, 4 or 5 years to become a citizen, I live here, work and contribute to society. I have already two passports that allow me to travel anywhere without restrictions..

 

[NewUser2018]

C6 is good very good for EVERYONE.

under c24 you are second class Citizen and any officer could just strip your citizenship without explanation & without appeal, and if your disgruntled racist neighbor, relative, friend or business associate could want to harm you all they could do is just make false allegation phone call to immigration saying this person has gained Citizenship in bogus way and get your Citizenship stripped.

i have seen people lossing their children to children's aid because a disgruntled neighbor calls and makes false abuse allegations to Ontario children's aid after loud music or some other disagreements' u had.

c24 had so many ridiculous stuff in it.

people who complain because c6 is too late and it will create backlog for them are shortsighted. Anyway I will apply this fall when c6 is implemented and will be glad to wait 8-12 months incase their is backlog v 8 months now without backlog.

 

[ImmiToCanada]

Yes, creating second class citizens is a major problem with C24. People with dual citizenships are discriminated in some sense.

C6 is good very good for EVERYONE.

under c24 you are second class Citizen and any officer could just strip your citizenship without explanation & without appeal, and if your disgruntled racist neighbor, relative, friend or business associate could want to harm you all they could do is just make false allegation phone call to immigration saying this person has gained Citizenship in bogus way and get your Citizenship stripped.

i have seen people lossing their children to children's aid because a disgruntled neighbor calls and makes false abuse allegations to Ontario children's aid after loud music or some other disagreements' u had.

c24 had so many ridiculous stuff in it.

people who complain because c6 is too late and it will create backlog for them are shortsighted. Anyway I will apply this fall when c6 is implemented and will be glad to wait 8-12 months incase their is backlog v 8 months now without backlog.

 

[day2day]

Sure we are happy about changing intent to reside and 2nd class citizenship but we don't to be back for long processing time.

For sure complaining will not help us, we can start make list for whom got delayed twice because of C24 and C6 and demand the Minister to give us priority to process our application faster when the backlogs start.

For me and my family we landed on Aug, 2013 and never left Canada. So we can apply on August, 2017 but am afraid we have to wait 2 years for Oaths if C6 implemented in September.

I don't think C6 will be implemented in September. Then mentioned fall which could be 21 Sep-21 Dec. Given that they are slow in everything, it can possibly be implemented in October or November. By that that you are already in the process and huge amount of applications after C6 won't affect you.

 

[screech339]

I believe the correct terms would be naturalized Canadians and born-Canadians. C-24's intend to reside would have applied only to naturalized Canadians, hence the need to remove it as it was one of a few other caveats that create a second class of Canadian citizenship.

If you examine the C-24 law closely, you will see that it only applies to PR. Never to Naturalized Canadian or Canadian born. Thus "intend to reside" clause has no impact on Canadians at all. Never did, never will.

 

[Nlkko]

Stop crying. It's unbecoming. Be happy for other people. Quit this memememe attitude. This is a great bill that fix the oversights of the old one.

 

[CANADIANZ]

A lot of friends who were anxiously waiting for Bill C-6 to pass, now worry that with 3/5 rule coming into force 'fall' of this year, there will be flood of applications which will effect the processing times.

Well this is true that there will be more applicants... but it is not necessary that the processing times take longer. The main reason is that the decision making process of citizenship grant does not changes and is more efficient.

Among other changes Bill C-24 also changed the decision making process from a 3-step decision making process to one-step, this process does not change with Bill C-6:

Three-step decision making process (Pre C-24)
Citizenship officer reviews, citizenship judge
makes decision, the citizenship officer makes
recommendation for grant or appeal of judge’s
decision

Single-step process (current process)
Where citizenship officer
makes decision. (Referred to citizen
ship judge in cases of not meeting residency requirement or resumption of citizenship)
(took effect after Bill C-24 ... on August 1, 2014)

 

[screech339]

Stop crying. It's unbecoming. Be happy for other people. Quit this memememe attitude. This is a great bill that fix the oversights of the old one.

The Liberals fell for it, hook line and sinker in believing something that isn't there. The removing the "intend to reside" clause, including removing 183 minimum calendar year requirement will make citizenship too easy. Now under 3/5 rule, a person can reside in Canada for 2 years straight and leave and come back for 4 months / year for the following 3 years to qualify for citizenship. In other words you can qualify for citizenship by being a resident of a foreign country for 3 years out of 5. Gee where's the logic in qualifying 3 years when you only resided in Canada 2 years. Perhaps Canada is the only country whereby you can get citizenship by being outside the country more than 50% of the time. I guess the Liberals didn't think that through either.

 

[Natan]

Perhaps Canada is the only country whereby you can get citizenship by being outside the country more than 50% of the time. I guess the Liberals didn't think that through either.

The USA is another. While there is a general guideline that LPRs should not be abroad for more than 6 months in the year, the government is not a stickler for those kinds of details. No one counts the days. People aren't penalized if they fall short. (LPRs may apply for citizenship 3 months before they are eligible. LPRs married to US citizens are eligible to apply after three years; others after five.)