Effective date of Bill C24
- Thread starter SherifEF
- Start date
For all the supporters of that fair idea I want to post again to where the comments might be sent .
Questions and requests for additional information, as well as comments on this Notice of Intent, may be directed to Teny Dikranian, Director, Legislation and Program Policy, Citizenship and Immigration Canada, 180 Kent Street, 6th Floor, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 1L1, 613-991-2485 (fax), Citizenship-Citoyennete@cic.gc.ca (email).
2 Weeks left.
Questions and requests for additional information, as well as comments on this Notice of Intent, may be directed to Teny Dikranian, Director, Legislation and Program Policy, Citizenship and Immigration Canada, 180 Kent Street, 6th Floor, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 1L1, 613-991-2485 (fax), Citizenship-Citoyennete@cic.gc.ca (email).
2 Weeks left.
I was just curious , because from the official message it seems that they should give a response back at least to some people.
I'm referring to that fragment "Questions and requests for additional information, as well as comments..."
But don't get me wrong I'm not going to be surprised at all, if they don't give any response and all that comment thing is just a pro form.
I'm referring to that fragment "Questions and requests for additional information, as well as comments..."
But don't get me wrong I'm not going to be surprised at all, if they don't give any response and all that comment thing is just a pro form.
1 thing some people do not understand.
in 2 years a lot of things can happen in life.I changed 4 jobs in canada before I became PR.that was when I really gained canadian experience in the workplace.
a guy who landed 1 day before me had no experience at all.Here,there is another reason I should have some "bonus" for the time,pre-PR, the CIC wants to disregard.
if they fxck around with people`s lives,this won`t be good for the image of canada in the world and the political future of this country since the population of immigrants increasing and the majority,the ruling power,changing in some industries.
I do not care how much money I spent here,but I care about my rights.If you shut up and say okay CIC you know the best,2 years later they will do something else that affects your life and changes the rights you have.
No wonder why people leave as soon as they get their canadian passports.....
do not let any power to play with you,including the government.I am not against the BillC24 at all,I just want what we deserve,no more no less.
if this conservative government loses the federal elections this year,and prior to elections,implements this bill,before they leave the ruling power,they will kick for the last time our butts.
no wonder why people leave this country as soon as they get their passports..There is discrimination in the workplace,there is pay inequity,there is separation in the society,there is X,there is Y. A lot of people disregard all these problems just because they love this country and trust the government.
I need to be able to go to the states freely as a student since this will benefit my future career.This is what the damn government don`t care about.Then why would I serve this country not the USA or elsewhere?
in 2 years a lot of things can happen in life.I changed 4 jobs in canada before I became PR.that was when I really gained canadian experience in the workplace.
a guy who landed 1 day before me had no experience at all.Here,there is another reason I should have some "bonus" for the time,pre-PR, the CIC wants to disregard.
if they fxck around with people`s lives,this won`t be good for the image of canada in the world and the political future of this country since the population of immigrants increasing and the majority,the ruling power,changing in some industries.
I do not care how much money I spent here,but I care about my rights.If you shut up and say okay CIC you know the best,2 years later they will do something else that affects your life and changes the rights you have.
No wonder why people leave as soon as they get their canadian passports.....
do not let any power to play with you,including the government.I am not against the BillC24 at all,I just want what we deserve,no more no less.
if this conservative government loses the federal elections this year,and prior to elections,implements this bill,before they leave the ruling power,they will kick for the last time our butts.
no wonder why people leave this country as soon as they get their passports..There is discrimination in the workplace,there is pay inequity,there is separation in the society,there is X,there is Y. A lot of people disregard all these problems just because they love this country and trust the government.
I need to be able to go to the states freely as a student since this will benefit my future career.This is what the damn government don`t care about.Then why would I serve this country not the USA or elsewhere?
Observations regarding no pre-landing credit:
Whether or not Canada should give credit, toward qualifying for citizenship, to a PR's time in Canada prior to that individual becoming a PR, time during which the individual would have no permanent commitment to Canada, is open to debate. That is not a debate I take sides regarding.
But there has been some rhetoric arguing that those who were living and working in Canada prior to becoming a PR are entitled to such credit, as a matter of fundamental fairness, which fails to acknowledge the essential nature of being in Canada with temporary status.
I offer the following in an effort to try explaining what I think the government's perspective is. It is not my perspective, but rather, again, an effort to illuminate the government's approach.
Government's Rationale Regarding No Credit for Pre-landing Presence
I do not know for sure what the government's rationale was for eliminating the credit (towards the residency requirement for a grant of Citizenship), but there are plenty of clues in the backgrounder information, various statements and speeches, and the overall expressed purpose of the changes, to get a good sense of the key considerations and underlying rationale.
Whether or not the change is unfair or not in a general sense, it was not an arbitrary or capricious change in the law but rather one based on the interests and purposes afforded priority by this government.
In general terms, as the name of the Act (the "Strengthening Canadian Citizeship Act" or "SCCA" or Bill C-24) suggests, the purpose was to strengthen the value of Canadian citizenship by requiring a greater commitment to being an in-fact citizen of Canada (not merely obtaining citizenship status). Here too, whether the changes in law accomplish this purpose, and whether or not the changes themselves were fair to those who already immigrated to Canada but whose path to citizenship is significantly altered because of them, are of course questions open to debate and opposing opinions. But, again, the underlying reasons are quite apparent, and within the scheme of things for this government, rationally structured to further this government's purposes and priorities.
Reasonable Expectations:
To be clear, the argument, that anyone had a reasonable expectation there was a promise (either explicit or implicit) pre-landing time in Canada would count toward citizenship, is largely bogus, as any such expectation is contrary to the necessary intent a person has to have to qualify for temporary status.
All temporary status in Canada requires the individual to intend to leave Canada if and when that status expires. Intending to leave Canada is not consistent with an expectation of a right to continue staying in Canada let alone a reasonable expectation of being granted citizenship.
So, during the pre-landing period, the only expectation someone living and working in Canada could reasonably have is that Canada might grant status to stay longer, permanently even, rather than temporarily, and there was no basis for expecting citizenship unless and until qualifying for it only if and after permanent status was obtained.
OK, sure, many, many have come and continue to come to Canada to work temporarily, or to attend school in Canada, with a plan to get permanent status and eventually become a citizen. And Canada does recognize dual intent, such that a person in Canada with temporary status can also intend to seek status to stay permanently. But intending to seek permanent status, while also continuing to have an intent to leave Canada if and when temporary status ends, in no way implicitly promises the individual will even be granted permanent status, let alone citizenship, let alone be given credit toward qualifying for citizenship for time during which the individual had no permanent commitment to Canada.
The mere fact of a plan does not give rise to a reasonable expectation.
So, any argument of unfairness based on a purported reasonable expectation that pre-landing time would count toward qualifying for citizenship is more about what that individual planned than it is about any promises implicit in the Canadian immigration system. Many people are unfair to themselves by setting themselves up for disappointment due to unreasonable or unfounded expectations. Canada is not to blame for that.
There is, nonetheless, the separate issue as to whether or not an immigration system should give credit, toward qualifying for citizenship, for time spent in the country pursuant to temporary status.
Until 2014, the Canadian Parliament had decided that Canada should. Thus, section 5(1)(c) specifically included the one-half ratio of credit for time prior to becoming a PR.
As of 2014, commencing on a date to be ordered by the Governor in Council (which will be sometime this year), the Canadian Parliament has decided that such credit will no longer be given.
The reason is quite apparent:
Being in Canada temporarily does not constitute the level of commitment to Canada this government now requires to qualify for citizenship.
Whether this should be the law is, of course, subject to debate. It was not the law for decades. Canadians elected a government in 2011 which believed it should be the law and which followed the established process for changing the law. Done deal.
There is no doubt, any applications made after the coming into force date for the revised provisions in section 5(1)(c) and added 5(1))c.1), of the Citizenship Act (as revised by the SCCA), will not include any credit for time spent in Canada pursuant to temporary status. That will be the governing law and it will be applied. There is virtually no chance whatsoever that any court will invalidate this.
Whether or not Canada should give credit, toward qualifying for citizenship, to a PR's time in Canada prior to that individual becoming a PR, time during which the individual would have no permanent commitment to Canada, is open to debate. That is not a debate I take sides regarding.
But there has been some rhetoric arguing that those who were living and working in Canada prior to becoming a PR are entitled to such credit, as a matter of fundamental fairness, which fails to acknowledge the essential nature of being in Canada with temporary status.
I offer the following in an effort to try explaining what I think the government's perspective is. It is not my perspective, but rather, again, an effort to illuminate the government's approach.
Government's Rationale Regarding No Credit for Pre-landing Presence
I do not know for sure what the government's rationale was for eliminating the credit (towards the residency requirement for a grant of Citizenship), but there are plenty of clues in the backgrounder information, various statements and speeches, and the overall expressed purpose of the changes, to get a good sense of the key considerations and underlying rationale.
Whether or not the change is unfair or not in a general sense, it was not an arbitrary or capricious change in the law but rather one based on the interests and purposes afforded priority by this government.
In general terms, as the name of the Act (the "Strengthening Canadian Citizeship Act" or "SCCA" or Bill C-24) suggests, the purpose was to strengthen the value of Canadian citizenship by requiring a greater commitment to being an in-fact citizen of Canada (not merely obtaining citizenship status). Here too, whether the changes in law accomplish this purpose, and whether or not the changes themselves were fair to those who already immigrated to Canada but whose path to citizenship is significantly altered because of them, are of course questions open to debate and opposing opinions. But, again, the underlying reasons are quite apparent, and within the scheme of things for this government, rationally structured to further this government's purposes and priorities.
Reasonable Expectations:
To be clear, the argument, that anyone had a reasonable expectation there was a promise (either explicit or implicit) pre-landing time in Canada would count toward citizenship, is largely bogus, as any such expectation is contrary to the necessary intent a person has to have to qualify for temporary status.
All temporary status in Canada requires the individual to intend to leave Canada if and when that status expires. Intending to leave Canada is not consistent with an expectation of a right to continue staying in Canada let alone a reasonable expectation of being granted citizenship.
So, during the pre-landing period, the only expectation someone living and working in Canada could reasonably have is that Canada might grant status to stay longer, permanently even, rather than temporarily, and there was no basis for expecting citizenship unless and until qualifying for it only if and after permanent status was obtained.
OK, sure, many, many have come and continue to come to Canada to work temporarily, or to attend school in Canada, with a plan to get permanent status and eventually become a citizen. And Canada does recognize dual intent, such that a person in Canada with temporary status can also intend to seek status to stay permanently. But intending to seek permanent status, while also continuing to have an intent to leave Canada if and when temporary status ends, in no way implicitly promises the individual will even be granted permanent status, let alone citizenship, let alone be given credit toward qualifying for citizenship for time during which the individual had no permanent commitment to Canada.
The mere fact of a plan does not give rise to a reasonable expectation.
So, any argument of unfairness based on a purported reasonable expectation that pre-landing time would count toward qualifying for citizenship is more about what that individual planned than it is about any promises implicit in the Canadian immigration system. Many people are unfair to themselves by setting themselves up for disappointment due to unreasonable or unfounded expectations. Canada is not to blame for that.
There is, nonetheless, the separate issue as to whether or not an immigration system should give credit, toward qualifying for citizenship, for time spent in the country pursuant to temporary status.
Until 2014, the Canadian Parliament had decided that Canada should. Thus, section 5(1)(c) specifically included the one-half ratio of credit for time prior to becoming a PR.
As of 2014, commencing on a date to be ordered by the Governor in Council (which will be sometime this year), the Canadian Parliament has decided that such credit will no longer be given.
The reason is quite apparent:
Being in Canada temporarily does not constitute the level of commitment to Canada this government now requires to qualify for citizenship.
Whether this should be the law is, of course, subject to debate. It was not the law for decades. Canadians elected a government in 2011 which believed it should be the law and which followed the established process for changing the law. Done deal.
There is no doubt, any applications made after the coming into force date for the revised provisions in section 5(1)(c) and added 5(1))c.1), of the Citizenship Act (as revised by the SCCA), will not include any credit for time spent in Canada pursuant to temporary status. That will be the governing law and it will be applied. There is virtually no chance whatsoever that any court will invalidate this.
okay,let`s shut up and accept the changes to the citizenship act.
in 2017 If the CIC changes the law again,increasing the residency requirement to 10 years.I`ll ask you all how you feel when you are getting ready to prepare documents for the citizenship application.
dont believe in long and shiny words.Some people shut up and write encouraging posts because they have nothing to lose with the changing law.
do not be puppets.
this law puts people who want to stay here and do not want to stay here forever in the same position.This is the most stupid thing I have ever seen.
No wonder why some people prefer the US.
Did I become PR before my temporary visa expired? YES.This is the reason I need to benefit from my pre-PR time.This is the sign from me to the CIC saying that I am going to stay here forever.
If my temporary visa had expired before I became PR.Then YES the CIC is right saying No benefiting from the pre-PR time.Use your logic a bit.
This country needs a lot more educated PRs and citizens.
in 2017 If the CIC changes the law again,increasing the residency requirement to 10 years.I`ll ask you all how you feel when you are getting ready to prepare documents for the citizenship application.
dont believe in long and shiny words.Some people shut up and write encouraging posts because they have nothing to lose with the changing law.
do not be puppets.
this law puts people who want to stay here and do not want to stay here forever in the same position.This is the most stupid thing I have ever seen.
No wonder why some people prefer the US.
Did I become PR before my temporary visa expired? YES.This is the reason I need to benefit from my pre-PR time.This is the sign from me to the CIC saying that I am going to stay here forever.
If my temporary visa had expired before I became PR.Then YES the CIC is right saying No benefiting from the pre-PR time.Use your logic a bit.
This country needs a lot more educated PRs and citizens.
I have to admit, that I'm somehow surprised about that unique problem Canada has, with so many leaving citizens short after the citizenship ceremony.
Maybe I'm surprised , because I've never encountered any of the common factors of frustration the recent newcomers have.
I've never seek regular employment here, never been studying here, never felt any racism or discrimination against me...
But I realize that many people who want to pass the traditional way of integration are facing a lot of the problems which I've never felt here.
Maybe the conventional system is not working properly like it used to 15 years ago.
But I want to admit another very important factor too, when I see the earnings for the majority of the newcomers I don't think that I would have a good standard of living in Canada if I have the same earnings. So I understand the frustration of the newcomers, they are facing a lot of struggle here.
Maybe I'm surprised , because I've never encountered any of the common factors of frustration the recent newcomers have.
I've never seek regular employment here, never been studying here, never felt any racism or discrimination against me...
But I realize that many people who want to pass the traditional way of integration are facing a lot of the problems which I've never felt here.
Maybe the conventional system is not working properly like it used to 15 years ago.
But I want to admit another very important factor too, when I see the earnings for the majority of the newcomers I don't think that I would have a good standard of living in Canada if I have the same earnings. So I understand the frustration of the newcomers, they are facing a lot of struggle here.
screech339
VIP Member
- Apr 2, 2013
- 552
- Category........
- Visa Office......
- Vegreville
- Job Offer........
- Pre-Assessed..
- App. Filed.......
- 14-08-2012
- AOR Received.
- 20-11-2012
- Med's Done....
- 18-07-2012
- Interview........
- 17-06-2013
- LANDED..........
- 17-06-2013
Thank you dpenabill for providing a very detailed and reasonable post on the issue of pre-PR credit and hopefully settle the issue. But there will always be a few that won't accept this.dpenabill said:
I like the part about the dual intent part. Yes it is dual intent towards PR. Not dual intent toward citizenship. It would make sense to claim pre-PR days toward PR. Not toward citizenship.
+1 for your posting.
for some people,obeying is part of their lives.Like sheep.you`ll always be ruled with this mindset.there will always be wage-gap,you`ll always serve people
good luck with you all with this citizenship and bill c24 thing.