Federal Elections 2015 and C24 Act

[ama912]

Thought I'd start a thread on this topic.

First question that comes to mind: In the event of an early election, how likely is it that the federal elections could happen BEFORE the full C24 Act comes into force? If the conservatives lost the elections, would the new government have any power (or interest) to influence how or when the rest of C24 could come into force?

Just trying to understand how things work with those things.. and whether there are any relevant precedents.
Thanks

 

[MUFC]

It is not an accident that all this overhaul was planned to happen on the year with federal elections. If the conservatives were so keen to change that law , they could have done it long time ago.... not in the elections year.

There is definitely a relation between the cut off date and the elections date... they are playing strategic game in which the elections are number one priority

 

[Empirical-Scientist]

Thought I'd start a thread on this topic.

First question that comes to mind: In the event of an early election, how likely is it that the federal elections could happen BEFORE the full C24 Act comes into force? If the conservatives lost the elections, would the new government have any power (or interest) to influence how or when the rest of C24 could come into force?

Just trying to understand how things work with those things.. and whether there are any relevant precedents.
Thanks

Interesting topic. Here are my thoughts.

C24 was enacted last June, as we all observed theatrically. As such, from a bill it evolved into an act -- a law, as you point out. In order to rescind a particular act, it would have to be deemed unconstitutional (there could be other avenues that can be pursued, but I do not have formal legal training and wouldn't attest to any other method). The Supreme Court of Canada would be the ultimate judge on the constitutionality of C24. The process to bring a case to the Supreme Court is extremely time-consuming. No matter how much the political forces push for a case to be presented before the Supreme Court, C24 would have no less chances of being reviewed by the Court than a case consisting of, say, some decision involving a particular Facebook profile. Furthermore, the review process itself may last for a long time. With that in mind, even if there were a Federal Election in the spring, as has been alluded to in this article, C24 would come into force way before being given the chance to be reviewed by the Supreme Court. If C24 were to be rescinded, it would not happen before at least two or three years from the moment it is presented to the Supreme Court.

I am not aware of any other related precedents, but am aware that certain acts by the Tories have been deemed unconstitutional within a single parliamentary session. Though I think those acts were not as crucial as this immigration bill we all have rather detested.

 

[dpenabill]

Currently the Federal Election is slated for October . . . memory fuzzy on exact date, the 19th I think.

It is nearly beyond all doubt that Bill C-24 will be in force well before that date (most likely by mid-summer at the latest).

Despite a law that PM Harper and the Conservatives adopted some time ago (when they held a minority gov't as I recall) fixing the date for Federal Elections (other than those arising from a minority gov't receiving a no-confidence vote), the PM can, and in the past has, nonetheless schedule the election to occur sometime before the fixed date. PM Harper has said, in at least one recent interview, that he will not schedule an early election. Many pundits, however, have opined or speculated the PM will indeed schedule an early election.

While it is possible the PM could schedule an election before the remaining provisions in Bill C-24 come into force, since the practical reality is that both dates are the PM's decision, it is far more likely that the Governor in Council (PMO in practice) will order the remaining provisions to come into force before an election date, even if early.

In any event, Bill C-24 is adopted law. So, a change in government, per an election, would not have any automatic impact. One could engage in the academic question about whether a Liberal or NDP government might not make the order for the remaining provisions to come into force if it happened that the election was held without the Governor in Council issuing an order as to the date those provisions come into force, but that is such an unlikely event as to not warrant much attention.

Moreover, even if the next government is a Liberal or NDP government, it is highly unlikely they will move to change much if anything in the amended version of the Citizenship Act.

Parliament has the power to amend the law, including the repeal or replacement of particular provisions in the law. (Indeed, this is precisely what the Conservative government has done via Bill C-24.) But there is little hint that either the Liberals or the NDP will go after significant modifications, despite the many criticisms raised against Bill C-24.

It is still possible for the Canadian courts to rule this or that provision unconstitutional or otherwise invalid. But there appears to be no substantive challenge made in this regard except as to the provisions providing for the revocation of a dual citizen's citizenship based on acts (terrorism, treason) committed after becoming a citizen. In particular, there is virtually no chance that the new residency requirement will be invalidated.

 

[ama912]

Currently the Federal Election is slated for October . . . memory fuzzy on exact date, the 19th I think.

It is nearly beyond all doubt that Bill C-24 will be in force well before that date (most likely by mid-summer at the latest).

Despite a law that PM Harper and the Conservatives adopted some time ago (when they held a minority gov't as I recall) fixing the date for Federal Elections (other than those arising from a minority gov't receiving a no-confidence vote), the PM can, and in the past has, nonetheless schedule the election to occur sometime before the fixed date. PM Harper has said, in at least one recent interview, that he will not schedule an early election. Many pundits, however, have opined or speculated the PM will indeed schedule an early election.

While it is possible the PM could schedule an election before the remaining provisions in Bill C-24 come into force, since the practical reality is that both dates are the PM's decision, it is far more likely that the Governor in Council (PMO in practice) will order the remaining provisions to come into force before an election date, even if early.

In any event, Bill C-24 is adopted law. So, a change in government, per an election, would not have any automatic impact. One could engage in the academic question about whether a Liberal or NDP government might not make the order for the remaining provisions to come into force if it happened that the election was held without the Governor in Council issuing an order as to the date those provisions come into force, but that is such an unlikely event as to not warrant much attention.

Moreover, even if the next government is a Liberal or NDP government, it is highly unlikely they will move to change much if anything in the amended version of the Citizenship Act.

Parliament has the power to amend the law, including the repeal or replacement of particular provisions in the law. (Indeed, this is precisely what the Conservative government has done via Bill C-24.) But there is little hint that either the Liberals or the NDP will go after significant modifications, despite the many criticisms raised against Bill C-24.

It is still possible for the Canadian courts to rule this or that provision unconstitutional or otherwise invalid. But there appears to be no substantive challenge made in this regard except as to the provisions providing for the revocation of a dual citizen's citizenship based on acts (terrorism, treason) committed after becoming a citizen. In particular, there is virtually no chance that the new residency requirement will be invalidated.

I hear you depenabill. I'm wondering though, why do you think that it is beyond doubt that the remaining provisions of C24 will come into force well before the elections?
How unlikely is it that the elections would be held in March while the remaining provisions of C24 come into force as slated for June/July ("approximately a year from now")?

 

[dpenabill]

I hear you depenabill. I'm wondering though, why do you think that it is beyond doubt that the remaining provisions of C24 will come into force well before the elections?
How unlikely is it that the elections would be held in March while the remaining provisions of C24 come into force as slated for June/July ("approximately a year from now")?

While paraphrasing works, your query blurs what I said. "Nearly" beyond doubt is not "beyond doubt," and I only said that in regard to the October date for the election, that is the date the Federal Election is currently slated for.

What I said about an election earlier than what is currently slated, is:

"While it is possible the PM could schedule an election before the remaining provisions in Bill C-24 come into force, since the practical reality is that both dates are the PM's decision, it is far more likely that the Governor in Council (PMO in practice) will order the remaining provisions to come into force before an election date, even if early."

Obviously, the earlier the election is actually scheduled, the more chance there is that the remaining provisions in Bill C-24 have not yet come into force. But the Governor in Council can make the order specifying the date the provisions come into force anytime, even if that order provides a date months away, even a year.

So, sure, there is the possibility that an election could be called for March, but again it will be the Prime Minister doing that, and it is the Prime Minister who effectively controls (1) when the Governor in Council issues the order specifying the coming into force dates, and (2) what those dates are.

There is virtually no chance this legislation will slip by without coming into force, regardless of the scenario. . . . even if an election is called soon and the Governor in Council issues an order for the remaining provisions to come into force July 1, 2015 (or any other future date).

That is, wondering about whether there is a scenario in which, somehow, the remaining provisions might not come into force, is NOT worth spinning one's wheels much.

In terms of forecasting when Harper will call the election, even the most well-informed pundits are at best merely speculating. The one best thing Harper is really good at is keeping decisions secret within his very, very close knit circle of advisors. That said, there seems to be a general consensus that an early election is more likely than not, but almost no consensus about how early. Recent economic news, however, plus the inconsistent messages coming from such insiders as Jason Kenney versus other sources in the Conservative leadership, regarding the budget and prospective cuts to services, have created a political environment most pundits say is not especially friendly to Harper and the Conservatives, so at the least it appears (for now) that a March election is very unlikely. That said, there are some pundits suggesting that given the economic news that Harper may see his best opportunity is to call an election before presenting a budget . . . so who knows?

Mostly, this legislation is a done-deal, well-done, ready to come out of the oven. This will be the law. The amended version of section 5(1) will come into force sometime this year and will govern all applications not received the day before it comes into force. That is the long and short of it.

 

[ama912]

While paraphrasing works, your query blurs what I said. "Nearly" beyond doubt is not "beyond doubt," and I only said that in regard to the October date for the election, that is the date the Federal Election is currently slated for.

What I said about an election earlier than what is currently slated, is:

"While it is possible the PM could schedule an election before the remaining provisions in Bill C-24 come into force, since the practical reality is that both dates are the PM's decision, it is far more likely that the Governor in Council (PMO in practice) will order the remaining provisions to come into force before an election date, even if early."

Obviously, the earlier the election is actually scheduled, the more chance there is that the remaining provisions in Bill C-24 have not yet come into force. But the Governor in Council can make the order specifying the date the provisions come into force anytime, even if that order provides a date months away, even a year.

So, sure, there is the possibility that an election could be called for March, but again it will be the Prime Minister doing that, and it is the Prime Minister who effectively controls (1) when the Governor in Council issues the order specifying the coming into force dates, and (2) what those dates are.

There is virtually no chance this legislation will slip by without coming into force, regardless of the scenario. . . . even if an election is called soon and the Governor in Council issues an order for the remaining provisions to come into force July 1, 2015 (or any other future date).

That is, wondering about whether there is a scenario in which, somehow, the remaining provisions might not come into force, is NOT worth spinning one's wheels much.

In terms of forecasting when Harper will call the election, even the most well-informed pundits are at best merely speculating. The one best thing Harper is really good at is keeping decisions secret within his very, very close knit circle of advisors. That said, there seems to be a general consensus that an early election is more likely than not, but almost no consensus about how early. Recent economic news, however, plus the inconsistent messages coming from such insiders as Jason Kenney versus other sources in the Conservative leadership, regarding the budget and prospective cuts to services, have created a political environment most pundits say is not especially friendly to Harper and the Conservatives, so at the least it appears (for now) that a March election is very unlikely. That said, there are some pundits suggesting that given the economic news that Harper may see his best opportunity is to call an election before presenting a budget . . . so who knows?

Mostly, this legislation is a done-deal, well-done, ready to come out of the oven. This will be the law. The amended version of section 5(1) will come into force sometime this year and will govern all applications not received the day before it comes into force. That is the long and short of it.

dpenabill, I always enjoy reading your posts, and I'm sure the level of insight you bring to this forum has been truly helpful to a lot of people. Though I'm afraid that I've either not expressed my point well, or that you've missed it.

There's no question that the remaining provisions of C24 will come into force this year. But let's assume a March 16th election date. In the short time leading up to that date, the remaining provisions of C24 could either:
1) be rushed to come into force before March 16th, or
2) be announced to come into force on July 1st.

Which of those two scenarios is more likely and why? Is either one of those scenarios better than the other for the Conservatives?

 

[dpenabill]

There's no question that the remaining provisions of C24 will come into force this year. But let's assume a March 16th election date. In the short time leading up to that date, the remaining provisions of C24 could either:
1) be rushed to come into force before March 16th, or
2) be announced to come into force on July 1st.

Which of those two scenarios is more likely and why? Is either one of those scenarios better than the other for the Conservatives?

We do not know what date is currently slated for the remaining provisions of Bill C-24 to come into force. My sense, with just a bit more confidence than a guess, is that a date is already decided upon (my guesses: either June 1st, July 1st, or May 1st, odds declining in that order, but these are just guesses) and that is the date the Governor in Council will order, and this will happen regardless of what date the election is scheduled.

Why? That is this government's modus operandi: a decision is made at the top, the very top, and it sticks with that decision come whatever. Harper may have solicited input (last June or before) from certain high level bureaucrats about how long it would take to implement the changes, and made his decision based on that, but is highly unlikely to be flexible. A steel beam is more flexible.

The other unknown is when the Governor in Council will issue the order prescribing the date for the remaining provisions to come into force; that is, how much notice will the public have before the coming into force date. That could be the day before or months before.

My guess is that an early election might accelerate the date the order is issued, that the order will be issued before an election. But the date for the provisions to come into force will remain what, probably, already has been decided to be that date. If that date is planned for July 1st, it will most likely be July 1st.

While this government tends to give the minimal amount of notice it can get away with, if Harper sees a significant advantage in calling an election sooner rather than later, they will do their housekeeping (including things like the Governor in Council issuing orders for the coming into force date of outstanding legislation) and then Harper will call the election.

Overall I see no reason to suspect that the date these provisions come into force will be much affected by political maneuvering regarding the actual date for the election. The date the order itself is issued may be affected, if an early election is called, but not the coming into force date.

I am no political pundit, but from what I gather from the pundits the fulcrum now is the budget, and the question is whether Harper will call an election before submitting a budget (so he can make promises he does not have to keep, the cynical side of me whispers loudly) or after a budget purporting to be balanced, no deficit (probably not possible without smoke and mirrors and a lot of unrealistic forecasting, or huge cuts in services, or both).

All that said: sure, it is possible the amended version of section 5(1) of the Citizenship Act could come into force almost anytime now. It could be March 1 or late summer or any day in-between. There are no guarantees with this government. All the speculation focused on June and July aside, Harper has his schedule and that is the schedule which will get implemented. Tens of thousands of PRs are on the cusp. Not much they can do but be prepared to apply sooner, if and when qualified, and watch. And if they are on the side cutoff by the coming into force date, they will have to wait, another year or so depending on their personal circumstances (taking into account potential loss of pre-landing credits for example) and travel histories.