Gov will "re-examine" condition 51

[kangamoose]

Did anyone else see this article?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberals-immigration-levels-plan-2016-1.3479764

The immigration minister has confirmed what most of us suspected, that the promise to make spouses immediate PR's refers to condition 51:

"We will work to restore the maximum age for dependants to 22 from 19 and re-examine the two-year conditional permanent residence provision for sponsored spouses."

I hope that the "re-examine" means thoroughly investigate...

 

[canadausa#11]

In all the articles I've seen about it the only immigration lawyer speaking out against Condition 51 was that it made some people stay in abusive or bad relationships to keep status. Ignoring the fact that being abused means your can keep your PR even if the relationship breaks down within 2 years.


I think condition 51 was a great idea, idiotic to get rid of it.

 

[kangamoose]

I think condition 51 was a great idea, idiotic to get rid of it.

Completely agree.

 

[ImABule]

Did anyone else see this article?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberals-immigration-levels-plan-2016-1.3479764

The immigration minister has confirmed what most of us suspected, that the promise to make spouses immediate PR's refers to condition 51:

"We will work to restore the maximum age for dependants to 22 from 19 and re-examine the two-year conditional permanent residence provision for sponsored spouses."

I hope that the "re-examine" means thoroughly investigate...

I would like them to bring back the fiancé visa, so that spouses aren't forced to live apart for so long while PR applications are processed. That would be my idea of "immediate PR".

I also think condition 51 was a good idea, and that it would make sense to approve all spousal sponsorship applications provided criminality, medical and security checks are all passed and extend condition 51 to a longer period of time. That would both deter marriage fraud if someone had to live with their spouse for say 5 or more years to keep their status opposed to 2 years, and it would also prevent legitimate couples from having to deal with the stress and anguish of denied applications and the appeal process while being separated from their loved ones. I would rather see 0 genuine couples denied than have even a small percent of genuine couples denied to maybe preventing a few fraud cases. In any case an undertaking is signed, so why not just let them all in and let condition 51 and the undertaking sort them out.

 

[Ponga]

I would like them to bring back the fiancé visa, so that spouses aren't forced to live apart for so long while PR applications are processed. That would be my idea of "immediate PR".

I also think condition 51 was a good idea, and that it would make sense to approve all spousal sponsorship applications provided criminality, medical and security checks are all passed and extend condition 51 to a longer period of time. That would both deter marriage fraud if someone had to live with their spouse for say 5 or more years to keep their status opposed to 2 years, and it would also prevent legitimate couples from having to deal with the stress and anguish of denied applications and the appeal process while being separated from their loved ones. I would rather see 0 genuine couples denied than have even a small percent of genuine couples denied to maybe preventing a few fraud cases. In any case an undertaking is signed, so why not just let them all in and let condition 51 and the undertaking sort them out.

Exactly!

 

[Alurra71]

I would like them to bring back the fiancé visa, so that spouses aren't forced to live apart for so long while PR applications are processed. That would be my idea of "immediate PR".

I also think condition 51 was a good idea, and that it would make sense to approve all spousal sponsorship applications provided criminality, medical and security checks are all passed and extend condition 51 to a longer period of time. That would both deter marriage fraud if someone had to live with their spouse for say 5 or more years to keep their status opposed to 2 years, and it would also prevent legitimate couples from having to deal with the stress and anguish of denied applications and the appeal process while being separated from their loved ones. I would rather see 0 genuine couples denied than have even a small percent of genuine couples denied to maybe preventing a few fraud cases. In any case an undertaking is signed, so why not just let them all in and let condition 51 and the undertaking sort them out.

Because the cost of the 'sorting' would be astronomical. Can you imagine the money and manpower needed to 'deport' 2000000000 'wrongly' PR'd folks? Of course, you'd have to find them all first since you're assuming that all the folks that were willing to 'lie' and/or be 'paid' to be a spouse would be willing to turn them in. Too many variables.

It wouldn't be that easy, not by a long shot. While I don't agree with the wait times and all that, I do agree that they need to have a good series of checks and balances so they aren't stung later...

 

[canadausa#11]

Speed up processing times to a decent standard and also make the appeal system much quicker, while keeping condition 51

 

[Ponga]

Because the cost of the 'sorting' would be astronomical. Can you imagine the money and manpower needed to 'deport' 2000000000 'wrongly' PR'd folks? Of course, you'd have to find them all first since you're assuming that all the folks that were willing to 'lie' and/or be 'paid' to be a spouse would be willing to turn them in. Too many variables.

It wouldn't be that easy, not by a long shot. While I don't agree with the wait times and all that, I do agree that they need to have a good series of checks and balances so they aren't stung later...

What about the...wait for it...`plethora' of Inland applicants that get an OWP about 14 months before the sponsor is even approved and the relationship between the applicant and sponsor is approved? It would be easy enough for those people to hide, right?

If the sponsor has signed the application to sponsor, the responsibility for the person and/or their whereabouts would be on their shoulders, IMO.

Remember, this conversation is a result of the government wrongly stating that spouses will receive immediate PR, which is obviously NOT what they really mean.

Soooo glad this nightmare is behind me, just as you are too!

 

[Alurra71]

What about the...wait for it...`plethora' of Inland applicants that get an OWP about 14 months before the sponsor is even approved and the relationship between the applicant and sponsor is approved? It would be easy enough for those people to hide, right?

If the sponsor has signed the application to sponsor, the responsibility for the person and/or their whereabouts would be on their shoulders, IMO.

Remember, this conversation is a result of the government wrongly stating that spouses will receive immediate PR, which is obviously NOT what they really mean.

Soooo glad this nightmare is behind me, just as you are too!

*spits out her water* ....

I just ... I just can't even ....

LMFAO!

 

[Ponga]

*spits out her water* ....

I just ... I just can't even ....

LMFAO!

I'm here all week. Tip your bartender and try the chicken...it tastes like, chicken (surprisingly).

 

[ImABule]

I'm here all week. Tip your bartender and try the chicken...it tastes like, chicken (surprisingly).

LOL

 

[cali780]

I personally dont care about condition 51, i think it was a step in the right direction.

They need to reduce the processing time for getting spouses into canada. That is what is killing me. If they can reduce it to some acceptable level of under 6 months, that would make more sense than re-examining condition 51.

 

[Mardek]

I'm perfectly fine with condition 51.
It's the a step in a right direction with fighting fraud, which is one of the main reasons why our applications take so long in the first place.

 

[mandiebraxton]

I personally dont care about condition 51, i think it was a step in the right direction.

They need to reduce the processing time for getting spouses into canada. That is what is killing me. If they can reduce it to some acceptable level of under 6 months, that would make more sense than re-examining condition 51.

I concur! I don't understand why this is not on top of their list. Processing time for some regions is rediculous. The disaprity in processing times is just staggering and makes the process 'unfair'.
*Mandie*

 

[YYC787]

Condition 51, and whether its abolished or not, makes no difference in terms of the processing times.

They're only doing this so McCallum can smile for the cameras and say that he's made "radical changes" to the immigration system, when in fact, he hasn't done squat.