Help defeat the Conservatives for Bill C-24 (Federal Elections - October 19th)

[taleodor]

As we all know, Conservatives have infamous record on immigration. Just to name few points:
- Bill C-24
- Tremendous growth of backlogs in immigration and citizenship programs
- Uncontrolled growth of fees
- Unpredictable immigration process

For each of those points mentioned above and for many others, there are multiple angry threads on this forum.

Most of us currently cannot vote, and a lot of us cannot vote due to backlogs, long processing and other unforced delays which occurred during the Harper's regime.

However, there are still ways to help defeat the Conservatives in the upcoming elections, using the strategic 'Anyone But Conservatives' vote.

Here is what you can do:
1. Locate your riding
2. Locate the opposition candidate with the better prospects, using http://www.threehundredeight.com/p/canada.html and http://www.electionprediction.org/2015_fed/index.php
3. Help this candidate to win by volunteering and/or donating for them. By the way, donations up to $400 annually are tax refundable at 75%, if you are a permanent resident or a citizen.

Remember, this is an investment in your future. You are likely to pay much more in fees and bureaucracy under Conservatives, not mentioning the time spent in the delays.

So even though many of us cannot vote, we can make a difference

 

[den_b]

Well, I see nothing wrong with Bill C-24. With such high immigration rate Canada needs a way to protect it's citizenship value.

 

[CanadaJimmy]

Two things I didn't like about C-24:
1) No time before permanent residency is counted towards citizenship - this is incredibly unfair, since when on a work permit or study visa you are integrating and becoming part of Canadian life. Canadian culture and values become part of you during any time you stay in Canada, regardless if you are PR or not. The previous rule that every day before PR counted as half a day was fair, this however, is not.

2) Two-tier citizenship - if you are ever decided by the government that you have committed a terrorist act, which they might decide is being involved in a protest for example, or you might simply have been in the wrong place and the wrong time, you can have your citizenship stripped of you. While I think it's quite unlikely to really affect anyone who doesn't deserve it, it sets a precedent that citizenship is not forever, more like it is "Permenant Residency 2.0" and that you do not have the same rights as someone born here. Naturalised citizens won't feel as included in Canada and this could actually make what it is trying to prevent (radicalisation) a worse problem.

But anyway yes, we should do our best to get these guys out of office. Canada needs to attract top talent from around the world, and the current rollercoaster system of CIC and cost has meant we have lost some great people to other nations who don't want to wait and deal with this terrible system. There's a million other reasons to vote them out too of course, but I don't want to go off topic

 

[torontosm]

Remember, this is an investment in your future. You are likely to pay much more in fees and bureaucracy under Conservatives, not mentioning the time spent in the delays.

Voting for any other party will not change C-24 as it had broad-based support across all the parties. Plenty of Liberal and NDP MP's voted in favour of it, so the chances of it being repealed so that the "fees and bereaucracy" are reduced are virtually nil.

 

[taleodor]

No Liberal or NDP or Green MP voted in favor of C-24: https://openparliament.ca/votes/41-2/210/

And both Liberal and NDP leaders promised to repeal parts of C-24, including parts mentioned above.

 

[blueray333]

Two things I didn't like about C-24:
1) No time before permanent residency is counted towards citizenship

2) Two-tier citizenship

1) There's a reason why it's called temporary. why count the days when they are temps. permanent resident has the caveat of establishing residency.

2) I don't have a problem with this. Unless you are into terrorism and espionage.

C-24 is a damn if you do, damn if you don't kind of thing. I prefer the "do" because this protects the people who have good intentions of residing and becoming Canadians.

 

[polara69]

And both Liberal and NDP leaders promised to repeal parts of C-24, including parts mentioned above.

Not going to happen..this has been introduced to satisfy Canadians thinking immigration got out of hands. But we will see.

 

[taleodor]

Not going to happen..this has been introduced to satisfy Canadians thinking immigration got out of hands. But we will see.

Yes, we will see. But at the very least, the situation is not going to get worse. On the other hand, who knows what other surprises to expect if Conservatives stay in power

On a side note, the uncontrolled CIC staff cuts, fees, delays, constant changing of rules under Conservatives and etc go far beyond C-24.

 

[CanadaJimmy]

1) There's a reason why it's called temporary. why count the days when they are temps. permanent resident has the caveat of establishing residency.

It's called temporary because the permit expires. It has nothing to do with whether you intend to immigrate to permanently to live in Canada. Since it can be used as part of a permanent residency application, this shows that it is a valid immigration path, so that argument doesn't hold, sorry.

2) I don't have a problem with this. Unless you are into terrorism and espionage.

Wedge politics - you're saying by being against the bill, I therefore must be in favour of terrorism and espionage. This is not the case. It is about recognizing that citizenship means you are now Canadian, not on a "Citizenship visa" that can be taken away at the government's discretion. Being a citizen means you are part of all Canadian Citizens, who are the masters of their government, this bill makes the government masters of us. It goes against canadian values.

C-24 is a damn if you do, damn if you don't kind of thing. I prefer the "do" because this protects the people who have good intentions of residing and becoming Canadians.

How does stripping citizenship protect anyone? It's just a cruel and unusual punishment that doesn't follow established laws and guidelines.

 

[taleodor]

BTW, Liberals have started the Petition promising to repeal parts of C-24:
https://www.liberal.ca/petitions/second-class/

And here is the NDP official statement (though this one is from more than a year ago):
http://www.ndp.ca/news/ndp-calls-changes-to-bill-c-24

 

[screech339]

It's called temporary because the permit expires.

And what happens when the permit expires? You have to leave Canada. Nothing to stipulate that your temporary visa means you get to stay permanently. That is what PR status means. You get to stay permanently. It makes more sense use pre-PR days towards qualification for PR, not citizenship.

You do realize that by accepting a temporary visa, you are accepting the fact that you have to LEAVE Canada at end of visa permit. If you had given any hints that you intend to stay permanently, you would have not gotten the visa, in the first place.

 

[Natan]

And what happens when the permit expires? You have to leave Canada. Nothing to stipulate that your temporary visa means you get to stay permanently. That is what PR status means. You get to stay permanently. It makes more sense use pre-PR days towards qualification for PR, not citizenship.

You do realize that by accepting a temporary visa, you are accepting the fact that you have to LEAVE Canada at end of visa permit. If you had given any hints that you intend to stay permanently, you would have not gotten the visa, in the first place.

This is, in fact, not entirely true. Some TRPs are issued to immigrants who intend to reside permanently in Canada, and the TRP is being issued with Government's acknowledgement that this is simply a step on the road to granting PR.

An example is a stateless immigrant who cannot receive PR status because they do not meet the passport/travel document requirement. They would be issued a TRP and a one-way travel document to Canada. After arrival in Canada, the immigrant would apply to have the passport/travel document requirement waived and for leave to apply for PR. As this process can take years, TRPs are renewed to extend their validity for as long as five years, after which, because they cannot leave the country voluntarily and also cannot be deported, CIC would either issue a PR or be compelled to do so by a court of competent jurisdiction.

 

[CanadaJimmy]

^ What Natan said!

On the last work permit I had I informed the immigration officer that I was applying for Permanent Residency using this permit and he wished me good luck. I was very clear that I would leave however if it was unsuccessful and the work permit expired. If a work permit is an officially recognized path to PR, your days spent in Canada under the visa beforehand should count towards it - 1 pre-PR day = 0.5 day system was a good compromise.

To give you some context, I was on a Work Permit for 3 years prior to getting my PR. Under the old rules, I was able to apply after living in Canada for 6 years in total (2 on PR, 3 on work permit (1.5) = 3.5 years credited). With the new rules, I would have to wait an additional 2 years, then the additional 1 year for it to process. Some people had to wait even longer for PR while working on temporary visas, so in total people could have to wait 8-12 years in some cases before they are allowed to vote and become part of Canadian society. This to me, seems like an unfair and excessive wait time.

 

[screech339]

This is, in fact, not entirely true. Some TRPs are issued to immigrants who intend to reside permanently in Canada, and the TRP is being issued with Government's acknowledgement that this is simply a step on the road to granting PR.

An example is a stateless immigrant who cannot receive PR status because they do not meet the passport/travel document requirement. They would be issued a TRP and a one-way travel document to Canada. After arrival in Canada, the immigrant would apply to have the passport/travel document requirement waived and for leave to apply for PR. As this process can take years, TRPs are renewed to extend their validity for as long as five years, after which, because they cannot leave the country voluntarily and also cannot be deported, CIC would either issue a PR or be compelled to do so by a court of competent jurisdiction.

Using a stateless person is a poor example. Since the person cannot leave Canada since he/she is stateless, Canada has no choice but to grant TRP until the applicant achieve citizenship. And beside stateless person falls under special circumstance. Canada doesn't have to accept the stateless person into Canada. So by accepting stateless people, Canada accepted the responsibility of the stateless person.

Is that the only example you can come up with?

Try telling the embassy that you intend to stay permanently in Canada when you apply for TRP. Changes are you clam up because you would get denied TRP. So by being silence about staying permanently, you accepted the condition of TRP that you will LEAVE Canada at end of permit. Again no stipulation that you get PR and / or citizenship attached with TRP.

 

[Natan]

Is that the only example you can come up with?

You said, "If you had given any hints that you intend to stay permanently, you would have not gotten the visa, in the first place."

I responded, "That is, in fact, not entirely true."

My response is correct, it is not entirely true.

But since you asked, another example would be the spouse of an approved skilled worker. The skilled worker was approved for PR status, but due to some minor problem with the spouse's background, the spouse was found ineligible for PR status. The Canadian embassy/consulate, however, approved the spouse for a TRP, so as to accompany the skilled worker to Canada. After arriving in Canada, the spouse is expected to petition for a waiver (of whatever condition made them ineligible) and leave to apply for PR.

Thus, your statement that openly intending to stay permanently in Canada would prevent someone from being issued a visa is prima facie false. There are many reasons that a Canadian embassy/consulate would approve a TRP in lieu of PR, fully expecting the emigrant to petition for leave to apply for PR status after their arrival in Canada.