question about "intent to reside" in c-24

[ZingyDNA]

No, because they are not going to start revoking Citizenship of every Canadian who is retired living abroad, that is impossible.

Of course it is impossible. It shouldn't even be remotely talked about! Bill C-24 has brought that into discussion - Don't you think that's least bit worrisome?

 

[MUFC]

Of course it is impossible. It shouldn't even be remotely talked about! Bill C-24 has brought that into discussion - Don't you think that's least bit worrisome?

The people who are worried about that from the very beginning seems a little bit paranoid for no reason

 

[fprince]

This now changes everything what was discussed on this thread...JULY 11, 2015 NEW FORM

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pdf/kits/citizen/CIT0002E-2.pdf

10. INTENTION
I intend, if granted citizenship,
•
to continue to reside in Canada;
•
to enter into, or continue in, employment outside Canada in or with the Canadian Armed Forces, the federal public administration or the public service of a province,
otherwise than as a locally engaged person; or
•
to reside with my spouse or common-law partner, or parent, who is a Canadian citizen or permanent resident and is employed outside Canada in or with the
Canadian Armed Forces, the federal public administration or the public service of a province, otherwise than as a locally engaged person.
Yes
I have a mental disability and am incapable of forming the intent referred to above.
Note:
You must submit supporting evidence.
No –
Note
: If you select `no', your application will be returned to you as you do not meet the requirements for a grant of citizenship

 

[Lux et Veritas]

I must admit the wording is "awkward" to say the very least. I guess most people are troubled by the "if granted citizenship" part.

 

[rayman_m]

I find members are giving different opinion and some are confused and mixing up what Minister said about this. Some are quoting it is for those who will apply and live abroad during processing..

BUT.. the reality is the new application clearly says: IF CITIZENSHIP GRANTED means this rule will apply after a person becomes Citizen!!!

The "Intend" clause is added deliberately by this Harper Govt. as this is part of the tightening immigration and granting of citizenship onward. Canada does not have enough employment opportunities anymore.

Under this intend clause the new citizen's status will be literally a PR and will not have freedom to live outside Canada for extended period. Under this clause if a person does not reside in Canada, CIC might say..Hey you declared you will reside in Canada but you are living abroad..So you miss declared or your have violated the citizenship rule.. might be an excuse to cancel citizenship.

This means only those who are willing to stay rest of their lives in Canada only should apply under new rules. New citizens under new rule does not have same freedom of living anywhere in the world under earlier rule. This will make new citizens with limited freedom and mobility rights.. Very sad and I think Canada got this Intent clause idea from some other European country while U.S does not have this kind of restrictions..

Also added Income Tax clause which means an applicant does not have satisfactory income deceleration might find themselves in limbo while CIC will scrutinize tax files and surely will ask lot questions to the applicant during interview and will find easier to issue RQ on this clause alone..

 

[Canadafrenzy]

Hey folks,

I've applied for my citizenship last December, so sorry if my comment seems a little overboard.

I strongly believe that the intent-to-reside clause is merely a symbolic measure by the PC government to shore up votes come election time. We can see that in the context of Canada's recent ratcheting up of its anti-terrorism stance. The citizenship Minister has said in a YouTube video that the so-called "intention" wouldn't apply once citizenship is granted.

So lets say I'm signing off on the "intention" clause but later face losing citizenship for non-compliance, in my defence I'd rely on the Minister's explanation of the clause.

Also, this clause can be challenged in court as it contravenes our Charter Rights.

At any rate, revocation of citizenship simply for non compliance of Intention doesn't seem to be an option here-- tightening of rules is. However, the Government seems to be using it as a bluff to discourage new citizens from moving out of the country. And I think that's why the wording in the Act as well as the application form is so off compared to what the Minister said.

 

[dpenabill]

The language in the form is virtually verbatim what section 5(1)(c.1) prescribed. It is straight-forward. The subject-predicate is clear and in present tense. "I intend . . . " All the rest is merely describing what that intention must be, that current intention.

The applicant must have this intent to be qualified for citizenship. The applicant must remain qualified throughout the processing of the application right up to the taking of the oath. So the applicant must have this intent, currently, at all times between applying and taking the oath.

Once the oath is taken, the individual is no longer a PR, no longer an applicant for citizenship, and thus this section will no longer be at all applicable. Period.

Straight-forward, simple.

I strongly believe that the intent-to-reside clause is merely a symbolic measure by the PC government to shore up votes come election time. We can see that in the context of Canada's recent ratcheting up of its anti-terrorism stance. The citizenship Minister has said in a YouTube video that the so-called "intention" wouldn't apply once citizenship is granted.

This requirement is far more than symbolic. It will give CIC authority to deny applicants who are residing abroad while the application is pending. This has been a pet peeve of the Tories for many years. In addition to essentially precluding applying-on-the-way-to-the-airport (which is obviously a key purpose of this requirement), in conjunction with other requirements it is designed to discourage taking-the-oath-on-the-way-to-the-airport. Obvious example: applicant has already taken a job abroad, entered into a lease agreement for a residence abroad or purchased a home, before taking the oath, and already has plans, before taking the oath, to soon go to that job or home . . . that will be fraud. If discerned prior to the oath, application will be denied. If discovered and investigated later, after the oath, at risk for imprisonment and revocation of citizenship. Straight-forward, simple.

Additionally, this requirement gives CIC a number of additional tools to assist in the investigation and assessment of an applicant's qualifications, including a basis for requiring disclosure of all ties abroad to compare to ties in Canada. This opens the door for CIC inquiries very wide.

Also, this clause can be challenged in court as it contravenes our Charter Rights.

Not really since it has no impact on the Charter Rights of citizens. None. Claims to the contrary are unfounded and a red herring, a persistent red herring.

 

[CanadianCountry]

This bill is very cleverly (almost sinisterly) drafted to worry people about a process which used to be a nice smooth process.

The path to citizenship is full of thorns now. But again some people love bloody feet.

The language in the form is virtually verbatim what section 5(1)(c.1) prescribed. It is straight-forward. The subject-predicate is clear and in present tense. "I intend . . . " All the rest is merely describing what that intention must be, that current intention.

The applicant must have this intent to be qualified for citizenship. The applicant must remain qualified throughout the processing of the application right up to the taking of the oath. So the applicant must have this intent, currently, at all times between applying and taking the oath.

Once the oath is taken, the individual is no longer a PR, no longer an applicant for citizenship, and thus this section will no longer be at all applicable. Period.

Straight-forward, simple.

This requirement is far more than symbolic. It will give CIC authority to deny applicants who are residing abroad while the application is pending. This has been a pet peeve of the Tories for many years. In addition to essentially precluding applying-on-the-way-to-the-airport (which is obviously a key purpose of this requirement), in conjunction with other requirements it is designed to discourage taking-the-oath-on-the-way-to-the-airport. Obvious example: applicant has already taken a job abroad, entered into a lease agreement for a residence abroad or purchased a home, before taking the oath, and already has plans, before taking the oath, to soon go to that job or home . . . that will be fraud. If discerned prior to the oath, application will be denied. If discovered and investigated later, after the oath, at risk for imprisonment and revocation of citizenship. Straight-forward, simple.

Additionally, this requirement gives CIC a number of additional tools to assist in the investigation and assessment of an applicant's qualifications, including a basis for requiring disclosure of all ties abroad to compare to ties in Canada. This opens the door for CIC inquiries very wide.



Not really since it has no impact on the Charter Rights of citizens. None. Claims to the contrary are unfounded and a red herring, a persistent red herring.

 

[rayman_m]

This bill is very cleverly (almost sinisterly) drafted to worry people about a process which used to be a nice smooth process.

The path to citizenship is full of thorns now. But again some people love bloody feet.

The Intention clause is added with some purpose of CIC but in reality what this means to the future citizens those who mostly will live outside remain to be see in coming years...

In the meantime, plain interpretation of the this clause in plain English means: by ticking YES an applicant is committing to maintain residency in Canada "IF GRANTED CITIZENSHIP". CIC will have or keeping options available in their disposal in violation of this clause unless a Federal court judge over turns this disturbing clause..

I think people who intends to live rest of their lives in Canada has no issues but peoples who having plan to leave Canada once get the Passport and visit once a while may find problematic or face questions entering to Canada with a prolong absence..

 

[fprince]

It is not the wording which is a bother, it is the 2 OPTIONS they are quoting below in the application.

So basically they say you ARE FREE TO LIVE OUTSIDE OF CANADA after given citizenship
BUT You need to.. ONLY

1.enter into, or continue in, employment outside Canada in or with the Canadian Armed Forces, the federal public administration or the public service of a province,

2. to reside with my spouse or common-law partner, or parent, who is a Canadian citizen or permanent resident and is employed outside Canada in or with the
Canadian Armed Forces, the federal public administration or the public service of a province,

So now this to me in plain English is...you can only live outside provided you meet the above two conditions as you signed in the application.

Am I missing anything here?
So what If a citizen gets a Job for a multinational company and moves to work in UK for the next 5 years? Thoughts thoughts...


and which citizen are we talking about, people who send in the NEW FORMS?

 

[bigben3]

Please watch this video for all your questions

https://youtu.be/uMoa1vbxRWk

 

[rayman_m]

Please watch this video for all your questions

https://youtu.be/uMoa1vbxRWk

This video from July, 2014 when minister was asked to clarify but under the new form where Intend clause has extensive clarification totally differs from minister's statement. So, if we go by rule of law we have to take as CIC official stand which form says and an applicant has to click YES knowingly that they must reside inside Canada "IF GRANTED" and if live outside must have Jobs with Canadian affiliation or their PR or Citizen Spouse.

I am sure in coming days many questions will be asked to the minister on this new form explanation. If he says we will change the form then totally fine no worry. However, if the form's new Intent Clause and 2 other sub clause remain intact there is a concern for future citizens who wish to live outside Canada after getting their passport.

 

[bigben3]

No country in the world restricts the freedom of mobility of their citizens. So, future citizens CANNOT MOVE OUTSIDE CANADA at all to different countries if circumstances change?.. Is it gonna be North Korea-2?

 

[MUFC]

This video from July, 2014 when minister was asked to clarify but under the new form where Intend clause has extensive clarification totally differs from minister's statement. So, if we go by rule of law we have to take as CIC official stand which form says and an applicant has to click YES knowingly that they must reside inside Canada "IF GRANTED" and if live outside must have Jobs with Canadian affiliation or their PR or Citizen Spouse.

I am sure in coming days many questions will be asked to the minister on this new form explanation. If he says we will change the form then totally fine no worry. However, if the form's new Intent Clause and 2 other sub clause remain intact there is a concern for future citizens who wish to live outside Canada after getting their passport.

I will apply by using this applications, so unfortunately I will be one of the future second class citizens without the right to stay abroad.
I just have to click on the YES button and accept it ??? :-\

 

[kaladdin]

"Intent to reside" clause only applies during the citizenship application process.

Quote from the CIC website:

You must declare your intent to reside during the citizenship application process.

To become a citizen, you must indicate your intention to:

live in Canada,

work outside Canada as a Crown servant, or

live abroad with certain family members who are Crown servants.

Once you become a Canadian citizen, you have the right to enter, remain in, or leave Canada, one of the basic rights of citizenship.