+1(514) 937-9445 or Toll-free (Canada & US) +1 (888) 947-9445

speculations regarding Galati's challenge

catwomancat

Full Member
Aug 10, 2014
27
0
Hi all, :)

What are your expectations regarding Rocco Galati's lawsuit against Bill C24? And is he only defending those who were born in Canada or those who acquire their Canadian citizenship via immigration as well? I am a little shocked that this bill turned into law.
 

Mary2009

Star Member
Aug 6, 2009
129
3
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
catwomancat said:
I am a little shocked that this bill turned into law.
Most of us here are shocked from the same!

What's even worst is that the proposal became a law, "AS-IS" :eek:
No amendments and no reaction regarding those who were suggesting modifications ...etc.. :(

The ONLY good thing about this law... is that sooner or later, anyone who becomes a Canadian citizen will never vote for conservatives again!

Well, may be not "everyone" but at least the majority of new citizens won't even consider conservatives again.
 

MUFC

Champion Member
Jul 14, 2014
1,223
214
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
For me is interesting why only he is the one challenging the Bill. I remember that many other organisations have said that they will challenge it too, but so far no action from them.
 

admontreal

Hero Member
Feb 15, 2011
326
9
Montreal, QC
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
I contacted CARL (Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers) who announced their intention to challenge the law against the Charter and they told me they're building their cases.

Also, if Rocco Galati's challenge is successful, all the new revocation clauses will be cancelled because they're too ambiguous and they cover natural born citizens. The government will be given a timeframe to propose new versions of the clauses (that cover naturalized citizens only) but I think the Liberals will already be in power at that time.
 

catwomancat

Full Member
Aug 10, 2014
27
0
Yes it is definitely a shock, and what is worse is I would be reading news about this law then you find the comments of the Canadians below like hundreds expressing happiness with the law. The amount of support it is getting is scary. Kind of makes me lose hope of a change.

I did not think other agencies were challenging it. I hope they do, because I immigrated to Canada with my family to seek citizenship in a country that treats all its citizens the same. Now with this law, we will be second class citizens so long as we have access to a second citizenship? That is how we are treated in our countries of origin,and now it is happening again.

What if one of my kids ever get better job/education opportunities abroad and has to live overseas for long time? this gives them the right to revoke citizenship? when I know many Canadian-born citizens who live most of their lives abroad but these will never be in danger of losing their citizenship.

I have recently landed in Canada, so I still do not have an understanding of their political system but I heard that the Liberals won elections. Does that mean the Conservatives are no longer in power? and what is the Liberals position on immigration?
 

SenoritaBella

VIP Member
Jan 2, 2012
3,673
194
Category........
Visa Office......
Dakar
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
App. Filed.......
08-01-2014
AOR Received.
12-02-2014
File Transfer...
25-02-2014
Med's Request
02-11-2015
Med's Done....
18-09-2013
Passport Req..
02-11-2015
VISA ISSUED...
hopefully soon
LANDED..........
hopefully soon
The Conservatives are still in power and they have a majority which is enough to pass laws even if the opposition objects. As much as people are excited about the Liberals, I don't think much will change. For one, I can't see any party wanting to change this new Citizenship Law(eventhough if they promise that during the campaign) - they will not want to be accused of "weakening" Canadian citizenship. On the political side, they can always say, "see, they(Cons) are the ones who passed this Bill, we didn't", blah blah blah.

Also, I was in Canada when the Liberals were in power(Paul Martin) and here is what I remember:
1. there was a backlog of federal skilled worker applications
2. skilled worker program was like a two-step process - a) you send just the application forms b) if you pass eligibility, they send request for the supporting documents. Some people waited years to get to step #2.
3. foreign students could not work off-campus until after graduation.
4. after graduation they had 60 days(later changed to 90 days) to find work related to their field of studies or return home.
5. if they found work, they had to go through the LMO process (there was no post-graduate work permit)
6. immigration application fees I think was more than $550.

It has taken me a long long time to get to citizenship because of the laws they had in place which they claimed to be "working on changing them" but never did.

Here's what the Cons did since they came into power in I think 2008:

7. created the off-campus work permit for foreign students, to ensure students don't have to stop working as they wait for the post-graduate work permit(PGWP)to arrive.
8. created PGWP for foreign students, so they can work and immigrate to Canada permanently(since they would have adapted to Canadian life and have Canadian work experience)
9. reduced the applications fees to $550
10. created the Canadian Experience Class (CEC) specifically for students graduating from Canadian schools and for foreign workers
11. created accelerated LMO process
12. students did not need to find work only in their field of studies in order to immigrate (it just had to be skilled work in any field)
13. the CEC program has helped many people immigrate in a shorter time (some as early as after 2 yrs of being in Canada). This would never have happened under the Liberal gov't back in the days.
14. legislating the backlog - this is a mixed bag. It was not a good outcome for many people but if you look at the principle behind it, the gov't was adjusting to changing labor market needs. We don't need many more foreign doctors, lawyers, engineers, architects, etc driving taxis or cleaning buildings.
15. the citizenship bill - one can say this is a mixed bag as well. There are good parts of the Bill but the "intent to reside" clause is not the one that is most worrisome in my opinion. I think the worst part is the power it gives the Minister to strip people off their citizenship if they are convicted of certain crimes abroad. I'm sure we have heard of countries with dictators who arrest and convict people falsely. It won't be fair for someone to loose their citizenship based on such bogus convictions, which is why I still believe Judges should be the only person involved when it comes to revocation of citizenship.

So overall, as you can see, most people who have had the opportunity to experience life under a previous gov't would likely still vote Cons, especially on immigration matters. Overall, when it comes to immigration, my experience has been better under the Cons. I don't know who I will vote for(once I can) but I won't be rushing to the Liberals just because of Bill C-34.
 

screech339

VIP Member
Apr 2, 2013
7,887
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
SenoritaBella said:
The Conservatives are still in power and they have a majority which is enough to pass laws even if the opposition objects. As much as people are excited about the Liberals, I don't think much will change. For one, I can't see any party wanting to change this new Citizenship Law(eventhough if they promise that during the campaign) - they will not want to be accused of "weakening" Canadian citizenship. On the political side, they can always say, "see, they(Cons) are the ones who passed this Bill, we didn't", blah blah blah.

Also, I was in Canada when the Liberals were in power(Paul Martin) and here is what I remember:
1. there was a backlog of federal skilled worker applications
2. skilled worker program was like a two-step process - a) you send just the application forms b) if you pass eligibility, they send request for the supporting documents. Some people waited years to get to step #2.
3. foreign students could not work off-campus until after graduation.
4. after graduation they had 60 days(later changed to 90 days) to find work related to their field of studies or return home.
5. if they found work, they had to go through the LMO process (there was no post-graduate work permit)
6. immigration application fees I think was more than $550.

It has taken me a long long time to get to citizenship because of the laws they had in place which they claimed to be "working on changing them" but never did.

Here's what the Cons did since they came into power in I think 2008:

7. created the off-campus work permit for foreign students, to ensure students don't have to stop working as they wait for the post-graduate work permit(PGWP)to arrive.
8. created PGWP for foreign students, so they can work and immigrate to Canada permanently(since they would have adapted to Canadian life and have Canadian work experience)
9. reduced the applications fees to $550
10. created the Canadian Experience Class (CEC) specifically for students graduating from Canadian schools and for foreign workers
11. created accelerated LMO process
12. students did not need to find work only in their field of studies in order to immigrate (it just had to be skilled work in any field)
13. the CEC program has helped many people immigrate in a shorter time (some as early as after 2 yrs of being in Canada). This would never have happened under the Liberal gov't back in the days.
14. legislating the backlog - this is a mixed bag. It was not a good outcome for many people but if you look at the principle behind it, the gov't was adjusting to changing labor market needs. We don't need many more foreign doctors, lawyers, engineers, architects, etc driving taxis or cleaning buildings.
15. the citizenship bill - one can say this is a mixed bag as well. There are good parts of the Bill but the "intent to reside" clause is not the one that is most worrisome in my opinion. I think the worst part is the power it gives the Minister to strip people off their citizenship if they are convicted of certain crimes abroad. I'm sure we have heard of countries with dictators who arrest and convict people falsely. It won't be fair for someone to loose their citizenship based on such bogus convictions, which is why I still believe Judges should be the only person involved when it comes to revocation of citizenship.

So overall, as you can see, most people who have had the opportunity to experience life under a previous gov't would likely still vote Cons, especially on immigration matters. Overall, when it comes to immigration, my experience has been better under the Cons. I don't know who I will vote for(once I can) but I won't be rushing to the Liberals just because of Bill C-24.
+1 for your detailed response on the changes of immigration brought on by the current government. A lot of people tends to forget what the current government has done to increase immigration as compared to previous government has done.

Honestly I think those that didn't like C-24 are falling for fear mongering over losing their citizenship over the "intent to reside in Canada" clause. Canada is not going to strip citizenship just because you left for a job overseas after you acquire citizenship. Not going to happen.

But honestly I think that once the PR gets their citizenship, they will drop the issue over citizenship rule changes. The only people complaining are the ones that was looking forward to the old rules qualification may now have to wait a little longer.

Screech339
 

catwomancat

Full Member
Aug 10, 2014
27
0
Senoritabella,

Thanks for the detailed answers. Gave me plenty of understanding. Much appreciated :) And I agree the Liberals do not seem to be keen on challenging/changing this law...especially with the number of support that it seems to have.

Screech,
for me the concern is not only having my citizenship or that of any of my children revoked if life led us to live abroad. The idea of someone other than a judge being able to revoke your citizenship for a number of reasons does give the feeling of 'fragile rights' and second class citizenship.. and yes of course the longer wait period is a little annoying, mainly because (at least for me) you have to wait longer to achieve a dream :) But the good thing about Canada is that a PR enjoys many of the rights of a citizen. which is great on the government's part.

In any case, I still have a long way to go before I can fulfill my citizenship obligations. And I think that the citizenship laws will keep changing with the change of powers.
 

screech339

VIP Member
Apr 2, 2013
7,887
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
catwomancat said:
Senoritabella,

Thanks for the detailed answers. Gave me plenty of understanding. Much appreciated :) And I agree the Liberals do not seem to be keen on challenging/changing this law...especially with the number of support that it seems to have.

Screech,
for me the concern is not only having my citizenship or that of any of my children revoked if life led us to live abroad. The idea of someone other than a judge being able to revoke your citizenship for a number of reasons does give the feeling of 'fragile rights' and second class citizenship.. and yes of course the longer wait period is a little annoying, mainly because (at least for me) you have to wait longer to achieve a dream :) But the good thing about Canada is that a PR enjoys many of the rights of a citizen. which is great on the government's part.

In any case, I still have a long way to go before I can fulfill my citizenship obligations. And I think that the citizenship laws will keep changing with the change of powers.
Your children will not lose their Canadian citizen once acquired over leaving Canada. They have mobility rights to leave and enter Canada.

So don't worry about that. If I were in your shoes, I wouldn't even lose sleep over it, knowing Canada will not strip my citizenship just because I left Canada to retire outside Canada.

This idea of "second class canadian" issue is a red herring. There are "no second class Canadian". All Canadians all have the same rights as everyone else. And don't give me this " unable to pass on citizenship" issue as a justification to call yourself 2nd class. You are Canadian as everyone else once you acquire it.
 

catwomancat

Full Member
Aug 10, 2014
27
0
screech339 said:
Your children will not lose their Canadian citizen once acquired over leaving Canada. They have mobility rights to leave and enter Canada.

So don't worry about that. If I were in your shoes, I wouldn't even lose sleep over it, knowing Canada will not strip my citizenship just because I left Canada to retire outside Canada.

This idea of "second class canadian" issue is a red herring. There are "no second class Canadian". All Canadians all have the same rights as everyone else. And don't give me this " unable to pass on citizenship" issue as a justification to call yourself 2nd class. You are Canadian as everyone else once you acquire it.
Thanks Screech for the encouraging words :) I will hope for the best.
 

admontreal

Hero Member
Feb 15, 2011
326
9
Montreal, QC
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
The only problematic part of this law, in my opinion,is the Revocation clause(s) and the broad (and ignorant) support it gathered from a majority of people in Canada.

Many natural born Canadians don't make a difference between permanent residency and citizenship. And once you're a foreigner, you'll always be. C-24 (incredibly bad) writers and strategists leveraged that 'ignorance' to the maximum.

I hope those clauses won't be used in excess (like in the UK) and that they will ultimately be cancelled by a Supreme Court ruling.

I noticed that this 'Revocation' thing became very trendy these days. After Kuwait, Bahrein started to revoke citizenship of its dissidents. Also, Pakistan sent a letter to Canada asking them to use the C-24 law to revoke a suspected (and detained) dual citizen's Canadian passport, so they could do whatever they want to him (even if he would deserve it, I find it very strange that Canada is being told what to do by another country for citizenship matters). Last but not least, M. Fahmy's citizenship wasn't revoked after the bogus convictions related to terrorism he just got in Egypt. On what grounds this government is picking those to which C-24 applies? It's a bit scary...
 

catwomancat

Full Member
Aug 10, 2014
27
0
admontreal said:
The only problematic part of this law, in my opinion,is the Revocation clause(s) and the broad (and ignorant) support it gathered from a majority of people in Canada.

Many natural born Canadians don't make a difference between permanent residency and citizenship. And once you're a foreigner, you'll always be. C-24 (incredibly bad) writers and strategists leveraged that 'ignorance' to the maximum.

I hope those clauses won't be used in excess (like in the UK) and that they will ultimately be cancelled by a Supreme Court ruling.
My point exactly.
 

anon123

Hero Member
Jul 19, 2013
218
21
SenoritaBella said:
The Conservatives are still in power and they have a majority which is enough to pass laws even if the opposition objects. As much as people are excited about the Liberals, I don't think much will change. For one, I can't see any party wanting to change this new Citizenship Law(eventhough if they promise that during the campaign) - they will not want to be accused of "weakening" Canadian citizenship. On the political side, they can always say, "see, they(Cons) are the ones who passed this Bill, we didn't", blah blah blah.

Also, I was in Canada when the Liberals were in power(Paul Martin) and here is what I remember:
1. there was a backlog of federal skilled worker applications
2. skilled worker program was like a two-step process - a) you send just the application forms b) if you pass eligibility, they send request for the supporting documents. Some people waited years to get to step #2.
3. foreign students could not work off-campus until after graduation.
4. after graduation they had 60 days(later changed to 90 days) to find work related to their field of studies or return home.
5. if they found work, they had to go through the LMO process (there was no post-graduate work permit)
6. immigration application fees I think was more than $550.

It has taken me a long long time to get to citizenship because of the laws they had in place which they claimed to be "working on changing them" but never did.

Here's what the Cons did since they came into power in I think 2008:

7. created the off-campus work permit for foreign students, to ensure students don't have to stop working as they wait for the post-graduate work permit(PGWP)to arrive.
8. created PGWP for foreign students, so they can work and immigrate to Canada permanently(since they would have adapted to Canadian life and have Canadian work experience)
9. reduced the applications fees to $550
10. created the Canadian Experience Class (CEC) specifically for students graduating from Canadian schools and for foreign workers
11. created accelerated LMO process
12. students did not need to find work only in their field of studies in order to immigrate (it just had to be skilled work in any field)
13. the CEC program has helped many people immigrate in a shorter time (some as early as after 2 yrs of being in Canada). This would never have happened under the Liberal gov't back in the days.
14. legislating the backlog - this is a mixed bag. It was not a good outcome for many people but if you look at the principle behind it, the gov't was adjusting to changing labor market needs. We don't need many more foreign doctors, lawyers, engineers, architects, etc driving taxis or cleaning buildings.
15. the citizenship bill - one can say this is a mixed bag as well. There are good parts of the Bill but the "intent to reside" clause is not the one that is most worrisome in my opinion. I think the worst part is the power it gives the Minister to strip people off their citizenship if they are convicted of certain crimes abroad. I'm sure we have heard of countries with dictators who arrest and convict people falsely. It won't be fair for someone to loose their citizenship based on such bogus convictions, which is why I still believe Judges should be the only person involved when it comes to revocation of citizenship.

So overall, as you can see, most people who have had the opportunity to experience life under a previous gov't would likely still vote Cons, especially on immigration matters. Overall, when it comes to immigration, my experience has been better under the Cons. I don't know who I will vote for(once I can) but I won't be rushing to the Liberals just because of Bill C-34.
These are all good changes you mention and they all made sense until Bill C-24 came along. That's when we saw the real goal of the immigration reform. It was never to create equal citizens, fully integrated into society. It was to bring (and retain as long as possible) cheap labour for Canada's corporations. Always waiting for "just one more year" and you will be equal. But Bill C-24 made it clear that this "one more year" will never come for many immigrants. If you look at the changes in the TFW program you will see how they all work together. It is not about people building a new life with security about their future and democratic rights. It is about people taking up "any" job just to fulfill the TFW requirements, then "doing anything" to stay on the job for two years, doing "more than anything" to get their employer to issue a bizarre letter for CEC which most employers wouldn't normally do. And even as a PR, when these people were just about to see the light at the end of the tunnel, finally completing their immigration project, the conservatives made them wait for two more years. Just like that, they changed the rules while the game was in progress. And there is more, if after all this waiting an immigrant gets an offer from a better employer overseas: too bad, have to choose between the risk of losing your citizenship you worked so hard for and a potentially better life.

That's the difference between the Liberal and the Conservative approach. The Liberal approach was not perfect, it was slow. But it had good intent, it gave people a place they can call home, it allowed to bring their families and live a happy life. On the contrary, the Conservative approach offers little benefit to new immigrants, it does nothing to make them feel at home in Canada, instead it treats immigration as a business deal. Even worse, a business deal of which the terms can change.
 

screech339

VIP Member
Apr 2, 2013
7,887
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
anon123 said:
These are all good changes you mention and they all made sense until Bill C-24 came along. That's when we saw the real goal of the immigration reform. It was never to create equal citizens, fully integrated into society. It was to bring (and retain as long as possible) cheap labour for Canada's corporations. Always waiting for "just one more year" and you will be equal. But Bill C-24 made it clear that this "one more year" will never come for many immigrants. If you look at the changes in the TFW program you will see how they all work together. It is not about people building a new life with security about their future and democratic rights. It is about people taking up "any" job just to fulfill the TFW requirements, then "doing anything" to stay on the job for two years, doing "more than anything" to get their employer to issue a bizarre letter for CEC which most employers wouldn't normally do. And even as a PR, when these people were just about to see the light at the end of the tunnel, finally completing their immigration project, the conservatives made them wait for two more years. Just like that, they changed the rules while the game was in progress. And there is more, if after all this waiting an immigrant gets an offer from a better employer overseas: too bad, have to choose between the risk of losing your citizenship you worked so hard for and a potentially better life.

That's the difference between the Liberal and the Conservative approach. The Liberal approach was not perfect, it was slow. But it had good intent, it gave people a place they can call home, it allowed to bring their families and live a happy life. On the contrary, the Conservative approach offers little benefit to new immigrants, it does nothing to make them feel at home in Canada, instead it treats immigration as a business deal. Even worse, a business deal of which the terms can change.
Immigration should be based on employment demand in Canada. How often have we seen people coming to Canada under the points system that doesn't consider job demand in the equation, only to see them unable to get jobs based on their education or even find any job. They should have not gotten any points for their education credit if Canada doesn't recognize it in the first place. You shouldn't be able to get points if there are no job demand for it. You often see them show up in Canada to find that there are no jobs for them waiting because there were no job demand for them.

The current immigration system that replaced the points system made more sense as it is based on actual job demand.

Screech339
 

catwomancat

Full Member
Aug 10, 2014
27
0
anon123 said:
That's the difference between the Liberal and the Conservative approach. The Liberal approach was not perfect, it was slow. But it had good intent, it gave people a place they can call home, it allowed to bring their families and live a happy life. On the contrary, the Conservative approach offers little benefit to new immigrants, it does nothing to make them feel at home in Canada, instead it treats immigration as a business deal. Even worse, a business deal of which the terms can change.
Super like.