+1(514) 937-9445 or Toll-free (Canada & US) +1 (888) 947-9445
McCallum knows the deal. He's just being slick (typical politician). He's basically making it sound like he's giving something big to his supporters when he's really not. It's like the Conservative's "Intent to reside" clause. Worded to look really tough when it has very minimal impact to the vast majority.
 
I agree with a few previous replies... He knows what he's saying.. This is just rhetoric.. a political move with absolutely no teeth, which sounds fantastic. To anyone outside of this forum/ who doesn't have to know the PR process like the back of their hand, this 'promise' sounds like he's fixing an obvious injustice. To us, removing this condition means next to nothing ONCE we finally have PR status
 
I am a citizen who married a Philipine wife May 2014 and we applied for PR November 2014. How do we light a fire under the right behind to take advantage of this?
 
Take advantage of what...getting PR without Condition 51 (which is what he's talking about)?

I can't believe that he hasn't been asked about this `confusion' in his rhetoric. Can't someone ask him point blank what this really means?
 
Drebeat said:
I am a citizen who married a Philipine wife May 2014 and we applied for PR November 2014. How do we light a fire under the right behind to take advantage of this?

It seems you applied inland, so you should hopefully be getting AIP next month.
 
Drebeat said:
I am a citizen who married a Philipine wife May 2014 and we applied for PR November 2014. How do we light a fire under the right behind to take advantage of this?

The only person who could take advantage of getting rid of Condition 51 would be a sponsored person who wishes to dump their sponsor before 2 years but keep their PR and have their sponsor continue to be financially responsible for them. You are staying you want this to happen?
 
Sorry, I'm pretty confused as I thought he's saying that my wife would get PR immediately rather than ha e to wait another year.
 
No, he's talking about removing Condition 51.
 
Drebeat said:
Sorry, I'm pretty confused as I thought he's saying that my wife would get PR immediately rather than ha e to wait another year.

Exactly why McCallum knows what he is doing. A "political move with absolutely no teeth, which sounds fantastic" as Lizzy mentioned.
 
Ponga said:
I can't believe that he hasn't been asked about this `confusion' in his rhetoric. Can't someone ask him point blank what this really means?

He's a politician. They are trained to dance around the truth.
 
So we still have to wait another year while I pay for Syrians health care as well as my wife's on a single income at 60 years old. Some country.
 
Drebeat said:
So we still have to wait another year while I pay for Syrians health care as well as my wife's on a single income at 60 years old. Some country.

Every country has politicians that bend the truth, isn't that synonymous with politics? Anyways, you should be thankful you are together, as many people are separated during their applications. If you didn't want to wait years you could have applied outland.
 
Drebeat said:
So we still have to wait another year while I pay for Syrians health care as well as my wife's on a single income at 60 years old. Some country.

It was not Canada's fault that your wife went out of status and therefore didn't qualify for the OWP program. It was not Canada's choice for you to apply inland instead of outland; had you applied outland, she would have been a PR by now.
 
Aquakitty said:
Every country has politicians that bend the truth, isn't that synonymous with politics?

Thank you for the reply. It certainly is but in this case it’s not politics as both parties are equally incompetent at administering this department which tells me it’s not politics but rather inability of the department itself to produce or process a product.

Anyways, you should be thankful you are together, as many people are separated during their applications. If you didn't want to wait years you could have applied outland.

We never would have been apart as I met her here so that is irrelevant as that is not a ‘luck’ factor but rather one of reality. As for time, we were more than willing to wait out the estimated 18 months which has now been increased to 27 however, the extra time is unreasonable as recently, it’s been proven that tens of thousands can be approved in a matter of weeks so, why the wait? Why the overly long waits for anybody as they can do it quickly as shown already.
 
canuck_in_uk said:
It was not Canada's fault that your wife went out of status and therefore didn't qualify for the OWP program.

No so. It is their fault that the entire program is confusing and unworkable. That’s why people are waiting years for something the government has recently proved they can do in mere weeks and, on top of all that, they allow perfect strangers to sponsor perfect strangers which shows us all how unimportant the criteria (and wait time) as to ascertain if a genuine relationship exists. That’s proof of either incompetence or unnecessary baggage that holds up tens of thousands of qualified humans loved by others merely wanting to live in Canada. I certainly hope you are not going to make the case that CIC is a lean mean efficient machine because I see no indication whatsoever that it is.

It was not Canada's choice for you to apply inland instead of outland; had you applied outland, she would have been a PR by now.

True. And if I picked better lotto numbers I’d be typing this from the beach. Seriously though, at one time I actually believed the posted wait times so, I suppose it was my fault for believing what they were feeding us.

Point is, no matter how or where you are applying from, outland like the thousands waiting who post on these very forums or inland, like myself and the thousands of still others who post here, the entire system is bent, confusing, open to political point scoring, wallowing in inefficiency and the time line for processing spouses and future Canadians no matter where or how it has been applied for is unreasonably long.

Surely you agree unless you are going to make the argument that CIC is efficient, holds to their projections and the wait times for all applications is perfect and justified in which case let me know and I’ll get some popcorn.