Canadian government are doing many good reforms about immigration & it is really appreciable. I feel that government should become a little liberal with the Canadian residents who are not able to meet the PR obligation of staying in Canada and now want to come back. It will be good for Canada also as they have already fulfilled the required immigration conditions & understand Canada also , except PR obligation due to one or other reason. Canadian government can charge health insurance for first one or two years from such cases as extra burden on Tax payer Canadian should not come from such cases. I think Canadian MPs should put this issue in parliament to given chance to such PRs.
Chance should be Given by Canadian Government to Whom, who are not able to meet PR obligation
- Thread starter manpreet4875
- Start date
I think they are more than generous with the residency obligation for PR as is; you only have to reside in the country for 730 days (2 years) within the 5 year cycle, and those days don't even have to be continuous. I feel that the remaining 1095 days (3 years) is plenty of time for you to leave Canada to take care of whatever you need to do, and then return to fulfill the residency obligation. If you can't come back, you can always renounce your PR status and re-apply when your affairs are finally in order, and you feel you can commit to the residency obligation.
Dear Mr. Hawk39,
I appreciate your views. Yet, as Manpreet says, there could be so many unique circumstances preventing some people from fulfilling the RO. My 2 cents here in are:
In case a person demonstrates his sense of belonging and seriousness to Canada through means like the immediate family of spuse and children staying and having fulfilled the PR obligatiosn and have either renewed the PR or having applied for citizenship, family ownership of property, not claiming any social benefits so far, etc. Perhaps, on such parameters, the honourable Govt. may consider deserving cases and allow the renewal of the PR Card w/o the fulfillment of RO. Of course, I do appreciate and endorse that they will and need to take all requisite precautions and exercise the right discretion warranted. Let's see how the authorities may view such cases, especially more so, given the exceptional circumstances caused by Covid 19 !
I appreciate your views. Yet, as Manpreet says, there could be so many unique circumstances preventing some people from fulfilling the RO. My 2 cents here in are:
In case a person demonstrates his sense of belonging and seriousness to Canada through means like the immediate family of spuse and children staying and having fulfilled the PR obligatiosn and have either renewed the PR or having applied for citizenship, family ownership of property, not claiming any social benefits so far, etc. Perhaps, on such parameters, the honourable Govt. may consider deserving cases and allow the renewal of the PR Card w/o the fulfillment of RO. Of course, I do appreciate and endorse that they will and need to take all requisite precautions and exercise the right discretion warranted. Let's see how the authorities may view such cases, especially more so, given the exceptional circumstances caused by Covid 19 !
How about we don’t even have ANY RO whatsoever ? Like nothing . People can have all the benefits of Canada , but not set foot in the country at all . That pretty much would satisfy those that jump thru the PR hoops then something comes “ up”, and they can never make it to Canada
Do you think, with everything else going on in this country , that the Government would even take the time to change the rules for what you want changed in the Act ? You have FIVE years to set up shop in this country , If FIVE years isn’t enough , then you need to explore the other priorities in your life . That’s not the Government’s job
Last edited:
As @hawk39 observes, the PR Residency Obligation is liberal, considered by many to be rather generous. There is little hint that Canada is going to amend or change the RO anytime soon.
Thus, new immigrants who remain abroad for a total of more than 1096 days prior to the fifth year anniversary of the date they landed will, as a matter of law, be in breach of the Residency Obligation. PRs who, after the fifth year anniversary of the date of landing, fail to be IN Canada for at least 730 days within five years as of any day a CBSA or IRCC official examines the PR's RO compliance, likewise as a matter of law are in breach of the RO.
There is a relief valve. The consideration of H&C factors.
Obviously the impact of Covid-19 will be a factor for MANY PRs who fail to comply with the RO this year or even into next year. How this will affect individual PRs will depend on the individual PR's own, personal situation, including the particular PR's immigration history, the extent of the failure to meet the RO, other reasons for not coming to Canada sooner, and otherwise the extent to which the PR can show he or she DESERVES to keep PR status despite failing to comply with the RO.
It is possible that IRCC will implement policies and practices which more formally structure how the Covid-19 situation will influence the H&C analysis. It is possible that Parliament could undertake making amendments to the IRPA provisions governing PR residency obligations.
Likelihood of the latter is NOT much, not much at all. Again, there is no hint that the RO itself will be amended. Moreover, it would be extremely unusual for the Canadian government to change its statutes in response to a temporary situation. Particularly where there is, again, already a means of relief available.
There is, perhaps, a significant possibility of the former. A more or less formal policy adopted. But so far it appears more likely that H&C policies and practices will largely remain the same. Which means that any and all explanations for failing to come to Canada sooner MUST be considered, so the effect of Covid-19 will be considered. No special relief but, rather, the standard H&C relief with due consideration for each individual PR, including consideration for the impact of Covid-19.
Personal PR Decision-making:
For PRs currently abroad, the safe approach will be to return to Canada sooner rather than later, soon enough to avoid a breach of the RO. Alternatively, at the least getting to Canada as soon as possible with as small a breach as possible.
Those who breach the RO will have, at the least, a fair opportunity to present a case as to why they deserve to keep PR status. Including an explanation as to how Covid-19 affected their personal return to Canada.
I cannot forecast how it will go for those who failed to actually settle permanently in Canada prior to measures in response to Covid-19. Any claim to know how it will go is suspect.
That said, some factors loom larger and obviously more influential than others.
In general, the biggest factors will continue to be big factors. The bigger the breach, for example, the greater the risk of a decision terminating PR status. The sooner the PR comes to Canada, the lower the risk.
The more and stronger the PR's ties are to Canada, in Canada, the better the odds of keeping PR status. Especially if the PR makes the effort to return as soon as practical relative to travel restrictions being eased.
My guess is that PRs who were already in breach of the RO before Covid-19, before mid-March this year say, will face more difficulty persuading Canadian officials they deserve to keep PR status. But again, by how much they are in breach will be a big factor.
Carte Blanche relief, however, is almost certainly NOT GOING to HAPPEN.
They should increase the time period and make it 4 years out of 10 years. 2 years out of 5 is very small amount of time. Essentially they are saying to PR not to study abroad. As most degrees are 3 to 4 years in length. Is some PR in Canada wants to go to Harvard for undergrad or Australia for good education, PhD etc, they are essentially penalizing that PR for improving their life and returning back to Canada to contribute to economy. And on the other hand they themselves are getting tons of students to come in and study. Sometime some study programs are not available in Canada and people need not be discouraged from seeking education outside.
It's actually not a short period of time at all. It's pretty generous in comparison to other countries. If you hold a US green card for example, once you've lived outside of the US for more than a year you're effectively considered to have lost your status and can expect your green card to be taken away from you at the border if you try to re-enter. Canada allows you to be outside of Canada for three times as long.
US rarely does that. I have two green card friends who completed 5 year education outside US with me and was never questioned or asked about green card issue. Infact US allows to take advance parole in case you are going outside for study or business and anticipating long absence. Thats more progressive. And US give green card for 10 years and 10 years is plenty of time.
It's not advance parole. You're confusing US immigration terms. Advance parole is for individuals who have an application pending to adjust their status (i.e. aren't green card holders yet) and need to leave the US. What you're referring to is a returning resident permit.
If you read US immigration forums you'll find that green cards are revoked all of the time at the port of entry for failure to return within a year. It's not at all uncommon.
Anyway - Canada's rules are what they are. That's what you have to live with. Really no point arguing it here. If you want to try to change a law, you would need to speak with your MP and convince him/her to support this cause.
I know no point in arguing. I am sorry if I confused the US rule. I just know two personal examples where my green card friends studied with me for 5 years and went back to US after study with no problem.
Anyways. I know Canada is different with different rules. They just need to let people have the freedom of studying abroad for degree programs without holding the absence against them.
Anyways. I know Canada is different with different rules. They just need to let people have the freedom of studying abroad for degree programs without holding the absence against them.
Do you know if they consider time spent in Canada in a five year period before becoming PR? Do they calculate five year period back in time on the day a person return or 5 years period start from the day person became PR moving forward?
Time before becoming a PR cannot be counted towards the PR residency requirement. Only time spent in Canada from the landing date.
Actually if you studied in Canada then half of your study period can go into your PR obligation up to an amount of 1 year.
No - it doesn't. You're confusing PR residency requirement rules with citizenship residency requirement rules. Time before PR only counts towards citizenship, not PR.
PR is given to people who have an intention to settle in Canada permanently.
If that's not your priority, then what's the point of becoming a PR?
The residency obligations are very generous, you can even continue renewing your PR status by only staying in Canada for 2 years in every 5 year period.
And you become a citizen after 3 years.
It's very generous compared to many other Western countries.
If that's not your priority, then what's the point of becoming a PR?
The residency obligations are very generous, you can even continue renewing your PR status by only staying in Canada for 2 years in every 5 year period.
And you become a citizen after 3 years.
It's very generous compared to many other Western countries.