Effective date of Bill C24

[valigap31]

mathlete, I don't about you but for me it will extra 3 more years.

 

[MUFC]

Many people will miss good opportunities for work, study or training abroad, consider this as financial losses.
Many people have somebody to take care of back home.
So this New Law will put them in a big dilemma , should they stay here for that citizenship or should they go and do what is better for them.

Don't forget that there is another stage of mandatory physical residence which was introduced as "Intend to reside" so basically the requirement will be much more then 4 years of physical presence because that Intend to reside must be until the Oath and like you said the processing time is very long until the Oath.

Nobody can tell what will happen with the processing times after the elections.

On top of that the government still play the hide and seek game about the cut off date. They deliberately tease the people.

 

[research-scientist]

I agree with the government on the Intention to reside, if people are not going to stay after citizenship, then why would they need the citizenship of a country that they won't reside in it and won't come back to it?!?!?

Many people will miss good opportunities for work, study or training abroad, consider this as financial losses.
Many people have somebody to take care of back home.
So this New Law will put them in a big dilemma , should they stay here for that citizenship or should they go and do what is better for them.

Don't forget that there is another stage of mandatory physical residence which was introduced as "Intend to reside" so basically the requirement will be much more then 4 years of physical presence because that Intend to reside must be until the Oath and like you said the processing time is very long until the Oath.

Nobody can tell what will happen with the processing times after the elections.

On top of that the government still play the hide and seek game about the cut off date. They deliberately tease the people.

 

[MUFC]

I agree with the government on the Intention to reside, if people are not going to stay after citizenship, then why would they need the citizenship of a country that they won't reside in it and won't come back to it?!?!?

I also don't mind the Intend to Reside if it was included officially in the physical residency requirement. Why it stays hidden in the background? Because they want to be hidden.

The other problem is that this Intend to reside will last with different timeframes , For some it will be Couple of months but for others couple of years.

The other hidden thing is that this Intend to reside have really good potential to be the most intrusive version of the RQ story.

 

[anon123]

I agree with the government on the Intention to reside, if people are not going to stay after citizenship, then why would they need the citizenship of a country that they won't reside in it and won't come back to it?!?!?

If you had read the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the founding document of the country you want to call home, you would know that the right to free movement is a fundamental right granted to everybody privileged to be Canadian. This is not a coast-to-coast prison for people to be tied to, this is a land for free people.

The multitude of problems with the intent to reside clause have been discussed at length. It boils down to a shift in the grant of citizenship process from one based on facts, to one based on assumptions. Assumptions made by an office clerk on the balance of probabilities. It's a guessing game about what the applicant plans to do in the future. A future that is unknown to the applicant: in 6 months, in 1 year, in 2 years...the applicant doesn't know when she will be granted citizenship. But the applicant has to declare, whenever that date happens to be in the future, the applicant will intent to reside in Canada on that date. And the officer has to guess if the applicant truthfully declared her intent. The officer can ask for any documents to support the application (understand a limitless RQ) but what constitutes a unquestionable evidence of intent to reside? It depends who the applicant is, and who the officer is.

 

[cecapplied]

nicely put

If you had read the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the founding document of the country you want to call home, you would know that the right to free movement is a fundamental right granted to everybody privileged to be Canadian. This is not a coast-to-coast prison for people to be tied to, this is a land for free people.

The multitude of problems with the intent to reside clause have been discussed at length. It boils down to a shift in the grant of citizenship process from one based on facts, to one based on assumptions. Assumptions made by an office clerk on the balance of probabilities. It's a guessing game about what the applicant plans to do in the future. A future that is unknown to the applicant: in 6 months, in 1 year, in 2 years...the applicant doesn't know when she will be granted citizenship. But the applicant has to declare, whenever that date happens to be in the future, the applicant will intent to reside in Canada on that date. And the officer has to guess if the applicant truthfully declared her intent. The officer can ask for any documents to support the application (understand a limitless RQ) but what constitutes a unquestionable evidence of intent to reside? It depends who the applicant is, and who the officer is.

 

[valigap31]

research-scientist, maybe is more smart for the government to figure it the reasons why they are getting citizenship and leave Canada, or cut medical etc. not blame everyone else.

 

[CanadianCountry]

Very well put. The whole process is now based on probabilities inspite of being a process based on facts.

If you had read the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the founding document of the country you want to call home, you would know that the right to free movement is a fundamental right granted to everybody privileged to be Canadian. This is not a coast-to-coast prison for people to be tied to, this is a land for free people.

The multitude of problems with the intent to reside clause have been discussed at length. It boils down to a shift in the grant of citizenship process from one based on facts, to one based on assumptions. Assumptions made by an office clerk on the balance of probabilities. It's a guessing game about what the applicant plans to do in the future. A future that is unknown to the applicant: in 6 months, in 1 year, in 2 years...the applicant doesn't know when she will be granted citizenship. But the applicant has to declare, whenever that date happens to be in the future, the applicant will intent to reside in Canada on that date. And the officer has to guess if the applicant truthfully declared her intent. The officer can ask for any documents to support the application (understand a limitless RQ) but what constitutes a unquestionable evidence of intent to reside? It depends who the applicant is, and who the officer is.

 

[CanadianCountry]

The govt has almost done everything to limit the benefits already, but still this.

For example:
1. Zero in OAS for residence less 10 years. Then beyond 10 years its prorated to maximum payout for 40 years.

2. Medical coverage expires once a person stays out for 183 days plus.

3. Child benefits are zero for people staying out.

As far as i know all benefits have been zeroed for people who stay out. Then whats the pain for the govt its hard to understand.

research-scientist, maybe is more smart for the government to figure it the reasons why they are getting citizenship and leave Canada, or cut medical etc. not blame everyone else.

 

[MUFC]

The govt has almost done everything to limit the benefits already, but still this.

For example:
1. Zero in OAS for residence less 10 years. Then beyond 10 years its prorated to maximum payout for 40 years.

2. Medical coverage expires once a person stays out for 183 days plus.

3. Child benefits are zero for people staying out.

As far as i know all benefits have been zeroed for people who stay out. Then whats the pain for the govt its hard to understand.

Actually recently I've started to ask myself the same question... What is the convenience of the so called Canadians of convenience? It seems that Canada doesn't give any benefits if the person is out of the country. .. I mean real practical benefits from the country... they are just none.

And I came to the conclusion that this story of "Canadians of convenience" is just made up artificially from the government.

 

[CanadianCountry]

There is ZERO convenience for these so called Canadians of convenience. Only that they can return to stable country provide a safe peaceful envuronment for their families.

But for the govt (Tories), they have built this case of XENOPHOBIA, so they want to keep drumming on the issue and continue harassing the newcomers. I guess that is their plan.

Actually recently I've started to ask myself the same question... What is the convenience of the so called Canadians of convenience? It seems that Canada doesn't give any benefits if the person is out of the country. .. I mean real practical benefits from the country... they are just none.

And I came to the conclusion that this story of "Canadians of convenience" is just made up artificially from the government.

 

[screech339]

There is ZERO convenience for these so called Canadians of convenience. Only that they can return to stable country provide a safe peaceful envuronment for their families.

But for the govt (Tories), they have built this case of XENOPHOBIA, so they want to keep drumming on the issue and continue harassing the newcomers. I guess that is their plan.

They can come back and use Canada health care without paying a dime for it while living outside Canada. They can stay out of Canada until they get a serious illness that will cost them serious money. So they can come back to Canada and get coverage right away if you go to Alberta.

I had a conversation with one person who was born in US to canadian parent, never lived in Canada. Just moved to Canada so he can sponsor his American wife and stay long enough for wife to get Canadian citizenship. Once wife gets it, they will move back to US. I believe he wants his American wife to have Canadian citizenship so that she doesn't have to worry about medical care cost in US. If one of them get cancer, they go to Canada to get free medical care. They won't have to worry about selling their house to pay for cancer treatment or any costly treatment.

If that is not called "Canadian of Convenience" I don't know what is.

If our medical care has followed the US format whereby everyone pays for their own care, then there wouldn't be any Canadian of convenience since tax payers would not be on the hook for their medical cost.

As long as there are services paid by tax payers, medical care, OAP, etc, there will always be canadian of convenience out there taking advantage of it.

And I came to the conclusion that this story of "Canadians of convenience" is just made up artificially from the government.

In conclusion, "Canadians of convenience" is reality, not a made up word.

 

[mathlete]

mathlete, I don't about you but for me it will extra 3 more years.

Typical immature and completely ignorant comment. I applied with 3 years physical presents. CIC then made we wait another 3.5 years. So that is a total of 6.5 years of waiting in an "ideal" situation. So when you say it will be an extra "3 years" for you after the Bill becomes law you must be forgetting that many of us have waited 3 years just for processing under the current system.

 

[mathlete]

Many people will miss good opportunities for work, study or training abroad, consider this as financial losses.
Many people have somebody to take care of back home.
So this New Law will put them in a big dilemma , should they stay here for that citizenship or should they go and do what is better for them.

Don't forget that there is another stage of mandatory physical residence which was introduced as "Intend to reside" so basically the requirement will be much more then 4 years of physical presence because that Intend to reside must be until the Oath and like you said the processing time is very long until the Oath.

Nobody can tell what will happen with the processing times after the elections.

On top of that the government still play the hide and seek game about the cut off date. They deliberately tease the people.

I can't agree with your reasoning. The whole point of being a Canadian citizen is living in Canada, paying your taxes here and making a life here. I agree for example that if you are employed by a Canadian company, working abroad and paying taxes in Canada you should get citizenship regardless of physical presents, I cannot agree that you should have the right as a PR to live elsewhere and still claim citizenship.

 

[mathlete]

There is ZERO convenience for these so called Canadians of convenience. Only that they can return to stable country provide a safe peaceful envuronment for their families.

But for the govt (Tories), they have built this case of XENOPHOBIA, so they want to keep drumming on the issue and continue harassing the newcomers. I guess that is their plan.

"Only that they can return to stable country provide a safe peaceful envuronment for their families." that sounds like a lot more than ZERO convenience! The country I come from is a violent cesspool hellhole. Many people have foreign citizenship's so they have an escape plan in case things go really bad. In the meantime they pay low taxes and live opulent life styles because the cost of living is far lower. You cannot defend the moral obligation of the government of Canada in wanting to prevent non-tax paying non-residents from becoming citizens. It's simply not fair to everyone else.