Toward Understanding Bill C-6 to Amend Citizenship Act; new 3/5 rule plus

[Anvatrix]

There's always a live audio-only broadcast from the Senate Chamber during their sittings. Just go on the official Senate of Canada website, go to the In The Chamber section, then scroll down to find the Listen tab towards the bottom. I listened to today's broadcast and heard them adjourn C-6, yet again, to the Senate's next sitting (tomorrow). Senator Frum spoke vehemently against the Bill, yet again, and this time she also spoke vehemently against Senator McCoy's suggested Amendments. Senator Omidvar appears to be as hapless and lost and unsure what to do as she was at the beginning of the long-running Second Reading if C-6.

Thank you ChippyBoy. In the meantime, I start having some anger feelings towards all those, who make obstacles to this Bill to become law!

 

[Hashad]

C-6 is fine it should pass, but do not agree with the reduction of residence requirement form 4 to 3, It gives fraudsters easy way out! for anyone else it does not matter if you want to live here. Miss you Stephen Harper.

 

[captain74]

Senator Omidvar appears to be as hapless and lost and unsure what to do as she was at the beginning of the long-running Second Reading if C-6.

All she needs to do is stand up and call for a vote. She either has the numbers behind her or she doesn't! Shouldn't really be that difficult to count. It is only a total of 100 sentaors after all If she has the numbers then this could be done and over with in a flash. If she doesn't have the numbers, then the bill is doomed and it is better to kill it than keep flogging a dead horse!

 

[ChippyBoy]

All she needs to do is stand up and call for a vote. She either has the numbers behind her or she doesn't! Shouldn't really be that difficult to count. It is only a total of 100 sentaors after all If she has the numbers then this could be done and over with in a flash. If she doesn't have the numbers, then the bill is doomed and it is better to kill it than keep flogging a dead horse!

I think that Senator Omidvar sounds like a genuinely nice person, but no new senator such as she should feel that they have to humiliate themselves on the Chamber floor as she felt she had to do three weeks ago, when she basically admitted that she's no lawyer and doesn't personally quite know or understand all of the ins-&-outs of the processes and procedures. Her staff have let her down badly, and her office needs routing. There are others who are having to do their work for them, and they're understandably resentful. She was unwise, as a newly-minted Senator, to undertake the sponsorship of this (or any) Bill; she ought to have waited at least a year to watch and observe how to go about things in the Senate, as well as to build rapports and relationships among her new peers. We're all paying the price now for her having acquiesced to the Government's desire for good 'optics' (ethnicity, foreign-birth, gender, age) at Bill signing time. She simply wasn't either humble enough or smart enough to perceive clearly what was going on by them asking her to sponsor it in the Senate. But she does nonetheless sound like a genuinely nice person.

 

[ChippyBoy]

C-6 is fine it should pass, but do not agree with the reduction of residence requirement form 4 to 3, It gives fraudsters easy way out! for anyone else it does not matter if you want to live here. Miss you Stephen Harper.

How incredible that you can write such nonsense. C-24 was passed in 2014 without a single Conservative voice being raised to speak for a grandfathering-in clause to be included in that Bill on behalf of the then-current cohort of permanent residents looking forward to fulfilling their charted course for qualifying for Canadian citizenship. Citizenship laws changing overnight for one group of people is an unkind reminder of 1930s fascism. Remember that not one Conservative voice spoke up for us. Permanent residents were not then thought of as valued members of Canadian society.

 

[captain74]

I think that Senator Omidvar sounds like a genuinely nice person, but no new senator such as she should feel that they have to humiliate themselves on the Chamber floor as she felt she had to do three weeks ago, when she basically admitted that she's no lawyer and doesn't personally quite know or understand all of the ins-&-outs of the processes and procedures. Her staff have let her down badly, and her office needs routing. There are others who are having to do their work for them, and they're understandably resentful. She was unwise, as a newly-minted Senator, to undertake the sponsorship of this (or any) Bill; she ought to have waited at least a year to watch and observe how to go about things in the Senate, as well as to build rapports and relationships among her new peers. We're all paying the price now for her having acquiesced to the Government's desire for good 'optics' (ethnicity, foreign-birth, gender, age) at Bill signing time. She simply wasn't either humble enough or smart enough to perceive clearly what was going on by them asking her to sponsor it in the Senate. But she does nonetheless sound like a genuinely nice person.

I agree completely with your post. However, she is where she is now and the way forward is to push for the vote. The more she lets others drag the debate (and let us face it, it is just being dragged now with same old points recycled all the time), the more she risks losing control of the process.

She needs to find the courage to call for the vote.

 

[amitshipra]

Tweet from Sen. Ratna: #C6 amendments will be further discussed and vote on amendment today or tomorrow. Next week debate on C6

 

[amitshipra]

Follow Sen Mobina Jaffer. She continously posts C-6 updates on Twitter and that is best real time news you can get.

@SenJaffer

Sen Ratna just retweets Sen Jaffer.

 

[alxms10]

C-6 is fine it should pass, but do not agree with the reduction of residence requirement form 4 to 3, It gives fraudsters easy way out! for anyone else it does not matter if you want to live here. Miss you Stephen Harper.

I come from a country where I need a visa for every single country I visit. If I become a citizen after 3 years it will make my travel experience easy. Why and how do you assume that 4 to 3 years helps fraudsters?

 

[cantaloupe]

Filibuster in progress...

 

[emamabd]

I come from a country where I need a visa for every single country I visit. If I become a citizen after 3 years it will make my travel experience easy. Why and how do you assume that 4 to 3 years helps fraudsters?

Some people in this forum are overly "obsessed" about a very subjective term invented during Harper's times called "Canadians of convenience" and think that 4 years to qualify for citizenship instead of 3 would fix that "problem". They are also quick to jump and label you as a canadian of convenience if you say you are "looking forward to getting your citizenship asap".

I don't think anyone here has the right to judge the other...each individual's situation is different and unique, its obvious and natural that any newcomer would be looking forward to becoming a citizen asap ..its an important milestone and a moment that can be "life-changing" for some people.

To me it simply means i can visit my close first degree relatives on the other side of the border without having to pay $200 for a single entry visa each time (multiplied by 4 if travel with my wife and kids)! Mind you... even after paying and getting the visa stamped on the passport..there's still no guarantee i could visit the US as Trump doesn't like my country of citizenship and has tried at least twice in the past 2 months to ban its citizens from entering.

I think patience is the key, 3 or 4 years - at the end we'll all become citizens anyway..its a matter of time

 

[tyl92]

Some people in this forum are overly "obsessed" about a very subjective term invented during Harper's times called "Canadians of convenience" and think that 4 years to qualify for citizenship instead of 3 would fix that "problem". They are also quick to jump and label you as a canadian of convenience if you say you are "looking forward to getting your citizenship asap".

I don't think anyone here has the right to judge the other...each individual's situation is different and unique, its obvious and natural that any newcomer would be looking forward to becoming a citizen asap ..its an important milestone and a moment that can be "life-changing" for some people.

To me it simply means i can visit my close first degree relatives on the other side of the border without having to pay $200 for a single entry visa each time (multiplied by 4 if travel with my wife and kids)! Mind you... even after paying and getting the visa stamped on the passport..there's still no guarantee i could visit the US as Trump doesn't like my country of citizenship and has tried at least twice in the past 2 months to ban its citizens from entering.

I think patience is the key, 3 or 4 years - at the end we'll all become citizens anyway..its a matter of time

+1

 

[alxms10]

To me it simply means i can visit my close first degree relatives on the other side of the border without having to pay $200 for a single entry visa each time (multiplied by 4 if travel with my wife and kids)!

My point basically

 

[amitshipra]

And the Ping Pong continues.


Senator Griffin's amendment to increase the age of language knowledge from 55 to 60 succeeded For-35 Against-27 Abstain-3

Libs opposed increasing age amendment but was still passed. Result is that it will be send to HoC and most probably they will reject it. They will send it again for debate and the game continues.

So far So Worse.

 

[amitshipra]

Latest News:
Frum/Eaton amendment C6 negates any time spent by foreign students/temp foreign workers as counting towards res requirements

If this amendment is passed - Bill C-6 is disaster.