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

[quasar81]

So the Bill C 6 will not pass before coming Friday July 1 and wont be made on time for Canada Day it looks

As long as CON controls committee majority and party majority in Senate, it might never pass at all. Keep pressure up on MPs and ministers to push.

 

[747-captain]

As long as CON controls committee majority and party majority in Senate, it might never pass at all. Keep pressure up on MPs and ministers to push.

That's exactly what I've always feared will happen! These Conservative hacks know exactly how to play this game. (OK, I really should not be saying this, since I don't know anything about the attitudes and behavior of various political parties in Canada, but I'm guessing they are very much like the conservative Republican scum here in the U.S.)

Most likely they will keep adding all kinds of amendments, knowing that this will result in permanent gridlock between the House and Senate, with neither side willing to give an inch. And this means the end result will be that the bill never passes. Then the ONLY surefire way to reslove this problem will be, for the Prime Minister to fill in the vacant senate seats with liberal-minded Senators (if he really intends to fulfill his campaign promises in any meaningful way).

 

[vnexpress]

That's exactly what I've always feared will happen! These Conservative hacks know exactly how to play this game. (OK, I really should not be saying this, since I don't know anything about the attitudes and behavior of various political parties in Canada, but I'm guessing they are very much like the conservative Republican scum here in the U.S.)

Most likely they will keep adding all kinds of amendments, knowing that this will result in permanent gridlock between the House and Senate, with neither side willing to give an inch. And this means the end result will be that the bill never passes. Then the ONLY surefire way to reslove this problem will be, for the Prime Minister to fill in the vacant senate seats with liberal-minded Senators (if he really intends to fulfill his campaign promises in any meaningful way).

If the Liberals was sincere enough to repeal C-24 by passing C-6 as one of the core campaign promises, they would have done anything and everything they can to create a way for this Bill to pass. They weren't ready to and they did not put enough thought into it that's why the timing of C-6 passing through HoC is right before the summer recession. Now that it gets stuck at the Senate for however long nobody knows. Also, McCallum used to state that the effective date of C-6 law will be delayed to avoid buildup of applications. That could hint the 3/5 rule won't be kick in for probably at least a year from now.

 

[vnexpress]

By the time it passes and the 3/5 rule gets reinstated, most people who have been most vocal about C-6 and those who supported Liberals last election would have already become eligible for citizenship under 4/6 rule. I don't know how to put it, but I guess the simplest way to put all these saga is that never put full trust in politicians. The 3/5 rule will most likely benefit future applicants who just happen to apply in the right timing. Unfortunately in this country, the immigration system is one that fails its own promises and pissing off new citizens very often.

I feel for those who try to apply to become Canadian citizens but get stuck in the time games totally controlled by these governments both Cons and Liberals. The people pay for it.

 

[Morty]

Do they (Senate) have any sitting anymore? According to the senate schedule 2016 they should have but today's agenda shows that they do not!

 

[dpenabill]

If the Liberals was sincere enough to repeal C-24 by passing C-6 as one of the core campaign promises, they would have done anything and everything they can to create a way for this Bill to pass.

Not really.

Bill C-24 was rammed through the process as quickly as any major legislation could be. But to do that Harper had to trample the democratic process, truncating debate, restricting committee study, abusing majority power to preclude consideration of proposed alternatives or even minor amendments to fix obvious problems in Bill C-24 (a number of the problems, mistakes in drafting the Bill actually, were fully recognized before Bill C-24 was adopted, but left to be fixed by provisions in subsequent Bills, Bills proposed and adopted under Harper's majority; it was done this way to totally preclude any amendments to Bill C-24 precisely to avoid any additional debate or committee discussion, any further delay).

In contrast, Trudeau and the Liberal party promised, foremost, to restore the democratic process, to allow full debate, to submit legislation to thorough committee study, to not only listen to opposing views and allow proposed amendments to be debated, but to genuinely consider the views of all MPs, all Canadians, regardless of party affiliation.

Trudeau has, so far, attempted one exception: Bill C-14, the legislation to implement laws governing assisted dying. The reason for the attempt to limit debate and amendments was the deadline imposed by the Supreme Court. It warrants remembering that the Supreme Court had actually ordered the Conservative government to adopt this legislation and imposed an earlier deadline, but similar to Harper's disregard for any authority but his own, while the Conservatives formed the government there was no progress toward drafting let alone adopting this legislation, leaving it to the Liberal government to get done with a very short deadline.

When the Liberals attempted to accelerate the adoption of Bill C-14 the opposition cried foul, decrying the abuse of democratic process by the Liberals in trying to ram through the very legislation the Supreme Court had ordered the Conservatives to adopt. Trudeau backed down (in some part due to the bad optics following his foolish, but understandable, indiscreet reaction on the floor of Parliament, when he slipped into a school teacher's disciplinary mode in response to the puerile stalling tactics by the opposition, literally physically blocking MPs from taking their seats).

Real democracy takes time and can be messy. I did not support or vote for the Liberals. I had my doubts about the open government promises being made. I had not seen the more low-brow side of Tom Muclair (about whom I had very high hopes but who has greatly disappointed me over the course of the last year) and threw my insignificant weight behind the NDP. But I have been very much impressed by what the Liberals have managed to accomplish since the election, and am particularly pleased to see that for the most part, as much as can be expected plus some, the Liberal government is indeed allowing the democratic process to work as it should. But that does take time.

What may seem like games to some is serious stuff, the ways and means and nuts and bolts of real democracy. Takes time. Takes a concerted effort to consider not just one's own point of view but the views of others. To debate. To study. To reflect and ruminate.

Some parts of Bill C-6 are not controversial. Some are a continuation of fixing obvious mistakes made in Bill C-24 (remember, Bill C-24 was a massive piece of legislation reforming many aspects of citizenship law, about a lot more than just revising the requirements for naturalized citizenship; much of Bill C-24 was badly needed revision and was supported by all sides). But some parts of Bill C-6 are controversial and do demand intensive evaluation and a robust debate, at least to the extent Canada wants to be a real democracy.

Harper and the Conservatives were not booted from government because of Bill C-24. Nor even, for the large part, due to their position on many major issues. It was overwhelmingly opposition to the non-democratic approach of Harper that drove the vote against Harper. From the way the Harper government had muzzled Canadian scientists to the way it rammed legislation through without study or debate.

Dictators can ram changes through a government in short order. That is not the kind of government Canadians want, no matter how much they agree with the policies the government adopts.

And remember, the changes to the requirements for naturalization, implemented by Bill C-24, were promised in the election of 2011, and it took nearly FOUR years for even bullying Harper to get the changes adopted and implemented. (Giving notice to any PR who would be eligible under the 3/4 rules now, if those rules were still applicable, before the PR immigrated to Canada, that the Conservatives intended to change the citizenship requirements . . . so no one can blame anyone but their own failure to do the homework if they expected to become a citizen sooner under a 3/4 rule . . . there was plenty of notice for anyone paying attention.)

 

[torontosm]

In contrast, Trudeau and the Liberal party promised, foremost, to restore the democratic process, to allow full debate, to submit legislation to thorough committee study, to not only listen to opposing views and allow proposed amendments to be debated, but to genuinely consider the views of all MPs, all Canadians, regardless of party affiliation.

Really? Because one of Trudeau's first orders of business was to try and pass Motion 6 under which only a handful of Liberals could determine what the agenda for each parliamentary session should be, and when each session should be dismissed. So, he wanted to take away whatever little power the opposition has in parliament. That hardly sounds like a restoration of the democratic process to me, and it definitely doesn't sound like he wants to "genuinely consider the views of all Canadians".

 

[screech339]

Really? Because one of Trudeau's first orders of business was to try and pass Motion 6 under which only a handful of Liberals could determine what the agenda for each parliamentary session should be, and when each session should be dismissed. So, he wanted to take away whatever little power the opposition has in parliament. That hardly sounds like a restoration of the democratic process to me, and it definitely doesn't sound like he wants to "genuinely consider the views of all Canadians".

Until Trudeau put the election vote change to a referendum, he will never "genuinely consider the views of all Canadians".

 

[dpenabill]

Really? Because one of Trudeau's first orders of business was to try and pass Motion 6 under which only a handful of Liberals could determine what the agenda for each parliamentary session should be, and when each session should be dismissed. So, he wanted to take away whatever little power the opposition has in parliament. That hardly sounds like a restoration of the democratic process to me, and it definitely doesn't sound like he wants to "genuinely consider the views of all Canadians".

Motion 6 was a part of the attempt to get Bill C-14 through Parliament because of the deadline imposed by the Supreme Court and way the opposition was engaged in outright delay tactics.

I addressed this in my post:

Trudeau has, so far, attempted one exception: Bill C-14, the legislation to implement laws governing assisted dying. The reason for the attempt to limit debate and amendments was the deadline imposed by the Supreme Court. It warrants remembering that the Supreme Court had actually ordered the Conservative government to adopt this legislation and imposed an earlier deadline, but similar to Harper's disregard for any authority but his own, while the Conservatives formed the government there was no progress toward drafting let alone adopting this legislation, leaving it to the Liberal government to get done with a very short deadline.

When the Liberals attempted to accelerate the adoption of Bill C-14 the opposition cried foul, decrying the abuse of democratic process by the Liberals in trying to ram through the very legislation the Supreme Court had ordered the Conservatives to adopt. Trudeau backed down (in some part due to the bad optics following his foolish, but understandable, indiscreet reaction on the floor of Parliament, when he slipped into a school teacher's disciplinary mode in response to the puerile stalling tactics by the opposition, literally physically blocking MPs from taking their seats).

There is absolutely no comparison in the way Parliament has functioned under Trudeau's Liberal majority with the way Harper ran Parliament, in a heavy-handed manner of truncating debate, limiting committee study, prohibiting consideration of amendments (even to fix grammatical errors), and lack of consultation even with members of the Conservative party. In contrast, much as the Liberal government has in respect to other legislation, Minister McCallum explicitly put out a call for members of the public to offer input about the proposed changes to the Citizenship Act.

There are indeed still many aspects of government suffering less transparency than many of us prefer, but again there is no comparison to how it was when Harper ran the government almost entirely behind closed doors.

The point, however, is that the Liberals are not dragging their feet in getting Bill C-6 adopted. The progress of this legislation is subject to the democratic process the Liberals promised Canadians. The democratic process takes time.

While Bill C-6 is not a major, broad-sweeping piece of legislation, it does contain some very substantial changes to citizenship law. The proposed 3/5 rule itself is way, way more liberal and flexible, way more favourable to immigrants, than the requirements for naturalization have ever been in Canada. While for many this is obviously the better approach, that view is not universal, and is precisely the kind of change for which extensive consultation and robust debate is called for. There should have been such debate before Bill C-24 implemented the 4/6 rule, but that was a different kind of government running the show then.

 

[torontosm]

Motion 6 was a part of the attempt to get Bill C-14 through Parliament because of the deadline imposed by the Supreme Court and way the opposition was engaged in outright delay tactics.

There was nothing in Motion 6 that said that it was restricted solely to C-14. Instead, it was establishing the new norm in for the Trudeau administration to exploit for years to come.

 

[pk10]

It seems that a lot of us are concerned that the Senate might kill or severely delay Bill C-6.

The good news though is that there are 19 open vacancies in the Senate. If Trudeau stacks it up with people who are liberal or at least left-leaning there is a good shot C-6 might pass come September.

There is a development today in the Hill Times which reported that the Minister Maryam Monsef will be announcing the names of senate board advisory members in the next few days. (I cant link the link for some odd reason).

2 months before Parliament resumes is hopefully plenty of time for the board to come up with nominations. Last time the nominations/appointments happened quite briskly and the 7 odd senators which got sworn in are somewhat left-leaning.

Maybe the delay to C-6 is actually a blessing in disguise.

 

[skidmarkz]

It seems that a lot of us are concerned that the Senate might kill or severely delay Bill C-6.

The good news though is that there are 19 open vacancies in the Senate. If Trudeau stacks it up with people who are liberal or at least left-leaning there is a good shot C-6 might pass come September.

There is a development today in the Hill Times which reported that the Minister Maryam Monsef will be announcing the names of senate board advisory members in the next few days. (I cant link the link for some odd reason).

2 months before Parliament resumes is hopefully plenty of time for the board to come up with nominations. Last time the nominations/appointments happened quite briskly and the 7 odd senators which got sworn in are somewhat left-leaning.

Maybe the delay to C-6 is actually a blessing in disguise.

So in conclusion the status is still PENDING (NO DECISIONS YET)?

 

[747-captain]

It seems that a lot of us are concerned that the Senate might kill or severely delay Bill C-6.

The good news though is that there are 19 open vacancies in the Senate. If Trudeau stacks it up with people who are liberal or at least left-leaning there is a good shot C-6 might pass come September.

There is a development today in the Hill Times which reported that the Minister Maryam Monsef will be announcing the names of senate board advisory members in the next few days. (I cant link the link for some odd reason).

2 months before Parliament resumes is hopefully plenty of time for the board to come up with nominations. Last time the nominations/appointments happened quite briskly and the 7 odd senators which got sworn in are somewhat left-leaning.

Maybe the delay to C-6 is actually a blessing in disguise.

Now you're talking my man! If what you say is indeed true, then I can feel confident that the Liberals are putting their money where their mouth is. If the Senate tries its OBSTRUCTIONIST tactics, then the Liberals need to come down on them HARD with a hammer.

And the only way they can do that is to fill the vacant seats and show these partisan hacks that they cannot "play political football" simply because they want to oppose anything and everything the "other side" puts forth (if that is indeed what is happening).

 

[subha_1962]

http://www.hilltimes.com/2016/06/27/trudeau-government-poised-to-start-the-process-for-filling-19-vacant-senate-seats/71379

Here is the link

 

[Japhro]

I think we need some perspective.

while many (myself included) have been made to wait up to a year more (for those that would have been eligible last june and JUST missed the deadline to apply) lowering the citizenship residency requirement by a year is HARDLY the government's only job. NOR SHOULD IT BE. there are far greater issues at play here. C-15 is one of them.

Also, the whole purpose of the Senate is to be INDEPENDENT. In explanation, if the members of parliament who get elected overpromise stuff just to appease the crowds, things that would put the nation's welfare at risk, then the Senators, as independents and free from the pressure of being re-elected have a responsibility to bring balance to the proposed legislation.

Waiting a few more months is NOT a big deal. This is the law and everything is happening as it is supposed to happen. We can't choose to rush legislation when we just like it. Otherwise we risk having worse stuff shoved down our throats by other people, who might happen to like something different.

Just my $0.02.

This is not waiting a few more months, this puts us 1.5 years into a 4 year wait rather than 2.5 years into a 3 year wait. Everything has taken vastly longer than we were told on the outset, my wife could not work for close to 3 years waiting for her PR, could not contribute to the family nor pay taxes. We are really just discussing the reversal of hastily implemented bill C-24, for the most part. Peoples lives are what we are discussing, and decisions that affect families for YEARS are real issues, do not minimise them because of your personal lack of concern please.