Canada Immigration and Visa Discussion Forum Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Canada Immigration Topics > Canadian Citizenship
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Moving forward: Harper plan on reducing Service
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Moving forward: Harper plan on reducing Service

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
Message
michels View Drop Down
Junior Member
Junior Member
Avatar

Joined: 11 Mar 2013
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 143
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote michels Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Jan 2014 at 12:36pm
Originally posted by links18 links18 wrote:

This would mean that Canada would have to "recognize" dual citizenship. In other words, it would treat its own citizens who also hold another citizenship differently from those who do not. It would create two classes of citizens.

Now, when you are in a country that you are a citizen of, they generally do not care if you are also a citizen of another country. They will treat you as a citizen of that country. In other words, the other country cannot protect you, because the country you are in will simply treat you like one of their citizens.

Does that make any sense at all?

Canada already recognizes dual citizenship.. The issue is that with some countries lime China or Russia, if you hold their citizenship you are obliged by law to enter the country using their passport.. This to hold you liable from legal perspective.. 
I hold dual citizenship from birth and it is like changing hats, I become a citizen of the country's passport I use to get into a destination country and I know that my other country will not assist me..
Same Canada wants to introduce this way of diffirentiation.. If you enter a country not using the Canadian passport, you are not Canadian for the time being from legal point of view to the host as the law does not diffirentiate/take into consideration as dual citizenship at one point of time.. If you buy a house you are buying it using one ID -->one citizenship.. Complex concept to some but easy.. 
In other words there is no grey in this kind of law.. Either white or black..

---
Michel-
PR: Applied SW Apr2001/Visa Aug2006/Landed Oct2006
Citizenship: Sent Nov2013,in Process Feb2014, LoT Aug2014, Test and Oath Nov2014
End of line :) Happy citizen ever since
Back to Top
canuck25 View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group

Forum Moderator

Joined: 09 Mar 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 831
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote canuck25 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Jan 2014 at 1:23pm
Originally posted by michels michels wrote:

Canada already recognizes dual citizenship.. The issue is that with some countries lime China or Russia, if you hold their citizenship you are obliged by law to enter the country using their passport.. This to hold you liable from legal perspective.. 
I hold dual citizenship from birth and it is like changing hats, I become a citizen of the country's passport I use to get into a destination country and I know that my other country will not assist me..
Same Canada wants to introduce this way of diffirentiation.. If you enter a country not using the Canadian passport, you are not Canadian for the time being from legal point of view to the host as the law does not diffirentiate/take into consideration as dual citizenship at one point of time.. If you buy a house you are buying it using one ID -->one citizenship.. Complex concept to some but easy.. 
In other words there is no grey in this kind of law.. Either white or black..

This is not true. From the standpoint of international law, China would view you as a Chinese national if you are in the country and hold Chinese and Canadian citizenships, regardless of which passport you used to enter the country. 
Back to Top
michels View Drop Down
Junior Member
Junior Member
Avatar

Joined: 11 Mar 2013
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 143
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote michels Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Jan 2014 at 1:57pm
Originally posted by canuck25 canuck25 wrote:

Originally posted by michels michels wrote:

Canada already recognizes dual citizenship.. The issue is that with some countries lime China or Russia, if you hold their citizenship you are obliged by law to enter the country using their passport.. This to hold you liable from legal perspective.. 
I hold dual citizenship from birth and it is like changing hats, I become a citizen of the country's passport I use to get into a destination country and I know that my other country will not assist me..
Same Canada wants to introduce this way of diffirentiation.. If you enter a country not using the Canadian passport, you are not Canadian for the time being from legal point of view to the host as the law does not diffirentiate/take into consideration as dual citizenship at one point of time.. If you buy a house you are buying it using one ID -->one citizenship.. Complex concept to some but easy.. 
In other words there is no grey in this kind of law.. Either white or black..

This is not true. From the standpoint of international law, China would view you as a Chinese national if you are in the country and hold Chinese and Canadian citizenships, regardless of which passport you used to enter the country. 

They will not issue you a visa on the Canadian passport if you are chinese.. You enter the country on the canadian passport but on the basis that you are chinese, in this case you are chinese and the passport is simply a travel document used for entry considered by China.Same case in other countries... Add to it that China does not recognise dual citizenships.. This creates and created lots of issues between Canada and various countries like a few years back with Iran..

I wanted to point that Canada recognizes dual citizenship, to the contrary of your post.. More info here:
http://travel.gc.ca/travelling/publications/dual-citizenship#disadvantages



Edited by michels - 27 Jan 2014 at 2:03pm
---
Michel-
PR: Applied SW Apr2001/Visa Aug2006/Landed Oct2006
Citizenship: Sent Nov2013,in Process Feb2014, LoT Aug2014, Test and Oath Nov2014
End of line :) Happy citizen ever since
Back to Top
dpenabill View Drop Down
Top Member
Top Member


Joined: 29 Nov 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 6407
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote dpenabill Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Jan 2014 at 5:47pm
Even the United States will not recognize that one of its citizens holds citizenship elsewhere. And while I do not know to what extent it is enforced, American citizens are required to enter the U.S. based on their U.S. citizenship.

Moreover, American citizens are bound by restrictions on travel regardless of which passport they use: Just because an American citizen carries and only uses a Canadian passport to travel to Cuba will not shield him from possible criminal prosecution for illegally (under American law) traveling to Cuba.

That said, yes this issue is largely a red herring. It is more about the Conservatives marshaling political support to back changes in the law which will make it more difficult to obtain Canadian citizenship as a "citizenship of convenience." The Tories are buzzing hot that there are more than a few immigrants exploiting the Canadian immigration system, planning to live in Canada just long enough to get citizenship, to get a passport, and then proceeding on their way . . . home, Dubai, the U.S., elsewhere, often somewhere where the money is better.

Even this so-called problem is probably exaggerated.



Bureaucracy is what bureaucracy does, or When in doubt, follow the instructions. Otherwise, follow the instructions.



BTW: Not an expert, not a Can. lawyer, never worked in immigration
Back to Top
in_cdn View Drop Down
Junior Member
Junior Member
Avatar

Joined: 18 Oct 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 65
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote in_cdn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Jan 2014 at 5:56pm
It is. We live in an increasingly global world. Under what delusions and in what self-fabricated bubble are the Cons living ?

Already, people realize the whole issue of jobs being available here is grossly overstated and hyped up. Even in the better times, it was not easy and now its impossible when the Feds themselves are being laid off and given the pink slip in droves and the GLOBAL economy is in an extended slump.

Do they want people driving taxis or working in grocery stores? Guess as long as they use immigrants like cash cows and have them pump $$ into the system they don't give a bloody peep about their problems. And more recently, it seems the true colors are showing

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2014/01/26/chris_alexander_shows_his_callous_side_goar.html

Or are they just unhappy with the pretence and burden of their roles and engaging in schadenfreude one wonders. We are unhappy...you seem happy...so let's screw you guys over ! ?
Back to Top
dpenabill View Drop Down
Top Member
Top Member


Joined: 29 Nov 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 6407
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote dpenabill Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Jan 2014 at 6:13pm

Quote From the Star:
There was a brief surge of optimism among humanitarian groups when Chris Alexander was named minister of citizenship and immigration six months ago.

“There was hope that the government might decide to change the discourse,” said Janet Dench, executive director of the Canadian Council of Refugees.

Not sure what kool-aid the author of this piece or Janet Dench had been drinking, but anyone who had the slightest sense it was remotely possible this government was going "to change the discourse," needs to check into a mental health clinic, given the extent to which only some rather radical delusions if not halluncinations could explain such thinking.

That the appointment of Chris Alexander would signal anything new or different about this government is even far, far more delusional.

Not a pundit in television, print, or digital sphere made the slightest hint that Chris Alexander would be a decision-maker, or even at the table when decisions were being discussed let alone made. At best he was to be groomed to become one of the more loyal insiders. In all caps and big bold, all the labels emphasized: FOLLOWER, not a game changer.

Sometimes I wonder about the editorial staff at The Star. Some of their stories are so far-fectched one is inclined to file them under fiction. But on the other hand, sometimes they dig up the dirt and get the goods on their target.

But, there is no mistaking Minister Alexander's recent remarks about refugees: purely a mouthpiece for the Prime Minister.


Bureaucracy is what bureaucracy does, or When in doubt, follow the instructions. Otherwise, follow the instructions.



BTW: Not an expert, not a Can. lawyer, never worked in immigration
Back to Top
canuck25 View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group

Forum Moderator

Joined: 09 Mar 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 831
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote canuck25 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Jan 2014 at 7:39pm
Originally posted by in_cdn in_cdn wrote:

It is. We live in an increasingly global world. Under what delusions and in what self-fabricated bubble are the Cons living ?

Already, people realize the whole issue of jobs being available here is grossly overstated and hyped up. Even in the better times, it was not easy and now its impossible when the Feds themselves are being laid off and given the pink slip in droves and the GLOBAL economy is in an extended slump.

Do they want people driving taxis or working in grocery stores? Guess as long as they use immigrants like cash cows and have them pump $$ into the system they don't give a bloody peep about their problems. And more recently, it seems the true colors are showing

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2014/01/26/chris_alexander_shows_his_callous_side_goar.html

Or are they just unhappy with the pretence and burden of their roles and engaging in schadenfreude one wonders. We are unhappy...you seem happy...so let's screw you guys over ! ?

The truth is, Canada's approach to immigration is based purely on economics, as is immigration policy of almost every country, but Canada is unique, and here's how. 

First, let's review the facts:
- population around 34.5 million
- 2nd largest land mass, most of which is not livable, hence the majority of citizens living within a certain proximity to the country's southern border with the United States
- nearly 48% of the population are dependent on the other 52% to generate tax revenues and thus to support social and welfare programs. Our labour force is around 18 million, which is smaller than populations of California, New York, Florida or Texas. 
- Canada's GDP is #13th, which means that if you reshuffled G8 memberships purely on the basis of the GDP Brazil, China, India, South Korea and Mexico would all come ahead of Canada and Canada won't make the group.

When you compare these stats to our neighbour south of the border (which is the most common comparison), Canada is not in an easy position economically and must solve several key problems:
- how do you keep the economy growing, while doing so with only 18 million working adults?
- how do you sustain federal powers, provincial and federal services on a shoe-string budget and with a geopolitical configuration that effectively makes you the 5th most populous state in North America, yet without the workforce mobility and economies of scale that individual US states (and their residents) enjoy?

So this is where immigration and national policies come together. Canada must maintain its political sovereignty and relative economic independence (though a very close relationship with US is key to its survival since it gives Canada a strong trade partner and eliminates the need for Canada to have a fully developed military force), and therefore is very protectionist in its domestic economic policies. Look at how some of the largest industries are regulated, such as wireless, and you'll understand that anti-competitive isolationism is required, otherwise Canadian consumers would easily favour US providers. 

Getting back to the point of immigration, Canada has a delicate balancing act to perform - expand the economy, yet sustain what is already in place economically. Investing into growth sounds great, but means that you also need a good deal of lower- and mid-level professionals to fill newly created jobs, which would take away from existing positions and create a labour shortage, leading to an economic collapse. This is why entrepreneurs don't come to Canada and go to the US. It's simply not economically viable to open shop in Canada - our market is smaller, the actual number of consumers is smaller, our regulations (at times) greater, and labour force pretty thinly spread. So, when an entrepreneur arrives on Canada's shores he realizes that a) there is no venture capital/private equity/lending culture to support aggressive growth (this is a result of the smaller economy) and b) that there is no talent relative to other locations, like UK and US. When an immigrant arrives in Canada, (s)he realizes that the job market is dismal, the number of spots is highly limited, particularly as one's seniority and experience rise, the economic growth is essentially stalled and they must start several notches down from their level of expertise and experience to make ends meet. 

As such, Canada is focusing - in practice - on attracting skilled workers (mostly blue-collar, or at the very least non-white-collar, if you look at the list of occupations admitted under the program) who would get here and are sure to stay, rather than white collar immigrants that seek, first and foremost, professional growth, diverse economy and economic mobility. And this is OK. This is what Canada's economy needs - or rather what its politicians need. Of course the most radical solution (and one that seriously has been advocated by a number of leading Canadian thinkers) is that Canada should fully integrate with the US, creating complete capital and talent mobility and giving the US access to its natural resources, which would attract labour to Canada, allow Canadian economy to diversify and be a win-win. This is as likely as Stephen Harper joining the NDP. If other countries, like the US, encourage internationalization of their immigrants, send them out of the country to do well and attract tax revenues back to the home country, or have a domestic market large enough to encourage economic development (US/EU), Canada must fend for herself, so she neither grows dramatically, nor shrinks when economic tides turn. Sure we did well when the oil prices shot through the roof in the last 14 years. And while the momentary bliss of a strong dollar at par was enjoyable, the truth is that it's not worth the whole $1US simply because Canada doesn't produce and export much except for natural resources. Therefore, as the Canadian dollar dives to around $0.83-85 US (my prediction), our purchasing power will decrease internationally. And while for countries that are huge on exports low domestic currency can be a blessing, for simple Canadians who already overpay relative, say, to their American neighbours who don't have an overly regulated economy, this will not be good news. 

It is what it is. In order for Canada to be fully global it needs to encourage economic mobility of its citizens and financial producers, yet it struggles to keep people here - hence the current rhetoric about keeping PRs/citizenship applicants in the country, procedurally punishing those that travel while waiting for their citizenship and scrutinizing international connections of its subjects-to-be.  Ultimately, this will attract the very folks who won't rise above $65-80K in annual salaries and will be happy with what Canada has to offer. There's nothing wrong this, mind you. To each his/her own.


Edited by canuck25 - 28 Jan 2014 at 2:49pm
Back to Top
in_cdn View Drop Down
Junior Member
Junior Member
Avatar

Joined: 18 Oct 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 65
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote in_cdn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 Jan 2014 at 5:03pm
Former admirers lose faith in Alexander

http://www.therecord.com/opinion-story/4336920-former-admirers-lose-faith-in-alexander/[B
Back to Top
dpenabill View Drop Down
Top Member
Top Member


Joined: 29 Nov 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 6407
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote dpenabill Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 Jan 2014 at 6:17pm

Originally posted by canuck25 canuck25 wrote:

Getting back to the point of immigration, Canada has a delicate balancing act to perform - expand the economy, yet sustain what is already in place economically. Investing into growth sounds great, but means . . .
[et al]

Good analysis.

I disagree with some of the details, and in particular some of the characterizations, but overall you well outline some key elements underlying and to a large extent undermining the Canadian immigration system.

One of the problems some of us have with the current government's focus and agenda is that it is so focused on the economic elements that it fails to adequately consider other important values, both those in the realm of overriding principles like justice, fair procedure, due process, and humanitarian, as well as values like the unification of families. This, however, in most respects has a more dramatic impact on the immigration end of the system and less on the grant citizenship aspect, except that in the last three years the grant citizenship process has become so bogged down that in may respects fair procedure and due process have been sacrificed, with delays in processing so extensive as to amount to an injustice.

This government is not very good at separating its policy agenda, its substantive objectives, from considerations of due process and what amounts to procedural burdens (including delays) which in effect comprise or even outright deny justice.

On the other hand, there are as well many thousands of immigrants whose expectations are not on the same page that the Canadian immigration system intends. There is little doubt, many pursue immigration to obtain Canadian citizenship in much the same vein as someone might go abroad for an advanced degree, more about building credentials than about seeking a new life in the country of Canada. This includes more than a few who see Canada as a pathway to lucrative career opportunities available in the U.S. Regardless of one's personal opinions regarding this, it is clear that there is a conflict between what the Harper government is pursuing and what these individuals are pursuing. For many of us who are focused on establishing a new life in Canada, we are caught in the crossfire.

And, indeed, it is what it is.

Regardless of whether or not one agrees with this government's apparent (virtually obvious I think) effort to discourage the career-ladder and other "citizenship of convenience" approaches to obtaining a grant of Canadian citizenship, most of us are hopeful that CIC continues to hone its tools so that for the rest of us the process is less burdened, less bogged down, by the procedural hurdles the government's agenda has imposed in the last few years.

In the meantime, though, the Citizenship Act is indeed in need of reform. Especially the residency requirement. I wish those reforms were being drafted by someone other than this government. But, they are needed.



Bureaucracy is what bureaucracy does, or When in doubt, follow the instructions. Otherwise, follow the instructions.



BTW: Not an expert, not a Can. lawyer, never worked in immigration
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down