Here is one of those cases where CBSA are going to be taking a lot of flak as they are now in the process of deporting a UK citizen back to Scotland for criminal inadmissibility for offences that had been committed over 20 years ago.
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/ot...713/story.html

One wonders why he never took out PR status although the article seems to suggest an application was submitted over 21 years ago. Now without all of the facts are they suggesting it has taken 21 years to make a decision on refusing his PR status and therefore now taking the steps to deport him.

Be interesting to see how this plays out. My guess is he gets to stay.

The article implies he'd be fine if he applied for rehabilitation, so sounds like they just want him to follow the rules.

But, yeah, 21 years for PR makes my three years seem short!

A bit harsh to say the least, but where should CIC draw the line under current regs? 10, 15, 20, 30 years?

Maybe applicants should apply for rehabilitation, as soon as eligible, to speed up an immigration process (as they can now) or, if they don't apply be deemed automatically rehabilitated after say 15 years?

Well because of his 2 offences he would never be deemed rehabilitated under the current law but he was eligible to apply for individual rehabilitation many years ago and was allegedly told about this but never got round to doing it.
Now that it has come to this stage out comes the sob story to the media.
Why didn't he apply as he was told? Was it genuine oversight or a case of stuff the rules nothing will happen sort of attitude that some individuals display.
Harsh or not the $631 might now seem a bargain. I don't know what that figure entails but individual rehab in his case would have only been $200.

It is harsh maybe, but the rules are no secret and it i snot like he has not had the time and opportunity to deal with it. Rules should be applied equally to someone here 20 years or 20 days. H e was just lucky it had not happened earlier and maybe hoped he had got away with it?

Deport him

This whole thing is simply ridiculous. The man is married, has a family, and has led a law-abiding and productive life in Canada for many years. Now, because of some nit-picking technicality, his life and the lives of his wife, child, and step-children are supposed to be torn apart. What harm would it do to anyone to allow him to stay?

So what was his excuse for not applying for rehabilitation many years ago as he was told to do? Its not a technicality per se its the law.
So those who don't pay their taxes and get caught later on and now are faced with a huge debt and give a sob story as it will financially impact them should be given a free pass?
He was told what to do years ago and for whatever reason elected not to follow the advice given to him. Where is his accountability and responsibility to do what he should have done to avoid this situation?
Should his actions now set a precedent for others not to follow the rules?

What was his crime?

Smoking crack with the mayor of Toronto or something?

Common sense should prevail... Woopty doo he didnt attend rehab for sitting in a car drunk 21 years ago what a threat to society he must be.

It's a tough one!

I personally would have liked to have seen him deported 25 years ago.

Is it right to deport him today after letting him live and work legally in Canada for 25 years without doing anything else wrong (since)? Not really, should he be in the country? No.

There should perhaps be a clause that the government has x amount of time from the point of the perp. being charged to use the crime as part of a deportation order.

He didn't apply to CBSA/CIC for individual rehabilitation to make him no longer inadmissible not rehabilitation as ordered by a court so there is a BIG difference.
Nobody is stating he is a threat to society he is CRIMINALLY INADMISSIBLE under the law.
Common sense should have prevailed when he was told to apply for rehabilitation and applied so he now wouldn't be facing a deportation order.

I think the lawyer has it right. The Government should have acted sooner and have created an expectation by annually renewing this mans TR. Too much water under the bridge and he has not reoffended. Let him stay.

I'd be interested to know how many times the necessary course of action was advised to him.

And why there were so many renewals.

Is it normal that TWP are issued so often but an extension to a visitor visa may not be granted as often?

Why is a TWP okay for someone otherwise inadmissible? Haven't scheduled concerts been cancelled for famous inadmissibles?

A Temporary Resident Permit is issued to those who are inadmissible be it a visitor, worker or student. I have seen TRPs issued for 1 day or 3 years.
Those issued at a Port of Entry are at the discretion of an officer with no guarantee one will be issued. The overseas offices are the same but they are only dealing with an application as opposed to the POE having the person in front of them.
OP Manual 20 deals with the overseas applications and IP Manual 1 deals with Inland or POE procedures.
I love this part of the manual
5.1. Purpose of temporary resident permits
Normally, persons who do not meet the requirements of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act are refused permanent resident or temporary resident visas abroad, denied entry at a port of entry, or refused processing within Canada. However, in some cases, there may be compelling reasons for an officer to issue a temporary resident permit to allow a person who does not meet the requirements of the Act to enter or remain in Canada.

So what is a compelling reason?
Yes some concerts have been cancelled because the artist was inadmissible.
Should Dog the Bounty hunter be eligible for a TRP, how about Chris Brown, and all of those other famous stars/artists who have been found guilty of DUI, possession of various narcotics, assault charges and other offences.
There are other factors that also come into play which can determine if a permit is issued or not.
Joe Blow is unlikely to contact the media if refused entry but have a concert cancelled for refusing the lead artist then watch the emails fly into your inbox if you were the officer that refused them.