Bill C-6

Old Dec 19th 2016, 5:41 am
  #1  
Weegie in Calgary
Thread Starter
 
cbrown89's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2012
Location: Calgary
Posts: 810
cbrown89 has a reputation beyond reputecbrown89 has a reputation beyond reputecbrown89 has a reputation beyond reputecbrown89 has a reputation beyond reputecbrown89 has a reputation beyond reputecbrown89 has a reputation beyond reputecbrown89 has a reputation beyond reputecbrown89 has a reputation beyond reputecbrown89 has a reputation beyond reputecbrown89 has a reputation beyond reputecbrown89 has a reputation beyond repute
Default Bill C-6

No idea about the jargon used in these debates but does it look like this amendment may finally be gaining some traction through the senate?

Debates - Issue 89 - December 15, 2016

"Referred to Committee
The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Honourable senators, when shall this bill be read the third time?

An Hon. Senator: Never.

Hon. Ratna Omidvar: Honourable senators, I move that the bill be referred to the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology.

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?

Some Hon. Senators: Agreed.

Senator Carignan: No, on division.

Senator Plett: On division.

(On motion of Senator Omidvar, bill referred to the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology, on division.)"
cbrown89 is offline  
Old Dec 19th 2016, 5:53 am
  #2  
I need a walk
 
Stinkypup's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2014
Location: Okanagan
Posts: 4,895
Stinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Bill C-6

Originally Posted by cbrown89 View Post
No idea about the jargon used in these debates but does it look like this amendment may finally be gaining some traction through the senate?
I wouldnt hold your breath
Next stage is committee stage
Then report stage
Then 3rd reading......... nothing in Canada moves swiftly- I would liken the process speed to CanadaPost!
Stinkypup is offline  
Old Dec 19th 2016, 8:51 pm
  #3  
Bex in the city
 
beckiwoo's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2013
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 3,833
beckiwoo has a reputation beyond reputebeckiwoo has a reputation beyond reputebeckiwoo has a reputation beyond reputebeckiwoo has a reputation beyond reputebeckiwoo has a reputation beyond reputebeckiwoo has a reputation beyond reputebeckiwoo has a reputation beyond reputebeckiwoo has a reputation beyond reputebeckiwoo has a reputation beyond reputebeckiwoo has a reputation beyond reputebeckiwoo has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Bill C-6

Originally Posted by Stinkypup View Post
I wouldnt hold your breath
Next stage is committee stage
Then report stage
Then 3rd reading......... nothing in Canada moves swiftly- I would liken the process speed to CanadaPost!
Lol

At first I was 'yay' but now I'm not so sure if and when this will go through.

Out of interest how long did it take Harper to get the bill through taking out the time before PR counting towards citizenship and upping the amount of time to 4 out of 6 years?
beckiwoo is offline  
Old Dec 19th 2016, 8:55 pm
  #4  
Edo
BE Forum Addict
 
Edo's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2008
Location: Near the Northern Lights
Posts: 1,435
Edo has a reputation beyond reputeEdo has a reputation beyond reputeEdo has a reputation beyond reputeEdo has a reputation beyond reputeEdo has a reputation beyond reputeEdo has a reputation beyond reputeEdo has a reputation beyond reputeEdo has a reputation beyond reputeEdo has a reputation beyond reputeEdo has a reputation beyond reputeEdo has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Bill C-6

Originally Posted by beckiwoo View Post
Out of interest how long did it take Harper to get the bill through taking out the time before PR counting towards citizenship and upping the amount of time to 4 out of 6 years?
Like 2 days
Edo is offline  
Old Dec 19th 2016, 8:59 pm
  #5  
I need a walk
 
Stinkypup's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2014
Location: Okanagan
Posts: 4,895
Stinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Bill C-6

Originally Posted by beckiwoo View Post
Lol

At first I was 'yay' but now I'm not so sure if and when this will go through.

Out of interest how long did it take Harper to get the bill through taking out the time before PR counting towards citizenship and upping the amount of time to 4 out of 6 years?
It will get through, it will just take a fair bit more time..
Stinkypup is offline  
Old Dec 19th 2016, 9:03 pm
  #6  
BE Forum Addict
 
Snowy560's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2012
Location: British Columbia
Posts: 3,187
Snowy560 has a reputation beyond reputeSnowy560 has a reputation beyond reputeSnowy560 has a reputation beyond reputeSnowy560 has a reputation beyond reputeSnowy560 has a reputation beyond reputeSnowy560 has a reputation beyond reputeSnowy560 has a reputation beyond reputeSnowy560 has a reputation beyond reputeSnowy560 has a reputation beyond reputeSnowy560 has a reputation beyond reputeSnowy560 has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Bill C-6

It took a whole year before the residency requirement was upped to four years as I recall. Other bits of the eligibility requirements were phased in earlier (I think but can't quite remember).

If you're eligible under the present rules (1460 days / 6 years strict physical presence since becoming a PR and other eligibility requirements), I'd get your application in ASAP. The number of applications is low comparatively at the moment but logic says they'll skyrocket once the new rules come into being.

S
Snowy560 is offline  
Old Dec 19th 2016, 9:19 pm
  #7  
I need a walk
 
Stinkypup's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2014
Location: Okanagan
Posts: 4,895
Stinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond reputeStinkypup has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Bill C-6

Originally Posted by Snowy560 View Post
It took a whole year before the residency requirement was upped to four years as I recall. Other bits of the eligibility requirements were phased in earlier (I think but can't quite remember).

If you're eligible under the present rules (1460 days / 6 years strict physical presence since becoming a PR and other eligibility requirements), I'd get your application in ASAP. The number of applications is low comparatively at the moment but logic says they'll skyrocket once the new rules come into being.

S
Three days and counting
Stinkypup is offline  
Old Dec 19th 2016, 10:26 pm
  #8  
Weegie in Calgary
Thread Starter
 
cbrown89's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2012
Location: Calgary
Posts: 810
cbrown89 has a reputation beyond reputecbrown89 has a reputation beyond reputecbrown89 has a reputation beyond reputecbrown89 has a reputation beyond reputecbrown89 has a reputation beyond reputecbrown89 has a reputation beyond reputecbrown89 has a reputation beyond reputecbrown89 has a reputation beyond reputecbrown89 has a reputation beyond reputecbrown89 has a reputation beyond reputecbrown89 has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Bill C-6

The Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology has 6 conservatives, 3 liberals and 5/6 non affiliated people there. They need 8 votes to get through, it's unlikely to get through without amendments to the terrorism part.
cbrown89 is offline  
Old Dec 20th 2016, 6:26 pm
  #9  
Edo
BE Forum Addict
 
Edo's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2008
Location: Near the Northern Lights
Posts: 1,435
Edo has a reputation beyond reputeEdo has a reputation beyond reputeEdo has a reputation beyond reputeEdo has a reputation beyond reputeEdo has a reputation beyond reputeEdo has a reputation beyond reputeEdo has a reputation beyond reputeEdo has a reputation beyond reputeEdo has a reputation beyond reputeEdo has a reputation beyond reputeEdo has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Bill C-6

Originally Posted by cbrown89 View Post
The Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology has 6 conservatives, 3 liberals and 5/6 non affiliated people there. They need 8 votes to get through, it's unlikely to get through without amendments to the terrorism part.
Yeah, or the govt can just wait until those 6 tw-a-ts are gone from the Senate's Standing Committee.

But on a serious note, doesn't the govt. usually have alternative ways to get bills passed into law if they get stuck in the system? I thought they had options to bypass committees or something.
Edo is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.