Liberals announce changes to spousal sponsorship rules

[mentalfloss]

Liberals announce changes to spousal sponsorship rules

Starting early next year, migrants sponsored by their Canadian spouses won’t be required to stay in a relationship for two years in order to keep their permanent resident status in the country.

In a notice published Friday, the Liberal government said it would by the spring repeal the condition introduced by its Tory predecessors to crack down on marriage fraud but criticized by advocates for potentially trapping vulnerable migrants, especially women, in abusive relationships.

“The proposed repeal of conditional permanent residence recognizes that the majority of relationships are genuine, and the majority of applications are made in good faith,” the government said in its plan.

“Eliminating conditional permanent residence would facilitate family reunification, remove the potential increased vulnerability faced by abused and neglected spouses and partners, and support the government’s commitment to combating gender-based violence.”

The so-called conditional permanent residence came into effect in late 2012 requiring a sponsored spouse to live with their Canadian partner for two years if they have no children together. Otherwise, their permanent resident status would be revoked and they must leave Canada.

https://www.thestar.com/news/immigr...nce-changes-to-spousal-sponsorship-rules.html

 

[Jinentonix]

Starting early next year, migrants sponsored by their Canadian spouses won’t be required to stay in a relationship for two years in order to keep their permanent resident status in the country.

Of course not. Why bother having any conditions at all? Hell, why bother having a f*cking immigration dept? Let's just open the borders entirely and have a f*cking free-for-all.

The proposed repeal of conditional permanent residence recognizes that the majority of relationships are genuine, and the majority of applications are made in good faith,” the government said in its plan.

Yet another load of ideological bullsh*t. This despite the fact that less than a year ago a report showed that immigration fraud through marriage was becoming a serious problem in Canada. Once again, ideological bullsh*t trumps facts and reality.
Man, it must be nice to be able to traipse through life so utterly blind and clueless. But that's what Canada gets for electing a two time drop out before he became a MIA MP.

 

[lone wolf]

Why not make marriage of convenience easier?

 

[mentalfloss]

It's funny how Harper was not much different than Trump.

I get the privilege of reviewing certain medical information (which I obviously cannot reveal due to privacy) but I can corroborate this story with a real situation wherein the old government policy has in fact forced someone to go back and live with an abusive spouse.

How they could not realize this is beyond me but it just shows, once again, how harmful conservatives are.

 

[JamesBondo]

It's funny how Harper was not much different than Trump.

I get the privilege of reviewing certain medical information (which I obviously cannot reveal due to privacy) but I can corroborate this story with a real situation wherein the old government policy has in fact forced someone to go back and live with an abusive spouse.

How they could not realize this is beyond me but it just shows, once again, how harmful conservatives are.

I call BS. medical evidence of abuse would get a person the option to stay in a shelter. I know this because my cousin works at a Toronto shelter.

 

[Jinentonix]

It's funny how Harper was not much different than Trump.

I get the privilege of reviewing certain medical information (which I obviously cannot reveal due to privacy) but I can corroborate this story with a real situation wherein the old government policy has in fact forced someone to go back and live with an abusive spouse.

How they could not realize this is beyond me but it just shows, once again, how harmful conservatives are.

Uh, yeah. So what the Libtards are saying is, it's better to have a physically abusive person running around at large with full PR status than it is to ship their a$$ back to wherever they came from if/when they demonstrate their abusiveness towards the women who sponsored them. F*cking brilliant. That'll show the women of Canada how much Trudeau cares about them.
You see dumbass, what this does is free the abusive goof up to move on and abuse other women. Of course if you don't think Canada has quite enough misogynists in it, then this is definitely a great plan.

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

It's funny how Harper was not much different than Trump.

I get the privilege of reviewing certain medical information (which I obviously cannot reveal due to privacy) but I can corroborate this story with a real situation wherein the old government policy has in fact forced someone to go back and live with an abusive spouse.

How they could not realize this is beyond me but it just shows, once again, how harmful conservatives are.

There no doubt are a few cases which this would cause an issue. There are also a lot of marriages of convenience which opening the flood door will allow.


I would be curious to see the governments statistics on both of these instances before I make my opinion.

 

[Remington1]

I know 7 acquaintance that met women outside of Canada (Cuba, Philippines and Jamaica); married them and all 7 are single again !! I also know of 3 women that married guys from the Dominican, Jamaica, and Cuba, 2 are alone. Much easier than going through the immigration process. They're probably already sponsoring their 'spouse' and families. If I am just one person and know 10 cases, I have to believe that the love quest to get a passport is more prevalent that we think. JT is a fool.

 

[mentalfloss]

I call BS. medical evidence of abuse would get a person the option to stay in a shelter. I know this because my cousin works at a Toronto shelter.

Yet the government still ordered them back home which will now cause an expensive mess in courts.

This woman is suffering from PTSD now.

All because of conbot fear of immigrants.

 

[Cannuck]

It's funny how Harper was not much different than Trump.

I get the privilege of reviewing certain medical information (which I obviously cannot reveal due to privacy) but I can corroborate this story with a real situation wherein the old government policy has in fact forced someone to go back and live with an abusive spouse.

How they could not realize this is beyond me but it just shows, once again, how harmful conservatives are.

You know, the funny thing with ideologues is, there is no middle ground. Because some spouses are battered let's throw out the whole the entire legislation/policy instead of amending it. School board shenanigans, let's shut it down and throw 3500 kids out of school. The complete inability to problem solve is staggering

 

[mentalfloss]

You do realize that this legislation did nothing good right?

 

[Cannuck]

You do realize that this legislation did nothing good right?

I'm sure you think that but you're an ideologue. Given that I'm not, I choose to look at the evidence before making up my mind.

 

[mentalfloss]

Too easy.

Conservatives are always wrong.


Addressing doubts of program integrity

Conditional permanent residence was introduced as a safeguard against fraudulent spousal and common-law partner sponsorship applications. However, IRCC believes that its numerous other measures that are designed to identify fraudulent applications are sufficient. Moreover, the department states that it is not possible to determine whether the provision was successful in deterring fraudulent applications.

http://www.cicnews.com/2016/11/cana...certain-sponsored-spousespartners-118626.html

 

[Cannuck]

Too easy.

Conservatives are always wrong.

Yes, I think we are all aware of your religious views though I'm not sure of their relevance to assessing or solving a problem

 

[JLM]

Conservatives are always wrong.



http://www.cicnews.com/2016/11/cana...certain-sponsored-spousespartners-118626.html

That takes the cake for the most ignorant statement on here this week! Congratulations!

 

[Cannuck]

That takes the cake for the most ignorant statement on here this week! Congratulations!

Nope. He has a long way to go to match some of the idiotic nonsense you post

 

[Machjo]

Ontario needs tougehr immigration rules. I'm tempted to start a petition to change the Constitution and establish Ontario citizenship passports. Those Manitobans just can't be trusted. Your thoughts?

Do you realise how easy it is for a Manitoban to just pack up and move to Ontario? No border controls, just one open border, it's a f^ckin' free for all.

 

[Remington1]

I asked a lifetime Liberal how he felt about the new baby Trudeau in Ottawa. This man lived in the papa Trudeau era. He proudly responded that the baby was the exact replica of papa. I thought yea man, same policies, same arrogance, same need to show the world he's fabulous, same idealism, same large deficit, and of course, tax the people, and tax them a lot...!!!

 

[Cannuck]

Ontario needs tougehr immigration rules. I'm tempted to start a petition to change the Constitution and establish Ontario citizenship passports. Those Manitobans just can't be trusted. Your thoughts?

Do you realise how easy it is for a Manitoban to just pack up and move to Ontario? No border controls, just one open border, it's a f^ckin' free for all.

Why would any Canadian choose to move to Ontario. I thought a move there had to be part of a sentence

 

[Machjo]

I asked a lifetime Liberal how he felt about the new baby Trudeau in Ottawa. This man lived in the papa Trudeau era. He proudly responded that the baby was the exact replica of papa. I thought yea man, same policies, same arrogance, same need to show the world he's fabulous, same idealism, same large deficit, and of course, tax the people, and tax them a lot...!!!

But this thread is about spousal sponsorship, not taxes and deficits.

On that front, immigration rates actually dropped under Trudeau Sr. but are increasing under Jr. So not a replica on that front. So while your post might apply in another thread, it's proved false in this one. He's not a replica on the immigration front.

Here's another stupid immigration rule apparently. I heard (I don't know if it's true) that if you inform an immigration officer that you're planning on living in Canada for a few years and then emigrate, it could be more difficult to sponsor your spouse and so it's better to lie and say you're planning on settling in Canada.

Again, I don't know if it's true or not, but if it is, how stupid! Why should they care if the couple is planning on living in Canada for only a few years? Why would they want to insist that you either plan on staying permanently or leave now? Why would they even care? Again, I heard this from a lawyer but I have not actually read the applicable law, so I'm just going by what I heard.