dredg97 Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 2 minutes ago, Roberta2 said: Canada seems to be six years. 3 out of 5 years with a new Bill approved these days, migrants will have a smoother pathway for Canadian citizenship: https://www.cicnews.com/2017/06/bill-c6-passed-giving-immigrants-smoother-pathway-canadian-citizenship-069248.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 What about the UK ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dredg97 Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Parley said: What about the UK ? Googling it: https://www.gov.uk/becoming-a-british-citizen/check-if-you-can-apply Edited June 22, 2017 by dredg97 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 Why ? Is UK a lot worse than here ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
logbook100 Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 Anyone heard rumour says the new law might be implemented from 1 Jan next year instead of 20 Apr as they are still negotiating the details...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinny Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 (edited) Where did you hear that rumour? Remember the backdating is only one of a number of issues not least of which is the power potato head wants to hand himself! Edited June 22, 2017 by Spinny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jess6 Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 5 hours ago, Parley said: Why ? Is UK a lot worse than here ? You can apply for British citizenship by naturalisation if: you’re 18 or over you’re of good character, for example, you don’t have a serious or recent criminal record, and you haven’t tried to deceive the Home Office or been involved in immigration offences in the last 10 years you’ll continue to live in the UK you’ve met the knowledge of English and life in the UK requirements you meet the residency requirement And you must usually have: lived in the UK for at least the 5 years before the date of your application spent no more than 450 days outside the UK during those 5 years spent no more than 90 days outside the UK in the last 12 months had settlement (‘indefinite leave to remain’) in the UK for the last 12 months if you’re from outside the European Economic Area (EEA) had permanent residence status for the last 12 months if you’re a citizen of an EEA country - you need to provide a permanent residence document not broken any immigration laws while in the UK 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie937 Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 2 hours ago, logbook100 said: Anyone heard rumour says the new law might be implemented from 1 Jan next year instead of 20 Apr as they are still negotiating the details...? Where did you hear this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bwatt99 Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 3 hours ago, logbook100 said: Anyone heard rumour says the new law might be implemented from 1 Jan next year instead of 20 Apr as they are still negotiating the details...? I hope your right but im sure many of us would have heard about it also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 So UK is still a bit tougher even with the new regs. Really there is not a lot of difference among comparable countries, maybe a year here or there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KidA Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 21 minutes ago, Parley said: So UK is still a bit tougher even with the new regs. Really there is not a lot of difference among comparable countries, maybe a year here or there. In some cases (ie those who arrive already on a permanent visa). But for people like me, who spent three years in Australia before being granted PR, the UK pathway is shorter (two year wait on PR, as opposed to 4 here) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rammygirl Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 11 hours ago, Spinny said: Where did you hear that rumour? Remember the backdating is only one of a number of issues not least of which is the power potato head wants to hand himself! Could it be that it refers to a statement at the beginning of the proposed bill. I can't be bothered to find the exact quote but it basically said that the legislation would take effect from a nominated date, but if it took longer than 6 months to be passed into law then it would take effect from the day it was actually passed into law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roberta2 Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 I do wish people would stop conflating a freeze with backdating. A freeze is normal practice and all governments do it. Obviously, this legislation will now have to wait until the next parliamentary session. But the government has just shown its ability to get contentious legislation through the Senate without the support of either the ALP or the Greens. Not without some important concessions, of course - but politics is the art of the possible. (Senator Lambie was a surprise..I think the Catholic lobby may have overdone it with her.) Senator Michaelia Cash, who represents Dutton in the Senate, will be the chief negotiator in the Senate for the Bill on citizenship changes. Basically, she will have to make enough concessions to round up six Senators (One Nation is in the bag already, of course.) A lot can happen in a few weeks too of course - e.g. more terrorist attacks in Australia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dredg97 Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 40 minutes ago, Roberta2 said: I do wish people would stop conflating a freeze with backdating. A freeze is normal practice and all governments do it. Obviously, this legislation will now have to wait until the next parliamentary session. But the government has just shown its ability to get contentious legislation through the Senate without the support of either the ALP or the Greens. Not without some important concessions, of course - but politics is the art of the possible. (Senator Lambie was a surprise..I think the Catholic lobby may have overdone it with her.) Senator Michaelia Cash, who represents Dutton in the Senate, will be the chief negotiator in the Senate for the Bill on citizenship changes. Basically, she will have to make enough concessions to round up six Senators (One Nation is in the bag already, of course.) A lot can happen in a few weeks too of course - e.g. more terrorist attacks in Australia. Lots of speculation and a very poor last remark.... You should have reported that the Senate has referred the Bill for inquiry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinny Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 ..." I do wish people would stop conflating a freeze with backdating".... The one is symptomatic of the other....no? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spleenus Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 3 hours ago, Parley said: So UK is still a bit tougher even with the new regs. Really there is not a lot of difference among comparable countries, maybe a year here or there. Not particularly, the UK asks for 5 years resident in the country of which one of those years must be 'indefinite leave to remain'. So it's one extra year over the old regs (or as they currently are with the freeze). new regs here (if they pass) will just mean all your non permanent residency won't count towards being able to get citizenship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jess6 Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 40 minutes ago, Spleenus said: Not particularly, the UK asks for 5 years resident in the country of which one of those years must be 'indefinite leave to remain'. So it's one extra year over the old regs (or as they currently are with the freeze). new regs here (if they pass) will just mean all your non permanent residency won't count towards being able to get citizenship. Burke sums up my views on the issue: http://www.sbs.com.au/yourlanguage/punjabi/en/article/2017/06/21/citizenship-changes-designed-create-second-class-australians-tony-burke Many people stay years under temporary subclasses, some of them come here, study here, then work here. These people contribute greatly to the economy of the country and are completely integrated to the life of the community. It'd be great to take this fact into account. During their time as temporary residents they have no rights to social benefits for most of them. Then as a permanent resident, people have no rights to vote. Think about it, would you like to live more than 5 years in a country without being offered a possibility to obtain rights to vote? I wish every person who does not understand this, could be put in the same situation to get a better understanding. Imagine you are hired by a company in another country, you pay taxes, you pay for your own private insurance without access to medicare, you pay increased school fees for your kids during several years. Would you want to have to wait more than 5 years to be able to apply for Citizenship if you wanted to stay in that country? Just think about it one minute. Is it justified to have people contributing more than citizens to the wealth of the country, and this during years and sometime more than a decade, without benefiting from some kind of social and civil rights? This is not an easy problem to solve but it is important to always keep the human factor in mind. 2 hours ago, Roberta2 said: I do wish people would stop conflating a freeze with backdating. A freeze is normal practice and all governments do it. Obviously, this legislation will now have to wait until the next parliamentary session. But the government has just shown its ability to get contentious legislation through the Senate without the support of either the ALP or the Greens. Not without some important concessions, of course - but politics is the art of the possible. (Senator Lambie was a surprise..I think the Catholic lobby may have overdone it with her.) Senator Michaelia Cash, who represents Dutton in the Senate, will be the chief negotiator in the Senate for the Bill on citizenship changes. Basically, she will have to make enough concessions to round up six Senators (One Nation is in the bag already, of course.) A lot can happen in a few weeks too of course - e.g. more terrorist attacks in Australia. Why would any terrorist attack influence country representatives to changes citizenship rules? Human beings can radicalise and become dangerous for any kind of random reasons, this is completely unrelated to their country of origin or citizenship status. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 (edited) Many people stay decades and live permanently here without ever wanting to become citizens, so it is not a concern to everyone. I have a family member who lives in the US on a green card and has no desire ever to become a citizen. Edited June 23, 2017 by Parley 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NicF Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 4 minutes ago, Parley said: Many people stay decades and live permanently here without ever wanting to become citizens, so it is not a concern to everyone. I have a family member who lives in the US on a green card and has no desire ever to become a citizen. Absolutely. A member of my OHs extended family is from Norway and has been here years and has no intention of ever getting citizenship. I've been here nearly 5 years ( as PR) and don't feel the need to rush in to getting citizenship either. I'll probably get round to doing it one day but only really to bring myself in line with my OH and kids. I have mixed feelings about not being able to vote, although it is possible to register to vote in the local council elections and I haven't done that either. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemesis Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 (edited) 26 minutes ago, NicF said: 26 minutes ago, NicF said: Absolutely. A member of my OHs extended family is from Norway and has been here years and has no intention of ever getting citizenship. I've been here nearly 5 years ( as PR) and don't feel the need to rush in to getting citizenship either. I'll probably get round to doing it one day but only really to bring myself in line with my OH and kids. I have mixed feelings about not being able to vote, although it is possible to register to vote in the local council elections and I haven't done that either. A Canadian friend of mine in Brisbane emigrated there when she was 2, is now in her late 40s and only became a citizen about 5 years back. She did it simply because she has an Ozzie husband and kids, and they were all planning their first holiday abroad. She said it would be simpler if they all travelled on Australian passports. Nothing to do with voting etc, pure travel convenience, and the security of knowing she had the same nationality as the rest of the family. Edited June 23, 2017 by Nemesis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silencio Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 (edited) There is no issue or disadvantage of not being able to vote for 5 years. I think many Aussies would wish to not vote as it's compulsory (not voluntary as in most countries). I know many Aussies who let it go, may get a fine or not. Voting is overrated anyway...as only once every 4 years the average Joe has a say so no show stopper of being a PR. By the way Jess you can vote as a PR, at least in Council elections which we did a couple of years before. In our country of origin migrants have to wait 8 (!) years before they are eligible to apply for citizenship + language test! And I know many more European countries where migrants have to wait 5-8 years. One of my friends actually had to wait 8 years before her eligibility though her kids and husband all were Germans. Took her 9 years with perfect language skills of matching her own nuclear family. So hey, Australia is still fair because PR's still wait 4 years unchanged whereas my other half is proud Aussie and I'm a proud PR. Edited June 23, 2017 by silencio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silencio Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 (edited) Norway doesn't allow dual nationality. Certainly a reason why some migrants stay PR as Norway in my opinion is above-standard and the richest country in the world with top quality living standards (me and hubby have been to Norway and would probably migrated there but the weather is too cold, dark and unpleasant) Edited June 23, 2017 by silencio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jess6 Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, silencio said: By the way Jess you can vote as a PR, at least in Council elections which we did a couple of years before. I did not know that! Thanks for sharing! Regarding access to citizenship and right to vote, I understand it might not matter to many of you, guys, but to me - and others - it does matter a lot. It does not matter to me what other countries do, what matters to me is where societies are evolving towards I am personally for an open world and I believe the more freedom, the more advanced the world is. When societies make decision led by fears, they are going backwards. Compromising freedom for an illusion of safety or security is not something I believe in. However I understand why many people believe or want to believe that such measures are necessary. Edited June 23, 2017 by jess6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevwtosh Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 To be candid and in my own opinion, people who are radicalised and not integrated into the society from history are those who either came here on boat or in general as refugee. We that spent money following the right channel (s) either studying or working visa(s) or even Skill migration are well screened before granted visa(s). Let's take the Melbourne recent terrorist case as an example, the guy came here when he was young, so as he not well integrated into the society? So the problem is not how long you are here to integrate but the willingness to integrate into the society, and most people who came here freely and hooked up public funds on arrival seems to be those who never appreciate what this beloved Country did for them and not we that contributed to the growth and development of the Country. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dredg97 Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 (edited) Staying on PR rather than getting citizenship has several disadvantages. Do you want to study at university? From next year, as per new budget announced in May, permanent residents will pay as much as international students (i.e.$35-40K rather than $5-10K per year). Think about those families being here on PR for 1 year with 16-17 yo waiting to go to university. If the Bill will pass, they have to wait up to 3 years before having their children enrolled at university. It's true you can stay indefinitely, but things can change in the future. At the end of the day, you are still on a visa and what you are entitled to today may not be there tomorrow. Do you have to leave the country extensively for work? What if your parents in your country of origin get sick and require you to come back for a certain period of time? You might not be able to qualify for your next RRV. Edited June 23, 2017 by dredg97 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts