The proposed changes to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act give the government increased power over immigration documents in cases where public health or national security are at risk.
Specifically it allows officials to cancel, suspend or change immigration documents immediately, pause the acceptance of new applications and cancel applications already in process if deemed in the public interest.
Asylum claims would also have to be made within a year of entering the country, including for students and temporary residents.
The immigration changes would also require irregular border crossers, people who enter Canada between official ports of entry, to make an asylum claim within 14 days of arriving in Canada.
Not the kind of legislation I would want a Tory government to inherit (and hence “strengthen”).
The changes would also speed up voluntary departures by making removal orders effective the same day an asylum claim is withdrawn.
And this kind of shit is straight up alarming.
Basically, at a time when the US is going full on fascist with respect to immigrants, I want Canada moving confidently in the opposite direction.
Fair point, while I wouldn’t like a Conservative government to expand on it, I read those sections but I don’t consider it beyond the pale. My impression was it is more about removing slack in the process. There are many good arguments to maintain that slack, but that to me is a matter of debate, not a certain slide into fascism.
I’m not a fan of the bill, why it’s the first thing the House gets to is concerning, but I’m trying to keep a level head while analyzing the bill and not get into an immediate frenzy.
Not the kind of legislation I would want a Tory government to inherit (and hence “strengthen”).
And this kind of shit is straight up alarming.
Basically, at a time when the US is going full on fascist with respect to immigrants, I want Canada moving confidently in the opposite direction.
Fair point, while I wouldn’t like a Conservative government to expand on it, I read those sections but I don’t consider it beyond the pale. My impression was it is more about removing slack in the process. There are many good arguments to maintain that slack, but that to me is a matter of debate, not a certain slide into fascism.
I’m not a fan of the bill, why it’s the first thing the House gets to is concerning, but I’m trying to keep a level head while analyzing the bill and not get into an immediate frenzy.