*BREAKING* Conditional Permanent Residency has ended

[simpsol22]

Conditional Permanent Residency (Condition 51) has ended. I believe the statement of on or after April 18, 2017 refers to if you land now and it still states it on your COPR...it does not apply. The removal of Condition 51 applies to all!

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/department/media/notices/2017-04-28.asp

 

[simpsol22]

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1381093338603727&id=656576637722071

Here is a live feed of the announcement

 

[browning911]

Someone in the 2016 Inland applications thread mentioned that when they landed the conditional status was not on their document.

Thanks for sharing.

 

[rcraig33hb]

good news! Thanks for sharing

 

[Ponga]

Good news for some, I suppose, but this is not what the Liberals really promised, by saying that they would be granting immediate PR to spouses and partners, eliminating the 2 year wait.

But...that's politics I suppose.

 

[simpsol22]

Good news for some, I suppose, but this is not what the Liberals really promised, by saying that they would be granting immediate PR to spouses and partners, eliminating the 2 year wait.

But...that's politics I suppose.

Seems like that was the quote... but that when you would read the articles or listened to the meetings....it was about the conditonal pr. At least wait times are coming down for most spouses.

 

[mmahedihasan]

These conditional residency was a dumb idea on first place

 

[simpsol22]

Someone in the 2016 Inland applications thread mentioned that when they landed the conditional status was not on their document.

Thanks for sharing.

It never did seem consistent. I've seen several land that should have had it based on rules and didnt.

 

[simpsol22]

They also just released the official bulletin that has more details
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/bulletins/2017/ob640.asp

 

[ScottishPolish]

Just a question - yes it seems like it was a dumb idea, however I if they put in place to cut down on MOC...then it wasn't a dumb idea. For those of us who have genuine relationships we shouldn't care if a requirement is 2 years of living together. For those who were just marrying to get someone in the country, then yes, its was valuable. Unless they are getting better and better at identifying those? I hope so...

 

[Aquakitty]

Cool, though I have mixed feelings about it. I can see both sides of the issue here.

But, my spouse is "released" a couple months early, not that it matters.

 

[spousalsponsee]

Good news for some, I suppose, but this is not what the Liberals really promised, by saying that they would be granting immediate PR to spouses and partners, eliminating the 2 year wait.

But...that's politics I suppose.

Strange to complain when they've done exactly what they promised?

 

[mikeymyke]

I personally thought Condition 51 was a good idea, it's too bad it had to come to this. After there's a spike in complaints about spouses ditching their sponsors, they might decide to go back to it again.

 

[Ponga]

Strange to complain when they've done exactly what they promised?

Epic FAIL on your part there skippy.

The Liberals promised to: "Grant immediate PR to spouses. eliminating the two year waiting period"...do you see the dichotomy in that statement?!

Even those that HAD Condition' 51 had immediate PR when they landed as a PR. What's `immediate' about removing Condition 51 FFS ?!

 

[chilkootcee]

Just a question - yes it seems like it was a dumb idea, however I if they put in place to cut down on MOC...then it wasn't a dumb idea. For those of us who have genuine relationships we shouldn't care if a requirement is 2 years of living together. For those who were just marrying to get someone in the country, then yes, its was valuable. Unless they are getting better and better at identifying those? I hope so...

Even with this condition, nothing changed with respect to following up on marriage fraud....and it can hurt genuine relationships. I do humanitarian contract work overseas and because of this condition, I am not able to take on work during the 2 year period because it is impossible for my husband (who is Syrian) to move to where I am working. When I spoke to the immigration officer upon his landing about this, he said short term contracts should be no problem (i.e. spending time away for short periods of time) but the reality of it is, the condition wording is very clear...and therefore there is huge discretion in the hands of immigration.

We applied outland and are in the process of moving back to Canada (finishing up contract here) and as everyone knows, it is not easy for our spouses to find work - especially if they are looking from outside Canada....so our ability to earn an income to bolster our finances is important and impacted by this condition.

This is just a small reason why it was not a great thing to implement in the first place...more importantly it may cause those who are in abusive relationships to feel they cannot help themselves (yes I'm aware of stuff that CIC has posted on this...http://ccrweb.ca/files/cprfrontlineen.pdf) but many people would find it difficult to present a case, not being familiar with the country and being fearful that they don't have enough "evidence"...

http://ccrweb.ca/en/conditional-permanent-residence

Anyways, thankfully it has been repealed...but it would sure be great if those of us still under it can have it removed as well.

C.