{"id":186937,"date":"2018-10-25T04:56:30","date_gmt":"2018-10-25T08:56:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=186937"},"modified":"2018-10-25T04:56:30","modified_gmt":"2018-10-25T08:56:30","slug":"new-pot-impaired-driving-penalties-bar-newcomers-canada","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2018\/10\/25\/new-pot-impaired-driving-penalties-bar-newcomers-canada\/","title":{"rendered":"New pot, impaired driving penalties could bar newcomers from Canada"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a>
\u201cThe impact of these new penalties on permanent and temporary residents could be significant,\u201d the Immigration Department advises in a statement. (File Photo Wikimedia commons, CC BY 2.5<\/a>)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

OTTAWA \u2014 The federal government is warning newcomers that stiffer impaired driving and cannabis-related penalties could lead to their removal from\u00a0Canada.<\/p>\n

The measures are part of the sweeping package of changes taking place as\u00a0Canada\u00a0becomes the first G7 country to legalize recreational cannabis use.<\/p>\n

The Cannabis Act includes penalties of up to 14 years in prison for illegal production or distribution of cannabis and for taking it across the Canadian border. The same maximum penalty applies for giving or selling marijuana to someone under 18 or using a young person to commit a cannabis-related offence.<\/p>\n

On Dec. 18, new impaired driving penalties take effect, and the maximum penalties for most of these offences will increase to 10 years from five. It means they will fall under the definition of serious crimes for immigration determination purposes.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe impact of these new penalties on permanent and temporary residents could be significant,\u201d the Immigration Department advises in a statement.<\/p>\n

People who work with immigrants and refugees agree that it will make things tougher for newcomers.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe significance of this change from an immigration point of view is very high,\u201d said immigration lawyer Lorne Waldman.<\/p>\n

Immigration officials could rule that a person is inadmissible to\u00a0Canada\u00a0for \u201cserious criminality,\u201d even if an impaired driving offence took place in another country.<\/p>\n

Under federal immigration law, a permanent resident or foreign national can be deemed inadmissible if they have been convicted of a Canadian offence punishable by up to 10 years in prison, or of an offence for which they have actually been sentenced to more than six months behind bars.<\/p>\n

In addition, the same rule applies to those who have committed an offence in another country that, if committed in\u00a0Canada, would carry a penalty of up to 10 years.<\/p>\n

As a result, the department says, the new cannabis and impaired-driving provisions could mean:<\/p>\n

\u2014 Permanent residents might lose their status and have to leave the country;<\/p>\n

\u2014 Temporary residents \u2014 including visitors, international students and foreign workers \u2014 may not be able to enter or stay in\u00a0Canada;<\/p>\n

\u2014 Refugee claimants may be ineligible to have their claim referred for a refugee hearing.<\/p>\n

Moreover, appeal rights for permanent residents and foreign nationals, including sponsored members of the family class, could also be affected, the department says.<\/p>\n

Under the changes, permanent residents convicted of impaired driving in\u00a0Canada\u00a0will have to worry about the prospect of deportation proceedings, Waldman said.<\/p>\n

Impaired driving is an extremely serious matter given the danger it poses, Waldman said. \u201cBut do I think people should be barred from\u00a0Canada, possibly for life, over one impaired driving (offence)? No.\u201d<\/p>\n

He cautioned that it remains to be seen how strictly Canadian authorities will apply the removal provision.<\/p>\n

Although criminality could always pose a barrier to entering\u00a0Canada, a serious offence \u201cmakes your pathway into\u00a0Canada\u00a0much more complicated,\u201d Waldman said.<\/p>\n

\u201cBecause you have to go through a whole series of extra steps and the requirements to get an exemption \u2014 a permit to allow you to come in \u2014 are more stringent.\u201d<\/p>\n

Even now,\u00a0Canada\u00a0doesn’t meet its international obligations with respect to refugees, because\u00a0Canada’s exclusions on the basis of serious criminality are much broader than the exclusions in the global refugee convention, said Janet Dench, executive director of the Canadian Council for Refugees.<\/p>\n

She said that adding another group of people who will be denied access to a refugee hearing on the basis of serious criminality means\u00a0Canada\u00a0is \u201cincreasing the risk that we’re going to send someone back to face persecution in violation of our international obligations.\u201d<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

OTTAWA \u2014 The federal government is warning newcomers that stiffer impaired driving and cannabis-related penalties could lead to their removal …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":44,"featured_media":186938,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[18,16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-186937","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-news-ca","category-news","mauthors-jim-bronskill","mauthors-the-canadian-press"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/186937","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/44"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=186937"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/186937\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/186938"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=186937"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=186937"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=186937"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}