☀️ JOIN SPN MOBILE
Forums
New posts
Guru Granth Sahib
Composition, Arrangement & Layout
ਜਪੁ | Jup
ਸੋ ਦਰੁ | So Dar
ਸੋਹਿਲਾ | Sohilaa
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਿਰੀਰਾਗੁ | Raag Siree-Raag
Gurbani (14-53)
Ashtpadiyan (53-71)
Gurbani (71-74)
Pahre (74-78)
Chhant (78-81)
Vanjara (81-82)
Vaar Siri Raag (83-91)
Bhagat Bani (91-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਝ | Raag Maajh
Gurbani (94-109)
Ashtpadi (109)
Ashtpadiyan (110-129)
Ashtpadi (129-130)
Ashtpadiyan (130-133)
Bara Maha (133-136)
Din Raen (136-137)
Vaar Maajh Ki (137-150)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗਉੜੀ | Raag Gauree
Gurbani (151-185)
Quartets/Couplets (185-220)
Ashtpadiyan (220-234)
Karhalei (234-235)
Ashtpadiyan (235-242)
Chhant (242-249)
Baavan Akhari (250-262)
Sukhmani (262-296)
Thittee (296-300)
Gauree kii Vaar (300-323)
Gurbani (323-330)
Ashtpadiyan (330-340)
Baavan Akhari (340-343)
Thintteen (343-344)
Vaar Kabir (344-345)
Bhagat Bani (345-346)
ਰਾਗੁ ਆਸਾ | Raag Aasaa
Gurbani (347-348)
Chaupaday (348-364)
Panchpadde (364-365)
Kaafee (365-409)
Aasaavaree (409-411)
Ashtpadiyan (411-432)
Patee (432-435)
Chhant (435-462)
Vaar Aasaa (462-475)
Bhagat Bani (475-488)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੂਜਰੀ | Raag Goojaree
Gurbani (489-503)
Ashtpadiyan (503-508)
Vaar Gujari (508-517)
Vaar Gujari (517-526)
ਰਾਗੁ ਦੇਵਗੰਧਾਰੀ | Raag Dayv-Gandhaaree
Gurbani (527-536)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਹਾਗੜਾ | Raag Bihaagraa
Gurbani (537-556)
Chhant (538-548)
Vaar Bihaagraa (548-556)
ਰਾਗੁ ਵਡਹੰਸ | Raag Wadhans
Gurbani (557-564)
Ashtpadiyan (564-565)
Chhant (565-575)
Ghoriaan (575-578)
Alaahaniiaa (578-582)
Vaar Wadhans (582-594)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੋਰਠਿ | Raag Sorath
Gurbani (595-634)
Asatpadhiya (634-642)
Vaar Sorath (642-659)
ਰਾਗੁ ਧਨਾਸਰੀ | Raag Dhanasaree
Gurbani (660-685)
Astpadhiya (685-687)
Chhant (687-691)
Bhagat Bani (691-695)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਤਸਰੀ | Raag Jaitsree
Gurbani (696-703)
Chhant (703-705)
Vaar Jaitsaree (705-710)
Bhagat Bani (710)
ਰਾਗੁ ਟੋਡੀ | Raag Todee
ਰਾਗੁ ਬੈਰਾੜੀ | Raag Bairaaree
ਰਾਗੁ ਤਿਲੰਗ | Raag Tilang
Gurbani (721-727)
Bhagat Bani (727)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੂਹੀ | Raag Suhi
Gurbani (728-750)
Ashtpadiyan (750-761)
Kaafee (761-762)
Suchajee (762)
Gunvantee (763)
Chhant (763-785)
Vaar Soohee (785-792)
Bhagat Bani (792-794)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਲਾਵਲੁ | Raag Bilaaval
Gurbani (795-831)
Ashtpadiyan (831-838)
Thitteen (838-840)
Vaar Sat (841-843)
Chhant (843-848)
Vaar Bilaaval (849-855)
Bhagat Bani (855-858)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੋਂਡ | Raag Gond
Gurbani (859-869)
Ashtpadiyan (869)
Bhagat Bani (870-875)
ਰਾਗੁ ਰਾਮਕਲੀ | Raag Ramkalee
Ashtpadiyan (902-916)
Gurbani (876-902)
Anand (917-922)
Sadd (923-924)
Chhant (924-929)
Dakhnee (929-938)
Sidh Gosat (938-946)
Vaar Ramkalee (947-968)
ਰਾਗੁ ਨਟ ਨਾਰਾਇਨ | Raag Nat Narayan
Gurbani (975-980)
Ashtpadiyan (980-983)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਲੀ ਗਉੜਾ | Raag Maalee Gauraa
Gurbani (984-988)
Bhagat Bani (988)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਰੂ | Raag Maaroo
Gurbani (889-1008)
Ashtpadiyan (1008-1014)
Kaafee (1014-1016)
Ashtpadiyan (1016-1019)
Anjulian (1019-1020)
Solhe (1020-1033)
Dakhni (1033-1043)
ਰਾਗੁ ਤੁਖਾਰੀ | Raag Tukhaari
Bara Maha (1107-1110)
Chhant (1110-1117)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕੇਦਾਰਾ | Raag Kedara
Gurbani (1118-1123)
Bhagat Bani (1123-1124)
ਰਾਗੁ ਭੈਰਉ | Raag Bhairo
Gurbani (1125-1152)
Partaal (1153)
Ashtpadiyan (1153-1167)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਸੰਤੁ | Raag Basant
Gurbani (1168-1187)
Ashtpadiyan (1187-1193)
Vaar Basant (1193-1196)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਾਰਗ | Raag Saarag
Gurbani (1197-1200)
Partaal (1200-1231)
Ashtpadiyan (1232-1236)
Chhant (1236-1237)
Vaar Saarang (1237-1253)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਲਾਰ | Raag Malaar
Gurbani (1254-1293)
Partaal (1265-1273)
Ashtpadiyan (1273-1278)
Chhant (1278)
Vaar Malaar (1278-91)
Bhagat Bani (1292-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਾਨੜਾ | Raag Kaanraa
Gurbani (1294-96)
Partaal (1296-1318)
Ashtpadiyan (1308-1312)
Chhant (1312)
Vaar Kaanraa
Bhagat Bani (1318)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਲਿਆਨ | Raag Kalyaan
Gurbani (1319-23)
Ashtpadiyan (1323-26)
ਰਾਗੁ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਤੀ | Raag Prabhaatee
Gurbani (1327-1341)
Ashtpadiyan (1342-51)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਜਾਵੰਤੀ | Raag Jaijaiwanti
Gurbani (1352-53)
Salok | Gatha | Phunahe | Chaubole | Swayiye
Sehskritee Mahala 1
Sehskritee Mahala 5
Gaathaa Mahala 5
Phunhay Mahala 5
Chaubolae Mahala 5
Shaloks Bhagat Kabir
Shaloks Sheikh Farid
Swaiyyae Mahala 5
Swaiyyae in Praise of Gurus
Shaloks in Addition To Vaars
Shalok Ninth Mehl
Mundavanee Mehl 5
ਰਾਗ ਮਾਲਾ, Raag Maalaa
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Videos
New media
New comments
Library
Latest reviews
Donate
Log in
Register
What's new
New posts
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
Sign up
Log in
Discussions
Hard Talk
Interviews
Sponsors Must Cover Welfare Costs: SCOC
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Archived_Member16" data-source="post: 147705" data-attributes="member: 884"><p>June 10, 2011</p><p></p><p><span style="color: Navy"><strong><span style="font-size: 18px">Sponsors must cover welfare costs: SCOC</span></strong></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy"><em><strong>Governments must not forgive debts in hardship cases, ruling confirms</strong></em></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">CBC NewsPosted: Jun 10, 2011 9:30 PM ET</span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">Last Updated: Jun 10, 2011 9:46 PM ET </span></p><p><span style="color: Navy"><img src="http://www.timescolonist.com/1090862.bin?size=620x400" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy">The Supreme Court of Canada has upheld the right of federal and provincial governments to collect social-service payments from the sponsors of immigrants. (Adrian Wyld/Canadian Press) </span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">The Supreme Court of Canada has upheld the right of federal and provincial governments to collect social-service payments from the sponsors of immigrants, even in cases involving abuse or abandonment.</span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">The landmark ruling involves the cases of eight Ontario immigrant families that sponsored relatives from abroad who later went on social assistance.</span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">Under federal immigration law, the sponsors agreed to repay any welfare payments that the new arrivals may have incurred after they got to Canada.</span></p><p><span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">'The risk of a rogue relative properly lies on the sponsor, not the taxpayer.'—Justice Ian Binnie</span></p><p><span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">The high court, in a unanimous 9-0 ruling, overturned an earlier Ontario Court of Appeal ruling in favour of the sponsors, all of whom had claimed various hardships. The individual cases involved repayments of $10,000 to $94,000 in social assistance to the Ontario government.</span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">"The risk of a rogue relative properly lies on the sponsor, not the taxpayer," Justice Ian Binnie wrote Friday on behalf of the court.</span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">The court said governments have limited discretion to delay collection of defaulted payments, but not to totally forgive the debts.</span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">"The discretion enables the governments to delay enforcement action having regard to the sponsor's circumstances and to enter into agreements respecting terms of payment, but not simply to forgive the statutory debt," wrote Binnie.</span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">The government is obliged to notify a sponsor that they are in default, he wrote, and allow them an opportunity to explain their financial circumstances.</span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">From job loss to abandonment</span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">In the eight individual cases before the court, the reasons the sponsors gave for not paying included leaving an abusive relationship and losing their own job. In a couple of cases, the fiancee or spouse of the sponsor simply took off after arriving in Canada and began collecting social services.</span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">The sponsors filed motions in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in 2008 to defer or avoid entirely making payments back to the provincial government.</span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">The court rejected their argument, saying that sponsorship undertakings are in fact contracts, and that the sponsors understood they were assuming financial liability for their family members.</span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">In 2009, the Ontario Court of Appeal reversed that ruling and said governments may exercise a case-by-case discretion not to collect. It noted that the law states money "may" be recovered.</span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">The provincial appeal court ruled the government owes sponsors a duty of procedural fairness, entitling them to a process in which they can explain their circumstances.</span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">The Supreme Court ruled that standard of procedural fairness was met in each of the eight cases.</span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">"We are dealing here with ordinary debt, not a government benefits or licensing program," said Binnie.</span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">Weighing the burden</span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">He noted that Parliament has become "increasingly concerned" about the financial burden that is being shifted to the public treasury to financially support sponsored relatives in immigrant families.</span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">"Family reunification is based on the essential condition that in exchange for admission to this country the needs of the immigrant will be looked after by the sponsor, not by the public purse," Binnie wrote.</span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">"Sponsors undertake these obligations in writing. They understand or ought to understand from the outset that default may have serious financial consequences for them."</span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">Binnie said the government does have some discretion when it comes to considering the specific hardships of sponsors.</span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">"It would hardly promote 'successful integration' to require individuals to remain in abusive relationships. Nor would the attempted enforcement of a debt against individuals without means to pay further the interest of 'Canadian society'," he wrote.</span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">Binnie said the government should notify sponsors as soon as their relatives begin receiving welfare payments so debts don't build up without them knowing. But ultimately the sponsors are responsible for keeping their relatives from becoming dependent on social programs.</span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">Friday's ruling does not affect refugee claimants, which are treated separately from family reunification applicants.</span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy">Of the two million permanent residents that were admitted to Canada between 1997 and 2007, about 615,000, or 27 per cent, were under the family class.</span></p><p> <span style="color: Navy"></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy"><strong>source:</strong> <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2011/06/10/scoc-immigrants-ruling.html" target="_blank">http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2011/06/10/scoc-immigrants-ruling.html</a></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy"><strong> </strong></span></p><p><span style="color: Navy"><strong><span style="color: Red">Link</span> </strong>: Supreme Court of Canada : <a href="http://scc.lexum.org/en/2011/2011scc30/2011scc30.html" target="_blank">http://scc.lexum.org/en/2011/2011scc30/2011scc30.html</a></span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Archived_Member16, post: 147705, member: 884"] June 10, 2011 [COLOR="Navy"][B][SIZE="5"]Sponsors must cover welfare costs: SCOC[/SIZE][/B] [I][B]Governments must not forgive debts in hardship cases, ruling confirms[/B][/I] CBC NewsPosted: Jun 10, 2011 9:30 PM ET Last Updated: Jun 10, 2011 9:46 PM ET [IMG]http://www.timescolonist.com/1090862.bin?size=620x400[/IMG] The Supreme Court of Canada has upheld the right of federal and provincial governments to collect social-service payments from the sponsors of immigrants. (Adrian Wyld/Canadian Press) The Supreme Court of Canada has upheld the right of federal and provincial governments to collect social-service payments from the sponsors of immigrants, even in cases involving abuse or abandonment. The landmark ruling involves the cases of eight Ontario immigrant families that sponsored relatives from abroad who later went on social assistance. Under federal immigration law, the sponsors agreed to repay any welfare payments that the new arrivals may have incurred after they got to Canada. 'The risk of a rogue relative properly lies on the sponsor, not the taxpayer.'—Justice Ian Binnie The high court, in a unanimous 9-0 ruling, overturned an earlier Ontario Court of Appeal ruling in favour of the sponsors, all of whom had claimed various hardships. The individual cases involved repayments of $10,000 to $94,000 in social assistance to the Ontario government. "The risk of a rogue relative properly lies on the sponsor, not the taxpayer," Justice Ian Binnie wrote Friday on behalf of the court. The court said governments have limited discretion to delay collection of defaulted payments, but not to totally forgive the debts. "The discretion enables the governments to delay enforcement action having regard to the sponsor's circumstances and to enter into agreements respecting terms of payment, but not simply to forgive the statutory debt," wrote Binnie. The government is obliged to notify a sponsor that they are in default, he wrote, and allow them an opportunity to explain their financial circumstances. From job loss to abandonment In the eight individual cases before the court, the reasons the sponsors gave for not paying included leaving an abusive relationship and losing their own job. In a couple of cases, the fiancee or spouse of the sponsor simply took off after arriving in Canada and began collecting social services. The sponsors filed motions in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in 2008 to defer or avoid entirely making payments back to the provincial government. The court rejected their argument, saying that sponsorship undertakings are in fact contracts, and that the sponsors understood they were assuming financial liability for their family members. In 2009, the Ontario Court of Appeal reversed that ruling and said governments may exercise a case-by-case discretion not to collect. It noted that the law states money "may" be recovered. The provincial appeal court ruled the government owes sponsors a duty of procedural fairness, entitling them to a process in which they can explain their circumstances. The Supreme Court ruled that standard of procedural fairness was met in each of the eight cases. "We are dealing here with ordinary debt, not a government benefits or licensing program," said Binnie. Weighing the burden He noted that Parliament has become "increasingly concerned" about the financial burden that is being shifted to the public treasury to financially support sponsored relatives in immigrant families. "Family reunification is based on the essential condition that in exchange for admission to this country the needs of the immigrant will be looked after by the sponsor, not by the public purse," Binnie wrote. "Sponsors undertake these obligations in writing. They understand or ought to understand from the outset that default may have serious financial consequences for them." Binnie said the government does have some discretion when it comes to considering the specific hardships of sponsors. "It would hardly promote 'successful integration' to require individuals to remain in abusive relationships. Nor would the attempted enforcement of a debt against individuals without means to pay further the interest of 'Canadian society'," he wrote. Binnie said the government should notify sponsors as soon as their relatives begin receiving welfare payments so debts don't build up without them knowing. But ultimately the sponsors are responsible for keeping their relatives from becoming dependent on social programs. Friday's ruling does not affect refugee claimants, which are treated separately from family reunification applicants. Of the two million permanent residents that were admitted to Canada between 1997 and 2007, about 615,000, or 27 per cent, were under the family class. [B]source:[/B] [url]http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2011/06/10/scoc-immigrants-ruling.html[/url] [B] [COLOR="Red"]Link[/COLOR] [/B]: Supreme Court of Canada : [url]http://scc.lexum.org/en/2011/2011scc30/2011scc30.html[/url][/COLOR] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Discussions
Hard Talk
Interviews
Sponsors Must Cover Welfare Costs: SCOC
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top