The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1221  
Old 01-11-2020, 05:07 AM
Purrs's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by wartenberg7 View Post
Because, in my naivity, I thought british people, different from other people in the world, could have easier access to Canada as Canada is a Commonwealth country (the other way around as well, of course) and they have a common Head of State.
No that's not the case anymore, It once was but that changed in the 1960s under Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau (Justin's father). That policy was changed because it was considered to be unfair to people from other countries. (Canada used to favour British people, then northern Europeans, then southern and eastern Europeans. People from Asia, the Middle East and Africa were generally not permitted to come here.
__________________

  #1222  
Old 01-11-2020, 05:11 AM
Muhler's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 13,669
So Canada cannot by law grant residence permit to H&M because they don't qualify?
It's gonna be interesting to see how the Canadian government is going to get around that one, if H&M insists on staying.

So that means if say Bill Gates wanted to settle in Canada, but not become a Canadian citizen, nor to work there, nor open a business there, then he would get a no? Even though he could more than pay for his own upkeep not to mention the taxes he would pay... Simply because he doesn't qualify for the specific rules?
Permit me to think the rules would be bend in his case.

The rules can always be "interpreted" in the desired direction.

(Salman Rushdie BTW was a most unwelcome guest to DK those couple of times he has come visiting. It was expensive to protect him and it potentially could ruin the export of cheese to Iran.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Purrs View Post
The process here is to remain in Canada legally, you apply to be a permanent resident (that's the legal term) first. Citizenship follows after a number of years of permanent residency and is not required to remain in Canada (it is for voting). However to stay in Canada more than 5 months consecutively, you HAVE to be a legal permanent resident. Neither of them qualify to apply to be permanent residents. You can ONLY live here permanently IF you have permanent residency or what once called "landed status" or a "landed immigrant" They can't live here permanently. The only ways currently to get permanent residency are a spousal sponsorship by a Canadian citizen (Meghan is an American) or being a refugee who's deemed to be legitimate (there's a process for this) or a family sponsorship from relatives who are Canadian citizens (there are long waiting lists). My son-in-law was a spousal sponsorship (he got his permanent residency after over 3 years of waiting - you are allowed to stay while it is process. He doesn't have his citizenship yet but will be eligible to apply soon. If my daughter's application for spousal sponsorship had been denied (they had to prove their marriage was legitimate and not for convenience), he would had to leave or be deported.


The other ways of staying here temporarily are are a work permit (which Meghan had previously, a lot of TV productions are filmed here and that is encouraged because it brings jobs to Canada. When the job ends, the work permit expires.) The other exceptions are a student visa for studying at a registered institution (which my son-in-law came here) or a specialized permit for very specialized technical/high demand job frequently used in the oil industry. Canada no longer allows independent immigrants based on the old points system or business class immigration.


Harry and Meghan don't qualify for any of the paths to permanent residency. They can't live here permanently. My daughter worked for an immigration lawyer and helped with the applications in addition to sponsoring her husband so I do know quite a bit about the process.


Semi permanent might be possible if they leave every 5 months (they can't stay longer than 5 months). I don't know how long the period has to be but they cannot stay over 5 months at a time. However, there are restrictions on visitors - they can't make money here unless they get a work permit (possible


I happen to believe that NO ONE including royalty is entitled to flout our laws. The majority of Canadians are immigrants or descendants of immigrants who followed the rules and laws to get here. Yes, Harry is the grandson of our symbolic head of state, the Queen. That family relationship doesn't give him a free pass to bypass the laws the rest of us must follow. He is not the Queen (who would never suggest such a thing and does not actively personally intervene and try to bend our laws. If she did, she would not remain our symbolic head of state.)


Your government made its own choice with Salman Rushdie, you cannot extrapolate that to what my government would do.


I doubt our government would 'kick them' out but I'm sure they would be told that they have to follow the rules like everyone else. They can move to the US as Meghan is an American citizen who could sponsor him although opens up a big can of worms because he'd be subject to American taxes (most countries tax by residency, the US is about the only one who taxes by citizenship - I have one American parent who immigrated here when they married.)


As for as paying for personal security, Harry has some money he inherited and his father has considerably more. Is it enough? I don't know although probably not. I personally think that the personal security costs is one of the reasons that their plan is not well considered or realistic. The rumours about them wanting to make money with commercial endeavors are partially based on the realization their life as presently living including the need for security will be very expensive.
__________________

  #1223  
Old 01-11-2020, 05:15 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,900
It would hardly look good if rules were betn for harry. Meghan has been applying for british Citizenship when she moved to the UK and ti was said she would make the normal application and it would not be fast tracked or tweaked.
  #1224  
Old 01-11-2020, 05:15 AM
Purrs's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helen.CH View Post
I did not read all the posts concerning the visa question, but how did Meghan live in Canada when being an actress. Maybe it is possible because she is Us and Harry is now married to her? By the way I don't think the Canadian Gov, will hesitate to wellcome them at any status if knly they choose to live there ��
She had a work permit because she worked on Suits, a TV series filmed in Canada. Our government encourages film/TV production will issue work permits for that because it brings more jobs for Canadians (crew and other cast). Therefore our government issues work permits for people employed by the TV shows and movies filmed in Canada. (Visitors are not allowed to earn money here.) She could stay here only as long as that job existed (not permanently). It had absolutely nothing to do with her being American.

If you read the other messages, you see that they are welcome to visit up to 5 consecutive months at a time but neither of them qualify for permanent residency which is required if you wish to live here permanently.
  #1225  
Old 01-11-2020, 05:22 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
Posts: 639
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tarlita View Post
I am surprised the family are supposed to be discussing this by telephone. I would have expected the family to sit down with the Queen and at least nut out a blue print that would suit all parties. The Queen, Charles, William and Harry all sitting around a conference table together.

I am also disappointed that Harry and Meghan have not given their roles as Duke and Duchess more time to develope despite the nasty press and bullying.
Even though Charles is wanting a slimmed down version of working royals that could still be some time away.
But I guess there is only so much bullying one can take. And that is very sad that it happens at all in this era of antibullying campaigns.
Harry knows that the queen stays at Sandringham until February ( the date of her fathers death and she became queen) his father is in Scotland in early January.
He brought out the statement and the website when they were away, so he knew what he was doing. If he had kept it at the statement it might have been better, the website made it clear what the intentions were also the arrogance of stating what they wanted from all this.
They could have came home at new year and spent time with the family at sandringham and thrashed out what was to happen next. They chose to leave their son in Canada, came home, and issued the statement,
I know the argument is that there hand was forced by the newspaper leak, but they were already here ,with Archie still in Canada, so there is something about that ,that just does not tally.
That leak was quite convenient for them, it meant they had to come out with their plans.....
  #1226  
Old 01-11-2020, 05:24 AM
Muhler's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 13,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
It would hardly look good if rules were betn for harry. Meghan has been applying for british Citizenship when she moved to the UK and ti was said she would make the normal application and it would not be fast tracked or tweaked.
The difference is that it was expected that Meghan would be around for decades to come - so the BRF could easily allow itself to conform to formalities. The end result was guaranteed anyway. And there was no way Meghan would have been kicked out.

But do you think Meghan would have been turned away and not allowed to marry Harry (in the UK) just because some rules would have been in the way?
Or do you think those rules would have been "interpreted?"
  #1227  
Old 01-11-2020, 05:41 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 6,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purrs View Post
She had a work permit because she worked on Suits, a TV series filmed in Canada. Our government encourages film/TV production will issue work permits for that because it brings more jobs for Canadians (crew and other cast). Therefore our government issues work permits for people employed by the TV shows and movies filmed in Canada. (Visitors are not allowed to earn money here.) She could stay here only as long as that job existed (not permanently). It had absolutely nothing to do with her being American.

If you read the other messages, you see that they are welcome to visit up to 5 consecutive months at a time but neither of them qualify for permanent residency which is required if you wish to live here permanently.



I haven't been following the entire thread, but, as I said a couple of pages before, Harry could stay indefinitely in Canada on a diplomatic visa if the UK made him an accredited diplomat in that country. However, he couldn't work (outside whatever diplomatic job he had) and much less run a business that would guarantee him "financial independence".
  #1228  
Old 01-11-2020, 05:44 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
Posts: 639
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
The more I think about it, my conclusion is that Meghan’s desire to live in North America could have been accommodated if the couple had approached Prince Charles ( the designated future head of the Commonwealth) to discuss with the relevant parties ( the UK Foreign Office, the.Canadian government, etc.) the possibility of setting up a new Commonwealth agency in Canada covering the entire Western Hemisphere including the Caribbean. Harry could have been appointed to that agency then in an official capacity as a British representative with costs paid under the FCO budget.

The problem seems to be that the couple was not satisfied simply with living overseas. They wanted “ financial independence” ( in terms) , which means actually the possibility to pursue their. “ progressive” agenda independently and monetize the Sussex brand. And they wanted to be outside the chain of command and not under Prince Charies or the Cambridges. That is where things get tricky and, perhaps, unworkable.
An excellent summary of the situation.
Choosing to reduce the royal duties in itself is not the problem, but they claim to want to continue with the charity projects. So lets ask ourselves what is the difference between doing that under the royal fold and doing it the way they want.?
  #1229  
Old 01-11-2020, 05:47 AM
Elenath's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Nuth, Netherlands
Posts: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
Its much bigger than a storm in a teacup. and Harrison is Arche's second name..
No, people are once again making it much bigger than it needs to be and all based on rumors in papers. None what is currently reported are facts. H&M at this point prefer to be part time royals and would like to focus a large part of their time on their own foundation. Far too many people here are acting like they are completely quitting the BRF and moving to Canada and getting a job somewhere at a local McD.

People here are judging H&M based on the notion that they were the ones who were the first to publish a statement, BP the issued a statement saying talks were in early stages and the BBC said BP knew nothing. After that it was said they knew a little and it was just announced, then they knew during H&M 6 week break, and then it was months ago.. So opinion here depends on whether BP and CH knew depends on your liking of H&M mostly since there are no facts.

H&M are judged for they shoddy statement and how it's a stab in the back of her majesty and Prince Charles. But BP statement is equally shoddy. And whether it's a stab in the back depends mostly on.. well see above.

And yes I know Harrison is Archie's middle name. But calling him that is like calling prince Harry David, Or calling Prince William Arthur. It's not his name.
  #1230  
Old 01-11-2020, 05:50 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
Posts: 639
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
I haven't been following the entire thread, but, as I said a couple of pages before, Harry could stay indefinitely in Canada on a diplomatic visa if the UK made him an accredited diplomat in that country. However, he couldn't work (outside whatever diplomatic job he had) and much less run a business that would guarantee him "financial independence".
"financial independence".

That is the key phrase, this is where the conflict lies.

There is nothing to stop them doing less royal events and more charitable work.
They are very good at it.
  #1231  
Old 01-11-2020, 05:59 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 705
Immigration is a very sensitive political topic everywhere at the moment. I can't believe that Trudeau will risk a row by making such a high profile exception to the rules.


We've been told that Meghan isn't even being fast-tracked for British citizenship, although she is entitled to live here as the spouse of a British citizen.


Has this just not occurred to Harry and Meghan?! Surely they cannot be that thoughtless?
  #1232  
Old 01-11-2020, 06:02 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Herefordshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,397
Should Harry & Meghan continue to receive an income from the Duchy of Cornwall?

Should 13%
Should not 63%
Don’t know 24%

YouGov Jan 9
  #1233  
Old 01-11-2020, 06:03 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
Posts: 639
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elenath View Post
No, people are once again making it much bigger than it needs to be and all based on rumors in papers. None what is currently reported are facts. H&M at this point prefer to be part time royals and would like to focus a large part of their time on their own foundation. Far too many people here are acting like they are completely quitting the BRF and moving to Canada and getting a job somewhere at a local McD.

People here are judging H&M based on the notion that they were the ones who were the first to publish a statement, BP the issued a statement saying talks were in early stages and the BBC said BP knew nothing. After that it was said they knew a little and it was just announced, then they knew during H&M 6 week break, and then it was months ago.. So opinion here depends on whether BP and CH knew depends on your liking of H&M mostly since there are no facts.


H&M are judged for they shoddy statement and how it's a stab in the back of her majesty and Prince Charles. But BP statement is equally shoddy. And whether it's a stab in the back depends mostly on.. well see above.

And yes I know Harrison is Archie's middle name. But calling him that is like calling prince Harry David, Or calling Prince William Arthur. It's not his name.
THE BRF usually announce things once everything is in place, basically any questions are answered within the statement.
It has been claimed that the family knew he wanted to move away from royal duties, but he had not told them the statement was going out when it did until it was too late to stop it. . That is the difference.

If a statement had been issued by the queen saying they wanted to make changes in their lives and the following steps were going to happen, there would have been a bit of sensation but everything would have been in place.
All questions would have been answered.

It is the unanswered questions that are causing the headlines. Also their assumption on the website of how they saw things going forward,
  #1234  
Old 01-11-2020, 06:06 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,216
Absolutely believe the issue is not their desire to move away, or to continue to represent the Queen or to work for their own foundation. Its the stated aim to be "financially independent" -which could quite potentially cause conflicts on interest- and once again when it comes to H&M, the way it has been done, that is causing issues.

Again, I don't see at all why they had to announce this now, without an agreement from all parties. They can't even say they've given the RF time to sort through it, apparently Harry told Charles on Christmas Eve he definitely wanted to step away. Most people would recognise that over the holiday period is no time to put a plan in place while staff are on holiday etc.

If H&M could have found it in themselves to wait it could have been announced in a joint statement from HM, Charles and Harry with clear answers to these complex issues and, yes of course there would have been major media interest, but the answers to all these speculations would have already been made clear.

On the visa issues etc, is there a way they could stay if they are running their Foundation from there? If the Foundation employs them as CEOs would that count as work/employment? Maybe they have thought this part through and are just going to visit for 5 months at a time?
  #1235  
Old 01-11-2020, 06:10 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 2,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purrs View Post
That is only possible exception I can see. However, I honestly don't think Harry is particularly qualified as a diplomat (although that's for the British government to decide). I assumed Meghan was in the UK on a spousal/fiancee sponsorship program since she was engaged and then soon married to Harry. I'd be surprised if they issued her diplomatic passport when she could be sponsored sinc she was marrying a British citizen.

Harry is the son and Meghan is the daughterin-law of the future king. A couple who has visited foreign countries as representatives of said kingdom. Of course they qualify as diplomats.
  #1236  
Old 01-11-2020, 06:11 AM
Elenath's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Nuth, Netherlands
Posts: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hallo girl View Post
THE BRF usually announce things once everything is in place, basically any questions are answered within the statement.
It has been claimed that the family knew he wanted to move away from royal duties, but he had not told them the statement was going out when it did until it was too late to stop it. . That is the difference.

If a statement had been issued by the queen saying they wanted to make changes in their lives and the following steps were going to happen, there would have been a bit of sensation but everything would have been in place.
All questions would have been answered.

It is the unanswered questions that are causing the headlines. Also their assumption on the website of how they saw things going forward,
I know all of this and that's not my point.
  #1237  
Old 01-11-2020, 06:12 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 6,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucien View Post
Really,the fuzz and nonsense over this nausiating couple is beyond believe!!Sickening lot!

Think about it:



The UK is due to leave the political institutions of the EU on January 31 and then start tense negotiations with Brussels on a new relationship that will have an impact on the country's future for decades possibly. And there are tensions in Northern Ireland and Scotland that have resurfaced with Brexit and have to be dealt with.

Meanwhile, there is an ongoing crisis with Iran in the Middle East where the UK has hundreds of diplomatic and service personnel on the ground. Right now, UK military assets are being deployed to evacuate UK citizens or staff if needed and to protect UK installations and interests (for example, escort ships in the Persian Gulf, etc.).

All of the above (and more) notwithstanding, we are told by the BBC that, at a cabinet meeting at No. 10 Downing Street, ministers had to pause their ordinary business to discuss the future arrangements for Harry and Meghan ! I am sure that, on the other side of the Atlantic, the Canadian government (Trudeau is said to be friends with Meghan BTW) is also being asked to join the discussion.


It is ridiculous and certainly gives ammunition to Republic and other anti-monarchist organizations (I'd assume in Canada too).
  #1238  
Old 01-11-2020, 06:16 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 2,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by tommy100 View Post
Absolutely believe the issue is not their desire to move away, or to continue to represent the Queen or to work for their own foundation. Its the stated aim to be "financially independent" -which could quite potentially cause conflicts on interest- and once again when it comes to H&M, the way it has been done, that is causing issues.

Again, I don't see at all why they had to announce this now, without an agreement from all parties. They can't even say they've given the RF time to sort through it, apparently Harry told Charles on Christmas Eve he definitely wanted to step away. Most people would recognise that over the holiday period is no time to put a plan in place while staff are on holiday etc.

As I understood it, the courtiers around his father asked him to put down his ideas in writing. He refused because he feared leaks. Then he was forced to write it down and it leaked. So he went public with the original ideas (on the website), probably to prevent his ideas from being watered down and changed in the details. As it had happened to Meghan's letter.


Problem that their ideas sound like demands and that the papers made the whole world crazy over what now seem to be an unhappy couple (with Meghan being as she is and Harry supporting her) trying to get rid of all "taxpayer"-arguments and move to Canada or the US while still trying to be helpful to Her Majesty and Charles.


IMHO it was the papers' fault to create such an "abdication"-drama! As it is neither HM nor Charles are enraged but supportive and understanding of H&M's wish, only the details have to be arranged and agreed upon and now there is pressure on them.



Because someone leaked the whole thing to the papers! Only because of that everything happened. And Harry knew it but had to comply.
  #1239  
Old 01-11-2020, 06:17 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Middlewich, United Kingdom
Posts: 21,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kataryn View Post
Harry is the son and Meghan is the daughterin-law of the future king. A couple who has visited foreign countries as representatives of said kingdom. Of course they qualify as diplomats.


I really don’t see how they qualify as diplomats, when to me they’ve made it quite clear that when they’re outside of the UK they won’t be representing that country. They will be in Canada for their own business ventures and charitable organisations. Therefore not representing anyone bar themselves. Representing a country in another country is the key to being a diplomat.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
  #1240  
Old 01-11-2020, 06:18 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,414
Quote:
Originally Posted by wyevale View Post
Should Harry & Meghan continue to receive an income from the Duchy of Cornwall?

Should 13%
Should not 63%
Don’t know 24%

YouGov Jan 9
Can I ask why this was even a legitimate question to ask in a poll? Harry and Meghan do *not* receive an income from the Duchy of Cornwall. Harry's father does and its his own personal income that he pays taxes on. Charles *chooses* to fund the Duchess of Cornwall, the Sussexes and the Cambridges from his income.

Shouldn't the question be "Should Charles continue to fund his son and his wife from his own personal income?"

"This summary describes how the official and private activities of The Prince of Wales and The Duchess of Cornwall are financed. The majority of staff and official and charitable activities, including the official offices of The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and The Duke and Duchess of Sussex activity, are paid for from His Royal Highness’s private income from the Duchy of Cornwall."

https://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/ann...ture-and-staff
__________________

__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Duke of Sussex and The Invictus Games: 2014 and 2016-2018, 2020 Dman The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family 1150 09-06-2020 07:30 PM




Popular Tags
#royalrelatives #royalgenes abu dhabi american history ancestry armstrong-jones baptism british british royals chittagong countess of snowdon cover-up daisy dutch dutch royals family life family tree games gustaf vi adolf haakon vii heraldry hill history house of glucksburg interesting introduction israel jack brooksbank jewelry jumma kids movie king willem-alexander książ castle list of rulers mailing maxima nepal nepalese royal family norwegian royal family popularity prince charles prince constantijn princess ariane princess catharina-amalia princess chulabhorn princess dita princess elizabeth pronunciation queen consort queen maud queen maxima royal balls royal events royal family royal jewels royal spouse royalty royal wedding russian court dress spain speech startling new evidence stuart swedish queen taiwan thailand tracts unsubscribe videos von hofmannsthal wedding gown


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:04 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises
×