Dear Honorable Minister, Mr. Sean Fraser.
The following suggestions in my email may give you the following benefits:
- The number of calls received by IRCC from applicants will reduce. Assuming the cost of 1 call is approximately 20 Dollars to IRCC for a 30 min call. The total number of applicants is 200,000—Total Savings of 4 Million Dollars a year.
- There will be less frustration amongst 'Future Citizens of Canada'.
- The IRCC process will be more transparent.
- Moreover, It will positively impact the Future Citizens of Canada.
How was this email constructed?
I was constantly wondering what was wrong with IRCC that they scheduled and gave citizenship to one application in my house very fast, and my application is stuck on Oath Ceremony to be scheduled. To start with, I'm a problem solver, and I assume that IRCC is fully committed and the oaths are scheduled through standard software than selected manually or randomly. This theory also answers why one application on a similar timeline is given oath ceremony schedule months ahead of others. Look at it this way.
The software may be using a formula. Descending order of application date + all stages checked as ‘Complete'. When software uses this combination, we get a variable "Q" (Line up number).
For instance, if I passed all my checks on Oct 12, 2022 and my filing date is Dec 14, 2021, I may be given a "Q" number, say 300.
In the next three days, say 700 other people pass the test, and their parameters are also "completed" and entered into the "Q" system. If out of these 700 people, 500 applied ahead of me, then my "Q" number is now pushed down 800.
Hence, people who got applications processed faster must have completed all parameters and entered "Q" when previous applicants did not thoroughly pass all the stages.
This formula honors the word of IRCC of 'First come, first serve". As in the application process, there are steps and interventions by applicants. Like test time itself is three weeks. However, I still need help answering why one office is slower than the other. Apologies in advance if I confused you. Here is my suggestion and solution. Based on the assumption I made.
So the solution is you can always have a maximum "MAX Q" number, which may be the number of applicants before an applicant irrespective of any stage, say 25000. You can also give the current stage of the "CURQ" based on completed applications before the candidate. Say 2000, and it keeps oscillating between 0 and 25000 for the oath ceremony.
This way, you can get the latest date of the oath schedule. You may reach number 1 on the waiting list, and very the next day you can be 5001, but you know the "MaxQ" number is always descending.
You can then calculate the Max time divided by oaths taken every week.
You can respond to me in the following ways:
1. Bluntly say that idea is totally based on a wrong assumption.
2. The assumption is right, but the formula is wrong.
3. The Idea of "Q" system publishing is good, and We are working on a "Q" System that will be helpful and accurate.
4. We don't think this email is worth replying to.
In any case, I request to publish a "Q" System and remove the three months timeline of the Oath Ceremony after the test from the website. Some people have been waiting for six months.
Warm Regards,