Why don't they hire more people to handle immigration cases?

[canadaguy238]

I see, so many people getting frustrated over this spousal application process. In some cases it is taking up to 2 years and some cases even as low as 6 months. There is no consistency. In two weeks time I will be up to 1 whole year with dead silence..

It's ok for all other streams to be delayed as much as 2-3 years such as Parents and Grand parents, blood relatives but for spousal application I think IRCC should try to streamline it better.

There are times i get frustrated with this entire process and then i just sit back and say to myself, " let's have some patience".

It will be nice to see improvements in this entire spousal application process. Here is what I also started believing recently;

For all of spousal applications, first step is in Canada and in all honesty that step is taking too long and shall be trimmed to less than a month. For most of us our files have moved out of the country after that first step and guess what in most cases since July last year it has been taking upto 6 months before it is sent to responsible VO overseas. I had recently contacted my MP and he mentioned you should count your one year from the day your file moved to LVO and I didn't want to believe that statement but more and more I am approaching close to 1 year timeline i am starting to feel maybe LVO started working that way as most European VO's are overloaded with Refugee applications.

Sometimes this drives me nuts and other times i just think to calm myself and hope it won't take too long.

July 9th Applicant and since file moved to LVO on Dec 17th have not heard a single word. Ordered GCMS notes and nothing on my file has even started yet.

So lets not fight here and just hope this process will be done soon as we are all waiting patiently and hanging on someone's mercy to start our live's.

Honestly it is stories like yours that made me post this post today and deal with all of these haters. I will put up with all the haters if it saves just 1 family from having to go through what we are going through. 1 year is too long and I am sorry to hear it will take you even longer. I think it's wrong and it needs to be fixed! There is really no reason why the process should be this frustrating and the only way anything will change is if someone speaks out and says something!

 

[mad_hatter]

Yes actually there is a law that states that any spouse can move to be with their Canadian spouse, provided they meet the requirements. Any application with a spouse is under this law and IRCC is legally bound to process these applications. If they had no legal right, then IRCC would not have to process applications right? If it was a privilege then they could choose who to give it to and who not. A legal right means as long as someone meets the requirements, they are in.

This is not

Yes actually there is a law that states that any spouse can move to be with their Canadian spouse, provided they meet the requirements. Any application with a spouse is under this law and IRCC is legally bound to process these applications. If they had no legal right, then IRCC would not have to process applications right? If it was a privilege then they could choose who to give it to and who not. A legal right means as long as someone meets the requirements, they are in.

The government has a policy for family reunification, but make no mistake it is only a policy. Next government can cancel this policy if it wants to, it won't because of the potential voter backlash. If it is your right to bring your family member to Canada then they would not have to meet any requirements, they should allow in no matter what.

 

[StephanH]

Im upset that not a single person has said, you know what, YOU'RE RIGHT! We should hire more immigration officers and speed things up. I still have not heard any good argument against that. I already proved the money is there to hire more officers through extra application fees, taxes, etc.

How can anyone think we need LESS immigration officers and a slower immigration system????

I really hoped almost every reply would tell me that I was right, and they do need more immigration officers. What a great idea, especially since it is paid for by the taxes of the spouses getting here early and into the workforce earlier. Instead everyone is just saying I should be happy with a flawed and slow system. Why should I be happy with a flawed and slow system? As Canadians we should expect the best from our government that we pay for.

Here is a good read, maybe some of your questions will be answered.

https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/publications-manuals/annual-report-parliament-immigration-2018/report.html

 

[canadaguy238]

This is not

The government has a policy for family reunification, but make no mistake it is only a policy. Next government can cancel this policy if it wants to, it won't because of the potential voter backlash. If it is your right to bring your family member to Canada then they would not have to meet any requirements, they should allow in no matter what.

Umm no it is not "policy", it is law. I suggest you read up on this.

The law is called the
Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (S.C. 2001, c. 27)

The part of the law that states we have legal rights is:
Sponsorship of foreign nationals

• 13 (1) A Canadian citizen or permanent resident, or a group of Canadian citizens or permanent residents, a corporation incorporated under a law of Canada or of a province or an unincorporated organization or association under federal or provincial law — or any combination of them — may sponsor a foreign national, subject to the regulation

 

[canadaguy238]

Here is a good read, maybe some of your questions will be answered.

https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/publications-manuals/annual-report-parliament-immigration-2018/report.html

Here ya go buddy! Some readin' for ya!

The law is called the
Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (S.C. 2001, c. 27)

The part of the law that states we have legal rights is:
Sponsorship of foreign nationals

• 
  
  
  • 13 (1) A Canadian citizen or permanent resident, or a group of Canadian citizens or permanent residents, a corporation incorporated under a law of Canada or of a province or an unincorporated organization or association under federal or provincial law — or any combination of them — may sponsor a foreign national, subject to the regulation

 

[canadaguy238]

You DON’T want to quote the law because THERE IS NONE. Period. Goodbye.

Here is the law and I QUOTE

The law is called the
Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (S.C. 2001, c. 27)

The part of the law that states we have legal rights is:
Sponsorship of foreign nationals

• 13 (1) A Canadian citizen or permanent resident, or a group of Canadian citizens or permanent residents, a corporation incorporated under a law of Canada or of a province or an unincorporated organization or association under federal or provincial law — or any combination of them — may sponsor a foreign national, subject to the regulation

 

[canadaguy238]

So curious to hear what you guys who said there was "no law" are going to say now!

 

[jddd]

Here is the law and I QUOTE

The law is called the
Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (S.C. 2001, c. 27)

The part of the law that states we have legal rights is:
Sponsorship of foreign nationals

• 
  
  
  • 13 (1) A Canadian citizen or permanent resident, or a group of Canadian citizens or permanent residents, a corporation incorporated under a law of Canada or of a province or an unincorporated organization or association under federal or provincial law — or any combination of them — may sponsor a foreign national, subject to the regulation

Awesome! Now you’re reading. Now see where it says MAY? If you studied law, you would know that if it is a RIGHT then the word that will be used is SHALL/MUST. Using the word MAY means it is NOT a right. I only replied coz you finally read up on the law. Now keep looking and see if the word SHALL or MUST shows up.

 

[canadaguy238]

Awesome! Now you’re reading. Now see where it says MAY? If you studied law, you would know that if it is a RIGHT then the word that will be used is SHALL/MUST. Using the word MAY means it is NOT a right. I only replied coz you finally read up on the law. Now keep looking and see if the word SHALL or MUST shows up.

Again, I said a spouse has the legal right to move to Canada, provided they meet the requirements. This is what the law states...

 

[mad_hatter]

Here is the law and I QUOTE

The law is called the
Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (S.C. 2001, c. 27)

The part of the law that states we have legal rights is:
Sponsorship of foreign nationals

• 
  
  
  • 13 (1) A Canadian citizen or permanent resident, or a group of Canadian citizens or permanent residents, a corporation incorporated under a law of Canada or of a province or an unincorporated organization or association under federal or provincial law — or any combination of them — may sponsor a foreign national, subject to the regulation

Remember a law can be repealed. If it is a right, there can be no regulation limiting the right. If someone's spouse is a serious crime, he/she would not be allowed into Canada. Canadian has a right to enter Canada, he/she can enter into Canada even this person is a terrorist.

 

[jddd]

Again, I said a spouse has the legal right to move to Canada, provided they meet the requirements. This is what the law states...

AGAIN, as the law does NOT state SHALL or MUST then it is NOT a legal right.

If you look at the subsection below what you quoted it says:


Instructions of Minister

(4) An officer shall apply the regulations on sponsorship referred to in paragraph 14(2)(e) in accordance with any instructions that the Minister may make.

This has nothing to do with what we are talking about but the use of the word SHALL means the officer is legally obligated to. You still keep insisting being a spouse of a Canadian, they get the LEGAL RIGHT to move to Canada which is still incorrect. You can look up all the FACTUAL AND DOCUMENTED cases of spouses of Canadians being rejected.

A RIGHT means there are NO CONDITIONS because you SHALL have it no matter what.

 

[canadaguy238]

Remember a law can be repealed. If it is a right, there can be no regulation limiting the right. If someone's spouse is a serious crime, he/she would not be allowed into Canada. Canadian has a right to enter Canada, he/she can enter into Canada even this person is a terrorist.

Right, a spouse only has the legal right to live in Canada, provided they meet all the requirements.

 

[canadaguy238]

AGAIN, as the law does NOT state SHALL or MUST then it is NOT a legal right.

If you look at the subsection below what you quoted it says:


Instructions of Minister

(4) An officer shall apply the regulations on sponsorship referred to in paragraph 14(2)(e) in accordance with any instructions that the Minister may make.

This has nothing to do with what we are talking about but the use of the word SHALL means the officer is legally obligated to. You still keep insisting being a spouse of a Canadian, they get the LEGAL RIGHT to move to Canada which is still incorrect. You can look up all the FACTUAL AND DOCUMENTED cases of spouses of Canadians being rejected.

A RIGHT means there are NO CONDITIONS because you SHALL have it no matter what.

How many times do I have to say this. The law states a Canadian spouse has the legal right to move to Canada, provided they meet the requirements.

 

[jddd]

Remember a law can be repealed. If it is a right, there can be no regulation limiting the right. If someone's spouse is a serious crime, he/she would not be allowed into Canada. Canadian has a right to enter Canada, he/she can enter into Canada even this person is a terrorist.

OP won’t accept this.

That’s what I’ve been saying, only Canadians have the legal right to be in Canada. Being a spouse of one does not provide that right. They can be sponsored. They can be approved or rejected though.

 

[jddd]

How many times do I have to say this. The law states a Canadian spouse has the legal right to move to Canada, provided they meet the requirements.

Nope. That’s not what the law states. But you’re gonna keep insisting anyway. Read. This just got boring again.