Have you seen how easily the US is allowed to deport people versus Canada? If a K1 visa relationship doesn’t work out there is much less recourse in the US. In Canada a person could file for H&C, etc.
IRCC response to the protests
- Thread starter dof13
- Start date
The majority of international students can not be fly to Canada unless they can prove they will be in classes. If you are talking about agricultural workers they are needed. Knowing a farmer who has used seasonal farm workers for decades they can’t find Canadians to do the hard work and we need the crops to feed the population and keep food prices reasonable. People in Canada are benefiting from them being in Canada temporarily. They will return home after the farming season. Not all express entry PRs can or want to land. You don’t need to be quiet but there are very little chances of changing things. Others have also waited 12+ months to be reunited with spouses for decades. It is one of the issues with marrying someone from abroad.
They are starting the process although it will take longer. Things are getting processed just much slower.
As I have been rather critical of the idea of asking for "TRVs for all" (because, as I noted, the government has a statutory responsibility to take certain steps to reduce the chances of visa fraud, and that can only be changed by a law that NO parties would support) .... here's my constructive advice.
Contact MPs, journalists and whoever else to put questions to the government:
1) What are the numbers of applicants and processing times? (More specific questions needed)
2) What impact is covid going to have on expected timelines for family class? Are there analyses/statistics on how long well-established steps in process are taking now compared to before covid delays?
3) What are the specific steps the government will be taking to clear any backlog?
4) Are there any other measures being considered to reunite families more quickly (if 'clearing the backlog' is going to take longer)?
The main 'targets' to get to ask these questions (apart from one's own MP) would be: opposition critics (MPs) for immigration; members of relevant parliamentary committee; journalists who follow immigration; other advocacy groups.
MPs can formulate these as written or oral questions (in the House of Commons to Minister of Immigration. Ministers do NOT like to not be able to respond in some way, but the more precise the question the better.
Journalists and other more specialised can also file Access to Information requests. This requires some knowledge of how to formulate. I would expect that the requests should target memoranda to the Minister or to senior executives in Immigration department.
There are complicated issues that Cabinet memoranda will NOT be released under ATI requests - since memoranda to minister that make recommendations may be Cabinet-related, they may be also excluded or heavily redacted. BUT: there are almost certainly reporting documents - data and statistics - that may be annexes or separate, and it should be possible to formulate a proper ATI request to get these.
My point is, it will be next to useless to just repeat "give us visas" when government can't under law without fulfilling steps. But getting data and information first and THEN - when there is concrete info showing large backlogs and lack of progress - asking government what it will do to fix the issue will be more effective.
My opinion only.
yes they can give us all visas, there's no law against it, you are misinformed.
@armoured d
You sound like an IRCC suckup. Stop buying into the political BS and trying to justify very silly and unreasonable excuses to a very evident issue
@armoured d
How about you really tell us how you feel ?
Unreasonable? Asking for visas for anyone that wants to enter the country ? But we wouldn’t want to call that unreasonable , would we ?
Much like you asking for OHIP coverage on implied status when your work permit expired . How’d that work out for you ?
Yup ponies for everyone, maybe the odd parade as well
https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/ohip-on-implied-status-work-permit.193662/
Last edited:
Did I ever say that is what I wanted or feel should happen? Why do you jump to conclusions? Please re read what I said.
..and I said simply because I've happened across a few posts by the above member and others alike who only seem to use the forums to play part time government or spokeperson for IRCC which is utterly redicilous. Everything is a justification to issues that are clear and evident. Everything is negative to the people that are here for help and maybe even in some circumstances Hope. You guys get paid to do this or something? Are you applicants currently in process or do you not have anything better to do?
I believe in being realistic and reasonable and I understand that Immigration is multifacated and complex but this negativity to everyone else who legitimately and righfully feel the process needs change is asinine. Those groups and protests are active for a reason. There is obviously long standing issues with IRCC that needs addressing. Successive Govt have failed to do so but it doesnt discredit the fact that change in Canada's Immigration system, especially the outland spousal process, is needed
Last edited:
That was years ago. Maybe if you learn how to read and recognize dates. It was a honest question.
Actually, worked out quite well! Ill go further and say I actually went from asking for healthcare to having to the opportunity to train and provide it as well! I'm doing just fine now and completing another process , the outland process this time. The stress and hardship paid off
Thank youAfter seeing that we have laid 37 million because people were unwilling to arrange their own AirBnB I can only imagine I don’t know why we allow let any visitor or PR landing for the first time to enter without proving they have a quarantine plan. A PR landing has just provided their POF yet the taxpayers are paying crazy amounts to provide free room and board for 2 weeks while others are responsible. We now have to worry about the healthcare liabilities of visitors and the cost of them potentially not arranging their own quarantine.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/canadians-millions-hotel-quarantine-covid-1.5691370
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/canadians-millions-hotel-quarantine-covid-1.5691370
Hi there - Canada used to land (grant PR) to fiances with terms and conditions that the person marry their sponsor within 90 days. I forget exactly when that ended but it was in the 1990s. It wasn't ended because of any rampant fraud but because it was labour intensive (expensive) to confirm that the condition was met and deal with them when they weren't.
When conditions weren't met there would be a mandatory report and an Inquiry and this was all part and parcel of a process that wasn't worth the expense. Like marriages of convenience it boiled down to a he-said, she-said event with some unseemly allegations as to why the marriage didn't happen. You could get a removal order but the Appeal was almost always granted because of the amount of time the person had to establish themselves in Canada.
In my lengthy, but ancient, experience with immigration, budgets drive all processing models. Budgets are going to be a scramble in the new fiscal year and the Treasury Board will decide which departments flourish and which flounder. Departments will decide their priorities and if one branch doesn't get enough resources then they've decided to stomach the fallout.
The CBC news article you attached reports a recently arrived immigrant said ' the experience made him feel welcome in Canada and well taken care of. The experience has motivated him to give back, he said, and happy to pay his taxes to the government to help cover the costs. '
I believe under law IRCC (government) is required to have processes to show candaina national security, health and public interest are guarded.
Please come back if you find the law does not make such requirements.
@armoured d
You sound like an idiot.