Search results

There is already a thread on "mandamus" stuff; you might find it useful to look at that. "Wait for 2 years" is not a requirement, but it would be reasonable in normal times, when most applications would be processed within 1 year. With covid, 2 years will probably not be considered...

Indeed. Here is the statement: "Moving forward, we are exploring an option for those who wish to self-administer their Oath by signed attestation, and celebrate their citizenship at a later date. " First, it is for "those who wish". And for people who want the warm fuzzies of a ceremony...

If you look at the stuff put out yesterday by the minister for immigration, there are about 60K people waiting for just the oath. Meanwhile the virtual ceremonies take only relatively small numbers at a time. So, overall, it looks like a long queue, although parts of the queue may move faster...

That seems like an extraordinarily long time, even with all the covid excuses. Something is definitely wrong somewhere, I think. The response too seems peculiar, since people generally ask about specifics cases (theirs or of those they represent), and their job is to to answer such questions.

I hope that in the meantime they will make the virtual oath ceremony more efficient so that larger---much larger---numbers can be processed in each session. As it is, quite a bit of the ceremony appears to be taken up with "symbolic" stuff that was probably OK with in-person ceremonies but has...

Forward all that to the minister!

One more time: Try and read a bit more carefully, or work on your comprehension of the English language. Nowhere has any suggestion been made to eliminate the oath.

Taking the oath by merely signing a document is coming. And without new legislation. This year. I will be back here to remind of the preceding statements you (especially Mr. Expert) when it happens!

Another lengthy 10,000-word essay that does not say much. But to the extent that you are so concerned, you should address all that to the minister; apparently he does not know what he is talking about . Perhaps he is relying on the following (and other parts that indicate that the ceremony...

Nonsense. Especially when the minister for immigration is already considering the idea that people simply sign a form and get on with things. Note carefully: The suggestion is to do away with the ceremony, not with the oath.

Nonsense. Especially when the minister for immigration is already considering the idea that people simply sign a form and get on with things.

2018? Wow. And I thought I was badly off being from 2019! Of course, it is BS. The real backlogs with citizenship applications are not with the "oath ready". They are with people who filed ages ago but are still waiting for tests, people who took tests ages ago and are still waiting for...

And the nutjobs are still going "strong": Ambulances pelted with rocks during protest; health workers, patients face added stress, delays (msn.com)

Maybe for some. Not for most. Some of us have been waiting for DM for ages (e.g., since 2019), and there is nothing in this "great news" to indicate how that backlog is to be dealt with. Smart move though, this claimed "exploration" by the IRCC. It will definitely give people a whole bunch...

As above. Or you could write back and ask.

I don't think so. Why would the Citizenship Act would have to be changed? The act does not have a requirement for an oath ceremony. All it says is that a person must make the oath, and, in principle, that can be done in writing.

If you don't like what he/she wrote, then just ignore it.

Really? On what concrete basis do you make that claim? Moving amazingly fast would have been to think of such an idea ages ago, when it became clear that backlogs were building up. Even better would have been to analyze their numbers, see that backlogs would build up, and at that time think...

The other important thing that is not mentioned in any of this: how to clear the backlog of applicants who are still waiting for decisions to be made in their cases. It's no use bragging about how many people are taking online tests (which, by the way, has not even been necessary in most...

It's positive in that IRCC if finally recognizing that it needs to move beyond the symbolism of the oath and the practicalities that are necessary to adjust to the covid pandemic. But, as with virtual testing and virtual oath, it appears that they are either incapable of or unwilling to look...