Fencesitter said:
My political views are mostly to the left, but on certain issues, like immigration, I am most definitely a strong conservative.
I have a very different perspective. My original application was rejected because they found (as part of the immigration medical physical) that I have a treatable medical condition. I demonstrated that I already contribute substantially to the tax base (over $50k per year just in income taxes), that I had two separate overlapping insurance policies that would cover 98% of the cost of the medication in question (up to $60k), an employer sponsored PHSP (a form of health savings account that pays for medical expenses and is not discretionary) that covered up to $20k per year and all I got back from CIC was a form letter rejection that said because BC has a program that can pay for the medication (which I don't even TAKE) my application for PR was rejected.
Within my field I'm a world-class expert; I bring my own customers with me wherever I live. I hire local staff, I rent local office space and I help support the local economy. But guess what? Because of the CONSERVATIVE view of immigration in Canada, the ONLY thing that counts is "how much could this cost us." It's cost/benefit analysis where the benefit is ignored and we do worst case assumptions for the costs.
Somewhere in the 31 months it took for them to reject me I met and married a Canadian citizen. We're ecstatically happy and I love my spouse with all my heart and soul. But because of my prior rejection the CIC website says I can not apply in the sponsored spousal class (I am "inadmissible). I've had plenty of people say "well, that's not the way the law reads" but the language on the CIC website is clear and unambiguous - so who do I believe?
Further, based upon the complete lack of transparency in the original decision I've grudgingly come to the conclusion that when it comes to medical inadmissibility at least the REAL reason is simply discrimination. The thin veneer of "due process" that CIC places over it is a farce. I recently spoke to someone who WON their case with CIC in Federal Court. But they never immigrated because when their case went back to CIC the CIC officer said they had to do something they couldn't do unless they were successfully immigrated to Canada. Such a Catch-22 situation makes a mockery of the concepts of "due process".
You have seen signs of this yourself, I've seen it as I've watched your posts evolve. There are clear discriminatory patterns within CIC. They claim this is due to fraud, but I seriously must question the reality of why it requires 24 months for an applicant for a work permit through Singapore to get resolution, when it require 1-2 months at most. Perhaps it's a staffing issue, but I wonder how much of those staffing decisions are based upon subtle bias. It's not blatant - it would be far too easy to prove - it is subtle.
Processes such as this do need to be subject to review and revision. Humans are amazingly adaptable at subverting fixed systems, so you have to shake things up from time to time. That's fine. But making a couple wait 2-3 YEARS before they can reunite isn't about preventing marriages of convenience, it's a bald attempt at preventing such relationships from surviving in the first place.
I didn't read that post as saying you were Hitler by the way. I read it in a much broader context. If the poster intended it to be an insult it didn't succeed with me.
I suspect you will see rules changes to prohibit child birth tourism in the future, because it does create complex situations. But punishing the child for the acts of the parents is something not worthy of a compassionate society such as Canada.
may have have to waste their child bearing years waiting for their spouse and needing to work to support them both.