CIC survey on Marriages of Convenience

[suenim]

Did anybody here take part in this survey by CIC? What do you think about it? I did the survey.

http://cic.sondages-surveys.ca/s/marriage-fraud/?lang=en

This is the background on their website:

Canadians are invited to participate in an online consultation on the issue of marriage fraud, also known as “marriages of convenience.” This national consultation questionnaire will gather input on the magnitude of the problem as well as opinions and ideas on how best to address it. Responses to the online consultation, along with messages collected from Town Hall meetings this fall and research data on the issue, will help inform future actions taken by the Department to address marriage fraud. MORE FROM THE LINK.

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/department/media/backgrounders/2010/2010-09-27.asp

 

[Kess]

I filled it out. Didn't really like the questions but lots of place to type answers more than just "yes or no".

 

[suenim]

I filled it out. Didn't really like the questions but lots of place to type answers more than just "yes or no".

I thought the questions were 'weirdly' worded as well. It is good to see they are looking more into the matter though.

 

[nyssa]

I started to fill it out and stopped... maybe I'm not understanding right, but I agree, those questions were worded strangely. I'm not sure what they're looking for...?

 

[Kess]

I started to fill it out and stopped... maybe I'm not understanding right, but I agree, those questions were worded strangely. I'm not sure what they're looking for...?

I spent a lot of time on the comment boxes. Hopefully I stressed that this process is too long and painful, etc enough for them to get the point.

My thought is that they are looking for feedback on policies that other countries use (see the questions on sponsorship bars and conditional visas) to see if they can be applied in Canada. Either that or in true goverment fashion they've already made a decision on how to change the policies and just want to gauge how hard they are going to have to sell it to us.

 

[Love_Young]

I took the survey. I hope they listen to those of us that are genuine and going through this process.
I think if they listen to our input, it will be easier for them and for us.

 

[Love_Young]

I spent a lot of time on the comment boxes. Hopefully I stressed that this process is too long and painful, etc enough for them to get the point.

My thought is that they are looking for feedback on policies that other countries use (see the questions on sponsorship bars and conditional visas) to see if they can be applied in Canada. Either that or in true goverment fashion they've already made a decision on how to change the policies and just want to gauge how hard they are going to have to sell it to us.

I completely agree. I too stressed on the long processing and how they need to be a bit more accommodating to those going through the process. When I got the question that asked, "Would you mind having longer processing...?" I was like are you kidding me? They are already long as it is. How about maybe they hire more people? Lol.

 

[Poetic]

I filled it out too, added alot of feedback. I think it's great that we can share our views in the hopes that they might actually value them.

 

[Alabaman]

I filled out the questionaire and mentioned how long it is to sponsor a spouse. I also mentioned that it is not fair to punish the majority because of a few bad eggs.

Another thing I mentioned was that if they want to compare US spousal sponsorship to that of Canada they need to look at it in totality and not just select the ones that will make our lives harder for example, the US has a fiancee visa called the K visa where fiancees can travel to the US and be married within 90 days. This way, the sponsoring spouse can do more due diligence on the future partner and then might be able to tell if the relationship is genuine or not.

Canada currently would almost NEVER give a fiancee the chance to even visit. Absurd!! They prefer you marry that person first and then give a PR straight away. It just does not make sense.

The 2 year conditional PR as it is practiced in the US doesn't do nada. A fraudulent person will wait 2 years anyways. There are sooo many fraudlent marraiges in the US despite this rule.

If they really want to improve immigration they should ask people who have lived and are still living it. They should make it common sensical and not tighter unneccesarily. I should say though, the Canadian immigration system is more reasonable and organised than the US (but there is room for improvement)

It can be difficult being an immigrant.

 

[nyssa]

I agree with the fiancee visa 100%. It's such a shame. Now, my husband and I always wanted to get married and would have no matter what. But if we could have lived together and had more time to plan the wedding together... etc... boy that would have been nice. We couldn't have all our friends/family there or save all the money we'd hoped to.

 

[dair2dv8103100]

I agree... fiance visa would save us a lot of headaches. My daughter (who's father will not let her travel) would have more time than she has now...few minutes on the computer chatting....making cards to send. He could meet my Mum and my church family. This would lesson the suspicion I face regularly from people as well. I would do this is a heart beat!!

As for 2 year probation...well I can understand the benefits but I think it is really a moot point in the end when someone that finally got what they wanted after years of waiting is not going to blink an eye at 2 years.

 

[PMM]

Hi

I agree... fiance visa would save us a lot of headaches. My daughter (who's father will not let her travel) would have more time than she has now...few minutes on the computer chatting....making cards to send. He could meet my Mum and my church family. This would lesson the suspicion I face regularly from people as well. I would do this is a heart beat!!

As for 2 year probation...well I can understand the benefits but I think it is really a moot point in the end when someone that finally got what they wanted after years of waiting is not going to blink an eye at 2 years.

There was a fiancee category prior to 2002, but it was a can of worms. If you think that there are MOCs now, then a fiancee had 90 days to marry and show compliance to CIC. A large number just disappeared. Then if they didn't marry, they had appeals rights and could claim H.& C. and that they were willing to marry but the sponsor wouldn't.

 

[Alabaman]

Hi

There was a fiancee category prior to 2002, but it was a can of worms. If you think that there are MOCs now, then a fiancee had 90 days to marry and show compliance to CIC. A large number just disappeared. Then if they didn't marry, they had appeals rights and could claim H.& C. and that they were willing to marry but the sponsor wouldn't.

OK so what is your suggestion??

 

[RobsLuv]

Re: Consulting the Public on Marriages of Convenience survey

Interesting questions they pose - I took it.

 

[angelbrat]

Yes I took the survey. Seems Canada is at last taking the Family sponsorship seriously. This should be good news for all the genuine couples out there.