I have just made a huge blunder. I found the survey they have been talking about and I took the survey. I was surprised by the questions, they did not ask exactly what I wanted to say, I answered them as best as I could, I had completed the survey before I knew it. I thought about the survey for a couple of days. I thought about what I had said. I returned to the site, and took the survey again, mostly to see it again and go over it. I had committed the cardinal sin of voting twice. I had committed the sin before I had realized it. I had taken the survey again to say the things I had forgotten. I even gave my name twice. That’s how they will catch me. What if I answered different each time? I did not mean to commit this error, I had approached it openly and honestly, I wanted to find out where these Town Hall meetings were being held, I want to attend one of these public hearings. Now I have probably disqualified myself, or at least breached some kind of etiquette. I feel guilty and dirty.
i don't post very often. a little steam built up...pardon me...thanks for your indulgence...
This is the kind of direct government I have always wanted to see. This is an ideal and perfect way to actually hear what the public thinks. I wish there was some kind of attached guarantee that our opinions could be realized. Then I become fearful of what most Canadians think; what would they say if they found this survey. Mob rule scares me as much as this elitist bureaucracy that we have now.
A referendum on marriages of convenience. The entire process is so contentious and confusing to go through that how could any one of the “misinformed” or “uneducated on the issue” public make a responsible decision for us.
These are some of the kinds of questions they asked.
Consider the information you read about marriages of convenience. Overall, how serious a threat or problem do you think fraudulent marriages are to Canada’s immigration system?
In your opinion, is there a need for better public awareness about marriages of convenience?
In your opinion, how much personal responsibility should the sponsor bear for ensuring that they are entering into a genuine marriage?
What should the sponsor be responsible for?
In your view, what measures and actions should the Government of Canada consider to address marriages of convenience (in terms of both prevention and law enforcement)?
Would you agree to longer processing times for spousal immigration applications if it meant more investigation into potential marriage fraud?
Countries such as the United States, Australia and New Zealand use sponsorship bars and conditional visas to address marriages of convenience. (Please refer to the background document for more information.)
What do you think of sponsorship bars?
What are acceptable exceptions?
What should happen if a genuine marriage legitimately breaks down once a sponsored individual is in Canada?
Have you been a victim of marriage fraud?
It seems that they have asked pointed questions. They have become adept at investigating fraud but they have shown complete chaos in investigating marriages. One couple is guilty because they are from different religions, one couple guilty because they are from different cultures, one couple guilty because they are from different languages, another guilty because they introduced by an agency or arranged by family. Its twisted about, only in this immigration court do they accuse you of fraud, then punish you, then demand you prove your not fraudulent. The only real problem is that they have found so many of us that they are back logged with all these extra cases since they decided to have this drive to catch all the fraudulent marriages. The burden of proof is not on them. What’s a fraudulent marriage? If either party gains any benefit? Seems like we are guilty because both of us gained immensely just having each other. That’s going to be easy for them to prove.
I didn’t get a chance to say these things in the first two times I took the survey. Should I take it again?
all fraud is serious. We were screwing like bunnies. We did not get married to gain any status in Canada. That was the last thing on our minds. I pursued her, I encouraged her, I supported her, I asked her to marry me and move here, then they accused her of fraud. The word status itself did not come up for another year, not until after we had been accused of it. That was the first time we heard of it. We did ask for status by applying for the resident visa after we got married. I married a wonderful girl. They seem to have no problem with our actually being married, or my choice of her as a wife; they decided to challenge her reason for marrying me. They pretend to know her motive. Is it impossible for them to imagine that she actually likes me?
Should the public be informed? yes. the public needs to know about the problem and the solutions being utilized to address the problem.
In your opinion, how much personal responsibility should the sponsor bear for ensuring that they are entering into a genuine marriage?
What should the sponsor be responsible for?
it is entirely the sponsors responsibility to bear all aspects of a sponsored relationship.
everything from background and history check, ongoing support and encouragement for housing, medical, food, clothing, social, educational, emotional, spiritual, and financial needs of the sponsored partner.
In your view, what measures and actions should the Government of Canada consider to address marriages of convenience (in terms of both prevention and law enforcement)?
try to make a workable definition of what an acceptable marriage is. We walked into the interview thinking that our marriage was the strength of the bond and attachment and the intent to spend our lives together and of the fondness and love for each other that we shared. We had been married for one year at the time of the interview. We had been denied visitor visas. We were trying to improve our sleeping arrangements to be more in align with our needs. We were accused of being 1)11 years difference in age, 2)of being from different cultures, we were accused of 3)utilizing an introduction agency for our introduction and translations services, of 4)not using the telephone to talk, and 5)of not sharing a language. If the government of Canada could find a way to talk to people, if they could define or suggest or indicate in any way what was expected then the visa officers confusion could have been alleviated before she met us. It was obvious the officer did not like our marriage. We did not know that those 5 points were proof of fraud and marriage of convenience.
If we had a case worker we would have been able resolve most of the concerns before completing the application. Why can it not be run more like a human resources center than like a corrections institution? To have had a case worker we would have been able to believe that someone had bothered to read the file before the interview. They could have gotten to know us as we filled out the application. We did not even want status. We wanted her to meet my family. My family wanted to meet her. Instead immigration decided to prove that my wife did not know my family history well enough to qualify for a genuine marriage. For every foreign national applying there is a Canadian sponsoring. Providing a service to the couple as a unit is not exactly giving it away. A workable system that was available for the needs of the applicants would have provided for an opportunity for her to meet the primary characters before the interview.
How long should the probationary period be?
three years with annual confirmation of agreement.
sponsorship ends with annual confirmation.
case by case decision on management.
Would you agree to longer processing times for spousal immigration applications if it meant more investigation into potential marriage fraud?
I met my wife on a website, we exchanged e-mails, i traveled to her country, i did my own investigation, i was laying my love and my life on the line, i was delighted with the girl i met, she was exactly what she had told me she was, i could tell she was taken by me. i asked her to marry me, i asked her to apply for visitor visas, i asked her to apply for the resident visa, her father signed over a home for us, we established residence in her country, i wanted to keep my job, i wanted her with me, i encouraged her, i supported her, i provided the means for us to build a future and a life together, there is no way to get pre approval from the government. I was very surprised and horrified when immigration decided to treat her like a criminal who was trying to sneak in through the front door by registering. They noted that my wife could not pronounce my son’s name correctly, that also became additional proof of fraudulent intent. They accused her of fraud and denied her family class status. There is no facility to make a victim impact statement over perceived wrongdoing by immigration. All I can do is tell my story.
make it clear what the rules and expectations are. at this point we hand in our information. they accuse us of fraud and we wait another year to be set a hearing date for an appeal. I invite my wife here and you run her through an emotional meat grinder with false accusations, refusals, denials, and then backlog a system waiting to prove that we are a genuine couple. you could follow up and prosecute the fraudulent. you could stop the bludgeoning of the innocent. if there is going to be a law that we could not be acceptable if we could not pass a language test then make it a visible law, this way they get to punish the deficiency without having even named it as an expectation. At this point my wife is absolutely denied the privilege to be with me or to meet my families in their homes.
They are done with us.
As far as immigration is concerned the case is closed.
No one is going to find the rest of our file and put it all together and notice that we had lots more supporting evidence than they have for our caips notes. No one is going to review it and write an apology and reopen our file for us.
The sentence is the appeal process itself.
They spent two hours building a case against us. We have been forced to be apart for two years now. We need help with our case, not this utter contentiousness. We are waiting for an appeal date. Our crime is considered so heinous that we do not qualify for the ADR hearing. We have done nothing wrong, we have not tried to represent ourselves as anything other than what we are.
# What is the appropriate role of government in identifying and protecting people from marriages of convenience?
Yes! People themselves should be responsible for their own decision to sponsor a spouse or partner into Canada! People who have been fraudulent should be reported and prosecuted.
The appropriate role of government would be to investigate reported cases in identifying and protecting people from marriages of convenience?
In our case they have CREATED a fraudulent marriage by accusing us falsely of it. My wife answered all the questions correctly except for two. The government as represented by the immigration officer decided that they did not like our using translation devices to speak to each other: we did not share a language. We used interpreters and used computer generated translation programs to speak. We had a genuine loving relationship for each other but my wife was from a different culture, we were 12 years different in age. The officer said that she did not appear to know me very well, but she did know me, she did not know my son's mother or his age. This was the evidence they used to catch us and accuse us of a marriage of convenience. Half of our file was missing. The officer did not look at the bulk of our communication, the officer made a mistake. I do not know how to suggest legislation to prevent this.
SHOULD people be responsible for their own decision to sponsor a spouse or partner into Canada?
People SHOULD be responsible for their own decision to sponsor a spouse or partner into Canada?
Should conditional visas be considered?
Yes, please consider conditional visas. I also requested to post a bond so that she could visit me and I could get the money back when she returned home. Nothing of this nature was available.
Communication was not possible with the Canadian government. It is peculiar that the government could not communicate with me when we shared a language. They decided instead to accuse my wife of not being able to communicate with me well enough to be enjoying a happy loving relationship as we claimed.
Yes. I demand it. Please consider this as a possible way to address the problem.
My wife thinks we have a genuine marriage. I know we have a genuine marriage. Her father certainly thinks we have a genuine marriage. My family certainly thinks we have a genuine marriage. Her community thinks we have a genuine marriage. My community thinks we have a genuine marriage. Her family knows her as a genuine person. We have a genuine marriage. We feel that we have been kept standing at the airport for two years waiting to begin our honeymoon. Anonymous people who have never met us and do not know us and have not read our file are ruining our lives together. Yes. i believe in accountability. Make the people who commit fraud accountable. Develop a system that works. We are innocent and waiting to deliver our case and carry our burden of proof of intent and on-going relationship. Give someone the tools they need and the funds they need to do the job. Why are we waiting another year to hear back from them?
Annual renewal. This way each partner in the genuine relationship could account for the next renewal. That would be the best time to have an interview. if there were concerns about abuse or about continued relations then this would be the time to analyze and assess a relationship. in our case they were able to develop an entire case against us without ever talking to us, then they were able to enforce rules we had no knowledge of like we were from different cultures, different languages, and age differences. They were able to enforce laws or regulations or requirements that are not even publicly presented.
If they considered the annual renewal then if there was a breach in the contract the agreement would not be able to be completed. The agreement with the sponsor would be voided.
49,500 applications for permanent residence for partners and spouses. Of these, just under 20 percent were refused. your quote in the background.
last year 2009, of the appeal cases heard, approximately 50% were approved and 50% denied. of 2,495 people accused of marriage of convenience only 1,247 were guilty. I am in the 1,247 other cases who were falsely accused. Even together my wife and I are only four years of unnecessary human suffering. It doesn’t sound like much. What are we, an acceptable bystander casualty rate?
If this entire group is forced to suffer for the two years while the appeal process grinds its way through the paperwork then this looks like the Canadian government willfully and intent-fully causes 2,454 years worth of unnecessary human suffering for each citizen sponsor identified as a threat.
Double that to include the couple’s partners and you have the Canadian government causing 4,508 years of human suffering that is unnecessary each year.
If the sponsor was made total responsible for the entire process then you would need to only investigate the cases that were reported or identified instead of interfering with ordinary human interaction and exchange.
Register and monitor all applications. Fraudulent claims would be acted on.
We are not part of a new wave of fraudulent claims they have decided to pogrom. We are two individuals who just got here.
Additional funds? Yes. i need you to do the job right. i actually need now to see this waiting period end, i need to appeal my case, i need to see my evidence accepted, i need to see the system work. please consider additional resources to diminish the back log and please consider instruction to officers regarding section 179 of the code as related to visitor visas and not allowing a carelessly and unsupported and unaccountable refusal for couples who want to spend time together on a visitor visa before they are forced to answer questions that do not identify fraudulent claims.
I spent a life time supporting order and good government. My orientation to life is cooperating and assisting people to understand their situation and to make their own responsible decisions. I met my wife through e-mail. We communicated for three months and then met each other. We were immediately infatuated and decided to marry and seal the bond. We married a week after we met in person and then we applied for the visitor visa so that she could meet with my family. Three times the visitor visa was denied. We were forced to live separately for the year. Then during the interview they asked detailed questions intimate and specific to my past relationships from 30 years ago. My wife misspoke my son’s age as "forty something" he was thirty something. We have often misquoted numbers to each other as we practice and learn each others language. My son was the product of a former relationship in which we were not married. My wife identified a former wife as the mother. This was incorrect. All the other answers she gave were precise and accurate. We were accused of fraud on this basis. The officer explained that she had only these tools to work with; she had only these questions too ask. If she had made a wrong decision she was sorry... she made a wrong decision. At no time did we submit false information or try to act as if we knew each other any better than we did.
In essence, we knew nothing about the immigration process. I needed help and understanding to see me through the process. Instead, the Canadian government decided to create this contentious atmosphere where court proceedings were necessary. We did not get married so that she could work or get social assistance in Canada.
And then, of course, I told them my Cinderella story.
A Canadian fairy tale.
Cinderella Canada
Once upon a time a handsome prince had scoured all the maps and websites that he could in order to find the perfect highway to ride his motorcycle on. He had already found himself and had covered many lands in his travels and had plans for many more, then, one night, almost by accident; he stumbled upon the secret to the answer of what he had been looking for all along.
A tiny advertisement for a matrimonial website had caught his eye. An admirer mail and a picture had captured his attention. It was after meeting in a foreign land that the handsome prince found the one true heart that he loved and bonded with the most, the girl behind the picture captured his devotion, she was soon swept off her feet, the pictures in his camera were suddenly filled with people and welcoming smiles, happy families and laughter instead of winding roads, barren tundra, painted deserts, and rocky peaks.
Cinderella and the handsome prince decided to seal the bond and pledged to love each other forever by registering to be married. After Cinderella and the handsome prince had celebrated with her family, the handsome prince and Cinderella tried to return to the castle to meet his family and to start out on their honeymoon.
It came to pass
That the guards at the gate did not like Cinderella anywhere near as much as the handsome prince liked Cinderella.
The guards had been specially trained to be hyper vigilant to spot couples who did not speak the same language and the guards had been given the authority and the power to use an invisible fence to stop these lovers from being together. The handsome prince begged the guards to allow Cinderella into the castle so that she could meet his family, so she could expose herself to a foreign society and see where he lived and worked and to visit with his friends and so that she could immerse herself into her new language.
The Cinderella in this story has grandchildren that have not met her yet. The couple needed this time together. The guards denied Cinderella entry to visit the castle three times.
They explained that they believed that Cinderella’s profile could not be trusted to comply with the expiry date for her visa; they said their concern was that the motivation for her to remain in the castle was greater than for her to return to her family.
With an uncaring flourish of the pen the guards used their power to insure that Cinderella would never, ever, be allowed to even visit the castle.
Never.
Ever.
Due to their enforced separation, the handsome prince returned to work and Cinderella stayed home. He and Cinderella worked separately on the resident application for one whole year with the use of a computer and translated e-mails, each page had to be carefully translated, explained to each other, discussed repeatedly, and then checked again, before they were able to finally complete the application and be granted an interview.
At the gate the guards stripped Cinderella and the handsome prince of their electronic and communication devices then met with Cinderella and the handsome prince, behind a bullet proof glass partition. They spoke through an intercom. The lady guard stated that they realized that Cinderella was not well educated and that they had not expected educated answers. In the interview the guards confirmed their suspicions; indeed Cinderella could not speak English. Nor did the handsome prince speak Mandarin, and how could this couple even pretend to have a relationship when they did not share a language the guards demanded.
They also confirmed, as they had suspected, that Cinderella could not accurately describe the shape of, nor details about the inside of the castle. The guards then proceeded to reveal that Cinderella could not accurately identify dates and relationships between members of the handsome prince’s family.
They found her to be digressive in her answers.
They also stated that she had tried to answer questions that had not been asked in her interview. Statements that she wanted to make were not welcome during their conversation.
The handsome prince tried to explain that it did not seem fair to be asking these questions to Cinderella about the intricate details of a home and family that they themselves had denied her to visit. The lady guard replied that the decisions that the other guards had made had nothing to do with the decision today. By their own testimony the couple had proven that they used translation devices both written and video to communicate with. The couple had obviously developed a chat relationship during the time of their enforced separation, but they had produced no telephone records. How could this couple even dare to pretend to be having a relationship if they could not even produce telephone records between them? Cinderella had answered the questions only with facts that she knew of, she even got a couple of them wrong, and she was unable to tell stories about castle life.
Her credibility was challenged; the guards felt that Cinderella’s motive revealed itself; there was no need to look at the evidence. There was no time to look at the evidence. The guards had concerns. The decision had already been made.
The guards accused Cinderella of only marrying the handsome prince in order so that she could gain status in the castle. The guards then accused Cinderella of fraud, they refused her status as a member of the family class, they now rejected Cinderella a fourth time; they denied her application.
The guards then, as a final display of their disdain, confiscated Cinderella’s marriage certificate.
Cinderella would be required to live alone across the great ocean at the farthest corner of the earth where the handsome prince had found her. The guards accused the handsome prince of only marrying Cinderella so that he could visit her country. They accused Cinderella of only seeing the handsome prince as a big fat visa.
They were both accused of discussing matters of the application extensively in their communications, they accused the couple of using interpreters to communicate, and they accused the couple of not using a telephone.
The guards then informed Cinderella of their decision and sentenced her to a two year appeal process.
When the handsome prince asked the guards what they could have done differently, they were told that it would cost them a lot of money to find that out.
The prince wanted to move out of the castle to be with Cinderella but he would have to forfeit his job as the handsome prince, the couple needed him to keep that job, it was a job worth saving. If he quit the job, they would lose their source of income, and he would then be disqualified as a sponsor.
The handsome prince thought that he now knew first hand what it felt like to be treated like a foreign national by the Canadian government.
With the seriousness of the crime they had been accused of there was little hope of an arbitrated appeal in the first year, the couple faced the entire two year process for the full appeal.
Some would say that he had gotten off lightly for falling in love and marrying a foreign girl; citizens falling in love and marrying foreign girls was a very big concern for the government of Canada.
The handsome prince was given the same two year appeal sentence as Cinderella; he would spend the time in a silk prison of his own.
