+1(514) 937-9445 or Toll-free (Canada & US) +1 (888) 947-9445

Citizenship Interview

nirmalramaraj

Star Member
Jun 20, 2018
85
23
I took my interview from within Canada. Best thing would be to call/email and clarify.
As far as I remember, my interviewer did ask me if I was currently in Canada
Thank you, I don't want them to cancel my interview because I am outside and pushing me back to the queue. I have already made plans to visit Canada and get this done although it's online, I Still want to be inside the country and get this rolling to avoid further delay. (Jan 2022 applicant)
 

sajjarapu

Star Member
May 12, 2017
142
15
Hey folks,

Just received a letter from IRCC requiring me to appear in an interview on MS teams in January 2023. Only my bg and test are complete and because i took the test from outside Canada, i was asked to submit full scans of my passport and government issued id on November 17, 2022 which I submitted on November 23, 2022.

Now i am back in Canada and I already informed ircc about my return with boarding pass and travel itinerary serving as proof of my return.

What should i expect in this interview? Anyone else have gone through this situation? Kindly share your experience as i have no idea why is this required at this stage. Any feedback in this matter is greatly appreciated.

Thanks.
Hey can you share your experience please
 

dpenabill

VIP Member
Apr 2, 2010
6,435
3,183
Why are they asking if we're working or not? is it a requirement now? I just went back to school after working for 3 years. will it cause an issue?
Not sure whats the purpose for the question as there is no such requirement on employment whatsoever.
There is NO employment related qualification requirement to become a Canadian citizen.

Nonetheless, information about an applicant's work or other activity (school or stay-at-home parent or whatever) is considered important enough that to even make a complete citizenship application the applicant must declare a complete employment history for the previous five years in the application itself, and any gaps in employment must be otherwise accounted for, accounting for every month. Failure to provide this full five year history will result in the application being incomplete and NOT getting processed.

Frankly, even though multifaceted, the relevancy of this information should be obvious . . . just the extent to which it helps corroborate identification and physical presence alone is sufficient to indicate the importance of this information. This relevance continues after the application is made. A core element of the interview, for example, is to positively identify that the applicant is the person they purport to be.

The main thing, however, as discussed in this particular thread multiple times, is that IRCC officials have very broad authority to ask a wide, wide range of questions in an interview, some focused on cross-checks to test the applicant's credibility. And the take-away is that yes, many applicants are asked questions about their current and recent circumstances, including where they live, where they work, where members of their family live. That's how it works. That's how it is done.

With regards to work, I heard that if you're unemployed, or are self-employed, they're more likely to send you a RQ after the interview... Not sure about going back to school though.
This is just stupid. If they have all the entry-exit records what's the point of RQ? Red tape after red tape. If employment is a criteria in citizenship then make it . Thank you for the info though.
Also, a lot of people move out of Canada after applying for citizenship and getting a job elsewhere, it just seems like a bullying tactic.
Historically being self-employed or unemployed was a significant factor tending to invite some degree of increased scrutiny. It's no mystery why. For the PR with a work history documenting they were employed and working IN Canada, week in and week out, that's compelling evidence they were in fact IN Canada all that time. Not much need to more closely examine the details in that PR's life in order to verify they were in Canada when they declared they were.

For the self-employed PR (like me), no objective (non-family/friend) employer to corroborate where the PR was physically located doing the work they do, that evidence of week-to-week physical presence in Canada is absent. So that is a factor that can influence a total stranger bureaucrat's decision-making, in particular as to whether there might be reason to more closely examine details in the PR's life in order to verify they were in Canada when they said they were.

Some Background: During the Harper years, when the Conservatives held a majority government, this was taken to a new level, and for a time this was not merely a factor but a stand-alone trigger for RQ. And yeah "stupid" probably applies, some "bullying" as well. Note that long before adopting a strict intent-to-reside requirement, which was mostly about making leaving Canada after applying a stand-alone ground for denying an application, Harper's Conservative government had dramatically escalated all sorts of measures to make getting citizenship a lot more difficult for those applicants the Conservatives (and more than a few others as well) branded as applying-on-the-way-to-the-airport or seeking-passport-of-convenience. It was in 2012, for example, the Conservative government implemented the screening criteria which automatically triggered RQ for any applicant reporting a period of unemployment, self-employment, or employment as a consultant . . . just about bringing processing citizenship applications to a standstill (some months one in every four applicants got the full blown RQ, CIT 0171) . . . routine processing timelines reached two years, with scores of applicants suffering three, four and more years of waiting. It was such a mess that it took less than a year for Harper's government to back down some (in time that my application got through without being RQ'd, noting though I deliberately waited to apply a full extra year after qualifying, until it was clear the Harper government was easing off giving full blown RQ to every self-employed applicant) and modify its "triage criteria" and how it is applied. In the meantime, though, the Harper government amended the Citizenship Act to give it authority to deny a citizenship application just because the applicant was residing outside Canada after applying; that provision was short-lived because the Trudeau government immediately ceased enforcing it when elected in late 2015, and the Liberals promptly pursued legislation to repeal it altogether.

Meanwhile, now and for all but a short period of time (in 2015), leaving Canada after applying does NOT directly affect a PR's qualifications for citizenship, and historically many have in fact relocated abroad after applying without encountering non-routine processing let alone real problems. HOWEVER, many others who have relocated abroad after applying have encountered non-routine processing, with more than a few running into significant difficulties and lengthy delays, the nature and extent of this depending on the particular situation.

Thus, being outside Canada while the application is pending has no direct impact on a citizenship application, and it has been this way for decades except during that short period of time when the intent-to-reside in Canada requirement provided a stand-alone ground to deny an application if the applicant was determined to be residing outside Canada after applying (the requirement was actually that the applicant intend to continue to reside in Canada, and of course a person cannot intend to continue doing something they are not currently doing, so those who moved abroad could not, as a matter of fact, possibly intend to continue residing in Canada, so under the approach adopted by the Conservative government, moving abroad before taking the oath was a more or less automatic trigger to deny the application).

Beyond That; Current Impact of Moving Abroad After Applying Generally:

We do not really know how much influence moving abroad typically has, currently. The jury is still out. There are many, many threads in this forum about this subject. The anecdotal reports reflect the whole gamut of outcomes, ranging from those who still sail through the process with no indication of any impact whatsoever, to those who have encountered and those still encountering delays and non-routine processing which appear to be in significant part caused by being seen to be abroad.

Again, moving abroad is NOT itself a reason to deny an application. There is a ton of evidence indicating moving abroad after applying (or appearing to have moved abroad) can still influence how things go, including an increased risk of non-routine processing, which in turn includes the risk of RQ-related non-routine processing, but which also includes some elevated scrutiny otherwise, ranging from simply more probing inquiries in interviews to applicants being required to document their return to Canada in order to be scheduled for the oath.

It appears that living abroad currently has LESS negative impact now, currently, than it has historically (well, especially compared to when there has been a Conservative government which overtly went after those applicants they perceived were applying-on-the-way-to-the-airport, noting that of course sooner or later the Conservatives will form the government again). But it readily appears that for SOME applicants abroad this continues to have some negative impact on how things go. Again, in regards to how much so, currently, the jury is still out -- we just don't know.

Meanwhile, there is nothing that precludes IRCC from considering an applicant's move abroad in deciding whether to issue RQ or pursue more probing inquiries. So all the outcries about how wrong it is for IRCC to do this have little or no effect on how things actually work. Why IRCC is almost certainly going to continue considering this (being abroad) in deciding whether to conduct non-routine processing of an applicant has been discussed at-length, in-depth, in many discussions in this forum, but is not particularly relevant here, since what is important here is to recognize that IRCC is almost certainly going to continue considering this in deciding whether to conduct non-routine processing, so that individual applicants and prospective applicants can make more informed decisions in navigating their way through the process.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: forw.jane

e_ca

Star Member
May 23, 2016
149
86
There is NO employment related qualification requirement to become a Canadian citizen.

Nonetheless, information about an applicant's work or other activity (school or stay-at-home parent or whatever) is considered important enough that to even make a complete citizenship application the applicant must declare a complete employment history for the previous five years in the application itself, and any gaps in employment must be otherwise accounted for, accounting for every month. Failure to provide this full five year history will result in the application being incomplete and NOT getting processed.

Frankly, even though multifaceted, the relevancy of this information should be obvious . . . just the extent to which it helps corroborate identification and physical presence alone is sufficient to indicate the importance of this information. This relevance continues after the application is made. A core element of the interview, for example, is to positively identify that the applicant is the person they purport to be.

The main thing, however, as discussed in this particular thread multiple times, is that IRCC officials have very broad authority to ask a wide, wide range of questions in an interview, some focused on cross-checks to test the applicant's credibility. And the take-away is that yes, many applicants are asked questions about their current and recent circumstances, including where they live, where they work, where members of their family live. That's how it works. That's how it is done.

Historically being self-employed or unemployed was a significant factor tending to invite some degree of increased scrutiny. It's no mystery why. For the PR with a work history documenting they were employed and working IN Canada, week in and week out, that's compelling evidence they were in fact IN Canada all that time. Not much need to more closely examine the details in that PR's life in order to verify they were in Canada when they declared they were.

For the self-employed PR (like me), no objective (non-family/friend) employer to corroborate where the PR was physically located doing the work they do, that evidence of week-to-week physical presence in Canada is absent. So that is a factor that can influence a total stranger bureaucrat's decision-making, in particular as to whether there might be reason to more closely examine details in the PR's life in order to verify they were in Canada when they said they were.

Some Background: During the Harper years, when the Conservatives held a majority government, this was taken to a new level, and for a time this was not merely a factor but a stand-alone trigger for RQ. And yeah "stupid" probably applies, some "bullying" as well. Note that long before adopting a strict intent-to-reside requirement, which was mostly about making leaving Canada after applying a stand-alone ground for denying an application, Harper's Conservative government had dramatically escalated all sorts of measures to make getting citizenship a lot more difficult for those applicants the Conservatives (and more than a few others as well) branded as applying-on-the-way-to-the-airport or seeking-passport-of-convenience. It was in 2012, for example, the Conservative government implemented the screening criteria which automatically triggered RQ for any applicant reporting a period of unemployment, self-employment, or employment as a consultant . . . just about bringing processing citizenship applications to a standstill (some months one in every four applicants got the full blown RQ, CIT 0171) . . . routine processing timelines reached two years, with scores of applicants suffering three, four and more years of waiting. It was such a mess that it took less than a year for Harper's government to back down some (in time that my application got through without being RQ'd, noting though I deliberately waited to apply a full extra year after qualifying, until it was clear the Harper government was easing off giving full blown RQ to every self-employed applicant) and modify its "triage criteria" and how it is applied. In the meantime, though, the Harper government amended the Citizenship Act to give it authority to deny a citizenship application just because the applicant was residing outside Canada after applying; that provision was short-lived because the Trudeau government immediately ceased enforcing it when elected in late 2015, and the Liberals promptly pursued legislation to repeal it altogether.

Meanwhile, now and for all but a short period of time (in 2015), leaving Canada after applying does NOT directly affect a PR's qualifications for citizenship, and historically many have in fact relocated abroad after applying without encountering non-routine processing let alone real problems. HOWEVER, many others who have relocated abroad after applying have encountered non-routine processing, with more than a few running into significant difficulties and lengthy delays, the nature and extent of this depending on the particular situation.

Thus, being outside Canada while the application is pending has no direct impact on a citizenship application, and it has been this way for decades except during that short period of time when the intent-to-reside in Canada requirement provided a stand-alone ground to deny an application if the applicant was determined to be residing outside Canada after applying (the requirement was actually that the applicant intend to continue to reside in Canada, and of course a person cannot intend to continue doing something they are not currently doing, so those who moved abroad could not, as a matter of fact, possibly intend to continue residing in Canada, so under the approach adopted by the Conservative government, moving abroad before taking the oath was a more or less automatic trigger to deny the application).

Beyond That; Current Impact of Moving Abroad After Applying Generally:

We do not really know how much influence moving abroad typically has, currently. The jury is still out. There are many, many threads in this forum about this subject. The anecdotal reports reflect the whole gamut of outcomes, ranging from those who still sail through the process with no indication of any impact whatsoever, to those who have encountered and those still encountering delays and non-routine processing which appear to be in significant part caused by being seen to be abroad.

Again, moving abroad is NOT itself a reason to deny an application. There is a ton of evidence indicating moving abroad after applying (or appearing to have moved abroad) can still influence how things go, including an increased risk of non-routine processing, which in turn includes the risk of RQ-related non-routine processing, but which also includes some elevated scrutiny otherwise, ranging from simply more probing inquiries in interviews to applicants being required to document their return to Canada in order to be scheduled for the oath.

It appears that living abroad currently has LESS negative impact now, currently, than it has historically (well, especially compared to when there has been a Conservative government which overtly went after those applicants they perceived were applying-on-the-way-to-the-airport, noting that of course sooner or later the Conservatives will form the government again). But it readily appears that for SOME applicants abroad this continues to have some negative impact on how things go. Again, in regards to how much so, currently, the jury is still out -- we just don't know.

Meanwhile, there is nothing that precludes IRCC from considering an applicant's move abroad in deciding whether to issue RQ or pursue more probing inquiries. So all the outcries about how wrong it is for IRCC to do this have little or no effect on how things actually work. Why IRCC is almost certainly going to continue considering this (being abroad) in deciding whether to conduct non-routine processing of an applicant has been discussed at-length, in-depth, in many discussions in this forum, but is not particularly relevant here, since what is important here is to recognize that IRCC is almost certainly going to continue considering this in deciding whether to conduct non-routine processing, so that individual applicants and prospective applicants can make more informed decisions in navigating their way through the process.
Well, changes in employment should not be a factor after the application is submitted if it's not a part of the citizenship requirement and also CBSA has all the entry-exit records. So I don't see a point in asking these questions regarding current employment or if one was present in Canada. it can be easily interpreted from CBSA and Tax records which i am sure IRCC has access to. I agree any information submitted in the application must be true when filled in. Once it is filled there is no point in asking what are you doing currently. Scrutinize someone based on what they did and where they lived based on what's in the application. Not what they are doing and what their plans are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sahibo

dpenabill

VIP Member
Apr 2, 2010
6,435
3,183
Well, changes in employment should not be a factor after the application is submitted if it's not a part of the citizenship requirement and also CBSA has all the entry-exit records. So I don't see a point in asking these questions regarding current employment or if one was present in Canada. it can be easily interpreted from CBSA and Tax records which i am sure IRCC has access to. I agree any information submitted in the application must be true when filled in. Once it is filled there is no point in asking what are you doing currently. Scrutinize someone based on what they did and where they lived based on what's in the application. Not what they are doing and what their plans are.
I don't wrestle much with how it should be, other than extrapolating from the law and rules in conjunction with what we know about actual practices (based on multiple sources, from IRCC online information to official accounts of actual cases in published Federal Court decisions, along with scores of anecdotal reports), to figure out, as best we can, how this works. Threads like this one, in particular, are generally focused on sharing information about how things actually work, to help applicants better navigate the process (in contrast to the scores of other threads here oriented to venting or criticizing, which has its place but which can be a distraction, in a topic like this, for those just trying to figure out what to expect and how to best approach things).

My sense is it helps to focus on and keep how-it-works separate from how-someone-thinks-it-should-work, particularly for those who are making personal decisions, and sometimes trying to navigate making tough choices, and who otherwise want to prepare for what might happen. If interviewed, all applicants should be prepared to answer questions about where they live, they work, and where their family members live. And those applicants known or perceived to be abroad (which of course is made apparent if the applicant takes the test while abroad) can anticipate they, in particular, are more likely to be asked such questions in an interview.

And for me, just keeping up with how-it-works, as best we can sort out (a lot about the nature and scope of IRCC's questions and internal decision-making is kept behind the curtain, not at all accessible to the public), can be challenging enough.

As for individual entry-exit records maintained by CBSA, IRCC primarily uses that information ONLY to check the accuracy of what applicants submit, or in contested cases to challenge the applicant's account. What that means is that if the CBSA information more or less affirms what the applicant has declared, that will be a big factor in helping IRCC make an inference the applicant was present in Canada not just the days they went through border controls, but in the days between a known date of entry and the next reported date of exit.

Many, if not most, assume that days following a date of entry count, counting all the days after the entry up to and including the next date of exit. And that is how the online presence calculator works, in effect making an inference of presence all the days in-between entry and next exit. Moreover, the vast majority of applicants generally benefit from this inference, BUT it is important to recognize that is only so long as IRCC has not found a reason to question the applicant's travel history. (IRCC's decision-making mostly depends on what the applicant reports is their travel history, going favourably if CBSA and other information indicates the applicant's account is reliable, going the other way if CBSA or other information indicates any reason to question whether the applicant's account is complete and accurate.)

There is, of course, some solid reasoning underlying the inference of presence between entry and next exit dates. Not many (at least not in terms of a percentage of travelers) exit or enter Canada without CBSA capturing a record connected to the PR's client ID. Nonetheless, Canada's border is notoriously porous and IRCC makes no inference that CBSA records are complete.

So, for now, despite employing this inference in the calculation of days, as calculated by the online presence calculator, it is NOT an inference IRCC employs unless there is sufficient corroborating evidence documenting actual presence supporting that inference (to a standard we do not know), evidence showing actual presence in-between travel dates. Hence, the requirement there be no gaps, none at all, in work or address history. And it does not take a whole lot to trigger RQ-related inquiries (just a few errors in the travel history can do it, or some concern about the applicant's actual employment history, or a combination of factors in which, yes, living or working abroad after applying can have significant influence).

IRCC could rely more on the CBSA travel history information. Many believe IRCC should. For now, HOWEVER, that does NOT appear likely to happen, at least not anytime soon.

Applicants would be wise to be aware of this, and to wait to apply with a buffer appropriate for their particular situation (not only was I self-employed, but I was providing services to businesses outside Canada, so I waited a full extra year to apply), to be as sure as possible the travel history in their application is complete and accurate, and to be prepared to document where they were and what they were doing in Canada in-between dates of entry and the next reported date of exit. And to be prepared to respond to a wide, wide range of potential questions about them and their lives, right up to when they are in an interview.

And these days, as it appears that Trudeau's turn at the helm is likely on a course headed toward retirement, voluntarily or otherwise, there is a rather substantial prospect that a Conservative government could be coming sometime soon, and Pierre Poilievre could be our next Prime Minister. Despite some moderation in rhetoric during his campaign for the leadership role, Poilievre is very much a solid former Reform Party, Alberta/Calgary rooted conservative, whose ties to Harper and Jason Kenney (one of the key architects of measures targeting those perceived to be applying-on-the-way-to-the-airport, the Minister who adopted drastic triage criteria making things like a recently issued drivers' license a stand alone trigger for full blown RQ) go deep, and who from most accounts is probably even farther to the right and more anti-immigrant than Harper or Kenney. If that happens, no advanced studies in political science necessary to map the trajectory of IRCC's handling applications by those known to have moved abroad.

While to a large extent the jury is still out about the nature and scope of current practices in regards to applicants known or perceived to be abroad, those affected would be wise to be prepared for more probing interview questions, and prepared for significantly more inconvenient hurdles on their path to taking the oath -- this is not to say how many will run into this, again the jury is still out and we just don't know -- but it is to say those affected should consider being prepared.
 

amhbala

Star Member
Feb 8, 2016
111
21
Category........
NOC Code......
2173
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
AOR Received.
10-01-2017
I got my interview done last week. Today i see the ecas status as Decision made. But no changes in CIC tracker as still all are pending except Background and citizenship test in completed status. Have you guys gone through this and know when i can expect update in CIC tracker
 

hfxfilms2020

Star Member
Oct 7, 2022
51
9
I got my interview done last week. Today i see the ecas status as Decision made. But no changes in CIC tracker as still all are pending except Background and citizenship test in completed status. Have you guys gone through this and know when i can expect update in CIC tracker
Same situation
 

Nuug33

Full Member
Mar 19, 2020
46
17
Hi All,
My situation is very similar what's has been posted in with this thread.
I have done the citizenship test in outside canada and i received today citizenship interview to attend in two week's.
I think that every one has mentioned he is doing the citizenship test in outside canada will receive the citizenship interview.
I don't live out side canada, just went to attend my mother's medical surgery at this time, and i will return to canada soon.
My question is: is the officer asking in the interview about my daughter's presence in canada, she is outside canada and we applied together,she under 10 years old ?
 
Last edited:

amhbala

Star Member
Feb 8, 2016
111
21
Category........
NOC Code......
2173
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
AOR Received.
10-01-2017
Hi All,
My situation is very similar what's has been posted in with this thread.
I have done the citizenship test in outside canada and i received today citizenship interview to attend in two week's.
I think that every one has mentioned he is doing the citizenship test in outside canada will receive the citizenship interview.
I don't live out side canada, just went to attend my mother's medical surgery at this time, and i will return to canada soon.
My question is: is the officer asking in the interview about my daughter's presence in canada, she is outside canada and we applied together,she under 10 years old ?
I had same similar situation as you. I took my test outside when i travelled for vacation and got the interview request as well. They asked about me and my spouse like how many times we had travelled outside country and had a look at passport pages. They didnt ask about kids and nothing to worry much about interview i beleive.
 

Nuug33

Full Member
Mar 19, 2020
46
17
I had same similar situation as you. I took my test outside when i travelled for vacation and got the interview request as well. They asked about me and my spouse like how many times we had travelled outside country and had a look at passport pages. They didnt ask about kids and nothing to worry much about interview i beleive.
Thanks for the replay, did you and your spouse Applied the citizenship appkication together?
 

amhbala

Star Member
Feb 8, 2016
111
21
Category........
NOC Code......
2173
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
AOR Received.
10-01-2017
Thanks for the replay, did you and your spouse Applied the citizenship appkication together?
Yes, we applied along with kids. they didnt ask about anything about kids in interview
 

anksyahoo

Hero Member
May 4, 2020
487
214
Thanks, I checked and it written Decision Made. Is that approved.
Citizenship tracker, only background and Test is completed. Rest is in progress.
Usually DM made that a decision has been made on your file and you should receive oath email soon.
Do you see a date in ECAS for DM?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nuug33