hi, i hope someone can help me out! i am applying outland to sponsor my japanese spouse. i am a canadian citizen and we have two children who were born in japan and have japanese passports. i just submitted their application for their Canadian Citizenship Card, i know this will take up to a year. my kids are canadian citizens but they do not have any proof(CCC)card. do i have to include them in the sponsorship with my husband? we are not planning on moving to canada until next summer so i can wait for the kids cards. the problem is that in the application it states ""for any dependent child who is a Canadian Citizen or a permanent resident of Canada, a photocopy of Canadian passport or Canadian Citizenship C. must be included with your application". i am nervous about submitting the application without this proof, as it says MUST. how should i include them in the application? are they considered "non-accompanying dependent"?
dependent child-help
- Thread starter eval28
- Start date
Hi eval28,eval28 said:hi, i hope someone can help me out! i am applying outland to sponsor my japanese spouse. i am a canadian citizen and we have two children who were born in japan and have japanese passports. i just submitted their application for their Canadian Citizenship Card, i know this will take up to a year. my kids are canadian citizens but they do not have any proof(CCC)card. do i have to include them in the sponsorship with my husband? we are not planning on moving to canada until next summer so i can wait for the kids cards. the problem is that in the application it states ""for any dependent child who is a Canadian Citizen or a permanent resident of Canada, a photocopy of Canadian passport or Canadian Citizenship C. must be included with your application". i am nervous about submitting the application without this proof, as it says MUST. how should i include them in the application? are they considered "non-accompanying dependent"?
Nothing to worry as you have enough time. You can do it it Tokyo.
Canadian Citizenship — Children Born Abroad
The proof of Canadian citizenship for a Canadian born abroad is a Canadian citizenship certificate. A child born outside Canada to a Canadian parent and meeting certain requirements is a Canadian citizen. However the child will not possess a birth certificate issued by a Canadian governmental authority and for proof of Canadian citizenship, the child will need to obtain a Canadian citizenship certificate. An application must be submitted to obtain this certificate. Although applications are processed in Canada, you may submit the application to a Canadian diplomatic office abroad. In Japan, such applications can be submitted to the Canadian Embassy in Tokyo.
Read this site for details
http://www.canadainternational.gc.ca/japan-japon/consular_services_consulaires/citizenship-citoyennete.aspx?lang=eng&view=d#app_child
thanks for the info. i just sent my kids application in to tokyo 3 days ago. my problem is that it says on the website that it could take up to 7 months to process and to add on an extra 3-4 months if applying from outside of canada. that means we wont get the certificates until next summer. i would like to be in canada by september to start school(for me), and i would like my kids to come with me because they are 4 and 7, cant leave them, so if their cards are a little late they can stay in canada for up to 3 months(i think) while we wait for the cards. i want to get my husbands spousal application in hopefully by the beginning of this december. i wont have the kids canadian citizenship cards by then. can i write a note and include it in the application saying that i have sent in my application for the citizenship cards and am just waiting for them? again its the whole part about the quote in the applicants checklist (my husbands) stating that i must include proof of canadian citizenship for any dependent child. so if i dont have proof i feel like i have to include them in the application , i am so confused!
Hi
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/bulletins/2009/ob154.asp
You should note that the CHC/Passport office are supposed to only issue limited validity passports to children under the age of 2. Other children are supposed to be issued a F-1 visarjessome said:You can apply for temporary Canadian passports for the kids at the consulate in Tokyo if they need to travel to Canada.
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/bulletins/2009/ob154.asp
Yep, my bad.PMM said:Hi
You should note that the CHC/Passport office are supposed to only issue limited validity passports to children under the age of 2. Other children are supposed to be issued a F-1 visa
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/bulletins/2009/ob154.asp
;DPMM said:Hi
Thinking of suitable punishment.
Hey, have you read this? http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-takes-aim-at-immigrant-waiting-lists-a-million-names-long/article2186976/
I wonder what Mr. Kenney will pull out of his bag of magic tricks next! He was so proud of reducing that backlog. And a bunch of lawyers are poised to make Charter challenges if his refugee reforms go through. As well, the new procedures being implemented at the IRB are not popular. That guy is not shy about generating contraversy. Whether I agree with him or not, I'm kind of a fan. He's fun to watch!
Hi
2. If the Refugee lawyers don't like the new Refugee rules and IRB rules, then the rules are probably on the ball. Lawyers have a tendency to howl when their ox is gored.
3. Actually he is about the only Immigration Minister who has actually taken an interest in the Dept. Previous Ministers, it was just a stop onto something better. They never bothered to push legislation that the Dept. pointed out that would clear the backlogs, expedite refugee claims. (I lie, the safe 3rd country with the US got done. But the proposal was to extend it to other countries, which never happened)
4. One of the worse decisions was to separate the Investigation function and enforcement and the POE Immigration from CIC to CBSA. CBSA really doesn't care about the Immigration function at POEs, as you probably know from the problems that are reported here. Inland investigation with CBSA, they are only interested in the "big score". Routine investigation, just isn't done anymore. A prime example is the "buying of AEOs" All it would take is a visit to the prospective employer, to see it s/he actually exists, where there are multiple AEOs.
5. Processing times in-Canada are getting to be ridiculous.
6. Should be interesting to see how far the Mandamus application goes for the pre 2008 Skilled work applicants. Probably nowhere, but the lawyers should make a bundle.
1. Read it, but there is always going to be a backlog, unless the points are raised back to 75. At 75 points (before the Liberals lowered it as an election ploy) the no. of skilled worker applications balanced out with the quota, within +/- 5%rjessome said:;D
Hey, have you read this? http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-takes-aim-at-immigrant-waiting-lists-a-million-names-long/article2186976/
I wonder what Mr. Kenney will pull out of his bag of magic tricks next! He was so proud of reducing that backlog. And a bunch of lawyers are poised to make Charter challenges if his refugee reforms go through. As well, the new procedures being implemented at the IRB are not popular. That guy is not shy about generating contraversy. Whether I agree with him or not, I'm kind of a fan. He's fun to watch!
2. If the Refugee lawyers don't like the new Refugee rules and IRB rules, then the rules are probably on the ball. Lawyers have a tendency to howl when their ox is gored.
3. Actually he is about the only Immigration Minister who has actually taken an interest in the Dept. Previous Ministers, it was just a stop onto something better. They never bothered to push legislation that the Dept. pointed out that would clear the backlogs, expedite refugee claims. (I lie, the safe 3rd country with the US got done. But the proposal was to extend it to other countries, which never happened)
4. One of the worse decisions was to separate the Investigation function and enforcement and the POE Immigration from CIC to CBSA. CBSA really doesn't care about the Immigration function at POEs, as you probably know from the problems that are reported here. Inland investigation with CBSA, they are only interested in the "big score". Routine investigation, just isn't done anymore. A prime example is the "buying of AEOs" All it would take is a visit to the prospective employer, to see it s/he actually exists, where there are multiple AEOs.
5. Processing times in-Canada are getting to be ridiculous.
6. Should be interesting to see how far the Mandamus application goes for the pre 2008 Skilled work applicants. Probably nowhere, but the lawyers should make a bundle.
1. I agree. I wonder what kind of impact his plan to reshuffle the way points are distributed will have. I'm not a huge fan of FSW apps in general. I try to manage expectations but lots don't want to hear it. PNP and CEC are the way to go if you fit.PMM said:Hi
1. Read it, but there is always going to be a backlog, unless the points are raised back to 75. At 75 points (before the Liberals lowered it as an election ploy) the no. of skilled worker applications balanced out with the quota, within +/- 5%
2. If the Refugee lawyers don't like the new Refugee rules and IRB rules, then the rules are probably on the ball. Lawyers have a tendency to howl when their ox is gored.
3. Actually he is about the only Immigration Minister who has actually taken an interest in the Dept. Previous Ministers, it was just a stop onto something better. They never bothered to push legislation that the Dept. pointed out that would clear the backlogs, expedite refugee claims. (I lie, the safe 3rd country with the US got done. But the proposal was to extend it to other countries, which never happened)
4. One of the worse decisions was to separate the Investigation function and enforcement and the POE Immigration from CIC to CBSA. CBSA really doesn't care about the Immigration function at POEs, as you probably know from the problems that are reported here. Inland investigation with CBSA, they are only interested in the "big score". Routine investigation, just isn't done anymore. A prime example is the "buying of AEOs" All it would take is a visit to the prospective employer, to see it s/he actually exists, where there are multiple AEOs.
5. Processing times in-Canada are getting to be ridiculous.
6. Should be interesting to see how far the Mandamus application goes for the pre 2008 Skilled work applicants. Probably nowhere, but the lawyers should make a bundle.
2. LOL! Very true. But the lawyers and my group are always whining about something!
3. Couldn't agree with you more. Hey, he got rid of CSIC and that was enough to get my vote. He takes his job seriously and is actually trying to fix some of the historical problems that people have been complaining about forever. He's also pushing the Conservative agenda which sometimes bothers my left of centre inclinations but for the most part, I can live with it. The guy is smart and tough. He's got a backbone and that doesn't come along very often in politicians. Maybe future Ministers of this portfolio will take a page out of his book. Predictions are that he's on his way to the top job.
4. Before my time in the immigration world so I don't know about the "good old days". But yeah, the fraud is unbelievable. I hate AEOs in general. I've worked on a few that I knew for a fact were genuine because the applicants were TFWs in Canada. And I can see AEOs working for only a small percentage of business types where they can afford to wait up to 2 years for the employee to land. And you are spot on about CBSA as well. The lack of training on the immigration piece is astounding at times. I now bring my copy of the Act and Regs with me if I have to take a client to the POE. If I can't go, I send them armed with a letter for the CBSA officer detailing the appropriate sections pertaining to the applicant. And the phone is glued to me waiting for the call that everything went ok. So far so good, knock wood. But I'm sure my time is coming.
5. BEYOND ridiculous.
6. It will be interesting. They are going to make a HUGE fortune if they can convince enough applicants to go for it. The FC says that "each application must be considered on its own merits" to grant mandamus. Plus, that big one-word change in A11(1) from "shall" to "may" is something they should be worried about. I would love to see the FCA and/or SCC rule on the legality of the Minister's quotas and priorities, however. Those questions were certified previously to FCA but never made it as CIC issued the visa so the appeal was moot. I personally don't have an opinion but would love to see what the high courts would say.