I am actually going to voice a concern.. not sure if it will make any difference but just want to let them know as to how unfair it is.
They talk about justice system here in Canada, how is the delay for quality assurance candidates justified.
It’s a big lie and this should you put in their ears, I mean the ministers.
While some delay in processing is to be anticipated, despite assurances otherwise, a complaint based on what one thinks WILL happen is NOT likely to carry much weight, except to reflect what it is, an unsubstantiated, unfounded complaint.
For now, some October applicants are still just barely getting AOR. There are obvious reasons for this, reasons many warned about long before the changes took effect: a huge surge in applications (which has happened, 40,000 or more in October alone, probably over a 100,000 already made under the new rules) at the same time one of Canada's largest bureaucracies (IRCC) was dealing with implementing the new rules and the bureaucrat learning curve that invariably entails.
No one who has applied since the change in rules has a factual basis for complaining about delays. Given the circumstances, even three plus months to get AOR is NOT a substantive reason for complaining about delays.
And, moreover, by IRCC standards (year timeline for citizenship applications), no one who applied under the new rules and issued the PPQ-QAE has had a decision on their application delayed past a year, so they have no basis for saying their application has been delayed, let alone delayed due to the PPQ, let alone delayed unfairly.
Sure, one is entitled to make a complaint if they like. Just in case there is a problem later on, however, might be better to not have already made a name for oneself complaining about things that have not happened, that could not have possibly happened. "Not yet . . . but . . . but it will" some may retort, but no, that's not going to gain any traction or save face.
This is NOT to say this procedure is fair. This is NOT to dismiss how profoundly intrusive and harsh this procedure is. It is not a mere inconvenience. It will cost money. It requires a considerable effort and amount of time. It requires disclosing status and current lack of citizenship to people the applicant would prefer to not be informed of this (employers, citizen references). It demands a summary of health care claims, which all by itself is a profound compromise of privacy.
But anyone who has successfully advocated an issue knows how important it is to do the homework and avoid compromising the weight of your position, and little will compromise one's position much faster than to make a blatantly unsubstantiated, unfounded assertion. Any good advocate knows that five great arguments will be largely ignored if a sixth bad argument is made, since that one bad argument will become the focus of attention, in effect
consuming all the oxygen in the room. And make no mistake, unless and until there is an actual excessive delay in processing PPQ'd applicants, an argument that it is unfair because it unduly delays becoming a citizen is virtually a per se bad argument.
[Lessons personally learned going back to the 60's and many, many times since, in many contexts including professional endeavors. And amply illustrated in the post-OB-407 debacle in 2012 as well. Lessons for those who desire to effectively advocate what is fair and make a difference. Lessons to be ignored by those merely in the whine business.]
